The fear porn he has been pushing is so obvious now. His WHOLE doctrine is based on fear. If you don’t see everything has to be turned upside down then you are going to the pit. He and his followers are following a different Gospel, a false Gospel. It’s roots are deep but it all boils down to the Acts of Peter. THAT is what he uses to indoctrinate, to brainwash. He had me stand in front of it and recite it aloud at his house. Yes, I’ve been there many times. It’s on his wall. In a video he says he doesn’t need the Acts of Peter, that’s a lie in itself.
In kleck’s latest video he says “I’m telling you right now you’re looking at the meaning of life the understanding of everything and it was it’s encapsulated over and over in the scriptures depends on your ability to see and perceive it and that depends on your willingness to admit your guilt before God because he’ll open the scriptures to you through a spirit they are spiritually encrypted”. “It’s understanding the keys to the kingdom of heaven Jesus was crucified right side up and Peter would be crucified upside down.”
There is no evidence whatsoever that Peter was crucified upside down. None. The only thing that exists is the Acts of Peter which are not a valid source. Why you might ask? Because they were written by a man who was never in Rome, he resided far far east of there in Asia Minor. It was written 200 to 300 years AFTER the fact and are in the same vein as four other Gnostic apocryphal Acts, Andrew, John, Paul and Thomas. I took this info (that anyone who actually wants to know) right from Wikipedia. I have also read many, MANY research papers on the subject.
There is no actual proof that Peter was ever truly even in Rome. Some of the only accounts of him being there is done by prominent Catholics St. Irenaeus of Lyon and St. Clement of Alexandria. They both wrote accounts dated near the end of the 2nd century AD, almost a century and a half after Peter would have died. St. Clement of Rome mentions Peter’s martyrdom, Tertullian (a Roman Christian from Africa) ie. Catholic also mentions Peter and Paul’s martydom in Rome. The ONLY accounting of Peter being in Rome is by prominent Catholic leaders. It seems odd since Paul was the Apostle to the Gentiles and Peter to the Jews that Peter would be the prominent Apostle to the Gentiles and then be crucified in Rome and then become the first Catholic Pope but that’s a different argument altogether.
So Peter might have been there, he might not have been there, it has been argued both ways for a millennia. So there IS tradition that he was there, there is also tradition that he was crucified too but that’s not ever been verified. Looking at the Acts of Peter, the WHOLE Acts of Peter you will see why it was never seriously considered inspired text. He has a sorcerer battle with Simon Magnus, he successfully prays for his daughter to become disabled to thwart sexual temptations of men, and raises a smoked fish from the dead. THIS is the text, the cornerstone of Jonathan Kleck’s ministry. THIS is everything he bases it all on, and it’s false. It’s a Gnostic fabrication written in the same vein as the other ACTS and the Gospel of Mary Magdalene etc.
I’ll paraphrase what one scholar said. He said “not saying he WAS crucified but if he was do you really think that Roman executioners would grant a prisoner’s request, especially one where he asks to be crucified in a different manner than they normally did? The answer would be a resounding no.”
It’s all right there, the Acts of Peter are ridiculous. When you read them IN THEIR ENTIRETY you will literally roll your eyes when you read some of it, especially about the fish. Read the Infancy Gospel of Thomas and you will see striking similarities between it and the Acts of Peter. They were both written about the same time. They both even have a similar story about raising a dried fish from the dead. This is what Jonathan Kleck bases his foundation of his ministry on.