Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

The myth of St. Peter was a thread which started in the 3rd century by the Roman papacy...It was a power stuggle inwhich the rival parties wanted the position of God's elite.

One solitary passage in the Gospel of Matthew 16: 18-19 which Jesus made a pun saying Peter was the Rock..would find it's way into scripture...Unfortunately the so called Petrine passage was a forgery...and deliberately inserted as a political ploy, to uphold the primacy of the Holy See...

The real roots of Peter lay in pagan Rome...the city of Petra or Pater Liber, assimilated to the Mithraic pater patrun (father of fathers). It has been called both Rock and Father....that is, a phallic pillar that's in the Vatican mundus since Etuscan times. Since his name also meant a rock, he was what the OT called "the Rock that begat thee" Deut. 32:18.

In older statues of peter he is seen with horns on his head....like the Horned God Bacchus (Pater Liber)

The churche's festival of St. Peter used to be held on the day of Janus, another pagan god, when the sun entered the sign of Aquarius, symbol of both the gate of the year and the Pearly Gate of Maria-Aphrodite...

Whatever Peters origin he stood in opposition to the female as shown by the Gnostic Gospels when Mary Magdalene said "Peter makes me hesitate, I am afraid of him because he hates the female race."

Marten Luther was so shocked by the decandt luxury of the popes courts that he wrote "If there is hell, then Rome is built upon it." And Peter had the keys to heaven even letting the Savior in????

Medieval legends also suggest the Petrine anti-feminism ...that Peter had a daughter and was very beautiful so he prayed that God would strike her with a fatal illness..It is also suggested in the Golden Legend that he tortured women to exorcise them, as to cause them to vomit up devils that possessed them along with much blood.

Got to love that Peter.....

The roots of Christianity keep getting better and better.We need a news show where we just take very extreme views on religon.It could very funny.especialy when cking comes in as a special guest.

peter was the most talkative apostle and his mouth always lead him into trouble. many times Paul had to rebuke him because he was acting like a hypocrite. James was the most quiet and he taught more of the Jewish law more than others. Luke was the only non Jew of the group and also was a doctor. Mathew a tax collector hated by the Jews because whatever was left over he kept. mark I have no idea, but he did journey with Paul alot and so did Luke. john was James brother.

Yea... the old Peter, I remenber him

naughty naught peter....so naughty....and sooooo not real....

Well you all know that I believe Heaven is here on Earth (and all across the universe), so St. Peter would have to be a metaphor for us. We let ourselves into heaven or not.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Well you all know that I believe Heaven is here on Earth (and all across the universe), so St. Peter would have to be a metaphor for us. We let ourselves into heaven or not.

Interesting........

And isn't it interesting that "Peter" was inserted in the 3rd century???

just when power was building and Constantine and the councils??

Hmmmmmmmmm.....becoming quite clear now...

Originally posted by debbiejo
Interesting........

And isn't it interesting that "Peter" was inserted in the 3rd century???

just when power was building and Constantine and the councils??

Hmmmmmmmmm.....becoming quite clear now... Jesus asked them who they said he was and peter said thou art the christ the son of the living god. Jesus said thou art peter and upon this rock I will build my church. Jesus was talking about his faith at that partucular moment, not peter or his bloodline. It's strange that if the pope is decended from peter that they have to elect a new one every time.

Originally posted by markie
Jesus asked them who they said he was and peter said thou art the christ the son of the living god. Jesus said thou art peter and upon this rock I will build my church. Jesus was talking about his faith at that partucular moment, not peter or his bloodline. It's strange that if the pope is decended from peter that they have to elect a new one every time.

The whole Peter story was insertedin the 3rd century though.

Originally posted by markie
Jesus asked them who they said he was and peter said thou art the christ the son of the living god. Jesus said thou art peter and upon this rock I will build my church. Jesus was talking about his faith at that partucular moment, not peter or his bloodline. It's strange that if the pope is decended from peter that they have to elect a new one every time.

The whole Peter Story was inserted though in the 3rd century..so the conversation between Jesus and Peter never happened.

then who betrayed Jesus three times then?

true, Jesus did say that based on Peter's faith and so he called him the rock of the church meaning also that peter would spread the gospel in later times. despite peter did betray him. I don't know why catholics believe peter was the first pope. I guess that have nothing else to believe in. peter had another name called Simon and Simon peter.

Originally posted by cking
then who betrayed Jesus three times then?


Can you please think outside of your little box for just one moment?
Peter was represented as the lower form of Christ in Gnostic Christianity along with Judith.

Originally posted by mr.smiley
Can you please think outside of your little box for just one moment?
Peter was represented as the lower form of Christ in Gnostic Christianity along with Judith.

Mr.smiley don't waist your time on cking. Cking will not think beyond what he was taught. Cking is not seeking.


Cking prove me wrong...

Hmm...fun stuff. Djoe, where's that info from your first post from?? I'd be interested in this stuff. It's gonna hit the fan at some point in my life when I have to declare that I'm not a Christian anymore, and I'd like to be properly armed for the ensuing battle.

Also, "The Power of Myth" was mentioned...good book.

still you didn't answer my question? who then if peter never existed or Judas never existed? do you think the Pharisees would do it? no they think they were to holy to do it.

It's the same with Pilate.We know Pilate historicaly exisisted but he could have easily been put into the gospels to give it more of a historical reference.

You're assuming there was a "betrayal" and a "denying" and that every word of the Bible is true cking. Think of how much a story changes if you tell it every month for a year...quite a bit. Now consider that the Gospels used in the Bible were all written around 40 years after Jesus' death. 40 years! I'm not discrediting the whole thing....far from it. And I believe in many of the teachings of the Bible (not all though). But to accept it like you might a news report or a history text is a bit absurd.

If you want a definitive answer...I don't know. If there was a "betrayal" maybe it was 'Peter' maybe it was Judas, maybe it was that the local authorities got tired of Jesus teaching and brought him in without any crime...systems of law were much different in those days. There's dozens of plausible explainations, but in focusing on "who denied Jesus?" you're missing the forest for the trees and ignoring the main body of the discussion.

but the apostles were filled with the holy spirit and he told them what to write and what not to write. we probably need to read the Torah instead of the bible.

still if peter was made up and if Judas was then all the characters and the whole bible is made up. I think that some parts of the bible is misinterpreted but not all of it. do you think the apostles would lie to the spirit? That is why we need the Torah to compare.

Who told them what to write? God? Just like rulers throughout history have been intermediaries with God?? God wrote existence...maybe not the Christian God, but some higher power. My own flesh and blood, ability to reason, think, act, feel emotions, etc....those things are more gospels to me than a book that doesn't even bother to present all sides of the argument (Gnostics and such).

Enough of the gospels are similar enough that some of it has to be founded on truth...I'll throw you that bone at least. But when you can ignore equally founded arguments such as this one about Peter, or Jesus teaching reincarnation in the Gnostics, or even other religions...many of whom have just as much claim to the truth (see: not much) as Christianity, then that shows a blind faith toward something that has done nothing to earn your trust other than saying that it's the truth (which anyone can claim). I'm sure Jesus was a great guy...and bunches of his teachings were 'true'...I've even been on your side of the coin. But there's more out there.

Let's look for a moment at "Absolute truth" vs. "Relative truth" If you look at a table, you can say "This is a table" and it's true. (there's a "But" here). But that truth is relative to time and space. Destroy the table, or use its materials to make raincoats, or simply wait 1000 years. Is that still true??? NO. But the 'idea' of the table is true eternally. The "relative truth" is tht which we normally perceive to be "Real" and the asolute truth...the truer and more 'real' of the two, are those things we would generally categorize as "Not Real". Apply this thinking to the Gospels and I hope you see my point. The absolute truth of the gospels might be real (stress on the word 'might'). But the relative truth of the gospels, with the changing of church doctrine, burning documents, not including others, translation errors, etc. That truth has been gone for a long time.

-DM

And that (above) will be my last attempt on this thread. Some get it and are open about it...others can't be bothered.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
And that (above) will be my last attempt on this thread. Some get it and are open about it...others can't be bothered.

Please don't give up.....

oh, I'm not giving up...I'm just done saying all I will on this thread. I don't think I can put it any better than I did above, and I've had some conversations with metaphorical rocks over in the comic books forum...it's frustrating to say the least. I don't like getting into those types of discussions. Now, I'm not personally attacking cking (I'm sure you're a nice guy and all, and you're certainly always welcome to your opinion.) but such opposing views that can't sway the other person involved is hardly a meaningful discussion, but is rather an exercise in futility.

But I suppoe I rescind my last statement, if only because I'm typing a new post now...If I have anything else of merit to add, I certainly will.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
oh, I'm not giving up...I'm just done saying all I will on this thread. I don't think I can put it any better than I did above, and I've had some conversations with metaphorical rocks over in the comic books forum...it's frustrating to say the least. I don't like getting into those types of discussions. Now, I'm not personally attacking cking (I'm sure you're a nice guy and all, and you're certainly always welcome to your opinion.) but such opposing views that can't sway the other person involved is hardly a meaningful discussion, but is rather an exercise in futility.

But I suppoe I rescind my last statement, if only because I'm typing a new post now...If I have anything else of merit to add, I certainly will.

I do understand. I simply ignore him.

Originally posted by debbiejo
The whole Peter story was insertedin the 3rd century though. why do you say it was an insert.

sure, the truth is floating in the wind waiting for someone to catch it.

I was just being sarcastic. I had nothing else to say.

Originally posted by markie
why do you say it was an insert.

It was added later for more a historical context.

Originally posted by debbiejo
The myth of St. Peter was a thread which started in the 3rd century by the Roman papacy...It was a power stuggle inwhich the rival parties wanted the position of God's elite.

One solitary passage in the Gospel of Matthew 16: 18-19 which Jesus made a pun saying Peter was the Rock..would find it's way into scripture...Unfortunately the so called Petrine passage was a forgery...and deliberately inserted as a political ploy, to uphold the primacy of the Holy See...

The real roots of Peter lay in pagan Rome...the city of Petra or Pater Liber, assimilated to the Mithraic pater patrun (father of fathers). It has been called both Rock and Father....that is, a phallic pillar that's in the Vatican mundus since Etuscan times. Since his name also meant a rock, he was what the OT called "the Rock that begat thee" Deut. 32:18.

In older statues of peter he is seen with horns on his head....like the Horned God Bacchus (Pater Liber)

The churche's festival of St. Peter used to be held on the day of Janus, another pagan god, when the sun entered the sign of Aquarius, symbol of both the gate of the year and the Pearly Gate of Maria-Aphrodite...

Whatever Peters origin he stood in opposition to the female as shown by the Gnostic Gospels when Mary Magdalene said "Peter makes me hesitate, I am afraid of him because he hates the female race."

Marten Luther was so shocked by the decandt luxury of the popes courts that he wrote "If there is hell, then Rome is built upon it." And Peter had the keys to heaven even letting the Savior in????

Medieval legends also suggest the Petrine anti-feminism ...that Peter had a daughter and was very beautiful so he prayed that God would strike her with a fatal illness..It is also suggested in the Golden Legend that he tortured women to exorcise them, as to cause them to vomit up devils that possessed them along with much blood.

Got to love that Peter.....

* this is a blatant misinterpretation of "The Rock" in Matthew 16:18...

"And I also say unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it."
Matthew 16:18

* Christ did not said that the church He built was upon Saint Peter, but upon "This Rock"...

"And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of a spiritual rock that followed them: and the rock was Christ."
I Corinthians 10:4

* it was Christ Himself... and being the "The Rock"...

"And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence."
Colossians 1:18

* Christ is the head of the Church He built...

* and i do not believe that the papacy was rooted from Saint Peter... this is a very common verse...

"And call no man your father on the earth: for one is your Father, even he who is in heaven."
Matthew 23:9

* the title given to the pope is "Most Holy Father", i doubt Saint Peter would accept a title like that...

* and the "Vicarius Filii Dei"? the Vicar or the Substitute of the Son of God? Christ has no substitutes...

"But he, because he abideth for ever, hath his priesthood unchangeable."
Hebrews 7:24

* and it is unfair for Saint Peter to throw upon him those ridiculous accusations about anti-feminism... he got a wife and a mother-in-law stated in the Bible for goodness' sake...

Meaning Jesus' teachings and since Jesus never wrote a book, and we know he was literate, because he read from the temple...........which Jesus are we supposed to follow?.....There are many writings about what Jesus said and did... .......Maybe the Jesus you are following is the WRONG Jesus.

Originally posted by debbiejo
The myth of St. Peter was a thread which started in the 3rd century by the Roman papacy...It was a power stuggle inwhich the rival parties wanted the position of God's elite.

One solitary passage in the Gospel of Matthew 16: 18-19 which Jesus made a pun saying Peter was the Rock..would find it's way into scripture...Unfortunately the so called Petrine passage was a forgery...and deliberately inserted as a political ploy, to uphold the primacy of the Holy See...

The real roots of Peter lay in pagan Rome...the city of Petra or Pater Liber, assimilated to the Mithraic pater patrun (father of fathers). It has been called both Rock and Father....that is, a phallic pillar that's in the Vatican mundus since Etuscan times. Since his name also meant a rock, he was what the OT called "the Rock that begat thee" Deut. 32:18.

In older statues of peter he is seen with horns on his head....like the Horned God Bacchus (Pater Liber)

The churche's festival of St. Peter used to be held on the day of Janus, another pagan god, when the sun entered the sign of Aquarius, symbol of both the gate of the year and the Pearly Gate of Maria-Aphrodite...

Whatever Peters origin he stood in opposition to the female as shown by the Gnostic Gospels when Mary Magdalene said "Peter makes me hesitate, I am afraid of him because he hates the female race."

Marten Luther was so shocked by the decandt luxury of the popes courts that he wrote "If there is hell, then Rome is built upon it." And Peter had the keys to heaven even letting the Savior in????

Medieval legends also suggest the Petrine anti-feminism ...that Peter had a daughter and was very beautiful so he prayed that God would strike her with a fatal illness..It is also suggested in the Golden Legend that he tortured women to exorcise them, as to cause them to vomit up devils that possessed them along with much blood.

Got to love that Peter.....

Have you ever heard of the dead sea scrolls?

Well, hasn't everyone???

Originally posted by debbiejo
Meaning Jesus' teachings and since Jesus never wrote a book, and we know he was literate, because he read from the temple...........which Jesus are we supposed to follow?.....There are many writings about what Jesus said and did... .......Maybe the Jesus you are following is the WRONG Jesus.

* and what is the RIGHT Jesus? the one from the Gnostics? the one that suits your interpretations? the Christ stated in the Bible is NOT the wrong Jesus...

* and i was talking about the misinterpretation of "The Rock" that Jesus was pertaining in Matthew 16:18... "The Rock" that Jesus stated was Himself... upon Himself was the TRUE Church built upon...

* i'm beginning to see the whole picture, ms.debbiejo... first, you call Saint Paul a heretic, now Saint Peter... am i correct to say that you doubt the integrity of ALL the books in the Bible?

Originally posted by debbiejo
The myth of St. Peter was a thread which started in the 3rd century by the Roman papacy...It was a power stuggle inwhich the rival parties wanted the position of God's elite.

One solitary passage in the Gospel of Matthew 16: 18-19 which Jesus made a pun saying Peter was the Rock..would find it's way into scripture...Unfortunately the so called Petrine passage was a forgery...and deliberately inserted as a political ploy, to uphold the primacy of the Holy See...

The real roots of Peter lay in pagan Rome...the city of Petra or Pater Liber, assimilated to the Mithraic pater patrun (father of fathers). It has been called both Rock and Father....that is, a phallic pillar that's in the Vatican mundus since Etuscan times. Since his name also meant a rock, he was what the OT called "the Rock that begat thee" Deut. 32:18.

In older statues of peter he is seen with horns on his head....like the Horned God Bacchus (Pater Liber)

The churche's festival of St. Peter used to be held on the day of Janus, another pagan god, when the sun entered the sign of Aquarius, symbol of both the gate of the year and the Pearly Gate of Maria-Aphrodite...

Whatever Peters origin he stood in opposition to the female as shown by the Gnostic Gospels when Mary Magdalene said "Peter makes me hesitate, I am afraid of him because he hates the female race."

Marten Luther was so shocked by the decandt luxury of the popes courts that he wrote "If there is hell, then Rome is built upon it." And Peter had the keys to heaven even letting the Savior in????

Medieval legends also suggest the Petrine anti-feminism ...that Peter had a daughter and was very beautiful so he prayed that God would strike her with a fatal illness..It is also suggested in the Golden Legend that he tortured women to exorcise them, as to cause them to vomit up devils that possessed them along with much blood.

Got to love that Peter.....


Man O man, I just love the sheer misogyny of ancient religions.

Paul the TRUE founder of orthodox Christianity. His writings predated the Gospels. Paul laid down the basic doctrine. He copied more ascetic Gnostic sects of his time. Pauls Church was entirely patriarchal, women were forbidden to teach or preach in it.. Paul also laid the guilt of original sin on woman alone, absolving man from responsibility. Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was the transgressor. Pauls antipathy toward women and sexuality, since women were unclean leads to a suspicion that his esoteric doctrine was linked with the early Christian practice of voluntary castration. Rome revered the self-castrated god Attis and Paul was an earnest admirer of Roman culture as shown by the fact that he Romanized his name, changing it from Saul to Paul. Roman Christians later used self castration as an automatic ticket to heaven in the manner of Attis's priests. Paul suggested that he was among the divinely favored eunuchs. . He scorned the "natural" unmutilated man for his lack of spirituality. 1 Cor. 2:14. You had to lack a penis. In Gal. he said "I would they were even cut off which that trouble you" The word rendered "cut off" also meant "castrated:. Paul found the divine law of reproduction outdated because it brought forth "fruit unto death"...ie., more life doomed to die. The carnal mind or minding of the flesh is enmity against God. so, then the flesh cannot please God. Rom. 8:7-13.

Originally posted by debbiejo
The myth of St. Peter was a thread which started in the 3rd century by the Roman papacy...It was a power stuggle inwhich the rival parties wanted the position of God's elite.

One solitary passage in the Gospel of Matthew 16: 18-19 which Jesus made a pun saying Peter was the Rock..would find it's way into scripture...Unfortunately the so called Petrine passage was a forgery...and deliberately inserted as a political ploy, to uphold the primacy of the Holy See...

The real roots of Peter lay in pagan Rome...the city of Petra or Pater Liber, assimilated to the Mithraic pater patrun (father of fathers). It has been called both Rock and Father....that is, a phallic pillar that's in the Vatican mundus since Etuscan times. Since his name also meant a rock, he was what the OT called "the Rock that begat thee" Deut. 32:18.

In older statues of peter he is seen with horns on his head....like the Horned God Bacchus (Pater Liber)

The churche's festival of St. Peter used to be held on the day of Janus, another pagan god, when the sun entered the sign of Aquarius, symbol of both the gate of the year and the Pearly Gate of Maria-Aphrodite...

Whatever Peters origin he stood in opposition to the female as shown by the Gnostic Gospels when Mary Magdalene said "Peter makes me hesitate, I am afraid of him because he hates the female race."

Marten Luther was so shocked by the decandt luxury of the popes courts that he wrote "If there is hell, then Rome is built upon it." And Peter had the keys to heaven even letting the Savior in????

Medieval legends also suggest the Petrine anti-feminism ...that Peter had a daughter and was very beautiful so he prayed that God would strike her with a fatal illness..It is also suggested in the Golden Legend that he tortured women to exorcise them, as to cause them to vomit up devils that possessed them along with much blood.

Got to love that Peter..... Well, Peter is greek for rock.

Oh, btw Attis was canonized by the Holy Roman Church.........You know Attis the pagan deity.....hmm

You know, this thread's title is grammatically flawed....

Originally posted by debbiejo
Oh, btw Attis was canonized by the Holy Roman Church.........You know Attis the pagan deity.....hmm

Poor Pagan deities. Pan and others get amalgamated unfairly into Satan, others get shoehorned into Sainthood's. Ah, the tools of assimilation were many "You god isn't a god, he is actually a saint" or "they like that festival, lets appropriate it."

* my first reaction was - "what on earth are you talking about, girl?" i was hoping you would somewhat refute my posts and we'll have a friendly discussion about this but your posts seems way out of line...

* but nevertheless, i will still prove according to the Bible that your accusations to Saint Paul are false and ridiculous...

Originally posted by debbiejo
Paul the TRUE founder of orthodox Christianity.

* from the rootword itself, the founder of Christianity is Christ Jesus...

"And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that even for a whole year they were gathered together with the church, and taught much people, and that the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch."
The Acts 11:26

* and those Christians are the disciples/followers of Christ, including the apostles...

* the owner of the Christian Church is the Father...

"And I also say unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it."
Matthew 16:18

* eventhough it was Christ who said that He built the Church, it is the Father who built it because when Christ is speaking of power and authority...

"For I spake not from myself; but the Father that sent me, he hath given me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak."
John 12:49

* is there any other proof that tellls us that the owner of the Church is the Father?

"But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how men ought to behave themselves in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth."
I Timothy 3:15

* the Church is also called the House of God and vice-versa...

"For every house is builded by some one; but he that built all things is God."
Hebrews 3:4

"And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen."
Matthew 6:13

"Thine, O Lord is the greatness, and the power, and the glory, and the victory, and the majesty: for all that is in the heaven and in the earth is thine; thine is the kingdom, O Lord, and thou art exalted as head above all.
Both riches and honour come of thee, and thou reignest over all; and in thine hand is power and might; and in thine hand it is to make great, and to give strength unto all."
I Chronicles 29:11-12

* so, according to the Bible, Christ is the founder of Christianity and the Father is the owner of the Church...

Originally posted by debbiejo
His writings predated the Gospels. Paul laid down the basic doctrine. He copied more ascetic Gnostic sects of his time.

* not all epistles of Saint Paul pre-dated the Gospels, Saint Paul wrote some about 55 AD onwards, whilst Saint Mark's was about 60 AD, Saint Luke's was around 56 AD and according to some Bible Scholars, Saint Matthew's was about 41 AD...

* you need to give proofs with regards to what Saint Paul had "copied" from the Gnostics...

Originally posted by debbiejo
Pauls Church was entirely patriarchal, women were forbidden to teach or preach in it..

* or is it?

"But I commend to you Phoebe, our sister, who is minister of the assembly which is in Cenchrea;"
The Romans 16:1

* Phoebe, obviously a female, is a minister in Cenchrea...

Originally posted by debbiejo
Paul also laid the guilt of original sin on woman alone, absolving man from responsibility. Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was the transgressor.

* that's not what Saint Paul was saying...

"And Adam was not beguiled, but the woman being beguiled hath fallen into transgression:"
I Timothy 2:14

* the woman being deceived had fallen into transgression... Saint Paul did NOT said that Eve was the transgressor... the blame was not on Eve because she was obviously deceived, the blame was on...

"Therefore, as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin; and so death passed unto all men, for that all sinned:--"
The Romans 5:12

* the blame was on Adam...

Originally posted by debbiejo
Pauls antipathy toward women and sexuality, since women were unclean leads to a suspicion that his esoteric doctrine was linked with the early Christian practice of voluntary castration. Rome revered the self-castrated god Attis and Paul was an earnest admirer of Roman culture as shown by the fact that he Romanized his name, changing it from Saul to Paul. Roman Christians later used self castration as an automatic ticket to heaven in the manner of Attis's priests. Paul suggested that he was among the divinely favored eunuchs. . He scorned the "natural" unmutilated man for his lack of spirituality. 1 Cor. 2:14. You had to lack a penis. In Gal. he said "I would they were even cut off which that trouble you" The word rendered "cut off" also meant "castrated:.

* i think, you misunderstood what the second chapter of Galatians...

"My companion Titus, even though he is Greek, was not forced to be circumcised,"
Galatians 2:3

Originally posted by debbiejo
Paul found the divine law of reproduction outdated because it brought forth "fruit unto death"...ie., more life doomed to die. The carnal mind or minding of the flesh is enmity against God. so, then the flesh cannot please God. Rom. 8:7-13.

* Saint Paul did NOT say that the flesh cannot please God... what he said is this...

"And they that are in the flesh cannot please God."
The Romans 8:8

* plus, in the epistle of Romans itself, Saint Paul preaches this...

"I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your spiritual service."
The Romans 12:1

* the Christians are commanded to present their bodies as a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God by which is their spiritual service...