CV wrote:
SteveR
You seem to always fall on the side of defending Rome. Why?
In another thread where "seven hills" was used in refering to Rome, you argued that the text translated as "mountains", not "hills". Rome argues that same point vociferously.
Here, where there's a contention on text, you state

Like English is to us, Greek was the common language then. The desciples would have used Greek in their public ministry.
But what your sly comment really belies is the fact that Rome has been arguing in favour of some nonexistent Aramiac text for certain passages because the Greek text clearly destroys Rome. (For example, c.f grammatical gender, peter the rock.)
You're too close to Rome. Please give this a serious and prayerfull consideration.