Is there evidence of Apostle Simon Peter in Rome?

[MysticPhD]

Originally Posted by cmforte

While most of the sources I quote and link to above are Catholic, they are not any more or less bias than your sources, and they simply quote word-for-word the early Church Fathers....and even the Orthodox Church believes and teaches that Peter the Apostle was in Rome!!

This makes sense . . . like the fact that a manufacturer's sources aren't anymore biased than the EPA's sources, right?

[cmforte]

Originally Posted by MysticPhD

This makes sense . . . like the fact that a manufacturer's sources aren't anymore biased than the EPA's sources, right?

I was just being lazy. Finding objective, secular sources is difficult as most secular historians and scholars have no vested interest in "proving" or disproving one religion's belief or another's. All they can do is state there is over-whelming concensus among the Church Fathers and throughout history in christianity, up until very recently, that Peter was in Rome. Even the Orthodox Church, no fan of Catholicism since at least 1054 AD or earlier, teaches this, and they certainly have no reason to make that up or continue the "lie". Here is one secular source that, again, can not definitvely confirm or disprove the legend that Peter was in Rome, but, again, does put great weight in the belief because of the archaeological evidence found there: The Apostle Peter in Rome?

And, as I said in my other post, my Catholic sources were simply quoting the early Church Fathers and Apologists. If it misquoted or lied about the words of the early Church Fathers and Apologists, please feel free to state and prove so.

And this may be a little off-topic, but if you believe everything a government agency tells you, then you've got an even bigger problem than not believing Peter was in Rome!!

[chuckmann]

Originally Posted by ancient warrior

RESPONSE:

These were not "churches" but communities of Christians. They were subject to persecution because they were disruptive of Roman society claiming that only their God should be worshipped. (The Romans were tolerant of a number of different religions).[/b]

Semantics. "Church" means "House of the Lord" The real point is that there were "communities" or "churches" of Christians who gathered together, but who may or may not have been aware of each other. After all, early Christianity was a movement non grata.

Us folks in modern American have no clue as to how it was to exist in such a hostile , no dangerous, environment!