Chains, Not Thrones: Why Paul, Not Peter, Brought the Gospel to Rome

One of the most overlooked truths in the New Testament is that the divine mission to bring the gospel to the Gentiles; specifically to Rome; was not given to Peter, but to the Apostle Paul. Though Rome already had Jewish visitors who had encountered the gospel at Pentecost, the Scriptures make plain that no apostolic foundation was laid there prior to Paul’s ministry. In fact, Paul himself emphasizes that he was uniquely chosen by Christ for this work, not to build upon another apostle’s foundation.

At Pentecost, when the Holy Spirit fell, Jews and proselytes from many nations were present, including some from Rome. Acts 2:10 says, “Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes.” These “strangers of Rome” were visitors, not a planted church. They returned to their homeland with what they had heard, but there is no evidence of apostolic authority or church order established in Rome at this point. The gospel message was known in Rome, but no apostolic mission or foundation had yet been laid there.

Paul’s calling was unique. Unlike the other apostles, Christ appeared to him directly to make him the apostle of the Gentiles. Acts 9:15 records, “But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel.” This divine commission was not a general calling; it explicitly included Gentiles and rulers, which naturally extended to the seat of empire: Rome.

Paul makes a key statement that proves no apostle, including Peter, had established the church in Rome before him. Romans 15:20 says, “Yea, so have I strived to preach the gospel, not where Christ was named, lest I should build upon another man’s foundation.” If Peter had already laid the foundation in Rome as bishop, Paul could not have written this. His very words demonstrate that Rome was virgin soil for apostolic authority, awaiting Paul’s divinely given ministry.

Paul also expresses his direct responsibility to bring the gospel to Rome. In Romans 1:13-15 he writes, “Now I would not have you ignorant, brethren, that oftentimes I purposed to come unto you, (but was let hitherto,) that I might have some fruit among you also, even as among other Gentiles. I am debtor both to the Greeks, and to the Barbarians; both to the wise, and to the unwise. So, as much as in me is, I am ready to preach the gospel to you that are at Rome also.” Paul longed to come because the divine charge was his. His mission to Rome was not a side plan; it was a direct outworking of his apostleship to the Gentiles.

Paul’s background also explains why Christ chose him for this unprecedented task. He was a Jew by birth. Philippians 3:5 says, “Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews.” Paul could reason from the Law, the Prophets, and the Scriptures with authority among Jews. He was also from Tarsus of Cilicia. Acts 21:39 records, “I am a man which am a Jew of Tarsus, a city in Cilicia, a citizen of no mean city.” Tarsus was a major Hellenistic center, giving Paul cultural fluency in the Greco-Roman world. Most importantly, he was a Roman citizen by birth. Acts 22:28 says, “And Paul said, But I was free born.” Roman citizenship gave him extraordinary privileges: protection from scourging, the right to legal trial, and most importantly, the right of appeal to Caesar.

Thus, Paul was uniquely fitted: a Jew in covenant, a Greek in culture, and a Roman in legal status. He could traverse the Jewish synagogues, the Gentile cities, and even the imperial courts with equal authority.

Paul’s Roman citizenship climaxed in his right to appeal to Caesar—bringing the gospel directly to the empire’s highest authority. Acts 25:11 records, “For if I be an offender, or have committed any thing worthy of death, I refuse not to die: but if there be none of these things whereof these accuse me, no man may deliver me unto them. I appeal unto Caesar.” This appeal was not incidental—it was providential. It was the very means by which Christ ensured His apostle to the Gentiles would bring the gospel into the heart of Rome.

The Scriptures therefore present a clear picture: Rome had “strangers” who knew of Christ from Pentecost, but no apostolic foundation. Christ gave Paul, not Peter, the divine mission to bring the gospel to the Gentiles, including Rome. Paul’s own rule, not to build upon another man’s foundation, shows no apostle had gone before him in Rome. His Jewish heritage, Greek background, and Roman citizenship uniquely equipped him for this mission.

Thus, Paul; and Paul alone; was divinely appointed to carry the gospel to Rome. This sets the stage for the next part, where we will show why Peter was never bishop of Rome, and how historical claims to the contrary conflict with Scripture itself.

Christ Himself defines Paul’s mission. Acts 9:15 says, “He is a chosen instrument of mine to carry my name before Gentiles and kings and the children of Israel.” This is a threefold scope: Gentiles, Israel, and kings, including Roman rulers leading up to Caesar. Acts 22:21 records, “Go, for I will send you far away to the Gentiles.” This is a direct commission to the Gentiles. In Acts 26:16–18 Paul is sent to the Gentiles “to open their eyes… that they may turn from darkness to light.” Paul’s mission is crystal-clear: Christ personally commissioned him for the Gentiles and for rulers, not Peter.

Paul’s Roman citizenship was also a divinely prepared tool. In Acts 16:37–39 Paul invokes his citizenship in Philippi, forcing the magistrates to release him publicly. In Acts 22:25–29 he avoids illegal scourging by declaring, “I am a Roman citizen by birth.” In Acts 25:11 he exercises the ultimate right: “I appeal to Caesar!” These moments were not merely self-protection. They were the very means by which the gospel advanced into the legal and political structures of Rome.

Christ also foretold Paul’s journey to Rome. Acts 23:11 says, “Take courage, for as you have testified to the facts about me in Jerusalem, so you must testify also in Rome.” During the storm in Acts 27:24 an angel told Paul, “You must stand before Caesar.” Paul’s path to Rome was foreordained by Christ, and his citizenship was the instrument that made it possible.

Paul himself understood his calling clearly, and the apostles acknowledged it. Romans 11:13 says, “I am speaking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch then as I am an apostle to the Gentiles, I magnify my ministry.” In Galatians 2:7–9 the apostles recognized that “Peter had been entrusted with the gospel to the circumcised… and Paul to the Gentiles.” Paul and the other apostles were in full agreement that his divine assignment was to the Gentiles, not Peter’s.

The gospel’s strategic reach is also evident. Acts 2:10 notes that Jews from Rome were present at Pentecost, so seeds of the gospel were already there. In Romans 1:8–15 and Romans 15:20–24 Paul longs to strengthen the Roman believers and then push further west to Spain. By sending Paul, a Jew with Roman citizenship, Christ ensured the gospel could spread both eastward to Jews and westward to Gentiles, reaching Rome itself.

Putting it together, Christ Himself commissioned Paul to Gentiles and kings (Acts 9:15). Paul’s Roman citizenship gave him legal access no other apostle had. Christ confirmed that he must testify in Rome (Acts 23:11 and Acts 27:24). The apostles recognized Paul’s unique calling (Galatians 2:7–9). Rome was the strategic heart of the empire. Paul, not Peter, was fitted for this task.

It makes complete sense that Christ chose Paul precisely because his background; Jewish roots, Greek education, and Roman citizenship; made him the perfect vessel to carry the gospel into the center of the Gentile world, even to Caesar.

There are lots more verses that reinforce why Paul, not Peter, was divinely chosen for the Gentiles and for Rome. Let me stack them up for you.

Paul received a direct commission. Acts 13:46–47 records Paul and Barnabas saying, “It was necessary that the word of God be spoken first to you [the Jews]… since you thrust it aside… we are turning to the Gentiles. For so the Lord has commanded us, saying, ‘I have made you a light for the Gentiles, that you may bring salvation to the ends of the earth.’” Here Paul quotes Isaiah 49:6, showing that his mission to the Gentiles was a fulfillment of prophecy. Again, in Acts 18:6, while in Corinth, Paul declares, “Your blood be on your own heads! I am innocent. From now on I will go to the Gentiles.” Both times Paul sees his turning to the Gentiles as a divine command, rooted in Scripture.

Christ’s plan for Paul also points directly to Rome. In Acts 19:21 we read, “Paul resolved in the Spirit… saying, ‘After I have been there [Jerusalem], I must also see Rome.’” Later in Acts 28:16, 30–31, Paul finally reaches Rome: “He lived there two whole years at his own expense, and welcomed all who came to him, proclaiming the kingdom of God… with all boldness and without hindrance.” The book of Acts ends in Rome, a deliberate sign that Christ’s commission for Paul had reached its climax.

Paul also fulfilled the part of his mission that included testifying before rulers and governors. In Acts 24–26, he stands before Felix, Festus, and Agrippa. In Acts 26:32 Agrippa even says, “This man could have been set free if he had not appealed to Caesar.” But that is the whole point; his appeal to Caesar was no accident. It was the outworking of Christ’s words in Acts 23:11: “As you have testified to the facts about me in Jerusalem, so you must testify also in Rome.”

Paul’s identity as the apostle to the Gentiles is repeated over and over. In Romans 15:16 he calls himself a “minister of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles in the priestly service of the gospel of God.” In 1 Timothy 2:7 he says, “For this I was appointed a preacher and an apostle… a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth.” In 2 Timothy 1:11 he writes, “For this gospel I was appointed a preacher and apostle and teacher, which is why I suffer as I do.” Paul never wavered from this: his calling was to the Gentiles.

Rome specifically was always in his view. In Romans 1:13–15 he tells the believers that he longs to come to Rome to reap a harvest among the Gentiles there. In Romans 15:22–24 he writes, “I hope to see you in passing as I go to Spain, and to be helped on my journey there by you.” Paul saw Rome as a strategic launchpad for the western Gentile world.

So the evidence piles up. Christ’s call in Acts 9:15, Acts 22:21, and Acts 26:16–18. Paul’s own declarations in Acts 13:47, Acts 18:6, Romans 11:13, Romans 15:16, and 1 Timothy 2:7. The Spirit’s guidance toward Rome in Acts 19:21, Acts 23:11, and Acts 27:24. And the very narrative arc of Acts ending with Paul preaching freely in Rome in Acts 28:30–31.

All of this shows beyond doubt that Christ sent Paul; the Jew by birth, the Roman by citizenship, and the chosen vessel of the risen Lord; to take the gospel to the Gentiles and to the very heart of the empire.

In Acts 21:19 it says, “Paul related one by one the things that God had done among the Gentiles through his ministry.” In Acts 22:14–15 Ananias tells Paul, “The God of our fathers appointed you to know his will, to see the Righteous One and to hear a voice from his mouth; for you will be a witness for him to everyone of what you have seen and heard.”

Paul was directed beyond Israel. In Acts 26:20 Paul says, “I declared first to those in Damascus, then in Jerusalem and throughout all the region of Judea, and also to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God.” In 1 Corinthians 9:21–22 he explains, “To those outside the law I became as one outside the law… I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some.”

Paul’s authority was tied to Rome and to Caesar. In Philippians 1:12–13 he writes, “What has happened to me has really served to advance the gospel, so that it has become known throughout the whole imperial guard and to all the rest that my imprisonment is for Christ.” In Philippians 4:22 he adds, “All the saints greet you, especially those of Caesar’s household.” His chains had placed him in contact with Caesar’s own inner circle, fulfilling Christ’s words that he would testify before kings.

Paul also saw his apostleship as divinely given. In 1 Corinthians 1:1 he begins, “Paul, called by the will of God to be an apostle of Christ Jesus.” In 1 Corinthians 15:9–10 he admits, “I am the least of the apostles… but by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace toward me was not in vain. On the contrary, I worked harder than any of them.” His authority was not self-proclaimed but anchored in God’s will and grace.

Paul connected his mission to Old Testament prophecy. In Romans 10:19–20 he cites Deuteronomy 32:21 and Isaiah 65:1: “I have been found by those who did not seek me; I have shown myself to those who did not ask for me.” In Romans 15:9–12 he strings together verses from 2 Samuel 22:50, Deuteronomy 32:43, Psalm 117:1, and Isaiah 11:10 to prove that his ministry to the Gentiles was foretold long before.

Paul’s journeys consistently led westward, ultimately toward Rome. In Acts 20:22–24 he says, “I am going to Jerusalem, constrained by the Spirit… not knowing what will happen to me there, except that the Holy Spirit testifies… that imprisonment and afflictions await me. But I do not account my life of any value… if only I may finish my course and the ministry… to testify to the gospel of the grace of God.” Later in 2 Timothy 4:16–17 he recalls, “At my first defense no one came to stand by me… but the Lord stood by me and strengthened me, so that through me the message might be fully proclaimed and all the Gentiles might hear it. So I was rescued from the lion’s mouth.”

Taken together this is fresh evidence that reinforces the same conclusion. Acts 21:19, 22:14–15, and 26:20 show Paul directly reporting his divine mission to the Gentiles. First Corinthians 9:21–22 shows how he adapted his methods to reach them. Philippians 1:12–13 and 4:22 prove that his imprisonment spread the gospel even into Caesar’s household. First Corinthians 1:1 and 15:9–10 show his apostleship was by God’s will. Romans 10:19–20 and 15:9–12 anchor his mission in Old Testament prophecy. Acts 20:22–24 and 2 Timothy 4:16–17 show that Paul embraced suffering as part of finishing his Gentile mission, especially in Rome.

Let’s gather Paul’s own reflections from the Prison Epistles, which include Philippians, Ephesians, Colossians, Philemon, and later 2 Timothy. These letters are especially valuable because Paul himself explains how his imprisonment fit into Christ’s plan.

In Philippians 1:12–13 he writes, “What has happened to me has really served to advance the gospel, so that it has become known throughout the whole imperial guard and to all the rest that my imprisonment is for Christ.” In Philippians 1:14 he adds, “Most of the brothers, having become confident in the Lord by my imprisonment, are much more bold to speak the word without fear.” Finally, in Philippians 4:22 he says, “All the saints greet you, especially those of Caesar’s household.” Paul understood that his chains were not a setback but a divine strategy. The gospel had penetrated the very power structures of Rome, even Caesar’s household itself.

In Ephesians 3:1 Paul says, “For this reason I, Paul, a prisoner of Christ Jesus on behalf of you Gentiles.” Later in Ephesians 6:19–20 he asks for prayer: “Pray also for me… that I may declare it boldly, as I ought to speak, for which I am an ambassador in chains.” Paul did not view his captivity as Rome’s doing. He called himself a prisoner of Christ and still considered himself an ambassador, boldly declaring the gospel even in bonds.

In Colossians 4:3 he writes, “Pray also for us, that God may open to us a door for the word, to declare the mystery of Christ, on account of which I am in prison.” Then in Colossians 4:18 he closes with a personal touch: “I, Paul, write this greeting with my own hand. Remember my chains.” For Paul, his chains were not a barrier but part of his mission. They were directly tied to his calling to proclaim the mystery of Christ to the Gentiles.

In Philemon 1:9–10 Paul appeals, “I, Paul, an old man and now a prisoner also for Christ Jesus—I appeal to you for my child, Onesimus, whose father I became in my imprisonment.” In verse 13 he adds, “I would have been glad to keep him with me, in order that he might serve me on your behalf during my imprisonment for the gospel.” Even in prison Paul was spiritually fruitful, leading Onesimus to Christ and demonstrating that his ministry was unstoppable.

Finally, in his last letter from prison, 2 Timothy, Paul reflects on his final trial. In 2 Timothy 1:8 he exhorts, “Do not be ashamed of the testimony about our Lord, nor of me his prisoner, but share in suffering for the gospel.” In 2 Timothy 2:9 he affirms, “I am suffering, bound with chains as a criminal. But the word of God is not bound!” In 2 Timothy 4:16–17 he recalls, “At my first defense no one came to stand by me… But the Lord stood by me and strengthened me, so that through me the message might be fully proclaimed and all the Gentiles might hear it. So I was rescued from the lion’s mouth.” At the end of his life Paul saw his trial before Caesar as the climax of his calling: the gospel proclaimed to the Gentiles at the heart of Rome.

What this all shows is that Paul consistently described himself as a prisoner of Christ, never as Rome’s prisoner. His chains advanced the gospel into Caesar’s household and among the Gentiles. His imprisonment was not an accident but part of Christ’s design, just as foretold in Acts 9:15, Acts 23:11, and Acts 27:24. Even his final trial was the fulfillment of his mission: proclaiming Christ before kings and Gentiles.

In other words, the Prison Epistles are Paul’s own commentary that Christ sent him; uniquely as a Roman citizen and apostle to the Gentiles; to take the gospel into Rome’s halls of power.

The Letter to the Philippians was written while Paul was in prison, as he states in Philippians 1:7, 13–14, and 17. The question is which imprisonment this refers to. The traditional and strongest view is that it was Rome, during the period described in Acts 28:16, 30–31 when Paul was under house arrest. Some have suggested Caesarea, as seen in Acts 23–26, but the details of travel and the situation do not align well with the tone of Philippians. Others propose Ephesus during Acts 19, but this is speculative and lacks strong evidence.

Internal evidence points most clearly to Rome. In Philippians 1:13 Paul says his imprisonment is known “throughout the praetorium,” or imperial guard. This matches Rome best, where the praetorian guard served Caesar. In Philippians 4:22 he adds, “All the saints greet you, especially those of Caesar’s household.” This again points directly to Rome. Paul also mentions his travel plans, hoping to send Timothy soon (Philippians 2:19–23) and expecting to be released himself (Philippians 2:24). These details fit the scenario of a Roman house arrest while awaiting trial.

If Philippians was written from Rome, the approximate date would be around A.D. 60–62, during Paul’s first Roman imprisonment as recorded in Acts 28:30–31. The purpose of the letter is fourfold: to thank the Philippians for their financial support (Philippians 4:10–18), to encourage them to stand firm and remain unified (Philippians 1:27–2:4), to warn them against false teachers (Philippians 3:2–3, 18–19), and to share news of his situation (Philippians 1:12–18), especially the way his chains had actually advanced the gospel in Rome.

The theological themes of Philippians are striking. There is joy in suffering, as seen in Philippians 1:12–26 and 4:4. There is the powerful declaration of Christ’s humility and exaltation in Philippians 2:5–11, often called the Christ hymn. There is the theme of perseverance in pressing on toward the goal in Philippians 3:12–14. And there is the contrast between citizenship in heaven and earthly citizenship in Rome in Philippians 3:20.

Let’s line up the Letter to the Philippians with Acts 28 and watch how they fit together.

In Acts 28 Paul arrives in Rome under guard. Acts 28:16 says, “Paul was suffered to dwell by himself with a soldier that kept him.” Then Acts 28:30–31 concludes, “He lived there two whole years at his own expense, and welcomed all who came to him, proclaiming the kingdom of God… with all boldness and without hindrance.” This was not a dungeon but a house arrest. Paul could receive visitors, teach freely, and write letters while awaiting his trial before Caesar.

Now compare this to what Paul writes in Philippians. In Philippians 1:12–13 he says his imprisonment has advanced the gospel, even to the praetorian guard. This matches Acts 28, where soldiers were stationed with him. In Philippians 1:14 he notes that other believers have been emboldened by his chains to preach fearlessly. This matches Acts 28’s description that Paul welcomed all who came to him and taught without hindrance. In Philippians 4:22 he sends greetings from “those of Caesar’s household,” which fits perfectly with Paul’s house arrest in Rome placing him in contact with Caesar’s officials and servants. In Philippians 2:23–24 Paul expresses hope that he will be released and visit Philippi again. This corresponds to Acts 28, where he lived with some liberty and anticipated a trial, not immediate execution.

The overlap is striking. Both Acts 28 and Philippians describe imprisonment in Rome, access to visitors, freedom to teach, the gospel spreading through Roman officials including Caesar’s household, and confidence that his chains were part of Christ’s plan.

The timeline also aligns. Acts ends with Paul under house arrest in Rome around A.D. 60–62. During that two-year window Paul wrote Philippians, Ephesians, Colossians, and Philemon. Philippians especially mirrors the closing scene of Acts: a joyful, bold apostle in chains, turning captivity itself into mission.

The New Testament letters do not provide a direct statement that Peter was never bishop of Rome, but they give strong counter-indications, especially during the years before and during Paul’s Roman imprisonments. When we examine the letters themselves, the cumulative picture weighs heavily against the idea that Peter presided as bishop in Rome from which the papacy later claimed its line of apostolic succession.

First, consider Romans, written around A.D. 57. Paul writes to the church at Rome and greets about twenty-six people by name in Romans 16:3–16, yet he never greets Peter. That omission is strange if Peter was living there as the resident apostle. Even more telling, Paul states in Romans 15:20 that his policy is “not to build on another man’s foundation.” If Peter had already established authority there, Paul’s entire approach to Rome would contradict his own principle.

Second, look at Acts 28 together with the so-called Prison Epistles; Philippians, Ephesians, Colossians, and Philemon; written during Paul’s first Roman imprisonment around A.D. 60–62. These letters are full of names of Paul’s companions in Rome: Timothy, Luke, Mark, Aristarchus, Epaphras, Demas, Tychicus, even “those of Caesar’s household” (Philippians 4:22). Philippians 1:13 shows Paul’s chains were known throughout the praetorian guard. Yet in all this personal detail, Peter is never mentioned. If Peter were serving as Rome’s leader or bishop at that time, his absence from these lists is remarkable.

Third, consider 2 Timothy, written during Paul’s final Roman imprisonment around A.D. 64–67. Paul laments in 2 Timothy 4:11, “Luke alone is with me,” and in verse 16, “at my first defense no one came to stand by me.” Again, there is no mention of Peter, even though this is precisely the moment when the presence of another leading apostle in Rome would have been invaluable. The silence here is especially difficult to reconcile with the claim that Peter was Rome’s acting bishop during Paul’s trial.

Finally, the very structure of church leadership in the New Testament points against the later papal claim. In the apostolic period churches are consistently described as being led by a group of “overseers” or “elders” (Philippians 1:1; Acts 20:17,28; Titus 1:5–7). The model of a single monarchical bishop over a city church only appears in later centuries. So the category “Peter as bishop of Rome” does not arise from the New Testament.

The conclusion from this evidence is clear. Within the time window covered by Romans, Acts 28, Philippians, Ephesians, Colossians, Philemon, and 2 Timothy, the internal record leans against Peter serving as resident bishop in Rome. It does not provide a formal disproof, but the repeated silence where his presence would be expected, combined with Paul’s own statements and lists of Roman associates, makes the traditional claim historically unlikely. If Peter ever was in Rome, as later tradition asserts, these letters strongly suggest it was not as the visible, resident bishop during Paul’s Roman ministry.

It is not difficult to see why, across stretches of church history, access to Scripture in the common tongue was restricted and great lectern Bibles were kept under lock and chain: once ordinary believers place the New Testament witness beside later claims, the assertion that Peter served as bishop of Rome; forming the unique taproot of papal apostolic succession; does not emerge from the text. Even granting for the sake of argument the most Petrine reading of “upon this rock” in Matthew 16:18–19, the New Testament never gives Peter a divine mandate to establish or oversee the church in Rome. By contrast, the commission to carry Christ’s name before Gentiles and kings is repeatedly, explicitly, and publicly assigned to Paul (Acts 9:15; 22:21; 26:16–18), and recognized by the Jerusalem leaders themselves as a Pauline charge, with Peter’s sphere identified as “the gospel of the circumcision” (Galatians 2:7–9). That basic allocation of mission is decisive for Rome, the Gentile capital.

The “keys” and “binding and loosing” language do not reverse this. Whatever interpretive weight one gives to Matthew 16:19, the same authority to bind and loose is explicitly extended to the apostolic body in Matthew 18:18. The grammar of the New Testament therefore refuses an exclusive, Roman, one-man pipeline of jurisdiction; the authority is collegial, not monarchical, and it is tethered to the apostolic gospel, not to a postal address in the empire’s capital.

When the Pauline record is allowed to speak, the Roman claim grows even thinner. Paul writes to the Roman believers before he has ever visited them, greets more than two dozen fellow servants by name (Romans 16:3–16), and asserts his policy not to build on another man’s foundation (Romans 15:20). Both the silence regarding Peter and Paul’s stated principle make poor sense if a resident apostle already presided there. In Paul’s final imprisonment, when any Roman bishop’s support would have been most conspicuous, he writes, “Luke alone is with me,” and, “at my first defense no one stood with me” (2 Timothy 4:11, 16). That cumulative silence is exactly where a living, resident Petrine episcopate should have spoken loudest.

Apostolic succession in the New Testament is succession in the apostolic teaching; the faith “once delivered” (Jude 3), Christ as the cornerstone with the apostles and prophets as the foundation (Ephesians 2:20); not succession by a single chair in a single city.

Appeals to “upon this rock” do not rescue the Roman thesis. If the “rock” is Peter’s confession of Christ, the argument evaporates at once. If the “rock” is Christ himself; the most pervasive New Testament usage; the argument is inverted. And even if one grants that “rock” includes Peter personally, nothing in the text assigns him a lifelong Roman see, much less a dynastic line of Roman successors. Peter’s primary footprint lies among the circumcision ( to the jews); Paul’s divine itinerary, by Christ’s own word, terminates in Rome and before Caesar. When Philippians reports the gospel permeating the praetorian guard and “Caesar’s household,” It was through Paul’s chains, not through Peter’s supposed throne, that God brought the gospel into the very heart of the empire.

Nor does the “keys” language supply what the history cannot. In rabbinic usage, binding and loosing concerned halakhic teaching and discipline; in the New Testament that authority is shared across the apostolic college and exercised wherever the apostolic gospel is preached and churches are formed. The continuity the New Testament envisions is doctrinal and missionary: faithfulness to the apostolic preaching, discipline according to Christ’s command, elders raised up in every city, and the word multiplying. It is not a juridical monopoly secured to one city by a chain of hands that the text itself never names.

Set all of this alongside the documentary record of Paul’s Roman years and the conclusion follows with force. The period most often invoked to anchor a Petrine episcopate is precisely the period when the New Testament shows Paul, not Peter, as the visible apostolic witness in Rome, preaching “with all boldness, none forbidding him,” addressing saints “especially of Caesar’s household,” appealing by right of Roman citizenship to stand before Caesar, and declaring that through his defense “all the Gentiles might hear.” If later ecclesiastical structures elevated Rome into a singular throne, that development stands downstream from, not inside of, the New Testament. The Scriptures do not give Peter a Roman see; they give Paul a Roman summons. The keys are not a warrant for a Roman dynasty; they are the shared trust of the apostolic band, bound to Christ’s word and distributed across the churches. Read on their own terms, the New Testament writings do not underwrite the papal claim; they undercut it at the very point where it should be strongest.

2 Peter 2:3 — “And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not.”