[Nosterrex]

The truth is that there is nothing in the Scriptures that support the monarchical episcopacy of the Roman Catholic Church. For instance, you cannot find anything in the Apostolic fathers that even mentions the papacy. Even the Scriptural passages used talks about the church being built upon the foundation of the apostles, not apostle. All the apostles shared equally in the Holy Ministry of Christ, not just Peter. In Acts, Peter has to defend himself in the Council of Jerusalem, and he is even rebuked by Paul at Galatia. There is nothing in the Scriptures or the early church that supports papal claims.

[Judith Anne]

“Thou art Peter and upon this Rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it.”

Ring a bell? Matthew 16:18?

[Salvation]

Scripture

**The same Paul who has called Christ the only foundation, tells his Ephesian converts (2:20):—”Ye are built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner-stone.” **

[Salvation]

From the author — a former Baptist, BTW.

**Paul did not scruple to call himself the spiritual father of those whom he had begotten in the Gospel. You see, then, that the fact that Christ is called the rock, and that on Him the Church is built, is no hindrance to Peter’s also being, in a different sense, called rock, and being said to be the foundation of the Church; so that I consider there is no ground for the fear entertained by some, in ancient and in modern times, that, by applying the words personally to Peter, we should infringe on the honour due to Christ alone. [7]**

[RobbyS]

The pope is not a monarch.

[srweaver]

I doubt if you’ll receive a substantive answer to your challenge about the primacy of Peter, just recycled verses viewed with the Roman Catholic interpretations and according to their “later” traditions. The reason the Roman Catholic views are not refuted in the church fathers is because they did not exist. People don’t usually attack/refute non-existent doctrines/teachings.

Though Peter shared a testimony of God choosing the Gentiles in Acts 15, it was James (Jesus’ half brother) who was the leader of the Jerusalem church and made the decision for the council in verses 19 and 20, which was supported and sent forth as the decision of “The apostles and elders and brethren” in verse 23.

Actually, at a later date Paul had to rebuke Peter for hypocrisy because his behavior was influenced by concern over James’ opinion rather that the “truth” of the gospel, pointing out the lack of primacy in Peter’s relationship with both James and Paul (Galatians 2).

[Catsrus]

Nor is there any record of Peter ever being in Rome. It was Paul who preached to the Romans. Anyone can twist scriptures to make them fit a particular teaching.

Your post was spot on!