[RegulatorCountry]

Once again, you are pointing to scripture that favors your point of view, but seem to discredit the ones that detract from your point of view.

I pointed to no scripture in the response you're referencing, I pointed to a reply on this thread, #84, that contained a cite from "Against Heresies" by Irenaeus, which refutes your contention that Peter was the first Pope.

Please pay closer attention to whom and to what you're responding. It'll save you a lot of confusion.

[johngrace]

No it does not. It just did not include every person specifically from the beginning. It depends on what subject it was written to declare a main point. You do not take it out of context.

Here is another early Church Father.

Augustine of Hippo:

Letter 53 (A.D. 400) For if the lineal succession of bishops is to be taken into account, with how much more certainty and benefit to the Church do we reckon back till we reach Peter himself, to whom, as bearing in a figure the whole Church, the Lord said: “Upon this rock will I build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it!”

The successor of Peter was Linus, and his successors in unbroken continuity were these: — Clement, Anacletus, Evaristus, Alexander, Sixtus, Telesphorus, Iginus, Anicetus, Pius, Soter, Eleutherius, Victor, Zephirinus, Calixtus, Urbanus, Pontianus, Antherus, Fabianus, Cornelius, Lucius, Stephanus, Xystus, Dionysius, Felix, Eutychianus, Gaius, Marcellinus, Marcellus, Eusebius, Miltiades, Sylvester, Marcus, Julius, Liberius, Damasus, and Siricius, whose successor is the present Bishop Anastasius..

Notice “successor of Peter”.

Just like We know the Presidents of the United States from Washington so Did St. Augustine 300 years later know the successors of Peter.