The differences between Saint Peter and the Popes.

Are you sure the Popes are spreading the message that Rome once angrily persecuted?

Let’s see:

Jacob tricked a blind man… so why does the Bible say that God loved him?

Did you know that the Bible says:

“I loved Jacob, and I hated Esau”?
(Romans 9:13)

But… let’s look at the facts.

Jacob took advantage of his brother’s weakness to obtain the birthright:
(Genesis 25:29–34)

And then he deceived his own father, who was blind, to steal the blessing:
(Genesis 27)

Is that justice?

Scripture itself condemns such acts:

“Cursed is he who leads a blind man astray on the way.”
(Deuteronomy 27:18)

And it also says:

“You hate all who do iniquity.”
(Psalm 5:5)

Then the question arises:

How can God love a usurper who deceives a blind man?

Can truth contradict itself?

EITHER…

Did the Roman Empire present an altered message?

A usurping message… like Jacob himself?

I wouldn’t be surprised by that from an empire that presented its god Mars as Michael.

The serpent’s words:
“Did God really say, ‘You must not eat that fruit’ (Genesis 3:1), ‘or the meat of the pig’ (Deuteronomy 14:8)?… Roman scribe, pass this out as the word of God:… Nothing God has made is evil if you receive it with thanksgiving (1 Timothy 4:1-6).”

---

Satan’s word:
“Servant of my empire, write also: ‘The whole world is under the power of the evil one (1 John 5:19), and to make them submit to me, add:

‘Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except from God (Romans 13:1)… for God appointed me so that I should never be overthrown (Revelation 13:5).'»

---

Satan’s word:
“Roman, write now that Jesus has risen and that his return will be from the clouds, so that people will expect impossible justice while I perpetuate myself with your empire in power, and love for their enemy is preached so that they will not demand their gold back when we steal it from them.”

For me, it’s not surprising either if it comes from an empire that presented its god Jupiter or Zeus as Jesus.

If the Roman Empire was capable of presenting Minerva as Mary, further frauds and usurpations from that empire would not surprise me.

Like the usurpation of a Peter who had a wife and whose humility led him to refuse to have men bow down before him, in a clear rejection of idolatry (Matthew 8:14; Acts 10:25; Exodus 20:3,5), by Caesars who, in addition to blessing those renowned statues and demanding that people kneel before them, had coins minted with their own faces, without seeking for themselves the blessing of God manifested in a wife (Matthew 22:20; Proverbs 18:22).

While Peter rejected these attitudes towards him,
because when Cornelius fell at his feet,
Peter lifted him up saying,
“Stand up, for I too am a man.”
(Acts 10:25–26) today, his so-called successors allow it.

How can we trust that the Bible contains the truth
and not what Rome wanted to say,
if its leaders act contrary to Peter,
who also had a wife?

“When Jesus came to Peter’s house,
he saw Peter’s mother-in-law lying in bed with a fever.”
(Matthew 8:14)

If Peter had a wife,
why don’t his supposed successors allow themselves one,
if «he who finds a wife finds a good thing»?
(Proverbs 18:22)

If the system teaches you to honor a usurper… who really wrote history?

Successor of Saint Peter… or successor of the Caesars?

Emperors and Councils
That Defined the Bible

CONSTANTINE I — Council of Nicaea (325 AD)
THEODOSIUS I — Synod of Rome (382 AD)
THEODOSIUS II — Council of Ephesus (431 AD)
MARCIAN — Council of Chalcedon (451 AD)

OBJECTIVE:
To eliminate any text that contradicted
the interests of the Empire.

“Let every man be subject to the authorities…”
“Do not claim what is yours…”

Rome plundered and did not want
resistance to its abuses.

In Genesis 25:29–34, the text does not say that Jacob deceived Esau, but that Esau sold him his birthright.

However, many interpret this episode as a form of usurpation or deception, since Jacob took advantage of his brother’s extreme weakness to gain an advantage.

In other words, it is not a direct quote, but a characterization of the action.

Explicit deception does appear later, when Jacob deceives his blind father
(Genesis 27).
However, Esau himself interprets both acts as the same substitution in Genesis 27:36, saying:

“Rightly was his name called Jacob, for he has supplanted me twice: he took away my birthright, and now he has taken away my blessing.” (Jacob means: “He who grasps the heel”) Is it a coincidence that the serpent in Genesis 3:15 is marked by wounding the heel, and that Jacob is born grasping the heel and is called ‘Supplanter’?