I don't see what in the Bible (or elsewhere) supports that proposition. It seems like an article of faith.
Also, Paul seems to refer to Peter as "Cephas."
"Petra" πέτρα is feminine. "Petros" Πέτρος is masculine. It would be at least awkward to call a guy Petra. It would be one thing to say that so-and-so is a πέτρα. It would be another to NAME him Πέτρα.
“I don’t see what in the Bible”
Your Bible is translated from Greek manuscripts.
If it is not directly translated from Greek, you would have a poor translation.
Certainly not an article of faith. Just a fact of transmission.
Thing is that even if we concede the Petros/petra point, nowhere else in Scripture is the primacy of Peter mentioned at all.
In fact, in Galatians, Peter is deliberately and publicly challenged and opposed by Paul, because Peter was allowing his behavior to be influenced by those who contradicted the Word.
Paul shows here that it’s God’s Word that is paramount, and should anyone, even Peter, teach in opposition to it, that person should not be obeyed. In fact, Paul says that anyone preaching a different Gospel than what Paul preached should be ‘anathema.’
Which is why on this thread I’ve pointed out Scripture so much; that is the most accurate message of the teachings of the Apostles—which are the teachings of Jesus—that we have.
If we are to follow the example of the Apostle Paul, that means that we are bound to oppose Roman Catholics every single time that they preach a different Gospel than what Paul preached.