Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: InterestedQuestioner; Diego1618; Uncle Chip
"you say there is historical evidence of Peter in Rome, the have you considered the possibilit that it may have been a Peter other than the biblical Peter?"
Do you have any evidence of a 1st century individual named Peter, other than the Apostle who was named Peter by Christ?

I guess a more accurate question would have been, do you think that the first pope could have claimed to be Peter, or was mistakenly assumed to be the biblical Peter, but wasn't really Peter? Whether or not the biblical Peter was ever in Rome I mean.

1,758 posted on 10/27/2006 5:09:57 PM PDT by DouglasKC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1751 | View Replies ]


To: DouglasKC
"I guess a more accurate question would have been, do you think that the first pope could have claimed to be Peter, or was mistakenly assumed to be the biblical Peter, but wasn't really Peter? Whether or not the biblical Peter was ever in Rome I mean."

No, I don't think that.
1,806 posted on 10/28/2006 3:37:34 PM PDT by InterestedQuestioner (Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you and your household will be saved.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1758 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson