PPSIMMONS EXCLUSIVE! Peter was NOT first Roman Catholic Pope! Here's why!

By Michael D. Shoesmith

With all of the hoop-la in the news lately concerning the rise of 'Petrus Romanus' we're hearing a lot of talk of  the new pontiff's succession through a mythological lineage beginning with Peter, Jesus' disciple. The problem here is - it's all fabricated.

I was brought up in the Roman Catholic school system. I am very familiar with the way things are done over there. One of the primary dynamics which allows the RCC to continue perpetuating the myth of succession is a nearly complete lack of interest in what the Bible says about topics like this. They favor tradition over truth - a sad reality which caused the deaths of many who were caught reading the Bible at their own leisure during darker times.

So, what does the Bible really say about this?

The stand-alone argument given by proponents of succession back to Peter use the following event when pressed on the matter.

Matthew 16:16  And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
17  And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
18  And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
19  And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

None of that suggests Peter was the first Roman Catholic Pope as we'll discuss in a moment. It also doesn't say Jesus will build His church upon Peter either. Jesus referred to "it". Notice, following Peter's confession of faith that Jesus is the "Christ" He told Peter he was "blessed" because the father revealed "it" to him. Then he calls him "Peter" and says He will build His church upon this "rock" and the gates of hell will not prevail against "it". What is "it?" Was Peter "it?" Of course not. "It" is the fact that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God! That fact is rock solid; a rock we can ALL stand on - firm ground for all who trust in its security. Peter was blessed with this knowledge and Jesus was building His church upon "it." If anyone embodies this 'Rock' it is Jesus... not Peter.

As it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion a stumblingstone and rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.
Romans 9:33

 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.
1 Corinthians 10:4

That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
Romans 10:9

"Well", one might ask, "why did Jesus give Peter the 'keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven?'" And now I have a question - was Jesus only speaking to Peter at that point? Or was he speaking to His church as a whole? Was He actually giving the keys to heaven to "it?"... His church? In fact, as we analyse the narrative, we discover that Jesus was speaking to all who were present... His disciples.

20  Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ. (e.m.)

The mysteries of the Kingdom of Heaven are given to all of us who are His... not just Peter. Jesus was speaking to all of us - to "it" - His church!

 He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.
Matthew 13:11

Jesus isn't building His church on Peter! If so, then the church is entirely Jewish. It was Paul who was the apostle to the Gentiles including the Romans. After all, who wrote the epistle to the church in Rome? Was it not Paul (though it was Tertius who wrote it as it was dictated to him by Paul)? Of course it was. Paul himself tells us he is the one sent to the gentiles:

Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles.
Acts 13:46

This "turn to the Gentiles" included the Romans. Peter was not instrumental in any of this. If anyone qualifies as the first Bishop of Rome it was Paul, not Peter. In fact, Peter was rebuked by Paul for his lack of compassion toward the Gentiles.

Galatians 2:11  ¶But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.
12  For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision.
13  And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation.
14  But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?

If Jesus was building his church on Peter He must have made a mistake. Peter, in Antioch, was embarrassed to be seen with the Gentiles and was rebuked by Paul. Paul then writes the epistle to the Gentiles in Rome. Jesus was actually using Paul to build his church and Peter was primarily involved with the Jews (Gal 2:7). Get it? Good!

But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me (Paul), as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;
Galatians 2:7

So now we can more clearly understand why the Roman Catholic "Church" so adamantly persecuted those who insisted on publishing the Bible in the language of the common man. They killed millions who were 'caught' diligently studying the "Word". It's because the "Word" is the single greatest threat facing the Roman Catholic 'Church.' Once a person gains the understanding that ALL believers are endowed with the keys to the kingdom of heaven through adoption then they can claim their rights as heirs and become powerful saints of God simply because the Bible says so. As for binding and loosing, well...

James 5:16  Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.17  Elias was a man subject to like passions as we are, and he prayed earnestly that it might not rain: and it rained not on the earth by the space of three years and six months.18  And he prayed again, and the heaven gave rain, and the earth brought forth her fruit.19  Brethren, if any of you do err from the truth, and one convert him;20  Let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins.

If you are "saved" you are many things...

You are powerful.
You are a Saint.
You are righteous.
You are adopted.
You are a priest.
You are forgiven.
And you belong to Jesus... who is building His church on the solid promise; the rock-hard truth that He is the Christ, the son of the living God. And no one comes to the Father but by Him. Church membership will not save you. No amount of "hail Mary's", "our father's" or relic worship will save you. Only Jesus... and Him alone. Trust in the rock of your salvation. Trust in Jesus alone.