The document discusses the Catholic Church's claim that Peter was the first pope based on Jesus' statement that he would build his church upon Peter. It summarizes the key points of evidence presented: 1) There is no biblical evidence that Peter served as the head of the church in Jerusalem or Rome. The early church structure was decentralized, not hierarchical. 2) The New Testament does not mention Peter ever being in Rome, and Paul's letter to Romans fails to greet Peter among the Christians there. 3) Jesus' statement refers to building the church upon the "rock" of Peter's confession of faith, not Peter himself. The church is built upon Christ as its foundation. 4) The

1. THE
PO
by
The second in a special series on Catholicism
PETER
FIRST POPE?
The pope of Rome
stands as the nominal
head ofall Roman Catholic He
represents (ac:col:dulg
trine) the central
church on and is claimed to be
successor in this to the
Peter. to Catholic tenets,
Christ appointed Peter the first pope.
Peter then went to Rome where he
served in this for some twenty-
five (or more) years.
Beginning with Simon the
Catholic church traces an unbroken
succession right down to this day. And
upon this claim, the entire framework of
Catholicism is built. It is therefore
incumbent upon anyone hrr,,,,,,th,
ing truth to ask some que:,HI;[J1IJ
blindly accepting such
tant assertions.
•Does the Holy Word of God reveal
that Christ ordained one man to be
above all others in His church?
•Can we find any scriptural
for an organization in which one man (a
pope) serves as the supreme head?
•Did early Christians .Peter
as pope, or leader, of the church?
THE POPE AND
THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
Here's what the Catholic church
says about the pope:
"The Roman Pontiff, when he
ex cathedra - that is, when in
the exercise of his office as pastor and
teacher of all Christians he defines . . .
a doctrine of faith or morals to be held
by the whole church reason
of Divine assistance to him
in blessed of that in-
fallibility . . . and such
definitions of the Roman Pontiff are
irreformable. " I
In other words, this states that the
Catholic church believes the pope to be
infallible when on matters of
faith and morals, and when sp<~aking
authoritatively (ex cathedra - from the
chair of .Peter) as the Vicar ofChrist on
earth.
Any person of average '''~~'''il:>~''
who is even conversant
with the New lesltament, will
that no such ordered hierarchical system
is even within Scripture.
the loosest and most tenuous of
authority structures (other than submis-
sion to the Head) can be
detected within the pages of the Holy
Bible. Christians
search in vain for any evidence of
Peter's as an authority figure
within the New Testament Church - as
the true beginnings of Christ's Church
are recorded in the book of Acts.
The other in no way
deferred to Peter. When the and
elders met in Jerusalem described in
Acts 15:6) to debate how to heal the first
major doctrinal schism within the
young Church, it was the Lord's
brother, who was obviously in
Peter spoke during this as did
others, but it was James who handed
down the decision.
Where is Peter here dernO!lstr'atillg
ihis capacity for infallible decisions and
; pronouncements as an example for all
subsequent popes? The decision finally
reached at this time did not come
nor was this decision transmitted
mr<JU.ll:nolut the Church by Peter. The
"alJOstleS and elders, with the whole
church" sent Paul, Barnabas, Jude, and
Silas to announce the determination of
this by the council.
It's easy enough to see from this
incident that the Early Church
functioned in a manner which was radi-
different from that claimed within
Catholic theology.
Continued on page 38
August, 37

2. The Pope
Continued from page 37
WAS PETER EVER IN ROME?
Peter may have
visited Rome at some
isn't a hint
firm this.
much-quoted, Catholic "traditions,"
neither is there any historical evidence
of Peter's presence in
As Paul closes out the book of
Romans (his letter to the church at
Rome), he mentions many In
the sixteenth consists of
little more than a listofthose he
there. Now according to the papal
ofbishops Peter was in
Rome at this time. however,
Paul does not send greetings to Peter!
Since Peteris not here by
it can be concluded with some
....,,";u..'J that he was not there at that
time! This, of course, undermines the
very foundation of the claimed apos-
tolic succession of the Roman bishops.
If he had been in Rome as (as
the Roman Catholic church claims),
he would have been the first one Paul
would have referred to! It is therefore
a waste of time to consider such a
groundless theory. To be brutally frank
and it is that
Peter ever even saw the of Rome in
his lifetime!
We do know a number of
about Simon Peter, however. FIrst of
he was one of the twelve apostles. He
was a native fisherman of Bethsaida
when the Lord called him. He was a
mamed man (Matthew 8:14 and I Co-
rinthians He had no headship over
the entire church; he ministered
to Jews V':Ul:lll!l:ll!:>
it would seem that he wasn't even the
head of the Jewish sector of the
much less that of the Gentiles - Acts
II Corinthians 11:28, and Galatians
2:6-21).
Peter was only one elder among
many (I Peter 5). As previously men-
tioned, there's not the slightest indica-
tion that he ever set foot in Rome.
Instead of west (toward
Rome), we find Peter in the east instead,
38 August. 1985
an epistle from Babylon (I Peter
5:13). Furthermore, we know of
his death - other than the Droph(~CV
which is given in John 21:18-19.
Some claim that Peter's reference to
in I Peter actually refers to
Rome. This is a ridiculous assertion,
however. The city ofBabylon was in
"'hl~'''''''''''' when Peter wrote was
home to many Jews, and was well-
known as a major city on the ........y,~'w..,,>
River. The great historian.
writes of during this same
then would Peter send
salutations from Babylon if he was
in Rome? This would be as
irrational as today claiming you were in
San Francisco when you were in
New York. Sad to say, Catholic asser-
tions about this don't hold water when
exposed to of the case.
DID GIVE PETER
THE TO CHURCH,
MAKING HIM THE FIRST IN A
LONG OF POPES,
AS CLAIMED BY THE
CATHOLIC CHURCH?
FIrst and we know that
Christ is the head of the Church
sians Peter was never the head of
the Church, nor is any other man -
only Christ.
Second, Peter himself said that
Christ was the true foundation rock (I
Peter 2:4·8). He also spoke of that rock
(Christ) as "the stone that was set at
nought ojyou builders" (Acts 4:11). He
further said, UNeither is there salvation
in any other"
The Church was built on Christ. He
is the only true foundation and there
is no other foundation. The Word of
God says:
"For otherfoundation can no man
lay than that is laid, which is Jesus
Christ" (1 Corinthians 3:11).
I think it is even cur-
sory investigation of that the
did not take our Lord's words
("Upon this rock I will build my
church") to mean that He was appoint-
Peter to be their pope. A short time
later they asked Jesus (in Matthew 18:1)
who among them would be the J<.l"'"...",1..
If Jesus had stated that Peter
was to be the disciples would
have automatically assumed that he was
the among them. Of course,
this was not what Jesus was saying
when He made this statement.
Furthermore, it seems obvious that
the outstanding role in the Church
was not taken by but by PauL Paul
wrote some 100 consisting of
verses within the New Testament.
(Actually, it was Paul who defined and
delivered the New On the
other hand, Peter wrote only eight chap-
ters, consisting of 166 verses. It would
thus seem that Paul's was of far
more import than that of Peter.
In II Corinthians Paul states:
"For I suppose I was not a whit
behind the very "
He said basically the same thing in
II Corinthians 12:11. Now if Peter had
been declared the supreme the
pope, then certainly Paul would have
been somewhat behind him. Obviously,
this was not the case, as Paul's statement
confirms.
in Galatians 2:11 we read that
Paul gave a rebuke to Peter "because he
was to be blamed." It would certainly
seem that Peter was not de:mo,nstratmg
infallibility in this situation, and cer-
tainly not considered by Paul to be "the
infallible pope. " It is for sure that
when papal infallibility has been for-
malized within the Catholic structure,
we find no bishops
the pope for his errors.
It was the Apostle Paul who was the
of the Gentiles" (Romans
11:13). On the other hand, Peter's minis-
try was "unto the circumcision" (Gala-
tians This within itself is clear
evidence that Peter was not the
of Rome the Catholics teach), for
Rome was a Gentile city.
The Catholic church claims that
Peter went to Rome about 41 A.D. and
was martyred there in about 66 A.D.
However, as we have said, there isn't
a shred of evidence that Peter was ever
in Rome. Certainly, he could have
but Scripture doesn't even remotely hint
at such.2

3. Actually, I believe that all evidence
is to the contrary. The New Testament
specifically tells us that Peter visited
Antioch, Samaria, Joppa, Caesarea
(and other places) - but absolutely no
mention is ever made of his going to
Rome. This would certainly be a strange
omission when we realize that Rome
was the capital of the Empire and was
considered to be the most important city
in the world.
Then if we accept 66 A.D. as the
date of his martyrdom, this would mean
that he was bishop of Rome from 41
A.D. to 66A.D. But in about 44 A.D.,
we know he was attending the council in
Jerusalem. About 53 A.D., we
know that Paul joined him in Anti-
och (Galatians 2:11). Then, in about
58 A.D. previously mentioned),
Paul wrote his letter to the Christians
at Rome - and failed completely to
mention Peter as among those he was
:5lUII.1Lllllj;i, in Rome.
incident in proper per-
im,lgule a missionary writ-
to his home church and greeting
twenty-seven of its prominent mem-
bers while ignoring
the
The entire hierarchy of the Cath-
olic church is built on the of
Peter the first bishop of Rome.
But once we to investigate
these we find no evidence to
<IJY1Mn,r. them. In at the same
time we're finding a great deal of
to them.
KEYS TO THE ..."n"un
"And1say also unto That thou
an Peter. and upon this rock 1will build
my church; and the of hell shall
not prevail it. And 1 will
unto thee the of the kingdom
heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind
on earth shall be bound in heaven: and
whatsoever thou loose on earth
shall be loosed in heaven" (Matthew
16:18-19).
In Rome today, at the altar in
St. Peter's church, hundreds of feet
above the altar and carved in
the words "Thou art
and upon this rock I will build my
church. "
Did Jesus actually appoint Peter the
first
For hundreds of years, at the begin-
ning of the Christian Church, no one
ever used these words to claim any
ofpapal supremacy or infallibility. Even
unto this only Catholics do. In the
ongmal biblical text, different words
are used for Peter and rock. Peter is
petros, to a pebble or small
rock which
boulder.
area
The pope of Rome stands as the nominal
head of all Roman Catholic worship. He
represents (according to Catholic doctrine)
the central authority of Christ's chUrch on
earth. The church's authoritative, hierarchical
structure includes the pope on down
bishops and priests to the average layman.
pebble (with no stability), but on this rock
(referring to Himself) I will build my
church and no force under heaven can
move it" Peter understood this perfectly,
as is demonstrated when he describes the
Lord Jesus as a rock while His believers
are stones (in I Peter 2:5-8).
The Church of the Lord Jesus Christ
is urtquestionably built on that solid,
massive rock, Jesus Christ.
WERE THERE POPES
IN THE EARLY CHURCH?
Nowhere in the book of Acts -
which is the most complete history of
the Early Church - is there any sug-
gestion of such a person or Dositio'n.
Only gradually did the concept of an
organized church -
directed, and regulated
of pope, bishops, and
And even then, it did so
spread opposition.
It was Cyprian of (who
died in 258 A.D.) who introduced the
COlilce:Dts which were to about rev-
olutionary changes in worship patterns
within the church.
Cyprian demanded from
the whole church to the bishop of
Rome, WllO (he said) derived his
authority directly from God. He
i!'!
~ made awesome claims for the epis-
~ copacy.
i In the years following. this con-
cept was gradually intruded into
existing practice, and church govern-
ment eventually became almost
completely autocratic.3
During the years 390 A.D. to
461 A.D.• Leo I (bishop of Rome)
used all his considerable powers to
establish recognition for the bishop
of Rome as "the universal bishop. "
It was he who first made the claim
that Peter had been the first pope
(some 400 years after this sup-
",n 'un1111 took
The eastern branch of the church
denied these claims.
Even the Council of Chalcedon
Leo exercised power)
refused his to certify his
claims. His assertions of papal
supremacy however, a pro-
found effect in later
Please note well that it was Leo 1-
the first of Rome - who laid
claim to universal authority over the
church, and note also that this did not
come about until some 400 years after
the time of the in the
Church (of which PeteTwas only one
among
Leo's claim was enforced lllllUU~:U
the power of the Roman emperor, but
even then it received only marginal
within the church.
not
Continued on page 40
39

4. The Pope whose purpose was ostensibly to root In contrast, evangelical Christianity
Continued from page 39 out and punish heretics. The lands and sees the Church primarily as the universal
properties of condemned heretics and invisible community of born-again
IS THE CATHOLIC CLAIM TO became the property of the church. It Christians. The Church's mission is to
UNIQUE GUIDANCE BY THE thus served two practical purposes: dis- witness to Jesus Christ crucified and to
HOLY SPIRIT, THROUGH THE . senters who disagreed with Catholic His plan for salvation - and to foster lite
OFFICE OF THE POPE, VALID? doctrines were silenced while the in the Holy Spirit through proclamation of
pope's coffers were swelled. the authoritative, written Word of God.
The answer to this becomes obvious The Inquisition was responsible for It sees the Church in a secondary
the moment we consider the Roman the torture and death of countless saints degree, with its visible congregations as
Catholic church's long history of errant who refused to accept the practices of a vehicle instituted by Christ to preach
and unscriptural doctrines. Rome. Any criticism of pope or bishop the Word, to celebrate the ordinances of
If the Catholic church is uniquely was immediate cause for the most baptism and the Lord's Supper, and to
protected from error by the intervention gruesome of tortures and execution. It gather saved Christians in fellowship
of the ~oly Spirit (through the pope's was the most effective device ever for mutual edification. Its life span in
office), one can only conclude (and no devised for stilling criticism. sacred history is limited to that period
irreverence is intended) that the Holy Not surprisingly, it suppressed for from Pentecost to the rapture.
Spirit was asleep (or at least had His many years the rising tide of protestant- It constantly renews itself by sub-
eyes closed) when the following oc- ism within the "Holy" Roman empire. mitting to the guidelines of the inerrant
curred during the long and checkered In fact, it is estimated to have been Scriptures and making itself available to
career of the Catholic church:8 responsible for the deaths of some the power of the Holy Spirit No latter-
• Leo I (bishop of Rome, 440-446 900,000 confessing Christians during day revelations are accepted if they are
A.D.) advocated the death penalty for this period alone. not in total agreement with the word
heresy. In totality, it is estimated that the and the spirit of God's written Word. It
• Leo II (682-683 A.D.) pro- Roman Catholic church murdered some supports no intricate, external, con-
nounced one of his predecessors (Pope 20 million people during the existence trived, hierarchical structure but con-
Honorius I) a heretic. of the Inquisition.9 And one can't help forms to the pattern of the simple
• Stephen II (752-757 A .D .) but ask the sobering question: Is this an pastoral framework revealed within the
encouraged the military conquest of example of the Holy Spirit guidance New Testament.
Italy by Pepin, and accepted the con- that supposedly keeps the Roman It relies without reservation on
quered lands as papal property. church on its unwavering course of God's sustaining help and claims nO
• Sergius III (904-911 A.D.) had a infallibility? infallible gift in regard to interpreting
mistress, and their illegitimate off- the Word of God. It says the Church is a
spring subsequently became pope. IN CONCLUSION saved people - not an organization
• John X (914-928 A.D .) had multi- based on the weaknesses of men.
pIe mistresses and was killed in the Traditional Roman Catholicism It does not claim to save. It makes
physical act of adultery by an irate states that there is only one true church God's plan of salvation known to man at
husband. founded by Jesus Christ which is visible all times and in all places. It is a slave
• Boniface VII (984-985 A.D.) to the world. It is the temporal extension to the sovereign power of Jesus Christ
murdered his predecessor, John XIV. of Christ's presence on earth. It is vivi- but enslaves no man's conscience. It
• Boniface VIII (1294-1303 A.D.) fied (lent life) and guided by the Holy believes all born-again people are a part
bought his papacy. Spirit. of the body of Christ - His universal
• Benedict IX (1033-1045 A.D .) It is endowed with infallibility and Church. ~
was made pope at the age of twelve. He will last until the end of time. It cannot
committed public murders and robber- err in matters of faith and morals. It FOOTNOTES
ies and was finally driven out of Rome is superior to, and the only reliable
I Ralph Woodrow. Babylon Mystery Religion, Ralph
by the populus. interpreter of, the Holy Bible. Woodrow Evangelistic Association, Inc.• Riverside.
• In 1045 and 1046 A.D., there It is visible in an authoritative, California, 1983. p. 100.
were three rival popes. During the reign hierarchical structure that includes the 2 Ibid. pp. 74-78.
of Alexander III (1159-1181 A.D.) there very vicar of Christ - the pope - on
3 Clark Bunerfield. Night Joumey From Rome. Chick
Publications. Chino. California. 1982. p. 93.
were four rival popes. (Will the real down through bishops and priests to the • Ibid.
Peter please stand up?) average layman. It is moreover a liv- , Ibid.
• The incredibly cruel Inquisition ing organism, "the mystical body of 6 Ibid, p. 94.
was initiated by'Pope Innocent III Christ." Union with this orgahization 70p. Cit. Woodrow. p. 101.
(1198-1216 A.b,"), and was to last for is. in some manner, necessary for sal-
• Op. Cit. Bunerfield. pp. 101-102.
9 Ibid.
some 500 years. This was a church court vation.
40 August. 1985