Was Apostle Peter ever in Rome?

[tonychanyt]

I think so. 1P 5:

13 She who is in Babylon, chosen together with you, sends you her greetings, and so does my son Mark.

Some scholars interpret "Babylon" as a coded reference to Rome. During this time, Rome was sometimes referred to as "Babylon" because of its association with oppression and corruption (Re 17:5).

Second century, Irenaeus wrote:

indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul

Irenaeus explicitly stated that Peter and Paul founded and organized the church in Rome. But as noted by StephenDisraeli below, by the time they showed up in Rome, the church in Rome had already existed. Irenaeus attributed the founding to the two apostles by emphasizing its organizational and traditional aspects. They didn't really start the church in Rome.

Eusebius (c. 325 CE) mentioned Peter traveled to Rome during Emperor Nero’s reign and was martyred there.

While the New Testament does not explicitly state that Peter was in Rome, early Christian tradition and writings strongly support the idea that he traveled to Rome, led the Christian community there, and was martyred. The evidence is not definitive, but the tradition of Peter's presence in Rome has been widely accepted for centuries and remains a cornerstone of Catholic teaching.

 

[Hoping2]

I think so. 1P 5:

Some scholars interpret "Babylon" as a coded reference to Rome. During this time, Rome was sometimes referred to as "Babylon" because of its association with oppression and corruption (Re 17:5).
Irenaeus (c. 180 CE) explicitly stated that Peter and Paul founded the church in Rome and that Peter served as its first bishop. Eusebius (c. 325 CE) confirmed that Peter traveled to Rome during Emperor Nero’s reign and was martyred there.
While the New Testament does not explicitly state that Peter was in Rome, early Christian tradition and writings strongly support the idea that he traveled to Rome, led the Christian community there, and was martyred. The evidence is not definitive, but the tradition of Peter's presence in Rome has been widely accepted for centuries and remains a cornerstone of Catholic teaching.

I can't accept teachings that come 200 or more years after the fact.
I wonder who it was that substituted "She" for what is written in the KJV of the bible..."The church which is at Babylon" ?
When I read "Babylon", I think of Jerusalem.