Was Peter went to ROME?

[SPRINGFIELD_XD_40]

what literature?.. no evidence have been found if he really was persecuted in Rome, became a Pope in Rome or that he even went in Rome at all.. heck there isnt even enough evidence to stipulate with certainty that he even existed at all.

Any forms of writings are LITERATURES .

In this case , CHRISTIAN LITERATURES. Gospels , historical acocunts written by early church fathers.

Now if that is not enough for you because you want PICTURES and VIDEO COVERAGE , sorry if that sounds so harsh but it seems that you are here for that , then it is only rightful to be likened to that. Unless you cna retract that you are only here for the discussion instead of attempting again to discredit the RCC .

Here is an example of the collective literatures found in the " ACTIVITY and DEATH in ROME " from this link :

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: St. Peter, Prince of the Apostles

And before you click it if you may , it contains sources that are not BIASED .

fisherman ring and the key of heaven? why what about it?...

These are talked about events and circumstances concerning St. Peter so therefore , there are numerous accounts involving his whereabouts through LITERATURE. Unless again the LITRATURES are being depicted by you as a TABLOID then I would understand. I do hope not because you should know better.

The 12 Apostles of the Catholic Church

Little did we know that St. James the Greater could be credited for our CHRISTIANITY since it was him who preached in Spain where it was spread here in the Philippines.

[Xian120]

Any forms of writings are LITERATURES .

In this case , CHRISTIAN LITERATURES. Gospels , historical acocunts written by early church fathers.

Now if that is not enough for you because you want PICTURES and VIDEO COVERAGE , sorry if that sounds so harsh but it seems that you are here for that , then it is only rightful to be likened to that. Unless you cna retract that you are only here for the discussion instead of attempting again to discredit the RCC .

Here is an example of the collective literatures found in the " ACTIVITY and DEATH in ROME " from this link :

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: St. Peter, Prince of the Apostles

And before you click it if you may , it contains sources that are not BIASED .

dont be sarcastic my friend.. im talking about historical literature other than the bible, using the bible or other religious sources to prove their existence to me is like proving the seven dwarfs existence by using the Brother Grimm's books.. ive searched through other historical sources like books etc, but i never found anything..

but anyway im out of context here..

These are talked about events and circumstances concerning St. Peter so therefore , there are numerous accounts involving his whereabouts through LITERATURE. Unless again the LITRATURES are being depicted by you as a TABLOID then I would understand. I do hope not because you should know better.

The 12 Apostles of the Catholic Church

Little did we know that St. James the Greater could be credited for our CHRISTIANITY since it was him who preached in Spain where it was spread here in the Philippines.

im disclosing it only as Religious Tradition for reasons that for the life of me is unable to find any substantial convincing written records that states the case.

[SPRINGFIELD_XD_40]

dont be sarcastic my friend.. im talking about historical literature other than the bible, using the bible or other religious sources to prove their existence to me is like proving the seven dwarfs existence by using the Brother Grimm's books.. ive searched through other historical sources like books etc, but i never found anything..

Again because as I have said , BIBLE for you is just a TABLOID . If you are familiar with the LIBRARY SYSTEM like the OPAC , that is where you make your search easier in the library of books or in our case now , LITERATURE. You would not look for books about Cognitive , Affirmative and Psychomotor through Understanding By Design in the history books nor search for Rizal poems in the cookbooks of the culinary department's collection of recipe books.

Since St. Peter and now that you raised it , the rest of the Apostles , it is only intelligent for the curious to search for it in the library of books of Christian genre or for that matter , Christina catalogs and for one , to verify its reliability as a source , in the case of RCC .... we have the IMPRIMATUR and NIHIL OBSTAT .

If you cant reconcile that with your HISTORICAL LITERATURE , well , unless I have the wrong impression of your message , anything outside HISTORICAL BOOKS are just plain GOOD READS . The IRONY here is that , the BIBLE in itself is a HISTORICAL BOOK . Written documents by early church fathers are HISTORICAL LITERATURES . Unless and you can always correct me , you are referring to HSITORICAL BOOKS authored by an ATHEIST ra ang reliable. That would only make sense because some of the accounts of the existence of St. Peter are found in the NT.

Tabla ra ta ni ingon ana na ang chronicles ni Magellan are all a joke because Pigafetta is a Christian.

im disclosing it only as Religious Tradition for reasons that for the life of me is unable to find any substantial convincing written records that states the case.

Prior to the expose of the twisted Philippine history penned by Zaide , we all dwelled in it including you.

[noy]

it is still not proven whether they existed or not..

Since the 18th century a number of quests for the historical Jesus have taken place, and historical critical methods for studying the historicity of Jesus have been developed. Various Christian and non-Christian sources are used to study and establish the historicity of Jesus, e.g. Jewish sources such as Josephus, and Roman sources such as Tacitus. These sources are compared and contrasted to Christian sources such as the Pauline Letters and the Synoptic Gospels to determine the historicity of Jesus. These sources are usually independent of each other (e.g. Jewish sources do not draw upon Roman sources), and similarities and differences between them are used in the authentication process.

Virtually all modern scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed, and most biblical scholars and classical historians see the theories of his non-existence as effectively refuted

Christopher Tuckett states that the existence of Jesus and his crucifixion by Pontius Pilate seem to be part of the bedrock of historical tradition, based on the availability of non-Christian evidence.[30] Graham Stanton states that "Today nearly all historians, whether Christians or not, accept that Jesus existed".

almost all modern scholars consider the baptism of Jesus and his crucifixion to be two historically certain facts about him.

Read more: Historicity of Jesus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

-- Definitely not a biased site.

[noy]

so Authentic Historical Writings do serve as Proofs for actual Happenings after all...
then as per Historical Writings of the Church Fathers on top of the verified Archeological Finds about the Saint's tomb and other references..
Peter DID go to Rome.

[SPRINGFIELD_XD_40]

Even the NatGeo's Lenten special , JESUS : Rise to Power , though really CONTRADICTING ang title , they would not talk about it if ang approach was that JC was reduced to a cartoon character as much as I see some flaws in their presentations but if that is the case , they are considered a joke because they are outside the confinement of Christianity and for the record , they are biased against the church. One thing is certain , they talked about JESUS CHRIST and His existence , ministries and divinity . ON top of that , the Passion of the Saints.

[necrotic freak]

mas biased pa ang Discovery when it comes to God.. ang History channel murag neutral ra..

[noy]

we know about Socrates, Plato and Aristotle and a lot more because of Historical Writings about them or their writings/works ascribed to them by the experts. yet? we don't dispute them..
how come Historical accounts about Saint Peter going to Rome,established Christ's Church then martyrd is such a big deal?
to think same verification and historicity process have been applied..

something's fishy! Lol

[Xian120]

It seems i have touched a very sensitive topic here, though it's worth mentioning but i find this argument futile to me and to you as it would seem.. i've been reading books about history, as i have a knack about it, i don't know whether authors are atheists or not, it doesn't really matter, all i know is that they have names that have PhD's in it and it's enough reason for me to suspect that the contents are valid.. all i know as far as my reading have reached is that there is really no mention about biblical figures.. if they are that significant in our history, why did they left them out?.. even wiki agrees,

Simon Peter, was an early Christian leader and one of the twelve apostles of Jesus, according to the New Testament and Christian tradition.

please note the bolded part where it says tradition, better watch out for that 'coz there is a lot of that in Peter's wiki page.. but i know ud all argue that it is premature to believe in a wiki page, although i see someone linking a wiki page.

In 2009 Otto Zwierlein (de) concluded in a critical study that "there is not a single piece of reliable literary evidence (and no archaeological evidence either) that Peter ever was in Rome."

still in his wiki page

i dont mean to disrespect Christianity or discredit it, i just wasnt able to gather enough reasons for me to believe it just yet..

my belief about Jesus is that he may and may not have existed, our recorded history dont really talk much about him, except the NT, i believe that he is not a divinitive figure as believed, just a normal human being embillished by words of spiritual grandeur..

[deadspace]

what do you thinkl