I come in peace and with a smile : )
Blessings of God’s Beauty to you and all who post on your site.

Artistree

Welcome.

St. Peter was indeed “The Rock”, but what does that have to do with Rome ? Peter was also the first Bishop of Antioch. What About Peter’s sucessors from the Church of Antioch ?
The Bible says that all of the Apostles were foundation rocks of the church. Ys, Peter was the leader of the Apostles but that is a far cry from the modern claims of Rome which are based on geography of where peter happen to have died. Reading the Early Church Fathers on this issues proves the modern claims of Rome to be greatly exaggerated.

The Roman Church has charged her doctrine on so many issues throughout the centuries. Yes, she is a great Church but she needs to return to her primative roots.

Rodd Umlauf (Artistree)

Thus, these interpretations above are interpretations of The Catholic Church and not mine.

You can check Catholic doctrine on this and all the other issues by yourself if you want.

Best wishes.

Thus The Bible and The Holy Spirit condemn you because of your clinging to errors. Until you repent.

You have no right to interpret The Bible: according to The Bible, only The Catholic Church is the pillar and ground of the truth (1 Timothy 3:15) due to the infallible pope’s (Peter’s) faith given to him by the infallible Jesus’ prayer (Luke 22:31-32).

Best wishes.

You said: Thus, it is obvious that the pillars must have continued in their existence and will continue till the end of the world.

That may be obvious to you, but it is not obvious to anyone who is not a Roman. Indeed, it is a non sequitur. It is an assertion that is not argued, just a bald statement.

I believe that the pillars remain in every meaningful way through their writings, which are contained in the Bible.

On another subject, how do you defend the idolatry of bowing down to images and statues? You cannot. So repent of this sin against the ten commandments.

Also, since all the pillars (The Apostles) died please explain to us all how could The House of God stand without all Its pillars?

Thus, it is obvious that the pillars must have continued in their existence and will continue till the end of the world.

Obviously pope cannot be Peter physically so that every pope be Simon Peter, having his body and his soul.
But pope is exactly the same as Peter in respect of Peter’s bishopric, infallible faith and leading position in The Catholic Church.
Thus, it is obvious that pope is Peter in that respect. And that respect is the only respect that matters.
Thus, this is the proof of pope being Peter (although it is also clear from the necessity of permanent existence of pillars among whom Peter is, according to The Bible – Luke 22:31-32, the only permanently infallible pillar).

Other of The Apostles were all infallible in faith because there was necessity of preaching The Gospel and establishment of local churches in distant parts of the world without telecommunications available.
But after establishment of connections between local churches of The Catholic Church there was no need that any other bishop except the successor of St. Peter be infallible: every normal body always has only one head.
Thus, except St. Peter and all his successors only the other of The Apostles including St. Paul were infallible in faith.

If you cannot understand these obvious explanations the problem is in you (regardless of the reason) and not in the explanations.
You can pray for grace, carefully re-read all these posts and ask others to help you if you still don’t understand them because you are unfortunately in a big and most dangerous trouble, whether you believe it or not.

There is of necessity a spiritual conflict between you and me because it has been obvious that you cling to errors, that I cling to the truth and errors are of necessity in conflict with the truth.

Best wishes.

I agree with all that you have said about apostles being the pillars of the church. I insist upon it too. But you have not shown that the Pope is Peter. You have merely asserted it. Please prove to me that the Pope is Peter, and not just the bishop of Rome.

What about the other apostles? Who and where are their successors?

There is no house which can be made of pillars only.
Thus, all believers are NOT pillars of Jesus’ Church but only some of them are pillars.
Thus, The Apostles and those of their successors who are pillars of God’s Church are not like the rest of believers: on them The House of God rests.
It means that, according to The Bible, other believers rest on one, substantially unchangeable and exclusively Apostles’ doctrine (Acts 2:42) and NOT on more doctrines (Galatians 1:6-9), on exclusively The Apostle’s authority (Matthew 28:19-20) and on exclusively The Apostle’s communion (Matthew 12:25) where St. Peter is above all the other Apostles (John 21:15-17).

Thus, those successors of The Apostles who are the pillars can only be those bishops whose origin can be traced to The Apostles (by seeing historical records) and who satisfy all of the three conditions mentioned above: they can only be the bishops who lead local churches of The Catholic Church.
Thus, whoever doesn’t obey (or is not ready to obey) any pope, successor of St. Peter and thus Peter and bishop of Rome, and thus is not in communion with him cannot be in communion with the rest of the pillars and thus cannot be a member of The House of God, The Catholic Church, cannot be justifed and cannot be saved.

Thus, it is not terrible that, if you cannot defeat this, you are merely wrong and defeated in this dispute but that that you are currently under condemnation as the follower of the father of all lies, the devil (John 8:44) and thus in danger of eternal suffering in Hell.

Best wishes.