New Covenant only for Jews?

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Status
Not open for further replies.

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,977
3,418
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
@amigo de christo is not a Protestant. He is a fundamental bible believing Christian. Period.
If he is in fact a Baptized Christian and he is NOT Catholic OR Eastern Orthodox - then he IS a Protestant by definition.
You guys are always trying to get around thast.

From the posts of his that I've read - he is an Amigo-believing Lone Ranger . . .
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,977
3,418
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
If the bible says it WE believe it .
Then why do you reject so much of it?

In John 6, Jesus says that His flesh is REAL food and His blood is REAL drink.
At the Last Supper, He gave the Apostles instructions on how to do this sacramentally. - yet YOU completely reject the Eucharist.

I can give you MANY other examples of your disbelief . . .
 
  • Like
Reactions: Reggie Belafonte

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,977
3,418
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I have no idea what you're babbling about. Neither do you.

Do both petros and petra appear in Matthew 16:18 in your Codex Vaticanus?
What a moronic response.
You remind me of these guys – who refuse to See, hear or repeat.
1672346141253.png

Simple-minded denials will NIOT make the truth “vanish”.

I’ve presented an air-tight case about Peter being the “Rock” of Matt. 16. and I included at leats a DOZEN of the most respected Protestant scholarly sources on the matter - and they ALL agree that Peter was the Rock of Matt. 16:18.

And all YOU’VE come back with are denials and an asinine belief that Jesus and the Apostles spoke GREEK to one another.
Good grief . . .

You’re correct about ONE thing:
You DOIN’T know what I’m talking about . . .
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,977
3,418
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Congrats on quoting some people who are as lacking in spiritual discernment regarding this issue as you are.
And THAT’S your response??
It’s utterly astounding to me that so many of you anti-Catholics live on such a voracious diet of denial, subterfuge and rejection.

I presented a rock-solid linguistic and Biblical case for Matt. 16:18, and you guys come back with this drivel because your cannot find a valid linguistic OR Scriptural refutation.
These are ALL highly-regarded Protestant sources – many of whom have dedicated their ENTIRE lives to the study of the Scriptures.

YOU, on the other hand, a poster on an obscure internet website who probably doesn’t even own a Bible can wallow in denial ‘til the cows come home . . .
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,977
3,418
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
You have debunked nothing apart from your own argument. The vast bulk of Reformed theologians sing from the same hymn sheet - Christ is the Rock. Your theology is built upon man, so it is not surprising you refuse to base your beliefs on Scripture.
I cannot imagine that you spend time on a discussion forum - yet you can’t seem to follow the discussion.

NOBODY stated that Christ WASN’T the Rock. He’s just not the Rock of Matt. 16:18Peter is.

- Jesus is the Rock of many verses, including Matt. 21:42, Luke 20:17, Acts 4:11.
- Abraham
is the Rock of Isaiah 51:1-2.
- Peter
is the Rock of
Matt. 16:18.

PLEASE – can ONE of you just give me an intelligent response?
And PLEASE try to refute my linguistic and Biblical argument – with a linguistic and Biblical argument

All I am getting is denial, obstinate rejection and good, old fashion subterfuge . . .
 
Last edited:

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,977
3,418
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
There is one Rock - Christ Jesus. Only idolaters like the Roman catholic "church" think otherwise.
And only LIARS tell lies . . .

Here is what the inerrant Word of Almighty God states:
The THREE people mentioned in the Bible who are called “The Rock” are:

- Jesus (Matt. 21:42, Luke 20:17, Acts 4:11.)
- Abraham (Isa. 51:1-2)
- Peter (Matt. 16:18)

By the way - there is s dire warning for ALL liars:
Rev. 21:8
But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the detestable, as for murderers, the sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, AND ALL LIARS, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death.”

Good luck with that . . .
 

covenantee

Well-Known Member
Feb 22, 2022
4,625
1,883
113
73
Canada
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
What a moronic response.
You remind me of these guys – who refuse to See, hear or repeat.
View attachment 27981

Simple-minded denials will NIOT make the truth “vanish”.

I’ve presented an air-tight case about Peter being the “Rock” of Matt. 16. and I included at leats a DOZEN of the most respected Protestant scholarly sources on the matter - and they ALL agree that Peter was the Rock of Matt. 16:18.

And all YOU’VE come back with are denials and an asinine belief that Jesus and the Apostles spoke GREEK to one another.
Good grief . . .

You’re correct about ONE thing:
You DOIN’T know what I’m talking about . . .
The delusional ranting, raving, shrieking, and screaming of apostate papistry.

Thank God for the Reformation.

You'd better exhume the authors of your Greek Codex Vaticanus and excoriate them for daring to understand the difference between petros and petra.

And you'd better immediately remove the Codex from your Vatican library and conduct a public immolation.

And you'd better immolate the pope at the stake at the same time for permitting its existence.

And that's just the start.

Better get going -- You have a lot of work to do.
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,977
3,418
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The delusional ranting, raving, shrieking, and screaming of apostate papistry.
I haven't used a single exclamation point, so I don't know what you're talking about . . .
Thank God for the Reformation.

You'd better exhume the authors of your Greek Codex Vaticanus and excoriate them for daring to understand the difference between petros and petra.

And you'd better immediately remove the Codex from your Vatican library and conduct a public immolation.


And you'd better immolate the pope at the stake at the same time for permitting its existence.

And that's just the start.

Better get going -- You have a lot of work to do.
Why??
I’m NOT the one who is confused here.

This is how stupid your argument is:
- I explain to you that the NT was written in GREEK – but Jesus and the Apostles spoke ARAMAIC to one another.
- I further explained the GREEK was simply the lingu franca (common language) of commerce and communication between different countries.
- I even presented a dozen of some of the most revered Protestant scholarly sources who ALL AGREE that Peter is the Rock of Matt. 16:18.

Apparently, this ALL went over your head as you presented the Codex Vaticanus as “evidence” to support your argument because it says “Petros”COMPLETELY ignoring the fact that Jesus spoke in ARAMAIC to His Apostles.

Sooooo, WHY would I object to the Codex Vaticanus being written in GREEK??
NOT
everybody us as slow to get the point as YOU are.

Don’t waste my time . . .
 
Last edited:

covenantee

Well-Known Member
Feb 22, 2022
4,625
1,883
113
73
Canada
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Sooooo, WHY would I object to the Codex Vaticanus being written in GREEK??
Sooooo, WHY didn't the authors of Codex Vaticanus render Matthew 16:18 the same way as you claim it was in oral Aramaic?

That is, petra/petra, as you claim it was.

Not petros/petra, as they rendered it.

Sooooo, WHY???

Because
they understood the distinction, and the Greek in which they wrote permitted that distinction to be reflected.

Sooooo, got it??

Or will you persist with the rhetoric of a fool and an antichrist?

What you are in reality doing is denying the Holy Spirit inspiration of the verse, by claiming that the written version did/does not match the oral version; which would constitute an error.

So stop your heresy and blasphemy.

Thank God for the Reformation.
 
Last edited:

Brakelite

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2020
8,610
6,451
113
Melbourne
brakelite.wordpress.com
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
@amigo de christo is not a Protestant. He is a fundamental bible believing Christian. Period.
Protestantism isn't a denomination. It's a mindset. Being a Bible believing fundamentalis, an advocate for religious liberty, and protesting on behalf of truth is the essence of protestantism. Which is precisely what I observe Amigo doing.
 

Brakelite

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2020
8,610
6,451
113
Melbourne
brakelite.wordpress.com
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
I haven't used a single exclamation point, so I don't know what you're talking about . . .

Why??
I’m NOT the one who is confused here.

This is how stupid your argument is:
- I explain to you that the NT was written in GREEK – but Jesus and the Apostles spoke ARAMAIC to one another.
- I further explained the GREEK was simply the lingu franca (common language) of commerce and communication between different countries.
- I even presented a dozen of some of the most revered Protestant scholarly sources who ALL AGREE that Peter is the Rock of Matt. 16:18.

Apparently, this ALL went over your head as you presented the Codex Vaticanus as “evidence” to support your argument because it says “Petros”COMPLETELY ignoring the fact that Jesus spoke in ARAMAIC to His Apostles.

Sooooo, WHY would I object to the Codex Vaticanus being written in GREEK??
NOT
everybody us as slow to get the point as YOU are.

Don’t waste my time . . .
The NT was written in dozens of languages, translated from Greek, and most of them more accurate than the Latin, which was a language of only a select few and they only the more educated. The more common language of the day was a the lower Itala, which was the basis for the KJV. This didn't originate in Rome, but in Antioch.
 

Johann

Well-Known Member
Apr 2, 2022
8,611
4,885
113
63
Durban South Africa
Faith
Christian
Country
South Africa
Christ IS the Rock – and SO is Peter and SO is Avraham
Time for a Bible and a Linguistics Lesson . . .

IF
Jesus and the Apostles spoke to each other in Greekthen you would have a point - but you don't..
HOWEVER, they didn’t speak in Greek – they spoke in Aramaic. Greek was the lingua franca of commerce in the 1st century and had a FAR more broadly used than Aramaic, so it’s why the Books of the NT are written in Greek.

The Aramaic word for “Rock” is “Kepha”. There is NO distinction between “little rock” and “large rock” – just “ROCK”.
So, what Jesus actually said to Simon was:
Matt. 16:18
“And so I say to you, you are Kepha (Rock), and upon this Kepha (Rock).

This is why Peter is referred to as Cephas in many of St. Paul’s letters, because Cephas is the closest Greek transliteration of the Aramaic, Kepha.
This couldn’t be related properly in the Greek because “Petra” is a FEMININE noun.
Unlike English, many other languages employ feminine and masculine traits to nouns and verbs.

Your false beliefs about Peter NOT being the Rock in Matt. 16:18 are only as old as the Protestant Revolt some 500 years ago
Christ’s Church has been around a LOT longer than that . . .

Finally - Jesus is the NOT the only “Rock” mentioned in Scripture, although He is the most important one.
Abraham is ALSO called the “Rock” in Isa. 51”1-2 – and Peter in Matt. 16:18.
You might also want to turn to Isaiah 22, which shows a prefigurement of what happened in Matt. 16:18 . . .

Isaiah 22:20–22
- In that day I will call my servant Eliakim the son of Hilkiah, and I will clothe him with your robe, and will bind your girdle on him, and will commit your authority to his hand; and he shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and to the house of Judah. And I will place on his shoulder the keyof the house of David; he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open.

Matt. 16:18-19 -
And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven.
Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosedin heaven."
Thou art Peter (οὺ εἶ Πέτρος)
Christ responds to Peter's emphatic thou with another, equally emphatic. Peter says, “Thou art the Christ.” Christ replies, “Thou art Peter.” Πέτρος (Peter) is used as a proper name, but without losing its meaning as a common noun. The name was bestowed on Simon at his first interview with Jesus (Joh_1:42) under the form of its Aramaic equivalent, Cephas. In this passage attention is called, not to the giving of the name, but to its meaning. In classical Greek the word means a piece of rock, as in Homer, of Ajax throwing a stone at Hector (“Iliad,” vii., 270), or of Patroclus grasping and hiding in his hand a jagged stone (“Iliad,” xvi., 784).
On this rock (ἐπὶ ταύτῃ τῇ πέρᾳ)

The word is feminine, and means a rock, as distinguished from a stone or a fragment of rock (πέτρος, above). Used of a ledge of rocks or a rocky peak. In Homer (“Odyssey,” ix., 243), the rock (πέτρην) which Polyphemus places at the door of his cavern, is a mass which two-and-twenty wagons could not remove; and the rock which he hurled at the retreating ships of Ulysses, created by its fall a wave in the sea which drove the ships back toward the land (“Odyssey,” ix., 484). The word refers neither to Christ as a rock, distinguished from Simon, a stone, nor to Peter's confession, but to Peter himself, in a sense defined by his previous confession, and as enlightened by the “Father in Heaven.”
The reference of πέτρα to Christ is forced and unnatural. The obvious reference of the word is to Peter. The emphatic this naturally refers to the nearest antecedent; and besides, the metaphor is thus weakened, since Christ appears here, not as the foundation, but as the architect: “On this rock will I build.” Again, Christ is the great foundation, the “chief corner-stone,” but the New Testament writers recognize no impropriety in applying to the members of Christ's church certain terms which are applied to him. For instance, Peter himself (1Pe_2:4), calls Christ a living stone, and, in 1Pe_2:5, addresses the church as living stones. In Rev_21:14, the names of the twelve apostles appear in the twelve foundation-stones of the heavenly city; and in Eph_2:20, it is said, “Ye are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets (i.e., laid by the apostles and prophets), Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner-stone.”

Equally untenable is the explanation which refers πέτρα to Simon's confession. Both the play upon the words and the natural reading of the passage are against it, and besides, it does not conform to the fact, since the church is built, not on confessions, but on confessors - living men.
“The word πέτρα,” says Edersheim, “was used in the same sense in Rabbinic language. According to the Rabbins, when God was about to build his world, he could not rear it on the generation of Enos, nor on that of the flood, who brought destruction upon the world; but when he beheld that Abraham would arise in the future, he said' 'Behold, I have found a rock to build on it, and to found the world,' whence, also, Abraham is called a rock, as it is said' 'Look unto the rock whence ye are hewn.'

The parallel between Abraham and Peter might be carried even further. If, from a misunderstanding of the Lord's promise to Peter, later Christian legend represented the apostle as sitting at the gate of heaven, Jewish legend represents Abraham as sitting at the gate of Gehenna, so as to prevent all who had the seal of circumcision from falling into its abyss” (“Life and Times of Jesus”).

The reference to Simon himself is confirmed by the actual relation of Peter to the early church, to the Jewish portion of which he was a foundation-stone. See Acts, Act_1:15; Act_2:14, Act_2:37; Act_3:12; Act_4:8; Act_5:15, Act_5:29; Act_9:34, Act_9:40; Act_10:25, Act_10:26; Gal_1:15.
Vincent

On this rock (epi tautēi tēi petrāi) Jesus says, a ledge or cliff of rock like that in Mat_7:24 on which the wise man built his house. Petros is usually a smaller detachment of the massive ledge. But too much must not be made of this point since Jesus probably spoke Aramaic to Peter which draws no such distinction (Kēphā). What did Jesus mean by this word-play?

I will build my church (oikodomēsō mou tēn ekklēsian). It is the figure of a building and he uses the word ekklēsian which occurs in the New Testament usually of a local organization, but sometimes in a more general sense. What is the sense here in which Jesus uses it? The word originally meant “assembly” (Act_19:39), but it came to be applied to an “unassembled assembly” as in Act_8:3 for the Christians persecuted by Saul from house to house. “And the name for the new Israel, ekklēsia, in His mouth is not an anachronism. It is an old familiar name for the congregation of Israel found in Deut. (Deu_18:16; Deu_23:2) and Psalms (Psa_22:25), both books well known to Jesus” (Bruce). It is interesting to observe that in Psalms 89 most of the important words employed by Jesus on this occasion occur in the lxx text.

So oikodomēsō in Psa_89:5; ekklēsia in Psa_89:6; katischuō in Psa_89:22; Christos in Psa_89:39, Psa_89:52; hāidēs in Psa_89:49 (ek cheiros hāidou). If one is puzzled over the use of “building” with the word ekklēsia it will be helpful to turn to 1Pe_2:5. Peter, the very one to whom Jesus is here speaking, writing to the Christians in the five Roman provinces in Asia (1Pe_1:1), says: “You are built a spiritual house” (oikodomeisthe oikos pneumatikos). It is difficult to resist the impression that Peter recalls the words of Jesus to him on this memorable occasion. Further on (1Pe_2:9) he speaks of them as an elect race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, showing beyond controversy that Peter’s use of building a spiritual house is general, not local. This is undoubtedly the picture in the mind of Christ here in Mat_16:18. It is a great spiritual house, Christ’s Israel, not the Jewish nation, which he describes. What is the rock on which Christ will build his vast temple?

Not on Peter alone or mainly or primarily. Peter by his confession was furnished with the illustration for the rock on which His church will rest. It is the same kind of faith that Peter has just confessed. The perpetuity of this church general is guaranteed.
Robertson
 
  • Like
Reactions: Illuminator

Johann

Well-Known Member
Apr 2, 2022
8,611
4,885
113
63
Durban South Africa
Faith
Christian
Country
South Africa
I cannot imagine that you spend time on a discussion forum - yet you can’t seem to follow the discussion.

NOBODY stated that Christ WASN’T the Rock. He’s just not the Rock of Matt. 16:18Peter is.

- Jesus is the Rock of many verses, including Matt. 21:42, Luke 20:17, Acts 4:11.
- Abraham
is the Rock of Isaiah 51:1-2.
- Peter
is the Rock of
Matt. 16:18.

PLEASE – can ONE of you just give me an intelligent response?
And PLEASE try to refute my linguistic and Biblical argument – with a linguistic and Biblical argument

All I am getting is denial, obstinate rejection and good, old fashion subterfuge . . .
Thou art Peter - This was the same as if he had said, I acknowledge thee for one of my disciples - for this name was given him by our Lord when he first called him to the apostleship. See Joh_1:42.
Peter, πετρος, signifies a stone, or fragment of a rock; and our Lord, whose constant custom it was to rise to heavenly things through the medium of earthly, takes occasion from the name, the metaphorical meaning of which was strength and stability, to point out the solidity of the confession, and the stability of that cause which should be founded on The Christ, the Son of the Living God. See the notes at Luk_9:62.
Upon this very rock, επι ταυτη τη πετρα - this true confession of thine - that I am The Messiah, that am come to reveal and communicate The Living God, that the dead, lost world may be saved - upon this very rock, myself, thus confessed (alluding probably to Psa_118:22, The Stone which the builders rejected is become the Head-Stone of the Corner: and to Isa_28:16, Behold I lay a Stone in Zion for a Foundation) - will I build my Church, μου την εκκλησιαν, my assembly, or congregation, i.e. of persons who are made partakers of this precious faith. That

Peter is not designed in our Lord’s words must be evident to all who are not blinded by prejudice. Peter was only one of the builders in this sacred edifice, Eph_2:20 who himself tells us, (with the rest of the believers), was built on this living foundation stone: 1Pe_2:4, 1Pe_2:5, therefore Jesus Christ did not say, on thee, Peter, will I build my Church, but changes immediately the expression, and says, upon that very rock, επι ταυτη τη πετρα, to show that he neither addressed Peter, nor any other of the apostles.

So, the supremacy of Peter, and the infallibility of the Church of Rome, must be sought in some other scripture, for they certainly are not to be found in this. On the meaning of the word Church, see at the conclusion of this chapter.
Adam Clarke

Sorry to burst your bubble
 

Johann

Well-Known Member
Apr 2, 2022
8,611
4,885
113
63
Durban South Africa
Faith
Christian
Country
South Africa
Thou art Peter - This was the same as if he had said, I acknowledge thee for one of my disciples - for this name was given him by our Lord when he first called him to the apostleship. See Joh_1:42.
Peter, πετρος, signifies a stone, or fragment of a rock; and our Lord, whose constant custom it was to rise to heavenly things through the medium of earthly, takes occasion from the name, the metaphorical meaning of which was strength and stability, to point out the solidity of the confession, and the stability of that cause which should be founded on The Christ, the Son of the Living God. See the notes at Luk_9:62.
Upon this very rock, επι ταυτη τη πετρα - this true confession of thine - that I am The Messiah, that am come to reveal and communicate The Living God, that the dead, lost world may be saved - upon this very rock, myself, thus confessed (alluding probably to Psa_118:22, The Stone which the builders rejected is become the Head-Stone of the Corner: and to Isa_28:16, Behold I lay a Stone in Zion for a Foundation) - will I build my Church, μου την εκκλησιαν, my assembly, or congregation, i.e. of persons who are made partakers of this precious faith. That

Peter is not designed in our Lord’s words must be evident to all who are not blinded by prejudice. Peter was only one of the builders in this sacred edifice, Eph_2:20 who himself tells us, (with the rest of the believers), was built on this living foundation stone: 1Pe_2:4, 1Pe_2:5, therefore Jesus Christ did not say, on thee, Peter, will I build my Church, but changes immediately the expression, and says, upon that very rock, επι ταυτη τη πετρα, to show that he neither addressed Peter, nor any other of the apostles.

So, the supremacy of Peter, and the infallibility of the Church of Rome, must be sought in some other scripture, for they certainly are not to be found in this. On the meaning of the word Church, see at the conclusion of this chapter.
Adam Clarke

Sorry to burst your bubble
 

ewq1938

Well-Known Member
Jul 11, 2015
6,061
1,233
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Mat 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter G4074, and upon this rock G4073 I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

G4074
Petros
pet'-ros
Apparently a primary word; a (piece of) rock (larger than G3037); as a name, Petrus, an apostle: - Peter, rock. Compare G2786.

G4073
petra
pet'-ra
Feminine of the same as G4074; a (mass of) rock (literally or figuratively): - rock.

It is clear that Peter was a rock, smaller than the mass of rock that Christ is building his church upon. Peter was part of the larger mass of rock, not the full rock of the church itself.

1Co 10:4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock G4073 was Christ.


G4073
pe´t?a
petra
pet'-ra
Feminine of the same as G4074; a (mass of) rock (literally or figuratively): - rock.

This proves that the Rock the church was built upon was the larger G4073 rock that 1Co 10:4 says is Jesus. Peter is a smaller rock, G4074.
 
  • Like
Reactions: covenantee

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,977
3,418
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Sooooo, WHY didn't the authors of Codex Vaticanus render Matthew 16:18 the same way as you claim it was in oral Aramaic?

That is, petra/petra, as you claim it was.

Not petros/petra, as they rendered it.

Sooooo, WHY???

Because they understood the distinction, and the Greek in which they wrote permitted that distinction to be reflected.

Sooooo, got it??

Or will you persist with the rhetoric of a fool and an antichrist?

What you are in reality doing is denying the Holy Spirit inspiration of the verse, by claiming that the written version did/does not match the oral version; which would constitute an error.

So stop your heresy and blasphemy.

Thank God for the Reformation.
REALLY??
What's wrong with you?

The Codex was COPIED DOWN from the original GREEK language -AS GREEK not some other language.
Do you even understand WHAT a "Codez" is?? A codex is titten in BOOK for instead of SCROLLS.
The Codex Vaticanus is the GREEK Bible copied down from the scrolls into BOOK form - got it?? It was created in the 4th century around the same time that Jerome was translating the Latin Vulgate.

If it says "Petros/Petra" - it's because it was simply COPYING the original manuscript. Jesuis spoke ARAMAIC - not Greek. There is NO word for "small stone" in Aramaic - just RICK.
Did that FINALLY sink into your head - or are you STILL in the dark??

It's AMAZING to me that I have explained the Aramaic context to you - FOUR TIMES now - and you STILL don't get it.
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,977
3,418
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The NT was written in dozens of languages, translated from Greek, and most of them more accurate than the Latin, which was a language of only a select few and they only the more educated. The more common language of the day was a the lower Itala, which was the basis for the KJV. This didn't originate in Rome, but in Antioch.
This is a non sequitur.

I wassn't making a case for the Vulgate - but for the fact that Jesus and His Apostels souke ARAMAIC - not Greek.
This single fact DESTROYS the notion that Jesus referred to Simon as a "Little Stone".

In Aramaic, the word "Kepha" means nothing elkse but "ROCK".
There is NO WORD for "Little" or "Big" rock in Aramaic.

The Greek in Matthew 16:18 DEMANDS that he be called "Petros" and NOT "Petra" bbecause Petros is a masculine nous, whereas, "Patra" is a feminine noun.


This ISN'T rocket science, people . . .
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,977
3,418
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Thou art Peter (οὺ εἶ Πέτρος)
Christ responds to Peter's emphatic thou with another, equally emphatic. Peter says, “Thou art the Christ.” Christ replies, “Thou art Peter.” Πέτρος (Peter) is used as a proper name, but without losing its meaning as a common noun. The name was bestowed on Simon at his first interview with Jesus (Joh_1:42) under the form of its Aramaic equivalent, Cephas. In this passage attention is called, not to the giving of the name, but to its meaning. In classical Greek the word means a piece of rock, as in Homer, of Ajax throwing a stone at Hector (“Iliad,” vii., 270), or of Patroclus grasping and hiding in his hand a jagged stone (“Iliad,” xvi., 784).
On this rock (ἐπὶ ταύτῃ τῇ πέρᾳ)

The word is feminine, and means a rock, as distinguished from a stone or a fragment of rock (πέτρος, above). Used of a ledge of rocks or a rocky peak. In Homer (“Odyssey,” ix., 243), the rock (πέτρην) which Polyphemus places at the door of his cavern, is a mass which two-and-twenty wagons could not remove; and the rock which he hurled at the retreating ships of Ulysses, created by its fall a wave in the sea which drove the ships back toward the land (“Odyssey,” ix., 484). The word refers neither to Christ as a rock, distinguished from Simon, a stone, nor to Peter's confession, but to Peter himself, in a sense defined by his previous confession, and as enlightened by the “Father in Heaven.”
The reference of πέτρα to Christ is forced and unnatural. The obvious reference of the word is to Peter. The emphatic this naturally refers to the nearest antecedent; and besides, the metaphor is thus weakened, since Christ appears here, not as the foundation, but as the architect: “On this rock will I build.” Again, Christ is the great foundation, the “chief corner-stone,” but the New Testament writers recognize no impropriety in applying to the members of Christ's church certain terms which are applied to him. For instance, Peter himself (1Pe_2:4), calls Christ a living stone, and, in 1Pe_2:5, addresses the church as living stones. In Rev_21:14, the names of the twelve apostles appear in the twelve foundation-stones of the heavenly city; and in Eph_2:20, it is said, “Ye are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets (i.e., laid by the apostles and prophets), Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner-stone.”

Equally untenable is the explanation which refers πέτρα to Simon's confession. Both the play upon the words and the natural reading of the passage are against it, and besides, it does not conform to the fact, since the church is built, not on confessions, but on confessors - living men.
“The word πέτρα,” says Edersheim, “was used in the same sense in Rabbinic language. According to the Rabbins, when God was about to build his world, he could not rear it on the generation of Enos, nor on that of the flood, who brought destruction upon the world; but when he beheld that Abraham would arise in the future, he said' 'Behold, I have found a rock to build on it, and to found the world,' whence, also, Abraham is called a rock, as it is said' 'Look unto the rock whence ye are hewn.'

The parallel between Abraham and Peter might be carried even further. If, from a misunderstanding of the Lord's promise to Peter, later Christian legend represented the apostle as sitting at the gate of heaven, Jewish legend represents Abraham as sitting at the gate of Gehenna, so as to prevent all who had the seal of circumcision from falling into its abyss” (“Life and Times of Jesus”).

The reference to Simon himself is confirmed by the actual relation of Peter to the early church, to the Jewish portion of which he was a foundation-stone. See Acts, Act_1:15; Act_2:14, Act_2:37; Act_3:12; Act_4:8; Act_5:15, Act_5:29; Act_9:34, Act_9:40; Act_10:25, Act_10:26; Gal_1:15.
Vincent

On this rock (epi tautēi tēi petrāi) Jesus says, a ledge or cliff of rock like that in Mat_7:24 on which the wise man built his house. Petros is usually a smaller detachment of the massive ledge. But too much must not be made of this point since Jesus probably spoke Aramaic to Peter which draws no such distinction (Kēphā). What did Jesus mean by this word-play?

I will build my church (oikodomēsō mou tēn ekklēsian). It is the figure of a building and he uses the word ekklēsian which occurs in the New Testament usually of a local organization, but sometimes in a more general sense. What is the sense here in which Jesus uses it? The word originally meant “assembly” (Act_19:39), but it came to be applied to an “unassembled assembly” as in Act_8:3 for the Christians persecuted by Saul from house to house. “And the name for the new Israel, ekklēsia, in His mouth is not an anachronism. It is an old familiar name for the congregation of Israel found in Deut. (Deu_18:16; Deu_23:2) and Psalms (Psa_22:25), both books well known to Jesus” (Bruce). It is interesting to observe that in Psalms 89 most of the important words employed by Jesus on this occasion occur in the lxx text.

So oikodomēsō in Psa_89:5; ekklēsia in Psa_89:6; katischuō in Psa_89:22; Christos in Psa_89:39, Psa_89:52; hāidēs in Psa_89:49 (ek cheiros hāidou). If one is puzzled over the use of “building” with the word ekklēsia it will be helpful to turn to 1Pe_2:5. Peter, the very one to whom Jesus is here speaking, writing to the Christians in the five Roman provinces in Asia (1Pe_1:1), says: “You are built a spiritual house” (oikodomeisthe oikos pneumatikos). It is difficult to resist the impression that Peter recalls the words of Jesus to him on this memorable occasion. Further on (1Pe_2:9) he speaks of them as an elect race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, showing beyond controversy that Peter’s use of building a spiritual house is general, not local. This is undoubtedly the picture in the mind of Christ here in Mat_16:18. It is a great spiritual house, Christ’s Israel, not the Jewish nation, which he describes. What is the rock on which Christ will build his vast temple?

Not on Peter alone or mainly or primarily. Peter by his confession was furnished with the illustration for the rock on which His church will rest. It is the same kind of faith that Peter has just confessed. The perpetuity of this church general is guaranteed.
Robertson
Since you obviously haven't actually read ANY of the evidence I've presented on this argument – Please read my last post - #617.

This does NOT take away from the fact that Jesus is the ROCK of our salvation. He is repeatedly referred to as “Rock” and “Cornerstone” in Scripture.
HOWEVEVER Abraham is also called the “Rock (Isa. 51:1-2) and so is Simo (Matt. 16:18).

Finally, I refer you to posts #592 & #593, where I provided no less than a DOZEN eminent scholarly sources on the matter – ALL of whom are PROTESTSANT.

Funny how all of these sources “trustworthy” to amti-Catholics when it bolsters their arguments but they are disregarded when they don’t . . .
 

Johann

Well-Known Member
Apr 2, 2022
8,611
4,885
113
63
Durban South Africa
Faith
Christian
Country
South Africa
Since you obviously haven't actually read ANY of the evidence I've presented on this argument – Please read my last post - #617.

This does NOT take away from the fact that Jesus is the ROCK of our salvation. He is repeatedly referred to as “Rock” and “Cornerstone” in Scripture.
HOWEVEVER Abraham is also called the “Rock (Isa. 51:1-2) and so is Simo (Matt. 16:18).

Finally, I refer you to posts #592 & #593, where I provided no less than a DOZEN eminent scholarly sources on the matter – ALL of whom are PROTESTSANT.

Funny how all of these sources “trustworthy” to amti-Catholics when it bolsters their arguments but they are disregarded when they don’t . . .
Friend, I stand by what I have posted, since you are very selective with "sources" on the Internet.

And for your information, I am not against Catholics.
 

Johann

Well-Known Member
Apr 2, 2022
8,611
4,885
113
63
Durban South Africa
Faith
Christian
Country
South Africa
Since you obviously haven't actually read ANY of the evidence I've presented on this argument – Please read my last post - #617.

This does NOT take away from the fact that Jesus is the ROCK of our salvation. He is repeatedly referred to as “Rock” and “Cornerstone” in Scripture.
HOWEVEVER Abraham is also called the “Rock (Isa. 51:1-2) and so is Simo (Matt. 16:18).

Finally, I refer you to posts #592 & #593, where I provided no less than a DOZEN eminent scholarly sources on the matter – ALL of whom are PROTESTSANT.

Funny how all of these sources “trustworthy” to amti-Catholics when it bolsters their arguments but they are disregarded when they don’t . . .
And I have provided scholarly resources debunking your claim re Peter and that he was the pope.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.