[Natural Law]

"Babylon as a city had been destroyed by that time but there seems to be some very strong debate that the Babylon Peter refers to was actually Jerusalem which would make sense because he was the apostle to the Jews."

I'm sure you can build an equally weak case for it being Toledo, Tokyo or Timbuktu too, but it wasn't. When you have to work that hard to find an alternative to it being Rome it is more than obvious that your agenda is clouding your judgment.

Peace be with you,

[CynicalBear]

>> When you have to work that hard to find an alternative to it being Rome it is more than obvious that your agenda is clouding your judgment.<<

You mean other then the weakest evidence was that he was in Rome? I think a Catholic accusing anyone of having an agenda when studying scripture is absolutely hilarious.