Was Peter went to ROME?

[SPRINGFIELD_XD_40]

I don't speak for all Protestants and our attitude towards Catholics do vary. In my experience as a former Catholic I have not been in Protestant churches that hold a militant view on Catholic dogma and accuse the Roman Catholic church all sorts of things. I have not been in churches that are like those, I have not encountered pastors or preachers that revolve around exposing Catholicism with a vengeance. These are age-old attitudes that were predominant during the 16th and 17th century and is not the same environment we have today. Despite the disagreements I have not been in a church that is verbally and physically 'protesting'.

Second, I have not yet encountered anyone or read something that deemed the Five Solas as an incitement to protest or to revolt even though later on they were used by countries or individuals as a justification to separate from the Holy Roman Empire. Luther himself was not keen on leaving the church he just meant to reform it, hence the movement was called "Reformation". Just as Aquinas was writing about Christian ethics in war in his "Just War theory" as an example, Luther was writing about returning to the Bible as the the primary source of authority for all Christians in the "Solas" likely based on Galatians 1. The rest of course is history.

If yu dont still see it clearly as a form of protest then I dont know why . Like I said , the SOLAS alone gives way to that being a HERESY. Martin had something different in his mind when he reformed otherwise we would again go back to the RCC history citing events during the Vatican I . Tanan reasons why nasuko si Martin gi ayo na sa Vatican I , therefore it is only rightful na gi "REFORMED" na ang RCC but why did he remained and the other leaders during that time as " PROTESTANTS " ?

Yes they are physical evidences of early church history. But these ancient shrines only tell us how early Christians worshiped in the Middle ages, Christians that were already following the traditional view of Peter to begin with thanks to the writings of Marcion, Irenaeus, and Dionysius.

If you discover bones,shackles,documents in Rome , do you really think some lunatic would have that effort of transporting it from somewhere to Rome just to satisfy us today that indeed St. Peter was in Rome ? Again.... I am not an authority of archaeology but if you have the doubts on what I said , staging my information from them as a reliable source , then it is only right that you question their conclusion . Not what I think of the matter .

For example. There would be hardly any difference to build an altar of Peter in Rome today and men from the future discovering and claim it as proof. Although it enriches the traditional view it still misses the answer to the question of its origin because its makers did not really know what happened to Peter because they themselves are subjects to tradition.

Well who are building altars for St. Peter today ?

For the record , it doesnt work that way . You made it look like , it is as simple as A-B-C . Bai , it undergoes critical studies and research . Dili na siya sama sa imohang pag tuo cguro na naay nakawtan na antiquity and right there and then announces its certainty. Heck it would probably even go for decades of study before concluding on it.

That is the same thing in modern times gi unsa nila pag arrive sa conclusion that Pedro Calungsod should be canonized as an example . It goes through the eye of the needle .

Historical texts outside the influence of tradition. And since finding sources void of any religious sympathies are tricky its preferable to cross-examine them instead. I am also asking secular sources on this topic somewhere else.

Which yielded you to what ? Dont you think it would be absurd of you to say that when you already professed the reliability and accuracy of the bible ?

[<SMILE>]

healthy before but now no more...hhehehe.
mao bitaw and rason mostly sa protestants and those nibalhin from catholicism kay they found wanting sa truth and they feel that need nga wala mafill sa church. meaning, dili na green and sagbot bro.

OT naman ta ani bro...hahahah! sorry...

OT:
What other truth do we need if we truly believe in God and Jesus Christ,
mga hinubad sa tawo.hmmmmm
maorag dili na ko motuo ana, naa ra ba na sa prophesy
Bro, beware.....

[%75life4Him]

OT:
What other truth do we need if we truly believe in God and Jesus Christ,
mga hinubad sa tawo.hmmmmm
maorag dili na ko motuo ana, naa ra ba na sa prophesy
Bro, beware.....

Unsa man prophecy ha bro?

[<SMILE>]

Unsa man prophecy ha bro?

OT:

Matthew 24: 1-51

Jesus left the temple and was going away, when his disciples came to point out to him the buildings of the temple. But he answered them, “You see all these, do you not? Truly, I say to you, there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down.” As he sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the close of the age?” And Jesus answered them, “See that no one leads you astray. For many will come in my name, saying, ‘I am the Christ,’ and they will lead many astray. ...

Remember Jim Jones
Source:Jim Jones - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

and

David Koresh
Source: The Waco Massacre

[%75life4Him]

the term Catholic refers to those who profess belief in the Trinity or basically the Church of Jesus Christ..

details as to how and when the term Roman Catholic Church came into being is in this Catholic site:
When did the term "Roman Catholic Church" first come into being? | Catholic Answers

Thanks for the article bro. An except says The earliest form was the noun "Romanist" (one belonging to the Catholic Church), which appeared in England about 1515-1525. . I am sorry bro but this is a name created by tradition. The bible says that the church was called just a church. People within the church are called christians. Not roman catholics. Those biblical names are ordained already in the bible and no one should have the right to alter it even the pope himself.

i know it is just a list, the highlights really were the dates. of course you cannot see their names in the bible but in history perhaps..hehehe except for Peter though.
our topic was about Constantine and the Catholic Church, so i showed you the dates..

I am sorry but those list are just presumptions.

regarding purgatory..

it's non-biblical if youe reason for saying such is because the term "purgatory" can nowhere be found in the Bible.
but it is biblical if you would believe God is all merciful and Just at the same time...

i have no doubts i believe in Jesus as my Lord and Savior, so if i die, i'm positive that i won't go to hell..
but i am also certain that before i became a Christian, while i was a Christian and even till the day i die
i would always sin even in its slightest form in God's grace...where would i go? Heaven directly?
what happens to the God of justice? my eternal sins are obviously washed by the blood of Jesus...
but we also know that "nothing defiled shall enter the gates of heaven"Rev 21:27

say a muslim who was born a muslim and never had a chance to know Jesus...what happens to Him when he dies?
obviously he cannot accept Jesus as God...
should he go to hell then? what happens to the all merciful God?

scriptural basis for purgatory:
Scripture Catholic - PURGATORY

by the way, the purgatory topic is a but off i think, it should be asked in the RCC q and a thread, however i believed the question has been answered na pud ngadto..

thanks for reading the article bro.

I love to discuss further with you about this if you want....

[Breakeven]

...I know catholic means universal but why is it called roman when Jesus was not a roman citizen? nor was Peter. Si Paul hinuon.

OT:
karon pasad ko ani bro. Pwede baya unta Christian Catholic no?
Thanks and sorry bro @noy and others from diverting sa topic.

[tsunade]

the term Catholic refers to those who profess belief in the Trinity or basically the Church of Jesus Christ..

details as to how and when the term Roman Catholic Church came into being is in this Catholic site:
When did the term "Roman Catholic Church" first come into being? | Catholic Answers




i know it is just a list, the highlights really were the dates. of course you cannot see their names in the bible but in history perhaps..hehehe except for Peter though.
our topic was about Constantine and the Catholic Church, so i showed you the dates..

regarding purgatory..

it's non-biblical if youe reason for saying such is because the term "purgatory" can nowhere be found in the Bible.
but it is biblical if you would believe God is all merciful and Just at the same time...

i have no doubts i believe in Jesus as my Lord and Savior, so if i die, i'm positive that i won't go to hell..
but i am also certain that before i became a Christian, while i was a Christian and even till the day i die
i would always sin even in its slightest form in God's grace...where would i go? Heaven directly?
what happens to the God of justice? my eternal sins are obviously washed by the blood of Jesus...
but we also know that "nothing defiled shall enter the gates of heaven"Rev 21:27

say a muslim who was born a muslim and never had a chance to know Jesus...what happens to Him when he dies?
obviously he cannot accept Jesus as God...
should he go to hell then? what happens to the all merciful God?

scriptural basis for purgatory:
Scripture Catholic - PURGATORY

by the way, the purgatory topic is a but off i think, it should be asked in the RCC q and a thread, however i believed the question has been answered na pud ngadto..

thanks for reading the article bro.

i cannot agree more bro.

[Chubi]

OT: but you cannot be a true Muslim if you don't believe in Jesus

[Passport]

After the original release of Boettner’s book, evidence had mounted to the point that Pope Paul VI was able to announce officially something that had been discussed in archaeological literature and religious publications for years: that the actual tomb of the first pope had been identified conclusively, that his remains were apparently present, and that in the vicinity of his tomb were inscriptions identifying the place as Peter’s burial site, meaning early Christians knew that the prince of the apostles was there. The story of how all this was determined, with scientific accuracy, is too long to recount here. It is discussed in detail in John Evangelist Walsh’s book, The Bones of St. Peter. It is enough to say that the historical and scientific evidence is such that no one willing to look at the facts objectively can doubt that Peter was in Rome. To deny that fact is to let prejudice override reason.

source: Was Peter in Rome? | Catholic Answers

[%75life4Him]

OT:

Matthew 24: 1-51

Jesus left the temple and was going away, when his disciples came to point out to him the buildings of the temple. But he answered them, “You see all these, do you not? Truly, I say to you, there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down.” As he sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the close of the age?” And Jesus answered them, “See that no one leads you astray. For many will come in my name, saying, ‘I am the Christ,’ and they will lead many astray. ...

Remember Jim Jones
Source:Jim Jones - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

and

David Koresh
Source: The Waco Massacre

Since you mentioned according to Alberto Rivera jim jones was a jesuit....

Alberto Rivera – The Jesuit Priest Who Told The Truth

Please no offence bro....but is this true?