The Gates of Hell and Peter Was Not a Pope

[RRLeath]

Jesus once took his disciples on a field trip to a pagan city at the foot of Mt. Hermon called Caesarea Philippi.
The location was unique because it stood at the base of a cliff where spring water flowed from a cave.

To the pagan mind, then, the cave and spring water at Caesarea Philippi created a gate to the underworld. They believed that their city was literally at the gates of the underworld-"the gates of hell" In order to entice the return of their god, Pan, each year, the people of Caesarea Philippi engaged in horrible deeds, including prostitution and sexual interaction between humans and goats.

When Jesus brought his disciples to the area, they must have been shocked. Caesarea Philippi was like a red-light district in their world and devout Jews would have avoided any contact with the despicable acts committed there.

It was a city of people eagerly knocking on the doors of hell and this is the place Jesus first commissioned Peter and the disciples as builders of His Church!

And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter (petros) and upon this rock( petra) I will build my church; and the "gates of hell" shall not prevail against it.
(Matt. 16:18) Notice Jesus did not say he was building his church on Peter (petros) but on "petra" the big rock!
Peter was not commissioned as a Pope of the church but Christ called him a small rock that would begin building on a large rock and that large craggy rock they were standing on was the symbol of a pagan world that needed a Savior!
The "gates of hell" would not prevail against the Church of Jesus Christ!

Greek words-
Peter-Petros= rock or stone
Rock-Petros=a rock, cliff or ledge

 

[bountifulove4]

Peter perfectly understood the message of Jesus to write in Greek - 1Pe 1:

:1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia,

:5 You also, AS LIVING STONES, - YOU ALSO - are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood


If we look at each one of Rome's claims that demands that Peter went to Rome and there he set up the Roman Catholic Church this narrative begins to completely fall apart when we pull in other elements of what is given by Rome as - so- called evidence.

The early - so- called Church fathers knew absolutely nothing about Peter being given a Papal Authority as Primacy over others,

in fact either the - so- called Early Roman Catholic Church fathers probably were attempting to invent the very idea by promoting Peter in humility and literally denying this very claim just to build it up

this is the way the Roman Catholic System works as a political religious movement, very organized, very methodological and slowly they begin a movement and then cultivate and stirr.

Here are the writings of the - so- called Early Roman Catholic Church fathers as they are openly denying the idea and yet playing and studying it like a group of hebephiles playing with a very small innocent idea, while growing it, in an attempt to introduce it into the Roman Catholic Church System -

meaning = introducing, studying and toying with the idea for the purpose and potential - to develop and bring the teaching into the Church - by first denying it.......

one must understand Rome

Roman Catholic Father - St. Augustine declared in writing called - Retratations ("Re-treatments"; 428 Ad - St. Augustine wrote

About the Apostle Peter: - "On him as on a rock the Church was built."
Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church,"

that it be understood ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, For, "Thou art Peter" and not "Thou art the rock" was said to him. But "the rock was Christ," in confessing whom as also the whole Church confesses, Simon was called Peter.

St. Augustine concludes, saying - But let the reader decide which of these two opinions is the more probable.

probable _ meaning = = most likely to be true or likely to happen. [vagueness] - probably


Roman Catholic Father - St. Chrysostom (349-407):

St. Chrysostom concludes, saying

“Peter, James, and John, were both first called, and held a primacy among the disciples”
(Commentary on Galatians, 1, vv. 1-3). How then is Peter alone the primary apostle?


Roman Catholic Father - St. Cyprian (200?-258):

Assuredly the rest of the apostles were also the same as was Peter, endowed with a like partnership both of honour and power; but the beginning proceeds from unity.” (On the Unity of the Church, 4)


Roman Catholic Father - St. Origen (185-254)

(Commentary on Matthew, 12:10-11)

“And if we too have said like Peter, ‘Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God,’ not as if flesh and blood had revealed it unto us, but by light from the Father in heaven having shone in our heart,

we become a Peter, ...... and to us there might be said by the Word, ‘Thou art Peter,

For a rock is every disciple of Christ ....... in regard to all and in the case of each of them? And also the saying, ‘Upon this rock I will build My church’?

Are the keys of the kingdom of heaven given by the Lord to Peter only, and will no other of the blessed receive them ?

But if this promise, ‘I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven,’ be common to the others,
how ---------- that which was addressed to Peter, is in common to them all
as the spirit of the Gospel teaches, to every one who becomes such as that Peter was.”


the truth is
Roman Catholics do not have Scriptures for the Roman Catholic Faith System, therefore tradition is the ultimate and only real authority.

 

[bountifulove4]

One of the main reasons that the very early writings of the - so- called Roman Catholic Church Fathers are so important is because they are used to propagate and make a show of early writers in the Egyptian and Roman world having arguments, debates and discussions between one another about such things as the - Primacy of St Peter and Apostolic Succession.

These Ideas such as this and many, many other Catholic Traditional Teachings are nowhere found in the Bible but the idea - is to show a written debate and discussion on the ideas in order to slowly build the idea into the acceptance and recognition.

to make a show - that very important associated people are arguing and discussing and expanding upon ideas and teachings that simply do not exist anywhere within the Bible itself. This is how the idea is started in the Catholic Church,

In the Scriptures there is absolutely no indication whatsoever anywhere that Jesus explaining the Keys to the Kingdom is somehow setting Peter above others - - but this is why these type Catholic writings are important,

by arguing and debating and even pretending to partly deny and halfway agree and - at first not quite completely fully understanding - pretending it is part of Christianity and the Bible Church.

this is exactly how Rome acquaints, presents and makes its introduction of its teachings into Christian literature and art work, paintings, drawings, Idols - having discussion about something that is not in the Bible, debating and even having disagreements .....

......in order to invent the narrative


see clearly in Mat 16:19 Jesus is speaking to Peter directly concerning the " KEYS TO THE KINGDOM "


but why is it that Roman Catholics do not mention that this was a message and meaning that Jesus mentions multiple times

we see that this conversation with Peter is where Jesus was located, = in the coasts of Caesarea Philippi

:13 Jesus was in the coasts of Caesarea Philippi - He tells Peter about the " Keys To The Kingdom "

Mat 17:1 And after six days Jesus ......... bringeth them up into an high mountain apart

:9 And - they came down from the mountain,

Jesus then travels to Galilee and spends at least 1 day preaching to the people


Jesus then travels 20 miles to Capernaum and again he makes the same statement to all of his disciples with a little child sitting with them all.

Mat 18:2 And Jesus called a little child unto him, and set him in the midst of them

this is at least a full week later and Jesus again makes the same exact statement - - ONLY HE IS NOT SPEAKING TO PETER ALONE

AND HE ALSO EXPLAINS EXACTLY WHAT IS THE EXACT MEANING OF " THE KEYS TO THE KINGDOM " WHAT THIS MEANS - - EXACLTY

Jesus speaking of all of his his disciples with a little child sitting there with them

Jesus explains to them all -----------


Mat 18:18 Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Again I say unto you,.............................

:19 Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven.

:20 For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.


but why is it that Roman Catholics friends specifically fail to mention that a whole week later Jesus goes on to explain what this means as he provides details that " THE KEYS TO THE KINGDOM " are about praying and joining others in prayer - and coming together in agreement to pray

" THE KEYS TO THE KINGDOM " - are described exactly - as two or more believers whom shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven

2 or more pray and agree on earth - it shall be done - in heaven


Mat 18:20 For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.

This is why it was important for Rome to create a false narrative to make claim to insist that this strictly applies to a position of authority to introduce something other that what the Bible clearly explains.

this narrative is never something that the Bible reader would conclude without a position of tradition that is external of the Bible