To: donmeaker
http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/peterpope.html
The myth of Peter as head of the church was not promugated until the 4th century, and was never accepted by the Orthodox. Many of the supports of that myth are either ridiculous, or fraud.
Constantinius had reasons for moving his capital away from Rome, the Romans being part of that.
16 posted on
10/09/2006 11:29:40 AM PDT by
donmeaker
(If the sky don't say "Surrender Dorothy!" then my ex wife is out of town.)
To: donmeaker
You may be invincibly ignorant. Put down
The DaVinci Code and back away, slowly.
There are many, many contemporaneous Christian writers from the first and second centuries A.D. who mention St. Peter as Bishop of Rome and head of the Church.
In order to believe that nonsensical geocities website, you have to ignore ALL the historical evidence (and there is plenty.)
26 posted on
10/09/2006 2:01:54 PM PDT by
AnAmericanMother
((Ministrix of Ye Chase, TTGC Ladies' Auxiliary (recess appointment)))
To: donmeaker
Constantinius had reasons for moving his capital away from Rome, the Romans being part of that.
Make that NO part of it. Constantine took many of the oldest Roman families with him to Byzantium. He moved the capital to Byzantium for military and economic reason, not religious ones. Rome was extremely difficult to defend absent a large army and was not a port city which made reprovisioning it very difficult in the event of a siege. Furthermore, it was far distant from the major theaters of conflict at the time, which were Persia and the Rhine/Danube frontier. Thus, the eastern Roman capital became Byzantium, and the Western Roman capital eventually became Ravenna.
38 posted on
10/09/2006 5:57:45 PM PDT by
Antoninus
(Attention GOP---Rule 4: See Rules 1 and 3. Rule 5: NO FOLEYS!)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson