As Harnack and many other historians have noted, popes Zephyrinus and Callixtus I, who were Monarchian Modalist heretics were the first Roman bishops to apply Matthew 16:18 to the themselves, and thus the Roman episcopacy, which drew fire from Hippolytus who then became an alternate pope of Rome, Tertullian, Origen and others for their arrogance in trying to subvert the faith. But then the cat was out of the bag and later popes seized upon Matthew 16:18 even though being soundly opposed in their twisting of the passage by 98% of the church fathers.
A sound post on the history of the unscriptural papacy and how it has twisted scripture to support itself in grand style and introduce unscriptural doctrine.
Oh really? So where does Irenaeus get off saying that it is a matter of necessity...necessity...that all churches everywhere agree with the Church of Rome. Irenaeus who was never a Roman pontiff but just a lowly bishop of Gaul in around A.D. 170.
A dupe of Zephyrinus and Callixtus, was he? A Monarchian modalist was he?
>> As Harnack and many other historians have noted, popes Zephyrinus and Callixtus I, who were Monarchian Modalist heretics were the first Roman bishops to apply Matthew 16:18 <<
The sources you people will quote sometimes to back your argument are amazing. You seem to be referring to Adolf von Harnack, a German who promoted the “social gospel,” the Protestant equivalent of liberation theology, and who asserted, among other claims, that the Gospel of John was spurious and denied the existence of miracles. He’s about as credible as the Queer Theory “historians” who claim that Jesus and John were homosexual lovers.