Apparently you forgot to read my earlier comment, which illustrates Christ’s usage of Petra vs petros, a distinction that is lost in the English. I showed that Christ uses Petros to christen Peter while using Petra as the actually foundation of the church. I showed that Paul corroborates this distinction by also declaring that the church, like Israel before, follows the true Rock which Christ. Paul uses Petra to refer to Christ just as Christ Himself does. Paul had every opportunity to say that Petros/Peter was the rock we should be following, and staunchly refuses to do so, pointing instead to Christ. The RCC would do well to follow Paul’s example.

The mere fact that the disciples repeatedly argued among themselves who was the greatest strongly indicates that Christ at no point designated one of them as having additional power or authority over the others. If anything Christ rebukes Peter more often and more strongly than the other disciples because Peter constantly refused to realize when he was saying something stupid.

I already said all of these things above; I’m repeating them again until it sinks in that Peter being the first pope and apostolic succession are not biblical principles

And you still have not addressed my other point that the RCC has utterly invalidated itself from being Peter’s successor in any form by teaching fables contrary both to Peter’s teaching and to the rest of scripture.