Paul more important than Peter


I’ve been trying to defend and teach the Catholic faith to a buddy who is a Christ Follower. He brought up the argument that if Peter was put in charge, why are most of the writings in the New Testament from Paul. I was curious if anyone has come across this argument before.



Why not? As the scriptures themselves say, “Some are apostles, some are prophets, some are teachers…”

Just because Peter was the final authority doesn’t mean that his “stamp” has to have been on anything and everything that was ever done in the early Church. No one disputes Moses role as one of the highest of all patriarchs in OT times. Why so little Scripture from him? Why nothing from Abraham? Isaac? Jacob?



If Jesus is in charge, why are most of the writings in the New Testament from Paul?

The real question is, of course, whether quantity of canonized writings makes one “in charge”.

If so, David would arguably be in charge, given the number of Psalms, right?

As for Paul and Peter in reality, why did Paul go 270 miles out of his way to visit Peter for 15 days before heading to plant churches in what is now Turkey?


If one omits Hebrews from Saint Paul’s resume, one finds that Saint Luke wrote almost as much as Saint Paul. :wink:


…How do you figure? Luke wrote Luke and Acts. Paul wrote…just about everything else. LOL

You must be thinking of John, who wrote the gospel, 1, 2, and 3 John, Revelation, aaaaaand…




This reminds me of the (very flawed) argument Muslims use… that “if you follow Jesus, why didn’t he write any of the Bible?” :rolleyes:


Count the pages each wrote.


Oh, so you’re talking total number of words/pages. Ok.

Got a lot of homework to finish within the next few hours, can you help me out? How many pages for each (and for John while you’re at it, if you happen to have that number handy)? I’m curious.



Number of pages depends on the Bible and Edition. I have the Jerusalem , Readers Edition at hand:

Paul [sans Hebrews] 84 pages [Hebrews 13 pages]

Luke 80 pages

John 65 pages

If we give Moses the entire first five books he has 224, which is a close match to all three combined.


Wow! Very interesting. Thank you.




< In Galatians 2, Paul is not only calling Peter “Kephas” in order to illustrate his office as “the Rock.” Rather, Paul is actually employing a pun in Greek.
Notice, for example, how Paul switches between the name “Peter” (Gal 2:7-8) and
the name “Kephas” (Gal 1:18, 2:9, 2:11, & 2:14). His is no accident. For, while the name “Kephas” is the Greek transliteration of the Aramaic “Kepha” (“Rock”),
it is ALSO the Greek word for “HEAD.” Thus, in Gal 2:14, when Paul boasts how
“I said to Kephas, in front of all,” what he’s REALLY saying is that ‘I even stood
up to the Head for the sake of the Gospel.’ This play on words would not be lost
on Paul’s original, Greek-speaking audience. Indeed, there would be no way for
them to miss it!
Notice, for example, how Paul only calls Simon Bar-Jonah “Peter” in Gal 2:7-8. Indeed, this is the ONLY TIME Paul ever uses the name “Peter” in his
writings. In all of Paul’s other references to Peter, he is always “Kephas” (1
Corinth 1:12, 3:22, 9:5, 15:5, Gal 1:18, 2:9, 2:11, & 2:14). So, why the change?
Because, if we notice, in Gal 2:7-8, Paul is not referring to Peter’s office of
headship, but rather to Peter’s PERSONAL apostolate to evangelize the Jews - an
apostolate which was EQUAL with Paul’s apostolate to the Gentiles. Yet, when
Paul wishes to show Peter as an authority, he is no longer “Peter” but “Kephas”
(BOTH “Rock” and “HEAD”): >


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit