So now we are relying on scholars? Scientists dating things and showing how they managed to date the works, I can deal with. You all seem to base everything under the sun on a group of books that only you guys put any real weight in. Over time, the grouping has been peared down as volumes are found to be frauds. Many are still in question. And pretty much noone views them as sacred outside of Catholicism. EVEN many of you have been forced to admit that the authors disagree with each other. Though they disagree with the Bible as well - you could never admit that; but, you have. If they can't agree with each other and only one of them is right on any given issue or only a few are, then by definition, the ones who are wrong are in conflict with the Bible. OOps.. didn't think of that either did we.
If they can't be trusted, they can't be trusted. I don't care how many guys you line up and say "he believes us". How many times in history has the Catholic church made claims it couldn't prove only to turn around and find that not only were they not right, they weren't even close. How many deceptions have gone on regarding relics in Catholicism? Can you be honest about it? You always are careful to avoid approaching the fact that the RCC has absolutely no credibility. You turn around with the same tiresome attack over and over. I have no problem with accepting facts - ya'll just haven't shown any. You swallow the stories hook line and sinker. I'm not that gullable.
You can't seem to argue the scriptures either. The world of scholarship produced dates to the Books and that is the only thing you can attack; but without any credibility there either. I suppose dating methods used by science and archeologists employing methods of dating against the style of writing, known history and so on.. I suppose the whole world is in some kind of Vast Conspiracy against Catholicism for working to narrow the dates down as closely as they have been able to. Ya'll have no problem with the dates if they agree with you; but, as soon as they don't suit your purposes...
Got any way of countering what I've offered? Apparently not. You guys haven't been able to attack what I've layed out from the Bible. Do you not have evidence to call the Bible a liar or to show my conclusions wrong. Where is your proof that Peter was in Rome? Proof, not hearsay. You can't just out and call the Bible a liar on everything, can you.
Denial is a horrible thing.
Thank you for proving my corollary of
SoothingDave's Law regarding Havoc. Namely, Havoc believes scholarship only when they agree with him and it can further his case. Otherwise, it's crap.
I am secure in the knowledge that Catholic, Orthodox, AND Protestant scholars agree on Peter's place of death. I am also secure in the testimony of the early Church.
As far as the Scriptures are concerned, all you can offer is a theory which you pass off as fact which is incredulous considering that the NT does not contain a comprehensive, all encompassing history of the Apostolic Age, nor does it pretend to.
That being said, I shake the dust off my feet and will have nothing more to do with you on this subject.
Pray for him