Here is part two to the Protestant response. Please see Part one here.
Again, my reply is in black and his is in red.
Allow me to briefly explain my point.
: )
Mat 16:17-18 And Jesus answered him, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
With all due respect, you just quoted one of the most Catholic verses there is known to man. I will demonstrate why in detail below.
This revelation to Peter was a revelation from GOD! Not because of his personal convection or wisdom. Which means God is the only one that can reveal any sort of new mystery or divine revelation, this does not make Peter any “special”
Agreed. The Father revealed this to Peter and therefore Peter cannot take credit for it. He cannot be “special” in that way. However, If Christ is the one who gives him the authority, then we would both have to agree that there is something unique and distinct about Peter. I believe that the burden of proof is on me to prove whether or not Christ gave Peter a special kind of authority. My job is to demonstrate this from the Scriptures.
Amos 3:7 Surely the Lord GOD will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.
Amen. : )
Eph 3:5 Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit;
Amen to this as well. We agree that the Father revealed this to Peter; however, that doesn’t negate the fact that Christ could have still given Peter the authority and built His Church on Peter. Again, my job is to demonstrate this from the Scriptures.
Obviously the scripture establishes how divine revelation is revealed unto the church. “And I tell you” were the words of Christ Jesus, which gives him the same authority as the revelation of God! The word “AND” is a conjunction, which means that Christ is ADDING to what God has revealed and will establish.
This does not take away from the fact that Jesus gives authority to Peter. Reason being is that we believe ALL authority ultimately belongs to the Son. This does not negate the fact that the Son can pass on His authority to Peter (John 21:15-17). The authority isn’t passed on in a way where Jesus loses the authority. No, it is passed down in a way to where Peter shares in that authority for the sole purpose of tending the Church. It is not to exalt Peter but to exalt Christ. To have an authority on earth so that the Church may remain one and not be divided into divisions. I’ll discuss John 21:15-17 in more detail and show how the Greek says something very explicit in favor of Peter having authority.
Also, please note that we don’t believe the Pope has equal authority to Jesus. To better understand this, let’s think about miracles. The Apostles were given the power to work miracles. Ultimately, who has the power to work these miracles? God. He has the ultimate power to do them. The Apostles are just instruments in working these miracles; therefore, they are not equal in power with God but they are given this special grace to work miracles by the power of the Holy Spirit. This is what I mean by “Peter having a sharing in the authority”. I don’t mean an equal sharing but I mean a sharing in so far as what the Lord has granted. The pope is still human. His job is to make sure the truth is protected and unaltered as it was passed down to him from the previous pope.
The Roman Catholic Church Puts a great deal of emphasis on Peter and claims that Jesus said he would build his church on him.
And rightfully so. It’s not just the Catholic Church today that puts this emphasis on Peter, but the earliest Christians (Early Church Fathers) from 2nd century AD and on put the same emphasis on Peter. Our claims are historical, apostolic, and Biblical. Again, burden of proof is on me to demonstrate this. : )
1. Simon Peter holds the first place in the college of the Twelve; Jesus entrusted a unique mission to him. Through a revelation from the Father, Peter had confessed: "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." Our Lord then declared to him: "You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it." Christ, the "living Stone", thus assures his Church, built on Peter, of victory over the powers of death. Because of the faith he confessed Peter will remain the unshakable rock of the Church. His mission will be to keep this faith from every lapse and to strengthen his brothers in it." (Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 552).
2. "By the word "rock" the Saviour cannot have meant Himself, but only Peter, as is so much more apparent in Aramaic in which the same word (Kipha) is used for "Peter" and "rock". His statement then admits of but one explanation, namely, that He wishes to make Peter the head of the whole community of those who believed in Him as the true Messias; that through this foundation (Peter) the Kingdom of Christ would be unconquerable; that the spiritual guidance of the faithful was placed in the hands of Peter, as the special representative of Christ." (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11744a.htm).
First of all, when we look at the Greek of Matthew 16:18 we see something that is not obvious in the English. "...you are Peter (πέτρος, petros) and upon this rock (πέτρα, petra) I will build My church..."
Correct so far. : )
In Greek nouns have gender. It is similar to the English words actor and actress. The first is masculine and the second is feminine. Likewise, the Greek word "petros" is masculine; "petra" is feminine.
Agreed. And this happens for a good reason. We will see why.
Peter, the man, is appropriately referred to as Petros. But Jesus said that the rock he would build his church on was not the masculine "petros" but the feminine "petra." Let me illustrate by using the words "actor" and "actress:" "You are the actor and with this actress I will make my movie." Do see that the gender influences how a sentence is understood? Jesus was not saying that the church will be built upon Peter, but upon something else. What, then, does petra, the feminine noun, refer to?
Let’s take a look at the full context and then we will deal with the “petra” and “petros”.
[15] He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?"
[16] Simon Peter replied, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God."
[17] And Jesus answered him, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.
[18] And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it.
[19] I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."
First of all, please note how many times Christ says “you” in this passage. He is emphasizing the person of Peter. Question is, why is He doing this?
Also, please note the word play in the passage. Peter says, “You are the CHRIST, SON OF THE LIVING GOD” and Jesus says, “Blessed are you SIMON SON (BAR) SON JONAH…YOU ARE PETER (Rock)…”.
Peter professes Jesus to be the CHRIST and the SON OF GOD.
Jesus professes Peter to be the ROCK and the SON OF JONAH.
This play on word is significant and should not be skipped over.
Let’s note something else in the passage. Peter’s name starts off as being Simon and is changed into being Peter. Whenever God changes someone’s name (such as Abram to Abraham, Israel to Jacob), there is much significance in it. He doesn’t just do it for fun. What you would need to do, is you would need to consider why Jesus changed Peter’s name from Simon to Peter. You seem to be skipping over this fact IMHO (In My Humble Opinion).
Let’s consider the Aramaic (which is the language that Jesus spoke). It would literally be, “You are KEPHA, and on this KEPHA I will build my Church.” The Aramaic would show no distinctions between the two types of Rocks. That alone, totally negates the petra and petros argument. However, there is a reason why the Greek translation is shown to be petra and petros. I showed the Aramaic because it’s important in understanding why the Greek shows a distinction. The normal word for “rock” in Greek is Petra. So a literal translation from the Aramaic to the Greek would be as follows: “You are Petra and on this Petra I will build my Church.” Question is, why is the first petra different from the second one?
I believe this is something that you already answered above. Peter is a male and therefore he cannot have a feminine name. The word “Petra” is a feminine word and if Jesus were to call Peter “Petra”, He would be giving him a feminine name such as Roxanne or something. The reason for the name change from Petra to Petro, is not to emphasize that the Church will be built on Petra instead of Petros, but it’s to give Peter a masculine name instead of a feminine name. The Aramaic would have no such distinction. The Greek only makes such a distinction because the word “rock” (Kepha) in Greek is Petra. That would give Peter a female name.
Therefore, the Greek translation is changed from Petra to Petros to give peter a masculine name.
I’d like to give you some Protestant sources that admit to this very fact. Please note that these Scholars and commentaries have no agenda in promoting the Catholic Church’s claims. They are just being honest with their study of the Greek and of the New Testament:
D.A. Carson (Protestant Evangelical) --
"Although it is true that petros and petra can mean 'stone' and 'rock' respectively in earlier Greek, the distinction is largely confined to poetry. Moreover, the underlying Aramaic is in this case unquestionable; and most probably kepha was used in both clauses ('you are kepha' and 'on this kepha'), since the word was used both for a name and for a 'rock.' The Peshitta (written in Syriac, a language cognate with Aramaic) makes no distinction between the words in the two clauses. The Greek makes the distinction between petros and petra simply because it is trying to preserve the pun, and in Greek the feminine petra could not very well serve as a masculine name." (Carson, The Expositor's Bible Commentary [Zondervan, 1984], volume 8, page 368, as cited in Butler/Dahlgren/Hess, page 17-18)
"The word Peter petros, meaning 'rock,' (Gk 4377) is masculine, and in Jesus' follow-up statement he uses the feminine word petra (Gk 4376). On the basis of this change, many have attempted to avoid identifying Peter as the rock on which Jesus builds his church yet if it were not for Protestant reactions against extremes of Roman Catholic interpretations, it is doubtful whether many would have taken 'rock' to be anything or anyone other than Peter." (Carson, Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary [Zondervan, 1994], volume 2, page 78, as cited in Butler/Dahlgren/Hess, page 18)
R.T. France (Anglican/Protestant Evangelical) --
"The name Peter means 'Rock', and Jesus played on this meaning to designate Peter as the foundation of the new people of God. His leadership would involve the authority of the steward, whose keys symbolized his responsibility to regulate the affairs of the household. Peter would exercise his leadership by his authority to declare what is and is not permissible in the kingdom of heaven (to bind and to loose have this meaning in rabbinic writings)....It is sometimes suggested that because the word for 'rock' (petra) differs from the name Petros, the 'rock' referred to is not Peter himself but the confession he has just made of Jesus as Messiah. In Aramaic, however, the same term kefa would appear in both places; the change in Greek is due to the fact that petra, the normal word for rock, is feminine in gender, and therefore not suitable as a name for Simon! The echo of Peter's name remains obvious, even in Greek; he is the rock, in the sense outlined above." (France, New Bible Commentary with consulting editors Carson, France, Motyer, Wenham [Intervarsity Press, 1994], page 925, 926)
Oscar Cullmann (Lutheran) from Kittel's Greek standard Theological Dictionary of the New Testament --
"The obvious pun which has made its way into the Gk. text as well suggests a material identity between petra and petros, the more so as it is impossible to differentiate strictly between the meanings of the two words. On the other hand, only the fairly assured Aramaic original of the saying enables us to assert with confidence the formal and material identity between petra and petros: petra = Kepha = petros....Since Peter, the rock of the Church, is thus given by Christ Himself, the master of the house (Is. 22:22; Rev. 3:7), the keys of the kingdom of heaven, he is the human mediator of the resurrection, and he has the task of admitting the people of God into the kingdom of the resurrection...The idea of the Reformers that He is referring to the faith of Peter is quite inconceivable in view of the probably different setting of the story...For there is no reference here to the faith of Peter. Rather, the parallelism of 'thou art Rock' and 'on this rock I will build' shows that the second rock can only be the same as the first. It is thus evident that Jesus is referring to Peter, to whom He has given the name Rock. He appoints Peter, the impulsive, enthusiastic, but not persevering man in the circle, to be the foundation of His ecclesia. To this extent Roman Catholic exegesis is right and all Protestant attempts to evade this interpretation are to be rejected." (Cullmann, article on "Rock" (petros, petra) trans. and ed. by Geoffrey W. Bromiley, Theological Dictionary of the New Testament [Eerdmans Publishing, 1968], volume 6, page 98, 107, 108)
Herman Ridderbos (Protestant Evangelical) --
"It is well known that the Greek word (petra) translated 'rock' here is different from the proper name Peter. The slight difference between them has no special importance, however. The most likely explanation for the change from petros ('Peter') to petra is that petra was the normal word for 'rock.' Because the feminine ending of this noun made it unsuitable as a man's name, however, Simon was not called petra but petros. The word petros was not an exact synonym of petra; it literally meant 'stone.' Jesus therefore had to switch to the word petra when He turned from Peter's name to what it meant for the Church. There is no good reason to think that Jesus switched from petros to petra to show that He was not speaking of the man Peter but of his confession as the foundation of the Church. The words 'on this rock [petra]' indeed refer to Peter. Because of the revelation that he had received and the confession that it motivated in him, Peter was appointed by Jesus to lay the foundation of the future church." (Ridderbos, Bible Student's Commentary: Matthew [Zondervan, 1987], page 303 as cited in Butler/Dahlgren/Hess,
page 35-36)
Craig Blomberg (Protestant Evangelical) --
"Acknowledging Jesus as The Christ illustrates the appropriateness of Simon's nickname 'Peter' (Petros=rock). This is not the first time Simon has been called Peter (cf. John 1:42 [wherein he is called Cephas]), but it is certainly the most famous. Jesus' declaration, 'You are Peter,' parallels Peter's confession, 'You are the Christ,' as if to say, 'Since you can tell me who I am, I will tell you who you are.' The expression 'this rock' almost certainly refers to Peter, following immediately after his name, just as the words following 'the Christ' in v. 16 applied to Jesus. The play on words in the Greek between Peter's name (Petros) and the word 'rock' (petra) makes sense only if Peter is the rock and if Jesus is about to explain the significance of this identification." (Blomberg, The New American Commentary: Matthew [Broadman, 1992], page 251-252, as cited in Butler/Dahlgren/Hess, page 31-32)
William F. Albright and C.S. Mann (from The Anchor Bible series) --
"Rock (Aram. Kepha). This is not a name, but an appellation and a play on words. There is no evidence of Peter or Kephas as a name before Christian times. On building on a rock, or from a rock, cf. Isa 51:1ff; Matt 7:24f. Peter as Rock will be the foundation of the future community (cf. I will build). Jesus, not quoting the OT, here uses Aramaic, not Hebrew, and so uses the only Aramaic word which would serve his purpose. In view of the background of vs. 19 (see below), one must dismiss as confessional interpretation any attempt to see this rock as meaning the faith, or the Messianic confession, of Peter. To deny the pre-eminent position of Peter among the disciples or in the early Christian community is a denial of the evidence. Cf. in this gospel 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15. The interest in Peter's failures and vacillations does not detract from this pre-eminence; rather, it emphasizes it. Had Peter been a lesser figure his behavior would have been of far less consequence (cf. Gal 2:11ff)." (Albright/Mann, The Anchor Bible: Matthew [Doubleday, 1971], page 195)
Craig S. Keener (Protestant Evangelical) --
"'You are Peter,' Jesus says (16:18), paralleling Peter's 'You are the Christ' (16:16). He then plays on Simon's nickname, 'Peter,' which is roughly the English 'Rocky': Peter is 'rocky,' and on this rock Jesus would build his church (16:18)....Protestants...have sometimes argued that Peter's name in Greek (petros) differs from the Greek term for rock used here (petra)....But by Jesus' day the terms were usually interchangeable, and the original Aramaic form of Peter's nickname that Jesus probably used (kephas) means simply 'rock.' Further, Jesus does not say, 'You are Peter, but on this rock I will build my church'....the copulative kai almost always means 'and'.... Jesus' teaching is the ultimate foundation for disciples (7:24-27; cf. 1 Cor 3:11), but here Peter functions as the foundation rock as the apostles and prophets do in Ephesians 2:20-21....Jesus does not simply assign this role arbitrarily to Peter, however; Peter is the 'rock' because he is the one who confessed Jesus as the Christ in this context (16:15-16)...." (Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew [Eerdmans, 1999], page 426-427)
Francis Wright Beare (Presbyterian/Reformed) --
"The play on words -- 'Peter', this 'rock' -- requires a change in Greek from petros (properly, 'stone') to petra. In Aramaic, the two words would be identical -- Kepha the name given to Peter, transliterated into Greek as Kephas (Gal. 2:9), and kepha, 'rock'. The symbol itself is Hebraic: Abraham is the 'rock' from which Israel was hewn, and in a rabbinic midrash, God finds in him a rock on which he can base and build the world..." (Beare, The Gospel According to Matthew [Harper and Row, 1981], page 355)
Eduard Schweizer (Presbyterian/Reformed) --
"The 'rock' is Peter himself, not his confession. Only on this interpretation does the pun make sense." (Schweizer, The Good News According to Matthew [John Knox Press, 1975], page 341)
Ivor H. Jones (Methodist) --
"...in 16.18 Peter is the rock on which the new community could be built, as Abraham was described in rabbinic writings as the rock on which God could erect a new world to replace the old....The arguments have raged across the centuries over the phrase 'on this rock' : does it mean on Peter, or on Peter's confession? But the text is clear: Peter was divinely inspired and this was the reason for his new function and the basis of his authorization. His function was to provide for Jesus Christ the beginnings of a stronghold, a people of God, to stand against all the powers of evil and death...They are God's people, the church...as the church they represent God's sovereign power over evil (18.18b) and rely upon a new kind of divine authorization...This authorization is given to Peter; so Peter is not only a stronghold against evil; he also is responsible for giving the community shape and direction." (Jones, The Gospel of Matthew [London: Epworth Press, 1994], page 99)
M. Eugene Boring (Disciples of Christ) --
"16:18, Peter as Rock. Peter is the foundation rock on which Jesus builds the new community. The name 'Peter' means 'stone' or 'rock' (Aramaic Kepha Cepha; Greek petros).... There are no documented instances of anyone's ever being named 'rock' in Aramaic or Greek prior to Simon. Thus English translations should render the word 'stone' or 'rock,' not 'Peter,' which gives the false impression that the word represented a common name and causes the contemporary reader to miss the word play of the passage: 'You are Rock, and on this rock I will build my church.' Peter is here pictured as the foundation of the church....On the basis of Isa 51:1-2 (cf. Matt 3:9), some scholars have seen Peter as here paralleled to Abraham; just as Abram stood at the beginning of the people of God, had his name changed, and was called a rock, so also Peter stands at the beginning of the new people of God and receives the Abrahamic name 'rock' to signify this." (The New Interpreter's Bible [Abingdon Press, 1995], volume 8, page 345)
Thomas G. Long (Presbyterian/Reformed) --
"Since, in the original Greek, Petros and petra both mean 'rock,' it is easy to spot this statement as a pun, a play on words: 'Your name is "Rock," and on this "rock" I will build my church.' Jesus' meaning is plain: Peter is the rock, the foundation, upon which he is going to erect his church...Jesus spoke Aramaic, however, not Greek. In Aramaic, the words for 'Peter' and 'rock' are the same (Kepha)...the most plausible interpretation of the passage is that Jesus is, indeed, pointing to Peter as the foundation stone, the principal leader, of this new people of God...there is much evidence that he also played a primary leadership role in the early Christian church....For the church, the new people of God, Peter was, indeed, the 'rock,' corresponding to Abraham of old, who was 'the rock from which you were hewn' (Isa. 51:1)." (Long, Matthew [Westminster John Knox Press, 1997], page 185, 186)
Richard B. Gardner (Brethren/Mennonite) --
"The key question here is whether the rock foundation of the church is Peter himself, or something to be distinguished from Peter. If the latter, Jesus could be speaking of Peter's faith, or of the revelation Peter received. It is more likely, however, that the rock on which Jesus promises to build the church is in fact Peter himself, Peter the first disciple (cf. 4:18; 10:2), who represents the whole group of disciples from which the church will be formed. At least four considerations support this view...." (Gardner, Believers Church Bible Commentary: Matthew [Herald Press, 1991], 247)
Those are 11 Protestant Scholars that admit what the Catholic Church claims. Therefore, one cannot accuse of the Catholic Church of emphasizing Peter as the Rock in Matthew 16 due to its personal agenda; but one must admit that the Catholic Church is just being honest with the text. These Protestants give great evidence to the Catholic claim when they have no agenda of doing so. If the Catholic Church is making this whole “Peter being the Rock” thing up, then why do we find Protestant scholars agreeing with her?
The word petra occurs 4x in the NT:
Matt. 16:18, "And I also say to you that you are Peter (petros), and upon this rock (petra) I will build My church; and the gates of Hades shall not overpower it."
Please see above.
Matt. 27:60, "and laid it in his own new tomb, which he had hewn out in the rock (petra); and he rolled a large stone against the entrance of the tomb and went away."
This is irrelevant. :)
1 Cor. 10:4, "and all drank the same spiritual drink, for they were drinking from a spiritual rock (petras) which followed them; and the rock (petra) was Christ."
And the Catholic Church would agree that Jesus is also the Rock. It’s not either/or but a both/and. Not Jesus or Peter but Jesus AND Peter. Please refer to the idea of “the Apostles working miracles” above.
1 Pet. 2:8, speaking of Jesus says that he is "A stone of stumbling and a rock (petra) of offense"; for they stumble because they are disobedient to the word, and to this doom they were also appointed."
Again, we agree.
Note that Peter himself in 1 Pet 2:8 referred to petra as being Jesus! If Peter uses the word as a reference to Jesus, then shouldn't we?
Yes we should and we do. :)
The truth is that the only foundation is Jesus. The only rock of truth is Jesus Christ and that we, as his redeemed, need to keep our eyes on him. We are to look to no one else as the foundation, the source, or the hope on which the church is built. The Church is built upon Jesus, not Peter.
We agree that the foundation is Jesus; however, we believe Jesus laid this foundation of the Church on the person of Peter as well as Peter’s confession. We are being obedient to Jesus when we say that the Church is built on Peter. This is what the Scripture teaches in Matthew 16.
You said something very interesting. You said:
We are to look to no one else as the foundation, the source, or the hope on which the church is built.
I’d like to point out that this is unbiblical. We agree that Jesus built His Church, but one cannot say that He didn’t build it on Peter and the Apostles. The Church is built primarily on Peter (as we saw in Matthew 16) and also, it is built on the Apostles. Here is the verse:
[19] So then you are no longer strangers and sojourners, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God,
[20] built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone,
The Scriptures themselves say that the Church is “built upon the FOUNDATION OF THE APOSTLES AND PROPHETS, Christ Jesus Himself being the CORNERSTONE.” Please take a look at what you said and compare it with the Scripture passage I provided. There is a clear contradiction.
Again, we are being obedient to the Scriptures when we make such claims. We’re not trying to take away from Christ (ultimately, everything comes from HIM), but we are being obedient to what Christ said and therefore we are glorifying His commandments and His Words.
Let’s now talk about John 21:15-17. The text says:
[15] When they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, "Simon, son of John, do you love me more than these?" He said to him, "Yes, Lord; you know that I love you." He said to him, "Feed my lambs."
[16] A second time he said to him, "Simon, son of John, do you love me?" He said to him, "Yes, Lord; you know that I love you." He said to him, "Tend my sheep."
[17] He said to him the third time, "Simon, son of John, do you love me?" Peter was grieved because he said to him the third time, "Do you love me?" And he said to him, "Lord, you know everything; you know that I love you." Jesus said to him, "Feed my sheep.
Notice how I bolded the word “Tend” in verse 16 where Jesus says to Peter, “Tend my sheep.” First of all, we need to acknowledge that Jesus is speaking to Peter only and not the other Apostles. This is very significant to point out. It shows that Peter is unique and distinct among the other Apostles. We will also demonstrate this in more detail in a bite. Let’s now take the word “Tend” and see what it means in the Greek. The English translation doesn’t do it much justice.
ποιμαίνω
poimainō
poy-mah'ee-no
From G4166; to tend as a shepherd (or figuratively superviser): - feed (cattle), rule.
Notice how I highlighted the word “rule”. Jesus does not only entrust Peter to tend the sheep, but to RULE THE SHEEP. Let’s take a look at how this same word is used in another place in the New Testament:
[6] `And you, O Bethlehem, in the land of Judah,
are by no means least among the rulers of Judah;
for from you shall come a ruler
who will govern my people Israel.'"
-Matthew 2:6
The highlighted word “govern” is the same word that is used to translate the word “tend” in John 21:16. This shows that the word doesn’t simply mean “to tend” but it also means to “govern” or “rule”. No one would go so far as admitting that Jesus’ mission is to merely tend the sheep; His mission was to govern and rule the sheep. The same word is used for Peter.
What else can we point to that suggests that Peter is the Rock/leader of the Church? Let’s go to John 1:42:
[42] He brought him to Jesus. Jesus looked at him, and said, "So you are Simon the son of John? You shall be called Cephas" (which means Peter).
The word “Cephas” is a transliteration from the Aramaic to the Greek of the word “Kepha” which means Rock. This alone totally negates the claim that Peter is not the Rock. The Scriptures are explicitly clear that Peter is the Rock. Let’s take a look at the Greek dictionary and see how it translates the word “Cephas”:
Κηφᾶς
Kēphas
kay-fas'
Of Chaldee origin (compare [H3710]); the Rock; Cephas (that is, Kepha), surname of Peter: - Cephas.
So, what Jesus literally said to him in Aramaic was: “So you are Simon the son of John? You shall be called KEPHA.”
Let’s take it further. After Jesus said what He said, John interprets the word “Cephas” (which is Kepha in Aramaic), into “Peter” which in the Greek it’s “Petros”.
Which means that the word “Petros” does not mean small rock, but it means KEPHA (big rock).
Another verse to consider is 1 Corinthians 15:5:
[5] and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve.
There are two things to consider:
1.) St. Paul calls Peter “Cephas” which means Rock.
2.) St. Paul distinguishes Peter from the “12” Apostles (really it’s 11 Apostles but “the 12 Apostles” is more of a title for the Apostles rather than a literal number “12” in this case).
[18] Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas, and remained with him fifteen days.
-Galatians 1:18
[9] and when they perceived the grace that was given to me, James and Cephas and John, who were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised;
-Galatians 2:9
Let’s consider another passage where Peter is singled out from all the other Apostles:
[31] "Simon, Simon, behold, Satan demanded to have you, that he might sift you like wheat,
[32] but I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail; and when you have turned again, strengthen your brethren."
-Luke 22:31-32
In the Greek, the words for “you” in verse 31 is plural (ya’ll). In verse 32, the words for “you” in Greek is singular. We miss this in the English but in the Greek, it’s very clear. Here is how the text is to be read in a literal way:
[31] "Simon, Simon, behold, Satan demanded to have ya’ll, that he might sift ya’ll like wheat,
[32] but I have prayed for YOU that your faith may not fail; and when YOU have turned again, strengthen your brethren."
This forces us to ask the question: Why does he single peter out in this scenario? And wouldn’t strengthening the brethren suggest a supremacy over them? Very interesting.
"For no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ," (1 Cor. 3:11).
Amen. :)
This is my understanding of the Church, hope to hear your reply brother Ehab!
Likewise, brother!
Greek dictionaries and lexicons give us further insight into the two Greek words under discussion:
1. Source: Liddell, H. (1996). A lexicon : Abridged from Liddell and Scott's Greek-English lexicon (636). Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.
1. Petros: "πέτρος, a stone, distinguished from πέτρα
2. Petra: πέτρα , Ion. and Ep. πέτρη, , a rock, a ledge or shelf of rock, Od. 2. a rock, i.e. a rocky peak or ridge...Properly, πέτρα is a fixed rock, πέτρος a stone."
2. Source: Vine, W., & Bruce, F. (1981; Published in electronic form by Logos Research Systems, 1996). Vine's Expository dictionary of Old and New Testament words (2:302). Old Tappan NJ: Revell.
1. PETRA πέτρα , (4073)) denotes a mass of rock, as distinct from petros, a detached stone or boulder, or a stone that might be thrown or easily moved.
This is a rather outdated claim to say that the word petros means small rock and petra means big rock. As many Protestant scholars have admitted that this distinction or petra and petros is not to be applied to Koine Greek (which is the New Testament Greek). Although, let’s assume that this distinction of petros and petra meaning “stone” and “rock” applies to Koine Greek as well, it doesn’t apply to 1st century Koine Greek. This was something that was only true from previous centuries, not 1st century AD.
Here’s a Protestant scholar who admits this:
D.A. Carson (Protestant Evangelical) --
"Although it is true that petros and petra can mean 'stone' and 'rock' respectively in earlier Greek, the distinction is largely confined to poetry. Moreover, the underlying Aramaic is in this case unquestionable; and most probably kepha was used in both clauses ('you are kepha' and 'on this kepha'), since the word was used both for a name and for a 'rock.' The Peshitta (written in Syriac, a language cognate with Aramaic) makes no distinction between the words in the two clauses. The Greek makes the distinction between petros and petra simply because it is trying to preserve the pun, and in Greek the feminine petra could not very well serve as a masculine name." (Carson, The Expositor's Bible Commentary [Zondervan, 1984], volume 8, page 368, as cited in Butler/Dahlgren/Hess, page 17-18)
In Koine Greek, the word for “small rock” is “lithos”. If Jesus wanted to emphasize that Peter is a small rock, the Greek word would have been lithos, not petros.
Here is a Protestant Greek dictionary.
Let’s deal with Petros first:
G4074
Πέτρος
Petros
pet'-ros
Apparently a primary word; a (piece of) rock (larger than G3037); as a name, Petrus, an apostle: - Peter, rock. Compare G2786.
Please note the fact that it says “larger than G3037” and G3037 is the word lithos which means small rock.
G3037
λίθος
lithos
lee'-thos
Apparently a primary word; a stone (literally or figuratively): - (mill-, stumbling-) stone.
And now let’s take a look at Petra:
G4073
πέτρα
petra
pet'-ra
Feminine of the same as G4074; a (mass of) rock (literally or figuratively): - rock.
Please note the fact that it says “Feminine of the same as G4074”. What word is G40474? If you scroll up, you will see that G4074 is Petros.
Therefore, we are forced to admit that Peter is the Rock on which Christ builds His Church. What I have done is only scratched the surface. We have not even gone into what verse 19 means (where Jesus gives Peter the keys). The handing on of keys to Peter has a Judaic meaning to it that emphasizes Peter’s supremacy over the whole Church. If you’d like, we can go into all of this in more detail. I believe I’ve given you enough to chew for now. Looking forward to your reply.
"To deny the pre-eminent position of Peter among the disciples or in the early Christian community is a denial of the evidence" (Albright/Mann, Matthew, page 195)
Saint Jerome in 375 AD writes to the Pope saying:
"…I think it my duty to consult the chair of Peter, and to turn to a church whose faith has been praised by Paul…The fruitful soil of Rome, when it receives the pure seed of the Lord, bears fruit an hundredfold…My words are spoken to the successor of the fisherman, to the disciple of the cross. As I follow no leader save Christ, so I communicate with none but your blessedness, that is with the chair of Peter. For this, I know, is the rock on which the church is built! This is the house where alone the paschal lamb can be rightly eaten. This is the ark of Noah, and he who is not found in it shall perish when the flood prevails.” Jerome, To Pope Damasus, Epistle 15:1-2 (A.D. 375).
