To my understanding, Catholics built a religion on a misunderstanding of "the rock" meaning Peter instead of Jesus Christ, and so this statement appears to be somewhat of a misstatement. Perhaps you meant to say not "just the writings" but the writings as well as the person himself.
Ah, but that understanding of Catholicism would be incomplete. There are hundreds of verses, and you may or may not have come across them, but one of the most compelling ones is the passage of the keys. In the tradition of the kings of the OT and the later Middle East and Europeans, the steward was the one who was entrusted with the keys when the king went on an extended journey. The steward was left in temporary charge of the kingdom and was supposed to ensure that the kingdom was looked after and flourishing when the king returned.
I think that my original post was probably more accurate, although I neglected to extend that thought to something like 'the writings of Paul, supplemented by the OT'. I have been informed by several of the Reformed that the Gospels are the chronicles of Christ, while Paul is the theology and what we should do and believe. In essence, saying that the Gospels are nice, but Paul is necessary.
However, there are no Catholics who try to build a religion out of just the writings of Peter.
- -
To my understanding, Catholics built a religion on a misunderstanding of “the rock” meaning Peter instead of Jesus Christ, and so this statement appears to be somewhat of a misstatement. Perhaps you meant to say not “just the writings” but the writings as well as the person himself.
- - - - -
ABSOLUTELY INDEED.
Well put.