I find it interesting that you believe that Peter was in Rome, with out one shred of proof, but you seem ready to argue to the grave that Peter wasn't married.
Or you say his wife was dead because he still had a mother in law, and that Christ would never have called them if they were married.
Well I think you are wrong on both points,
Mt 8:14 And when Jesus was come into Peter's house, he saw his wife's mother laid, and sick of a fever.
If his wife was dead, why would it say his wife's mother? By this statement, he is first acknowledging the wife, then the relationship between them.
The term "mother in law" was commonly used, see Mt10:35 and Lk 12:53, and if his wife had been dead, he would have simply referred to his wife's mother as the mother in law.
You said that Jesus would never call married men away from their family
Mt 19:27 Then answered Peter and said unto him, Behold, we have forsaken all, and followed thee; what shall we have therefore?
If Peter forsook all, what was his all he forsook?
Mk 10:29 And Jesus answered and said, Verily I say unto you, There is no man that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my sake, and the gospel's,
28. Then Peter said, Lo, we have left all, and followed thee. 29. And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, There is no man that hath left house, or parents, or brethren, or wife, or children, for the kingdom of God's sake,
This statement was made by Christ, and was to these men, but inclusive for time to come, but the simple statement is that between the 12 disciples, all of them had forsaken someone, either, parents, brethren, wife, children, sisters, and since there is ample proof that Peter was married, and his wife was still alive, what are the odds that Christ was referring to one of the other disciples, and not Peter?
Saint John's Gospel contained a passage in which Christ prophesied Peter's death: When you are old, then you will stretch out your hands and another will bind you and take you where you do not want to go.[10] The phrase "to stretch out one's hands" is found in literature of the time referring to crucifixion.[11] Certainly the Christian church at Rome claimed Peter as a martyr and founder of along with Paul as early as the end of the first century AD. And another Roman tradition which we can trace back to the third century AD added the detail that Peter asked his persecutors to turn his cross upside down, because he was unworthy to die in the same manner as Jesus.
This was not the first time I have heard this claim, that was based on John saying that Peter was to be crucified up side down. Let's read what it does say.
Jn 21:18 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, When thou wast young, thou girdedst thyself, and walkedst whither thou wouldest: but when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee, and carry thee whither thou wouldest not.
19. This spake he, signifying by what death he should glorify God. And when he had spoken this, he saith unto him, Follow me.
If you read what this says, and not what you wish it said, you will see that it tells us that Peter is going to die of old age, not martyrdom.
"another shall gird thee, and carry thee whither thou wouldest not."
(Paraphrase)When you are young, you get up, you get dressed and go where you please, but when you grow old, others have to dress you, and take you where they are going, not where you want to go.
If they had read the first part of the scripture they would have known this.
This is just one more fable foisted on a gulable public.