Please Provide Historical Proof That Peter Was The First Pope.

[revduane]

Yes Catholics believe every word of those verses. They dont, however, accept the recent reinterpretation of those verses.

Oh, and Rev, if you could, just answer the question. Youre so busy attacking Catholics, you dont stop to realize that the majority of Christendom agrees with them on many things, including Peter's Papacy. Yes, I realize a majority does not necessarily make it true, but you cant just say "Oh I know why the Catholics believe this blah blah" bc THEYRE NOT THE ONLY ONES THAT BELIEVE IT! Unless you can address each group that beleives it, youre not making a case at all.

I am not attacking catholics. I am opposed to the doctrine, and know it is for future events to come concerning the last days. Also anger isn't becoming of you.

Blessings.

 

[jckstraw72]

I am not attacking catholics. I am opposed to the doctrine, and know it is for future events to come concerning the last days. Also anger isn't becoming of you.

Im not angry, perhaps frustrated, but not angry. You keep telling us how you are so certain in your beliefs and how they are the right ones, and yet, you have "Legitimate questions about the RCC", and you wont answer a simple question.

 

[TreesNTrees]

Matthew 1:25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.

jckstrw72....

Then, seeing you think the Catholics believe those verses, including this; what do they believe the "till" means.

Best I know, there's a word there in the Latin / Greek. So if we don't add another additional word, or subtract words that are supposed to be there, how is that part of the verse explained. I know they believe the word "son" is there, that his name "Jesus" is there - almost verbatim as it sits.

But I've never read their teaching for "till" or "firstborn". Do they have a book that explains it, or do you know the teaching off the top of your head. If you don't know, that's okay, I might be able to find a source.

Thanks.

 

[jckstraw72]

basically the "till" doesnt imply a necessary change after the fact. Like if your mom says "be good until i get back", that doesnt mean be a hellion once shes back. plus, not to mention that in Greek the linguistic rules are different. and "firstborn" doesnt necessarily mean there are other children. For instance, all the firstborn children were killed at Passover--did this not apply to familes with only one child?
I think this may have been covered in more depth on this thread, and if not, certainly on other threads.

this website deals with these words, although i have def seen posts somewhere on here that have gone much more in depth http://www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/article9174.asp

 

[IgnatiusOfAntioch]

But how about a whole different way of looking at this. Since the Catholics believe one way and several other groups another or other ways.

The verses you quoted are about the ever-virginity of Mary, which is not really the subject of this thread. There are several thread on this subject, one is here: http://www.christianforums.com/t2477070-the-ever-virginity-of-the-mother-of-god.html.

Also, it may surprise you to learn that 2/3 of all Christians hold to the Catholic beliefs on the ever-virginity of Mary.

Do the Catholics at least believe and teach that all those words are the Word of God?

You might want to read the Book "Where we got the bible" by Henry G. Graham.
You can also research the subject by searching for "Canon of the New Testament", Council of Carthage and Council of Hippo.

May the Lord be gracious to you and grant you His peace.

Your brother in Christ.

 

[TreesNTrees]

Also, it may surprise you to learn that 2/3 of all Christians hold to the Catholic beliefs on the ever-virginity of Mary.

Name 560 of them? Do you know 200 of them? By name.

Time to get a check-up from the neck-up here and talk turkey.

I've been to a lot of churches. And in most, even the high commitment ones, for every person that attends and says they believe, there seems to be one other that does not believe everything their church teaches.

So I may agree - to be generous - that 2/3 or about 2/3 of christians (call themselves) go to churches that believe the ever-virginity of Mary, BUT, I am not ignorant. Not 2/3 or them believe that, nor will 2/3 of them even say they believe it.

On top of that, when many people have their doctrine explained in greater detail, they will realize that what they thought they believe in is not really what they thought they believed.

In a real world, if 2/3 of "so-called" Christians to to ever-virgin churches, it's more like 1/3 that will really believe it.

I've been around too many to know otherwise. Many of my friends are and were that way. The inside story is not bound too tightly.

 

[Benedicta00]

Shelb5 has provided ample evidence for the Catholic side of the argument.

That was just to show Peter was in Rome becuase someone said he was even never in Rome.

Here are some quotes from the early Church on him actully being the head of the Church.

"Peter was proncounced blessed by the Lord...the duty of feeding the spiritual sheep of the Church under whose protecting shield, this Apostolic Church of his has NEVER turned away from the path of truth in ANY direction of ERROR, whose AUTHORITY, as that of the Prince of all the Apostles, the whole Catholic Church and the Ecumenical Synods have faithfully embraced..."
Agatho Pope,To Ecumenical Council VI at Constantinople,(A.D. 680),in NPNF2,XIV:328-339

"It was right indeed that he(Paul) should be anxious to see Peter; for he was the first among the apostles, and was entrusted by the Savior with the care of the churches."
Ambrosiaster,Commentary on Galatians,PL 17:344 (A.D. 384),in SPP,62

" 'Thou art Peter and upon this Rock I will build my Church', Wherefore where Peter the Church is..."
Ambrose,Commentary on the Psalms,40:30 (AD 395),in DOP,184

"At length, after being tempted by the devil, Peter is set over the Church."
Ambrose,Commentary on the Psalms,43:40(AD 397),in GILES,145

"...the chief of the disciples...the Lord accepted him, set him up as the foundation, called him the rock and structure of the church."
Aphraates, De Paenitentibus Homily 7:15(A.D. 337),in SPP,58

"In order that he may show his power, God has endowed none of his disciples with gifts like Peter. But, having raised him with heavenly gifts, he has set him above all. And, as first disciple and greater among the brethren, he has shown, by the test of deeds, the power of the Spirit. The first to be called, he followed at once....The Saviour confided to this man, as some special trust, the whole universal Church, after having asked him three times 'Lovest thou me?'. And he receive the world in charge..."
Asterius,Homily 8(A.D. 400),in GILES,145-146

"Number the priests even from that seat of Peter. And in that order of fathers see to whom succeeded: that is the rock which the proud gates of hades do not conquer."
Augustine,Psalmus contr Partem Donati(A.D. 393),in GILES,182

"Peter bore the person of the church"
Augustine, Sermon 149:7(inter A.D. 391-430),in SPP,69

"Peter upon which rock the Lord promised that he would build his church."
Basil,In Isaias,2:66(A.D. 375),in SPP,55

"Peter is again called 'the coryphaeus of the Apostles"
Basil of Seleucia,Oratio 25(ante A.D. 468),in FOC,II:49

" 'Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it, and to thee I will give the keys of the kingdom of heaven'? When Wilfrid spoken thus, the king said, 'It is true, Colman, that these words were spoken to Peter by our Lord?' He answered, 'It is true O king!' Then says he, 'Can you show any such power given to your Columba?' Colman answered, 'None.' Then added the king,"Do you both agree that these words were principally directed to Peter, and that the keys of heaven were given to him by our Lord?'They both answered,'We do.' "
Bede Venerable, AD 700, Ecclesiastical History,3:5(A.D. 700),in RCH,I:271

"ut that great man, the disciple of disciples, that master among masters, who wielding the government of the Roman Church possessed the authority in faith and priesthood. Tell us therefore, tell us we beg of you, Peter, prince of the Apostles, tell us how the churches must believe in God."
Cassian John,Contra Nestorium,3:12(A.D. 430),in SPP,61

"A copy of the letter sent by the holy and Ecumenical Sixth Council to Agatho, the most blessed and most holy pope of Old Rome...Serious illnesses call for greater helps, as you know, most blessed (father); and therefore Christ our true God, who is the creator and governing power of all things, gave a wise physician, namely your God-honoured sanctity, to drive away by force the contagion of heretical pestilence by the remedies of orthodoxy, and to give the strength of health to the members of the church. Therefore to thee, as to the bishop of the first see of the Universal Church, we leave what must be done, since you willingly take for your standing ground the firm rock of the faith, as we know from having read your true confession in the letter sent by your fatherly beatitude to the most pious emperor: and we acknowledge that this letter was divinely written (perscriptas) as by the Chief of the Apostles, and through it we have cast out the heretical sect of many errors which had recently sprung up.."
Constantinople III Council to Pope Agatho,(A.D. 680),NPNF2,XIV:349

"Wherefore the most holy and blessed Leo, archbishop of the great and elder Rome, through us, and through this present most holy synod together with the thrice blessed and all-glorious Peter the Apostle, who is the rock and foundation of the Catholic Church, and the foundation of the orthodox faith..."
Council of Chalcedon,Session III (A.D. 451),in NPNF2,XIV:259-260

" '...thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build my Church' ... It is on him that he builds the Church, and to him that he entrusts the sheep to feed. And although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single Chair, thus establishing by his own authority the source and hallmark of the (Church's) oneness...If a man does not fast to this oneness of Peter, does he still imagine that he still holds the faith. If he deserts the Chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, has he still confidence that he is in the Church?"
Cyprian, De Unitate Ecclesiae(Primacy text),4(A.D. 251),in NE,228-229

"He promises to found the church, assigning immovableness to it,as He is the Lord of strength, and over this he sets Peter as shepherd."
Cyril of Alexandria,Commentary on Matthew (A.D. 428),in SPP,74

"Peter, the foremost of the Apostles, and Chief Herald of the Church..."
Cyril of Jerusalem,Catechetical Lectures,11:3(A.D. 350),in NPNF2,VIII:64

"(Peter)The first of the Apostles, the foundation of the Church, the coryphaeus of the choir of disciples."
Chrysostom John,Ad eos qui scandalizati 17(ante A.D. 407),in SEP,74

"Peter, that head of the Apostles, the first in the Church, the friend of Christ, who recieved revelation not from man but from the Father...this Peter, and when I say Peter, I mean that unbroken Rock, the unshaken foundation, the great Apostle, the first of the disciples, the first called, the first to obey"
Chrysostom John, De Eleemosyna,3:4(ante A.D. 407),in SEP,74

"[W]e have considered that it ought be announced that although all the Catholic Churches spread abroad through the world comprise one bridal chamber of Christ, nevertheless, the holy Roman Church has been placed at the forefront not by conciliar decisions of other churches, but has received the primacy by the evangelic voice of our Lord and Savior, who says: "You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it..."...The first see, therefore, is that of Peter the Apostle, that of the Roman Church, which has neither the stain nor blemish nor anything like it"
Damasus Pope, Decree of Damasus,3(A.D. 382), in JUR,I:406

"[T]he first of the apostles, the solid rock on which the Church was built."
Epiphanius, In Ancorato,9:6 (A.D. 374),in SPP,in 57

"Simon, My follower, I have made you the foundation of the Holy Church. I betimes called you Peter(Kepha), because you will support all its buildings. You are the inspector of those who will build on earth a Church for me...I have given you the keys of my kingdom. Behold, have given you authority over all my treasures."
Ephraim, Homily 4:1,(A.D. 373),JUR,I:11

"...Peter, that strongest and greatest of all the apostles, and the one who on account of his virtue was the speaker for all the others..."
Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History,2:14 (A.D. 325),in NPNF2,I:115

"And Peter,on whom the Church of Christ is built, 'against which the gates of hell shall not prevail' "
Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History,6:25 (A.D. 325),in NPNF2,I:273

"...folly of (Pope) Stephen, that he who boasts of the place of the episcopate, and contends that he holds the succession from Peter, on whom the foundation of the Church were laid..."
Firmilian,Epistle To Cyprian,Ep 75(74):17(A.D. 256),in ANF,V:394

"To Peter,that is, to his church, he gave the power of retaining and forgiving sins on earth."
Fulgentius, De Remissione Peccatorum,2:20(A.D. 523),in SPP,71

"The holy Roman Church is senior to the other churches not by virtue of any synodal decrees, but obtained the primacy from Our Lord and Savior in the words of the Gospel,'Thou art Peter...' "
Gelasius Pope,Decree of Gelasium(A.D. 492),in SPP,166

"Who could be ignorant of the fact that the holy church is consolidated in the solidity of the prince of the Apostles, whose firmness of character extended to his name so that he should be called Peter after the 'rock', when the voice of the Truth says, 'I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven'. To him again is said "When after a little while thou hast come back to me, it is for thee to be the support of thy brethren."
Gregory the Great Pope,Epistle 40(A.D. 604),in SPP,66

"Seest thou that of the disciples of Christ, all of whom were exalted and deserving of choice, one is called rock, and is entrusted with the foundations of the church."
Gregory of Nazianzen,Oration 32:18(A.D. 380),in SPP,56

"The memory of Peter, who is the head of the apostles...he is the firm and most solid rock, on which the savior built his Church."
Gregory of Nyssa,Panegyric on St. Stephen,3(ante A.D. 394),in SPP,56

"lessed Simon, who after his confession of the mystery was set to be the foundation-stone of the Church, and received the keys of the kingdom..."
Hilary de Poiters,On the Trinity,6:20(A.D. 359),in NPNF2,IX:105

"By this Spirit Peter spake that blessed word, 'Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.' By this Spirit the rock of the Church was stablished."
Hippolytus,Discourse on the Holy Theophany,9(ante A.D. 235),ANF,V:237

"[T]he statement of Our Lord Jesus Christ who said, 'Thou art Peter,and upon this rock I will build my Church,'...These (words) which were spoken, are proved by the effects of the deeds, because in the Apostolic See the Catholic religion has always been preserved without stain.''
Hormisdas Pope,Libellus professionis fidei,(A.D. 519),in DEN(171),73

"The decrees of the Roman Pontiff, standing upon the supremacy of the Apostolic See, are unquestionable."
Isidore of Seville,(ante A.D. 636),in PL:84

"But you say, the Church was rounded upon Peter: although elsewhere the same is attributed to all the Apostles, and they all receive the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and the strength of the Church depends upon them all alike, yet one(ie. Peter)among the twelve is chosen so that when a head has been appointed, there may be no occasion for schism."
Jerome,Against Jovinianus,1 (A.D. 393),in NPNF2,VI:366

"As I follow no leader save Christ, so I communicate with none but your blessedness, that is with the chair of Peter. For this, I know, is the rock on which the church is built!"
Jerome,To Pope Damasus,Epistle 15(A.D. 375),in NPNF2,VI:18

"lessed Peter preserving in the strength of the Rock, which he has received, has not abandoned the helm of the Church, which he under took...And so if anything is rightly done and rightly decreed by us, if anything is won from the mercy of God by our daily supplications,it is of his work and merits whos power lives and whose authority prevails in his See...to him whom they know to be not only the patron ofthis See, but also primate of all bishops. When therefore...beleive that he is speaking whose representative we are:..."
Leo the Great(Pope),Sermon 3:3-4(A.D. 442),in NPNF2,XII:117

"[T]he Lord wished to be indeed the concern of all the Apostles: and from him as from the Head wishes His gifts to flow to all the body: so that any one who dares to secede from Peter's solid rock may understand that he has no part or lot in the divine mystery."
Leo the Great(Pope),To Bishops of Vienne,Epistle 10 (A.D. 450),in NPNF2,XII:8

 

[Benedicta00]

Continued.

"For the extremities of the earth, and all in every part of it who purely and rightly confess the Lord, look directly towards the most holy Roman Church and its confession and faith, as it were a sun of unfailing light, awaiting from it the bright radiance of our fathers, according to what the six inspired and holy Councils have purely and piously decreed, declaring most expressly the symbol of faith. For from the coming down of the Incarnate Word among us, all the churches in every part of the world have possessed that greatest church alone as their base and foundation, seeing that, according to the promise of Christ Our Savior, the gates of hell do never prevail against it, that it possesses the Keys of right confession and faith in Him, that it opens the true and only religion to such as approach with piety, and shuts up and locks every heretical mouth that speaks injustice against the Most High"
Maximus the Confessor,Opuscula theologica et polemica(A.D. 650),in PG(91:137-144)

"This Peter on whom Christ freely bestowed a sharing in his name. For just as Christ is the rock, as the Apostle Paul taught, so through Christ Peter is made rock, when the Lord says to him: "Thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build my church..."'
Maximus of Turin,Homily 63(A.D. 408),in SPP,61-62

"[F]or the good of unity blessed Peter, for whom it would have been enough if after his denial he had obtained pardone only, deserved to be placed before all the apostles, and alone received the keys of the kingdom of heaven, to be communicated to the rest."
Optatus of Milevis, De Schismate Donatistorum,7:3(A.D. 370),in GILES,120

"And Peter, on whom the Church of Christ is built, against which the gates of hell shall not prevail..."
Origen,Commentary on John,5:3(c.A.D. 232),in ANF,X:347

"[T]he Lord spoke to Peter a little earlier; he spoke to one, that from one he might found unity, soon delivering the same to all."
Pacian,To Sympronianus,Epistle 3:2(AD 372),in GILES,123

"Wherefore the most holy and blessed Leo, archbishop of the great and elder Rome, through us, and through this present most holy synod together with the thrice blessed and all-glorious Peter the Apostle, who is the rock and foundation of the Catholic Church, and the foundation of the orthodox faith, hath stripped him of the episcopate, and hath alienated from him all hieratic worthiness.'Peter, the apostle, who is the rock and support of the Catholic Church' "
Paschasinus, Council of Chalcedon,Session III(A.D. 451)in NPNF,XIV:259-260

"You know that the Lord proclaims in the Gospel: 'Simon, Simon, behold:Satan has desired to possess you,so that he might sift you like wheat. But I have prayed for you,that your faith may not fail. And you,once you have converted, confirm your brethren!'(Lk 22:31-32). Consider that the truth could not have lied,nor will the faith of Peter be able to be shaken or changed forever. For, although the devil desired to sift all the disciples,the Lord testifies that He Himself asked for Peter alone,and wished that the others be confirmed my him;and to Peter also was committed the care of 'feeding the sheep'(John 21:15);and to him also did the Lord hand over the 'keys of the kingdom of heaven'(Matthew 16:19),and upon him did He promise to 'build His Church' (Matthew 16:18);and He testified that 'the gates of Hell would not prevail against it' (Matthew 16:19)."
Pelagius II(Pope),Quod Ad Dilectionem(c.A.D. 685),in DNZ(246),95

"We exhort you, honourable brother, to submit yourself in all things to what has been written by the blessed Bishop of Rome, because St. Peter, who lives and presides in his see, gives the true faith to those who seek it. For our part,for the sake of peace and the good of the faith, we cannot judge questions of doctrine without the consent of the Bishop of Rome."
Peter Chrysologus,Epistle 25 of Leo from Peter(A.D. 449),in SPP,215

"There is no doubt, and in fact it has been known in all ages, that the holy and most blessed Peter, prince and head of the Apostles, pillar of faith, and foundation of the Catholic Church, received the keys of the kingdom from our Lord Jesus Christ, the Savior and Redeemer of the human race, and that to him was given the power of loosing and binding sins: who down even to to-day and forever, lives and judges in his successors. The holy and most blessed Pope Celestine,according to due order,is his successor and holds his place..."
Philip,Council of Ephesus,Session III (A.D. 431),in NPNF,XIV:223

"...the most firm rock, who(Peter) from the principal Rock recieved a share of his virtue and his name"
Prosper of Aquitaine,The Call of All Nations,2:28(A.D. 426),in SPP,71

"Peter, who is called 'the rock on which the church should be built,' who also obtained 'the keys of the kingdom of heaven...' "
Tertullian,On the Prescription Against the Heretics,22(c.A.D. 200),in ANF,III:253

"If Paul, the herald of the truth, the trumpet of the Holy Ghost, hastened to the great Peter in order that he might carry from him the desired solution of difficulties to those at Antioch who were in doubt about living in conformity with the law, much more do we, men insignificant and small, hasten to your apostolic see in order to receive from you a cure for the wounds of the churches. For every reason it is fitting for you to hold the first place, inasmuch as your see is adorned with many privileges."
Theodoret of Cyrus,To Pope Leo,Epistle 113(A.D. 449),in NPNF2,III:293

 

[lismore]

I don't think that there is any argument at all that Peter was the first bishop of Rome - just as James was the first Bishop of Jerusalem. These are historical facts. ?

Every protestant or Christian I have ever met would first question if peter was even in Rome, the scriptures say paul was in rome, not Peter.

Some Christians even write articles like this:

http://www.aloha.net/~mikesch/peters-jerusalem-tomb.htm


Dont Misunderstand me. If catholics or Orthodox wish to see peter as the first pope then they have a free choice to do this. But to say it is a ' historical fact' is fantasy. Its a tradition of their group which may or may not be a ' historical fact'.

 

[Benedicta00]

Every protestant or Christian I have ever met would first question if peter was even in Rome, the scriptures say paul was in rome, not Peter.

Some Christians even write articles like this:

http://www.aloha.net/~mikesch/peters-jerusalem-tomb.htm


Dont Misunderstand me. If catholics or Orthodox wish to see peter as the first pope then they have a free choice to do this. But to say it is a ' historical fact' is fantasy. Its a tradition of their group which may or may not be a ' historical fact'.

But when it comes along with historical proof it isn’t a fantasy.

 

[twosid]

You are very welcome. And you are too kind, and a total inspiration of what an example should be. By the way. I am not condescending, I just challenge what I know to be inacurate. And then I am counter challenged. It is I guess what you could say to be an equal challenge from 2 or more viewpoints.

Blessings to ya. Rev.Duane.

The problem with the whole me and my posse are going to show the Catholic Church the error of their ways is that many of you don't know what the true beliefs and practices of the RCC are. You don't want to know what they are. That makes it a mission just to tear down, which sadly is what I am beginning to believe that the end result of the Reformation has been, simply a destroyer of the Church. It corrected what it was supposed to correct and then its role became that of accuser.

Here is a series that I'm running through at the moment, if any of you want to actually learn something about what Catholics believe about the Pope.

http://www.ewtn.com/vondemand/audio/seriessearchprog.asp?seriesID=6148&T1=Pope+Fiction

It's about 7 hours long but they are in 27 minute segments. There won't be anyone hollering AAAAAMEN! or WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! and so if that is what charges your battery it will be a hard listen. It will be a hard listen for a Protestant anyhow but you might go listen to it just so you can say you halfway know what their position is. You might, but your posse does not and while they are nipping at everyones heels they might pick up some knowledge along the way.

 

[S Walch]

Shelb5, do you have anything from before A.D 125 that state that Peter was the Bishop of Rome/Pope ?

You know, like the Op asked.

 

[lismore]

But when it comes along with historical proof it isn’t a fantasy.

There is no 'historical proof', just subjective data. The information from after Peter died that is quoted wont act as proof to everyone, just those who have a vested interest in believing it already. If there were proof then everyone following Christ would believe you.

What about 'proof' that peter was buried in jerusalem and that Jesus had brothers?

 

[ScottBot]

I would appreciate it if someone would provide proof, that has been determined, by what could be called a third party, to be proof that the Apostle Peter was, indeed, the first Pope of Rome.

1.) This historical proof must have been determined by a "third party" to have been written before, say, A.D. 125.

IOW, verification as to the authenticity of this document must not come from within the RCC.


2.) Peter in this document must be referred to as the "Pope," and it must be said that his place of authority was in Rome.


BTW, there are multiple historical proofs that show that Jesus Christ actually lived, which were written by Romans(and others) before A.D. 125.

People are free to reject the fact that Jesus is God. If you don't want to hold that Peter was the first Pope, go ahead. Your little game of having to provide quantifiable evidence means absolutely nothing to those of us who adhere to that belief. Peter was the first of the Apostles and evangelized extensively from Rome. Good enough for me. You should go ahead and ask for certified medical records that Jesus was really dead when they burried Him, and not merely unconscious.

 

[eoe]

Every protestant or Christian I have ever met would first question if peter was even in Rome, the scriptures say paul was in rome, not Peter.

I never knew that it was an issue at all and I used to rant like mad in the Fundamentalist forum louder than anyone. I suppose it is most important to people that want to justify certain types of church leadership. I just don't see why it is important for anything else for a protestant to deny that Peter was the first bishop of Rome as in order for the protestants to even hold water the whole of the church had to fall into apostasy very soon afterwards anyway. Why is it relevant in the protestant position other than from a political / church organizational POV?

 

[FreezBee]

Why is it relevant in the protestant position other than from a political / church organizational POV?

For that very reason - and from what follows from that

- FreezBee

 

[ScottBot]

Oh boy, here we go with the "Catholic Church is apostate" crap again.

 

[Quijote]

There have been leaders deceived by Satan in every denomination. What about all of the massacres that were commited in Scotland and Ireland back in the 1500s and 1600s? Thousands of protestants were massacered because of their denial of the eucharist. They were burned at the stake. Women had their beasts cut off and left to bleed to death. Pregnant women had their fetus' cut out and fed to the dogs, while their husband were made to watch. It is historical fact, and these are just a couple of examples, and it was all done in the name of God.

Yeah. There is much deceit. And Satans purpose will be revealed in a very short time, when the beast is in the picture. Our job as Christians is to get people saved, and taught correctly. People need rebirth and truth, not conversion.

 

[ProAmerican]

People are free to reject the fact that Jesus is God. If you don't want to hold that Peter was the first Pope, go ahead. Your little game of having to provide quantifiable evidence means absolutely nothing to those of us who adhere to that belief. Peter was the first of the Apostles and evangelized extensively from Rome. Good enough for me. You should go ahead and ask for certified medical records that Jesus was really dead when they burried Him, and not merely unconscious.

That which cannot be proven to be absolutely certain should not be taught as though it were absolutely true.

Keeping that in mind concerning Peter's so-called Bishoprick being in Rome, there are three primary methods by which one can look at a particular thing like Peter's so-called Bishoprick in Rome and determine the veracity or lack thereof of this.

The Scriptures. Historical documents. Church tradition.

I have looked through all of the 'proof' provided on this thread and have determined that none can absolutely prove historically that Peter was the first Bishop of Rome. They may lean in favor of Peter being in Rome or preaching there, but one must also remember that Paul states that Peter was made the Apostle to the circumcision and he, Paul was made the Apostle to the uncircumcised(Gentiles). So Peter could very easily have been preaching to the Jews in Rome.

What the RCC and others rely upon is tradition, plain and simple, to support their contention that Peter was the first Bishop of Rome.

A.)

There is scriptural proof that Jesus Christ lived and rose victoriously from the dead.

There is historical proof that Jesus Christ lived, and some of these documents are before 125 A.D.

B.) There is church tradition that Peter was the first Bishop of Rome, and only a few historical documents to show that he might have preached at Rome, but no proof of this is found within the scriptures.

there is no historical proof, before A.D. 125, that I have seen, which proves Peter as being the first Bishop of Rome.

Relying on tradition, which has nothing before the third century A.D. to show that Peter was the first Bishop of Rome, is pretty much relying on what could easily be called hearsay.

Feel free to believe amongst yourselves that Peter was the first Bishop of Rome, but don't trot this out as fact when facts are lacking to sustain this belief.

Remember, that which cannot be proven to be absolutely certain should not be taught as though it were absolutely true.

 

[ScottBot]

That which cannot be proven to be absolutely certain should not be taught as though it were absolutely true.

Keeping that in mind concerning Peter's so-called Bishoprick being in Rome, there are three primary methods by which one can look at a particular thing like Peter's so-called Bishoprick in Rome and determine the veracity or lack thereof of this.

The Scriptures. Historical documents. Church tradition.

I have looked through all of the 'proof' provided on this thread and have determined that none can absolutely prove historically that Peter was the first Bishop of Rome. They may lean in favor of Peter being in Rome or preaching there, but one must also remember that Paul states that Peter was made the Apostle to the circumcision and he, Paul was made the Apostle to the uncircumcised(Gentiles). So Peter could very easily have been preaching to the Jews in Rome.

What the RCC and others rely upon is tradition, plain and simple, to support their contention that Peter was the first Bishop of Rome.

A.)

There is scriptural proof that Jesus Christ lived and rose victoriously from the dead.

There is historical proof that Jesus Christ lived, and some of these documents are before 125 A.D.

B.) There is church tradition that Peter was the first Bishop of Rome, and only a few historical documents to show that he might have preached at Rome, but no proof of this is found within the scriptures.

there is no historical proof, before A.D. 125, that I have seen, which proves Peter as being the first Bishop of Rome.

Relying on tradition, which has nothing before the third century A.D. to show that Peter was the first Bishop of Rome, is pretty much relying on what could easily be called hearsay.

Feel free to believe amongst yourselves that Peter was the first Bishop of Rome, but don't trot this out as fact when facts are lacking to sustain this belief.

Remember, that which cannot be proven to be absolutely certain should not be taught as though it were absolutely true.

How do you know that the bible is absolutely true? The Koran claims divine inspiration far more often than Scripture does, so why don't we follow the Koran?