Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Salvation

What you mean is it is not Roman Catholic truth...There is No evidence that Peter was ever Bishop of Rome. NONE..


18 posted on 07/16/2015 7:50:30 PM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]


To: RnMomof7
What you mean is it is not Roman Catholic truth...There is No evidence that Peter was ever Bishop of Rome. NONE..

I know you're taking a lot of heat lately, try to not let it get you down. There are a lot of Born Again Christians who really don't know the history of Christianity, or what the RCC demands it's adherents believe.

Scripture does not substantiate the perpetuated Peterine papacy of Rome. The Bible is clear that Jesus is THE ROCK DT. 32:4, ICor. 10:4, which Peter also attests IPt. 2:8. Not one command is given in the NT for the church to submit to Peter as it's "supreme leader", or one example of it. Peter refers to himself as an "elder", "apostle" and a "servant" IPt. 5:1, 2Pt. 1:1 and he was married Mt. 8:14, ICor. 9:4. Also, he would not let a man bow down to him Acts 10:25-26.

IOW, even if there were some historical evidence that Peter founded and ran the church in Rome during the Apostolic Era there is no support for what it has devolved into.

89 posted on 07/18/2015 7:17:24 AM PDT by wmfights (a stranger in a hostile and foreign land that used to be my home)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | 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