There is no precedent for the papacy and no instructions office anywhere in the NT. The first popes did not show up until after 300 AD, way too long after to even justify saying that the office was handed down from Peter. Where'd those 300 some years ago? Just vanish into the abyss?
In effect, you are your own pope, sharing some beliefs with other Protestants (and unwittingly even with Catholics!) but not all.
You are assuming a lot about what I think and believe. I do not unwittingly share beliefs with Catholics. I'm well aware that there are many areas where Protestantism and Catholicism agree, so that assertion is false.
Like a holocaust denier, you deny the "holiness" of Catholic saints—who gave not money but their lives, "There is no greater love than this ..." (John 15:13) to others for Christ, "Whatsoever you did to the least of my brothers, that you did for me" (Matt 25: 31-46).
I don't care what denomination some one is and how much they gave and what they gave. The saints are believers in Christ no matter where they are and what church they choose to affiliate themselves with. All churches have believers and unbelievers in them and Catholics have no corner on the spirituality and holiness market.
To deny Catholicism is to deny Scripture, deny history, deny Christ; and in doing so make the Bible into a book that ultimately only you can interpret INFALLIBLY…
Hardly. To deny Catholicism is to deny the papacy, prayer to Mary, salvation based on works, all of which is unbiblical. And the history of the Catholic Church is nothing to brag about. Why any Catholic wants to go there is beyond me. I don't need the writings of Luther or Calvin to be able to read and understand Scripture. It's written plain enough. And I never claimed that anyone can interpret the Bible infallibly. Another unfounded assumption.
Do a word study in the Greek on rock. Jesus is using a play on words. Petra means a large rock. Petros means a piece of large rock. It's also not grammatically correct to use the term *this* to mean a person. If Christ had really intended that Peter be the rock on which Christ's church be built then He would have said "On you I will build my church" but He didn't.
Peter's own writings never refer to that incident. Peter said that the church, which is Christ's church not Peter's church, was build on Christ.
I Peter 2:4-7 4As you come to him, the living Stone—rejected by men but chosen by God and precious to him— 5you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. 6For in Scripture it says: "See, I lay a stone in Zion, a chosen and precious cornerstone, and the one who trusts in him will never be put to shame."
INDEED TO THE MAX.