Who was Peter?
Peter was a disciple of Jesus. He was informed of the person of Jesus by his brother Andrew. Here is the record of Jesus first meeting Peter:
One of the two who heard John speak and followed Him, was Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother. He found first his own brother Simon and said to him, “We have found the Messiah” (which translated means Christ). He brought him to Jesus. Jesus looked at him and said, “You are Simon the son of John; you shall be called Cephas” (which is translated Peter). (John 1:40-42)
Later, Peter became the head of the disciples and took the lead in the gentile mission. Paul calls him one of the pillars of the early church. (Galatians 2:9)
Why did Jesus give him the name Cephas?
This name means rock and it signifies the stability and strength that Peter would bring to the church. (Matthew 16:18) Unfortunately, Peter often failed to live up to his name:
- Jesus had to give him a sharp rebuke (Matthew 16:22–23; Mark 8:32–33);
- Peter fell asleep in the garden of Gethsamene when he should have been watching (Matthew 26:40; Mark 14:37);
- Peter attacked Malchus with the sword (Mark 14:47; John 18:10–11);
- Peter also denied that he knew Jesus (Matthew 26:69–75; Mark 14:66–72; Luke 22:55–61; John 18:15–27);
In spite of all this, we see Jesus bringing Peter back and putting him back in place as the leader of the apostles. (John 21:15-17)
Did Peter ever go to the city of Rome?
It is impossible to know what became of Peter after the Jerusalem council. Jackson suggests (p266) that if Peter had gone to Rome, then Paul would certainly have mentioned it in his letters. Paul was very earnest to bring the gospel where others had never been (Romans 15:20-21); and therefore, he would not have gone to Rome if Peter was already there.
Is there any evidence in the New Testament that Peter was at Rome?
There is no explicit statement. Some have pointed to 1 Peter 5:13 as evidence that Peter was in Rome when he wrote this letter. The closing of this letter is:
Through Silvanus, our faithful brother (for so I regard him), I have written to you briefly, exhorting and testifying that this is the true grace of God. Stand firm in it! She who is in Babylon, chosen together with you, sends you greetings, and so does my son, Mark. Greet one another with a kiss of love. Peace be to you all who are in Christ. (1 Peter 5:12-14)
The claim is that “in Babylon” means in Rome as in Revelation 14:8; 16:19; 17:5; 18:2, 10, 21.
What are we to think of this?
It is likely that Peter’s reference to Babylon is referring to the city of Rome which would mean that Peter was in Rome when he wrote this letter. Many scholars argue that this is not a reference to Rome at all but a metaphor for all the opposition against the kingdom of God. Alford says (p128) there is no reason to doubt that Peter wrote this letter from the city of Babylon on the Euphrates.
What do the early church fathers say about Peter being in Rome?
- Clement (35-99ad) writes (p11) of Peter’s martyrdom but does not say where it happened. Clement, however, was the bishop of Rome. If Peter was martyred in Rome, how would Clement not know this?
- Ignatius denies (p75) that he issued commands as Peter and Paul did and says nothing more.
- Irenaeus says (p261) that Peter and Paul founded the church at Rome.
Zahn argues that (p165) Peter did minister in Rome; Farrar says (p77) that it could only have been a brief time.
Did Peter and Paul found the church at Rome?
First, we know that there were Jews from Rome in Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost and that these Jews were converted to Christ. Paul had not yet been converted (Acts 9:1), and Peter had not even come to embrace the gentile mission. (Acts 10:34-35) It’s far more likely that these Jewish Christians took their faith back with them to Rome and founded the church there.
What does Eusebius say about this?
Eusebius (260-340ad) states (see chp 14) that Peter went to Rome and quarreled with Simon Magus
1 THE evil power, who hates all that is good and plots against the salvation of men, constituted Simon at that time the father and author of such wickedness, as if to make him a mighty antagonist of the great, inspired apostles of our Savior.
2 For that divine and celestial grace which co-operates with its ministers, by their appearance and presence, quickly extinguished the kindled flame of evil, and humbled and cast down through them “every high thing that exalted itself against the knowledge of God.”
3 Wherefore neither the conspiracy of Simon nor that of any of the others who arose at that period could accomplish anything in those apostolic times. For everything was conquered and subdued by the splendors of the truth and by the divine word itself which had but lately begun to shine from heaven upon men, and which was then flourishing upon earth, and dwelling in the apostles themselves.
4 Immediately the above-mentioned impostor was smitten in the eyes of his mind by a divine and miraculous flash, and after the evil deeds done by him had been first detected by the apostle Peter in Judea, he fled and made a great journey across the sea from the East to the West, thinking that only thus could he live according to his mind.
5 And coming to the city of Rome, by the mighty co-operation of that power which was lying in wait there, he was in a short time so successful in his undertaking that those who dwelt there honored him as a god by the erection of a statue.
6 But this did not last long. For immediately, during the reign of Claudius, the all-good and gracious Providence, which watches over all things, led Peter, that strongest and greatest of the apostles, and the one who on account of his virtue was the speaker for all the others, to Rome against this great corrupter of life. He like a noble commander of God, clad in divine armor, carried the costly merchandise of the light of the understanding from the East to those who dwelt in the West, proclaiming the light itself, and the word which brings salvation to souls, and preaching the kingdom of heaven.
Eusebius goes on to note (see chp 15) that Peter’s hearers in Rome requested from him a written account of his doctrine and teachings. This too shows that Peter was in Rome.
What about Jerome?
Jerome (347-420ad) believed (p361) that Peter was the bishop of Rome for twenty-five years. This is clearly false.
SIMON PETER the son of John, from the village of Bethsaida in the province of Galilee, brother of Andrew the apostle, and himself chief of the apostles, after having been bishop of the church of Antioch and having preached to the Dispersion—the believers in circumcision, in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia—pushed on to Rome in the second year of Claudius to over-throw Simon Magus, and held the sacerdotal chair there for twenty-five years until the last, that is the fourteenth, year of Nero. At his hands he received the crown of martyrdom being nailed to the cross with his head towards the ground and his feet raised on high, asserting that he was unworthy to be crucified in the same manner as his Lord. He wrote two epistles which are called Catholic, the second of which, on account of its difference from the first in style, is considered by many not to be by him. Then too the Gospel according to Mark, who was his disciple and interpreter, is ascribed to him. On the other hand, the books, of which one is entitled his Acts, another his Gospel, a third his Preaching, a fourth his Revelation, a fifth his “Judgment” are rejected as apocryphal. Buried at Rome in the Vatican near the triumphal way he is venerated by the whole world.
What else can be said about Peter?
Peter was married. (Matthew 8:14; 1 Corinthians 9:5; 1 Peter 5:13)
What was Peter’s role at the council of Jerusalem?
See here.