Replies

WoW...Never heard that one before...

I only started thinking about it because some one is always using the argument against the Catholic doctrine that since Paul had to correct Peter then Peter could not have been very great.

Paul does not say that he corrected Peter he said he withstood him face to face which he most likely thought was a pretty big sized job.

What they fail to understand is that it was just an unofficial accusation.

Mathew 18
15 Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.

16 But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.

It was not mentioned by Luke who wrote the account of Pauls circumcision of Timothy which I would think Paul would have wanted to keep quite seeing as how opposed he was to the Jews teaching circumcision, was he afraid of the Jews or what?

A fine one to call Peter a hypocrite.

It was simply told to the world through Pauls letter to the Galatians.

Which in my book is nothing but gossip or even worse slander.

But the way I see it Paul will be Paul, but if you think this is anything new just go to Google and write in search (The false apostle)