Peter had a mother-in-law, but that was not HIS wife? WHAT???!
Your ref. to 1 Cor. ch. 7 indicates that Paul was not married. Which is true. I stated that Paul could have previously been married. Then you imply that Peter COULD HAVE BEEN prciously married, by stating that there is no evidence that he was married while Jesus was on earth.
So the same kind of thing could apply to Paul. He could have been a widower.
But then Paul states in the same book, chapter 9, that he had the power (authority) to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as the other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, AND AS CEPHAS. Cepahs is Peter.
So it looks like Peter was married, had a mother-in-law, and Peter was leading his wife about with him, as were the other apostles and the brethren of the Lord.
Paul had the power/right ot do the same thing, but elected not to.
Your logic fails.
It is rather clear that St. Paul speaks of his power of leadership in 1 Cor 5 that equally applies to a wife and a sister, so it cannot be a prooftext of anything regarding celibacy or marital status of anyone.
You wrote:
“Peter had a mother-in-law, but that was not HIS wife? WHAT???!”
Are you suggesting that his mother-in-law was his wife? You’re not making any sense at all. There is no evidence that Peter’s wife was alive.
“Your ref. to 1 Cor. ch. 7 indicates that Paul was not married. Which is true. I stated that Paul could have previously been married. Then you imply that Peter COULD HAVE BEEN prciously married, by stating that there is no evidence that he was married while Jesus was on earth.”
Exactly.
“So the same kind of thing could apply to Paul. He could have been a widower.”
Doubtful, because when he wrote of marriage he never mentioned a wife.
“But then Paul states in the same book, chapter 9, that he had the power (authority) to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as the other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, AND AS CEPHAS. Cepahs is Peter.”
Yes, and...?
“So it looks like Peter was married, had a mother-in-law, and Peter was leading his wife about with him, as were the other apostles and the brethren of the Lord.”
No. You are making an assumption. Notice how it says sister? Notice how many translations say “believing wife” or “Christian wife”? It doesn’t mean PETER’S wife. It means a woman from the Christian community who would essentially consecrated to that duty.
“Paul had the power/right ot do the same thing, but elected not to.”
Right, but it doesn’t mean that Peter led about HIS OWN wife.