Are Mormons and Unitarians Christians?

[hope]

1. Peter’s name is first ONLY because Jesus approached Peter and Andrew first. The other apostles describe John as the apostle that Jesus loved. Does that mean he was the leader, no! Does that mean Jesus only loved John, no! We can’t read into it or assume. We have to go by what it EXACTLY SAYS.

Exactly? No scripture does not say that Jesus approached Peter and Andrew first. It says that Andrew who was a disciplte of John was told by John as Jesus passed “behold the Lamb of God”. Andrew approached Jesus and asked where Jesus was staying. Jesus told him to follow and find out. He did and stayed with Jesus a day then went to Peter and told him that he had found the Messiah. So if what you claim were true Andrew would be the first named. At this point, when Jesus does meet Simon, Jesus renames him Cephas. God Changed the names of Abraham, Sarah, and Israel and in each case it signaled a significant change that began a new life. Peter is no different. Jesus change his name and gave him the Keys to the kingdom. Peter’s name change is significant all by itself just like Abraham, Sarah and Israel. Jesus gave brothers James and John the name of Boanerges but it wasn’t an name change as much as a description. Paul is often said to have had his name changed from Saul but it was not. Paul being a citizen of Rome had two names. Saul was his Jewish name and Paul his Roman name.

 

[hope]

Now I have some questions for you?
If Peter was the so call alleged Pope. Than how how come in scripture it describes James the brother of Jesus making the FINAL decisions and holding order in the council?

We disagree. We read the same thing but see it differently. I see Peter as making the final decision. I wish you would have read the post I linked twice

Secondly, few non-Catholic commentators seem to notice the striking wording Peter used in his speech. If he was only a witness, wouldn’t he have appealed only to his experience? But while Peter did focus on his experience, the main object of his speech was God: “God made a choice among you, that by my mouth . . .”; “And God . . . bore witness to them, giving them the Holy Spirit”; “He made no distinction”; and “why therefore do you put God to the test?” (vs. 7-10). It is readily apparent that Peter was quite comfortable in being a spokesman for God. Even James seems to take this for granted by stating, “Simeon has related how God first concerned himself . . .” (v. 14). There is an immediacy to Peter’s relating of God’s work which is noticeably absent from James’s speech.
As mentioned, Paul, Barnabas, and James all reinforced and agreed with Peter’s declaration, albeit in different ways. The first two related “the signs and wonders God” had been working “among the Gentiles” (v. 12). James pointed first to the words of Peter and then to the Prophets (vs. 14-15). Those who claim James’s speech was the definitive one point to the language in verse 19 (“Therefore it is my judgement . . .”) as evidence for James’s primacy. Yet James is simply suggesting a way of implementing what Peter had already definitively expressed. “Peter speaks as the head and spokesman of the apostolic Church,” state Scott Hahn and Curtis Mitch in the Ignatius Catholic Study Bible, “He formulates a doctrinal judgment about the means of salvation, whereas James takes the floor after him to suggest a pastoral plan for inculturating the gospel in mixed communities where Jewish and Gentile believers live side by side (15:13-21)” (232).

How come there is no where in scripture Peter is being granted the title of leader.

Jesus appointed him leader. I will give you the Keys to the kingdom of heaven. Do a search on what keys meant in scripture… It is the only time Jesus gives the Keys and only to Peter.

How come it is James writing the letter to the council with the final decision?

Interesting, exactly what verse states that James wrote the letter?

Where in the Bible is there EVIDENCE that Peter was EVER in Rome?

What difference does that make? You do realize that he was Pope not because he was in Rome but that Jesus appointed him to be leader? Now as for evidence there is no verse that says I Peter am in Rome however, he does state that he is in Babylon, a code word for Rome. If you need scripture for this Rev. 14:8

If Jesus didn’t have brothers or sister how come in the Bible the names that I gave you in the last E-mail they keep calling them HIS BROTHERS AND SISTERS. Not relatives, nor cousin, nor kinsmen?

already answered this.

 

[hope]

How come when the Gospels end Peter is in Jerusalem and not in Rome where the roman catholic church was started?

The Catholic Church Started on Pentecost when the Holy Spirit decended on the apostels in Jeruselem. The tomb of Peter was found under the St. Peter’s Church in Rome.
Pope Paul VI was able to announce officially something that had been discussed in archaeological literature and religious publications for years: that the actual tomb of the first pope had been identified conclusively, that his remains were apparently present, and that in the vicinity of his tomb were inscriptions identifying the place as Peter’s burial site, meaning early Christians knew that the prince of the apostles was there. The story of how all this was determined, with scientific accuracy, is too long to recount here. It is discussed in detail in John Evangelist Walsh’s book, The Bones of St. Peter. It is enough to say that the historical and scientific evidence is such that no one willing to look at the facts objectively can doubt that Peter was in Rome. To deny that fact is to let prejudice override reason.

 

[hope]

How does a person get to Heaven?

An official asked him this question, "Good teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life? "Jesus answered him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone. You know the commandments, ‘You shall not commit adultery; you shall not kill; you shall not steal; you shall not bear false witness; honor your father and your mother.’”> And he replied, “All of these I have observed from my youth.” When Jesus heard this he said to him, “There is still one thing left for you: sell all that you have and distribute it to the poor, and you will have a treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”

Amen, I say to you, whoever does not accept the kingdom of God like a child will not enter it."

Jesus answered, "Amen, amen, I say to you, no one can enter the kingdom of God without being born of water and Spirit.

The one who believes and is baptized will be saved; but the one who does not believe will be condemned.

Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, abideth in me, and I in him. As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father; so he that eateth me, the same also shall live by me. This is the bread that came down from heaven. Not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead. He that eateth this bread, shall live for ever.

Be you therefore perfect, as also your heavenly Father is perfect.
Amen I say to thee, thou shalt not go out from thence till thou repay the last farthing.
For I was hungry, and you gave me to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave me to drink; I was a stranger, and you took me in: Naked, and you covered me: sick, and you visited me: I was in prison, and you came to me. Then shall the just answer him, saying: Lord, when did we see thee hungry, and fed thee; thirsty, and gave thee drink? And when did we see thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and covered thee? Or when did we see thee sick or in prison, and came to thee? And the king answering, shall say to them: Amen I say to you, as long as you did it to one of these my least brethren, you did it to me.

 

[hope]

We do not read scripture in the original language. We don’t have an original manuscript. Mathew is speculated to have been first written in Hebrew. The only copies we have are in the Greek. When you read scripture you have to keep in mind that they are translation and the culture that they were written in.
Take for instance Luke 1:27
betrothed is translated as engage, espouse, and pledged yet all of those translations do not convey the cultural reality.
Marriage took place in two parts. Mary and Joseph had already entered into the first part of their marriage and is why the angle tells Joseph to take his wife to his home which was that second part of the marriage. As should be obvious, translations do not always convey what scripture is telling us. So to the use of brothers, How was the writer suppose to convey the cultural aspect of families who lived together. They would have included not only cousins but aunts and uncles. You couldn’t just say cousins. The best they could do was call them brothers and sisters,