Continuing the debate

Commenting on Taylor Marshall's "10 Differences" · Debate Under Taylor Marshall's "10 Differences" · Continuing the debate

Anne Francis Elizabeth

@Hans-Georg Lundahl Sir, are you not attempting to hide the truth in plain sight?

Never mind. Fourth question.

The task of defining Christian doctrine fell mainly to St. Paul. Paul wrote to churches he did not found, including a ground-breaking Epistle to the Church of Rome, without any reference whatsoever to Peter. No Cardinal would write a letter to the Vatican without any reference to Pope Francis.

On at least some questions, Paul expected his readers to accept his own viewpoint and reject Peter's. If Peter were to be Pope, where does Paul get his own pontifical infallibility from?

NOTE: Clement the Stromatist said, this was not St. Peter: that claim does not help the Romanist cause, at all. Because:
i. it makes no sense
ii. it makes Peter NOT a pillar of the Church!
iii. No Pope or any other Romanist commentator is known to have claimed that Cephas was not Peter.
iv. One of the sub-themes of the Epistle to the Galatians is the disagreement between Paul and Peter.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Anne Francis Elizabeth "Paul wrote to churches he did not found, including a ground-breaking Epistle to the Church of Rome, without any reference whatsoever to Peter."

Perhaps bc Peter arrived later and was still in Antioch?

Either way, St. Peter referred to him. And to his epistles being twisted, as is also the case with other Scriptures. People who are into the "Romans' road" - take note.

"No Cardinal would write a letter to the Vatican without any reference to Pope Francis."

One problem is your assuming Bergoglio is Pope.

But apart from that, why would protocol have been in place identical, for the doctrine to be so?

"On at least some questions, Paul expected his readers to accept his own viewpoint and reject Peter's."

And reject Cephas' - St. Peter had been called Peter as late as in previous verse.

"If Peter were to be Pope, where does Paul get his own pontifical infallibility from?"

St. Paul didn't have pontifical infallibility, but hagiographical inerrancy, which is a charism. It was vetted for all of his epistles by precisely Popes by as late as the 300's between the two first general or ecumenical councils.

"i. it makes no sense ii. it makes Peter NOT a pillar of the Church!"

Did you note "seemed to be pillars of the Church"? The hypothesis here is that James, Cephas and John were impostors.

"iii. No Pope or any other Romanist commentator is known to have claimed that Cephas was not Peter."

Clement the Stromatist counts as "Romanist" with us for obvious reasons. Like St. Thomas Aquinas who held the opposite view. How many Popes are known to have spoken in direct comment of Galatians?

"iv. One of the sub-themes of the Epistle to the Galatians is the disagreement between Paul and Peter."

Between St. Paul and Cephas.