Ok when was the earliest date of him being called the "Bishop of Rome?
In Matthew 16:23 Christ is addressing Satan, not Peter. When Peter suggested that Christ forbids His Passion from happening, unknowingly he repeated the temptation of Christ to become a temporal ruler by Satan, and Christ rebuked Satan once more. It is clear that He continued to love Peter as He charged him with the stewardship of the sheep later. Peter's proneness to error prior to Christ's resurrection, combined with his unflinching recognition of Christ the Son of God is the reason Peter was chosen to be the foundation of the Church, which is also infallibly lead by fallible men.
Mar 8:33 But when he had turned about and looked on his disciples, he rebuked Peter, saying, Get thee behind me, Satan: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but the things that be of men.
Satan favors the things of man?
Remember that was the man Christ had already made the pope ( by your reading) ..kinnda rules out infallibility in matters of faith huh ?
I don't know when St. Peter was called bishop of Rome first. In apostolic time that terminology was quite unsettled. It is clear, from the references I gave you that he ended up in Rome and had unique authority given by Christ. As for these historical trivia you should find someone else to ask. I am here to defend Catholic Christianity, not play Jeopardy.
No, St. Peter was not made pope in Matthew 16, as Christ spoke in future tense then. The suggestion made by Peter to obtain power echoes Satan's but was done innocently; he followed up on the night of the betrayal by drawing a sword. His worst act is, of course, his denial of Christ. None of these impedes his status following the charge to feed and guide the sheep given after the Resurrection.