[Diego1618]

What benefit was it to the RCC to have Peter rather than Paul the Apostle that started their church?

When our Lord was speaking to Paul [Acts 9:3-9] he never mentioned the word "rock".

[proud_2_B_texasgal]

When our Lord was speaking to Paul [Acts 9:3-9] he never mentioned the word "rock".

Neither was it mentioned by in the book of Mark (8:27-30)after Peter answered "You are the Christ.". No mention of any "rock".

Oh, Luke's account of the same conversation (9:18-20), no "rock" .. only "The Christ of God".

I read these over and over again, and the ONLY common thing in all three gospels, is that JESUS is THE CHRIST .. Son of the living God. Could it be that THAT is the "rock" upon which He built His church: The fact that He is Jesus, Our Christ, Son of the Living God??

That seems to be the theme through the whole NT. One head, Christ Jesus.

[wmfights]

"When our Lord was speaking to Paul [Acts 9:3-9] he never mentioned the word "rock". "
_____________________________

You've really got me going on this! The scholarship both of you have provided has been terrific. So based on a misinterpretation of Matthew 16: 17-19 the church in Rome began claiming Peter founded it so they could claim "special" authority. IOW, that their Bishop was the "top" Bishop. When did Rome begin to assert this position? If for example it was after the persecutions in the early 300's I can see how they might be able to, since 240 years had passed.