“I think the point is that since there isnt biblical evidence, there was a need to create extensive FALSE evidence”
Far be it from me to claim final or certain understanding of daniel1212’s mind, but as I read it the “extensive polemic” seemed to refer to the “Petrine Fact” series.
“Of course, Papal Supremacy is based on interpreting a partial sentence”
Do you really think that’s accurate, or are you only saying it because you think it sounds good? The question is sincere, not rhetorical: I really want to know.