Another good show & Mike certainly hit the nail on the head with the scriptures from Revelation 13 & 17 especially 13 as I literally saw it all falling into place as he was speaking the words of the passage. I will take up one point with you Tony & only because just recently I went down a rabbit trail with the apostle Peter after some comments I had heard. It was in conjunction with Peter actually being in Rome & part of the church there etc. How the Roman catholic church could build it upon Peter. We know that Jesus was saying that upon the statement that Peter made that He would build his church & we also know that Peter only made that statement by the Holy Spirit. Anyway, I dug deep to find out if there was actually any proof of Peter ever being in Rome & as it turns out, by using Scripture itself, there is a 90% plus case that Peter never put a foot in Rome in his life. It was pointed out by Bible Scholars that when Peter identifies himself as in Babylon, he wasn’t being cynical, he was being truthful. As you know not all the people came back to Israel from Babylon, these people were the children of those who were sent into exile & they had made their lives & had no desire to uproot & go back to their parents or grandparents country. It is the same with us, my family migrated from the British Isles, they intermarried here in Australia & none of the children ever went back ‘home’. Since then some have taken a trip but have been glad to return to Australia where they now belong, emotionally & spiritually. Peter on the day of Pentecost spoke in the languages of many men of Israel from other nations, some of these men were from the east, Babylon. It is believed that Peter went & took the gospel to these fellow Jewish people. Paul on the other hand, always desired to go to Rome & impart some word to them. So he ended up there & finally died there. It is not really known how Peter died, it is hearsay that Peter died upside down on a cross in Rome. No proof unless you are a follower of Roman Catholicism. Paul also said that he would not build on another man’s work, so why would he want to go to Rome if Peter had already gone there? Also Paul spoke the language, Peter spoke Aramaic & the common man’s Greek. So that on its own tells me that it is unlikely that Peter went there to spread the gospel. Maybe, he did end up there in the end to be killed, no one really knows. You only have the word of the Roman Catholic ‘popery’ & I wouldn’t believe anything they said was history anyway.
.
Our audio podcast channel on 
