The Devil's work

[Mungo]

No. The Rock is Christ Himself. In fact He is called the Rock in Scripture.

Yes, and that makes Jesus' renaming of Simon as Rock every significant.

In the first chapter of John’s gospel we read of Jesus’ first meeting with Peter. At that point Peter is called Simon. Jesus says to Peter (vs 42)
"So you are Simon the son of John? You shall be called Kephas" (which means Peter)

Renaming someone is always significant in the Bible. Kephas (sometimes transliterated as Cephas) is Aramaic for Rock (a big one).

St. Paul refers to Kephas in 8 places in both his first letter to the Corinthians and in his letter to the Galatians. For example:
“and that he appeared to Kephas, then to the twelve.” (1Cor 15:5)
“Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to confer with Kephas” (Gal 1:18)
“and when James and Kephas and John, who were acknowledged pillars” (Gal 2:9)

 

[Mungo]

Of course, the rock on which the Lord will build His church is the confession of Peter that Jesus is the Christ...

No, Jesus is referring to Peter.

 

[justbyfaith]

No. The Rock is Christ Himself. In fact He is called the Rock in Scripture.

I can accept that.

However, when Jesus is referring to "this rock" He is not referring to Peter, and neither is He referring to Himself; but He is referring to Peter's confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God (see also John 20:31).

Kephas (sometimes transliterated as Cephas) is Aramaic for Rock (a big one).

Nope. It means a little one.

Jhn 1:42, And he brought him to Jesus. And when Jesus beheld him, he said, Thou art Simon the son of Jona: thou shalt be called Cephas, which is by interpretation, A stone.

No, Jesus is referring to Peter.

Nope.

 

[Mungo]

I can accept that.

However, when Jesus is referring to "this rock" He is not referring to Peter, and neither is He referring to Himself; but He is referring to Peter's confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God (see also John 20:31).

John 20:31 has nothing to do with this.
Jesus is clearly referring to Peter.

Nope. It means a little one.

Nope. Kephas in Aramaic is a big rock.

Jhn 1:42, And he brought him to Jesus. And when Jesus beheld him, he said, Thou art Simon the son of Jona: thou shalt be called Cephas, which is by interpretation, A stone.

That is just an appalling interpretation/translation. The Greek actually has petros which anywhere else is translated Peter.
If Jesus meant stone it would be lithos.

Nope.

Yep.

 

[justbyfaith]

John 20:31 has nothing to do with this.

It has everything to do with it (see 1 Corinthians 2:13 (kjv)).

Jesus is clearly referring to Peter.

Nope.

Nope. Kephas in Aramaic is a big rock.

Nope.

That is just an appalling interpretation/translation. The Greek actually has petros which anywhere else is translated Peter.
If Jesus meant stone it would be lithos.

What does your Catholic Bible say in that verse (John 1:42)?

Because I don't think that the Catholic Bible has many differences from the kjv; otherwise it would not be sustainable as the word of God.

Yep.

Thank you for agreeing with my "nope."

 

[justbyfaith]

G2786 - kēphas - Strong's Greek Lexicon (KJV)

 

[Mungo]

G2786 - kēphas - Strong's Greek Lexicon (KJV)

Your link proves my point that kephas means rock not stone.

Definition: "a rock", Cephas, a name given to the apostle Peter

Under Thayers Greek lexicon it says
Κεφας, κεφα (Buttmann, 20 (18)), ὁ (Chaldean כֵּיפָא, a rock), Cephas

Here is a link to another source of Strong's number G2786
Strong's Greek: 2786. Κηφᾶς (Képhas) -- "a rock," Cephas, a name given to the apostle Peter

And that says:
Képhas: "a rock," Cephas, a name given to the apostle Peter
and
Definition: "a rock", Cephas, a name given to the apostle Peter
Usage: Cephas (Aramaic for rock), the new name given to Simon Peter, the apostle.

And under Strongs's Exhaustive Concordance it says
Cephas.
Of Chaldee origin (compare keph); the Rock; Cephas (i.e. Kepha), a surname of Peter -- Cephas.

The KJV is just plain wrong to interpret kephas as stone.

 

[justbyfaith]

Your link proves my point that kephas means rock not stone.

No, it doesn't.

I encourage the reader to read what is behind the link.

 

[Mungo]

No, it doesn't.

I encourage the reader to read what is behind the link.

I encourage the reader to read my previous post that clearly shows that kephas means rock.

 

[justbyfaith]

I encourage the reader to read my previous post that clearly shows that kephas means rock.

It clearly means, a stone (John 1:42).

The Bible trumps your false dictionary.

 

[Mungo]

It clearly means, a stone (John 1:42).

The Bible trumps your false dictionary.

1. The Bible doesn't say stone. A false translation of the Bible says stone.
The word in the Greek text which translates the aramaic kepha is petros (rock) not lithos (stone).

2. The "false dictionary" is Strong's Greek Lexicon which YOU GAVE ME.
If you think it is false why did you give it to me?

 

[mailmandan]

The Church is built upon Jesus – not Peter.

Is Peter the rock on which the Church is built? | carm.org

 

[Mungo]

The Church is built upon Jesus – not Peter.

Is Peter the rock on which the Church is built? | carm.org

Peter is the Rock on which the Church is built.

At a quick look there are two points that CARM makes that have not already been covered.
1. In Mt 16:18 although the Greek petra rather than petros is used for rock, in ancient Greek the distinction may have been significant (though some dispute even this), by NT times the two words were interchangeable. Moreover it would have been inappropriate for Peter to have been called by the feminine petra rather than the masculine petros. In addition there was a word in regular use for stone (lithos – see Jn 19:13).

More importantly Jesus did not call Peter either Petra or Petros but the Aramaic Kephas. (meaning Rock). So the above would have been “you are Kephas, and on this kephas I will build my Church”.

We know this because in John 1:42 Jesus renames Peter from Simon to Kephas (Rock)
Jesus looked at him and said, “You are Simon the son of John; you will be called Kephas”
Renaming someone is always significant in the Bible.

2. CARM claims that kepha is not used as a name in Aramaic. But clearly it was used as a name by Jesus and others.
Jesus renames Simon in John 1:42. Also Paul refers to Kephas in 8 places in both his first letter to the Corinthians and in his letter to the Galatians. For example:
“and that he appeared to Kephas, then to the twelve.” (1Cor 15:5)
“Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to confer with Kephas” (Gal 1:18)
“and when James and Kephas and John, who were acknowledged pillars” (Gal 2:9)
This shows that Peter was generally know as Kephas (or Cephas).


By giving Peter the name Rock, a name that represents himself, Jesus was indicating that Peter was to be his representative before men.

This wasn’t the first time God chose someone to be his representative before people.
The Lord answered him [Moses], “See! I have made you as God to Pharaoh" (Ex 7:1).
God made Moses as God to Pharaoh. In other words Moses was representing God to Pharoah,

In Mt 16:18 Jesus made Peter his representative before people, and he gives him authority represented by the keys in Mt 16:19, and the power to bind and loose, also in Mt 16:19.

The Pope, as the successor of Peter, is God’s representative before his people with his authority.

 

[justbyfaith]

1. The Bible doesn't say stone. A false translation of the Bible says stone.
The word in the Greek text which translates the aramaic kepha is petros (rock) not lithos (stone).

2. The "false dictionary" is Strong's Greek Lexicon which YOU GAVE ME.
If you think it is false why did you give it to me?

So, how does your Catholic translation translate John 1:42?

The Strong's Greek Lexicon clearly defines kephas as "a stone".

What? Are you counting on the fact that most people don't do their research?

It is plainly there, in black and white.

G2786 - kēphas - Strong's Greek Lexicon (KJV)

Peter is the Rock on which the Church is built.

Nope; it was the confession of Peter that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God (see John 20:31).

 

[Mungo]

So, how does your Catholic translation translate John 1:42?

The Strong's Greek Lexicon clearly defines kephas as "a stone".

What? Are you counting on the fact that most people don't do their research?

It is plainly there, in black and white.

G2786 - kēphas - Strong's Greek Lexicon (KJV)

.[/QUOTE]


I don't need a specifically Catholic translation

RSV
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[a]">[a]).
Footnote: [a] From the word for rock in Aramaic and Greek, respectively


NIV
And he brought him to Jesus.
Jesus looked at him and said, “You are Simon son of John. You will be called Cephas” (which, when translated, is Peter[a]">[a]).
Footnote [a] Cephas (Aramaic) and Peter (Greek) both mean rock.

regarding Strong, from your link, as I showed you before Strong says under Definitions
Κηφᾶς Kēphâs, kay-fas'; of Chaldee origin (compare H3710); the Rock; Cephas (i.e. Kepha), a surname of Peter:—Cephas.

and under
Thayer's Greek Lexicon
STRONGS NT 2786: Κεφας
Κεφας, κεφα (Buttmann, 20 (18)), ὁ (Chaldean כֵּיפָא, a rock),

And then I gave another link to another source of Strong's number G2786
Strong's Greek: 2786. Κηφᾶς (Képhas) -- "a rock," Cephas, a name given to the apostle Peter

And that says:
Képhas: "a rock," Cephas, a name given to the apostle Peter
and
Definition: "a rock", Cephas, a name given to the apostle Peter
Usage: Cephas (Aramaic for rock), the new name given to Simon Peter, the apostle.

And under Strongs's Exhaustive Concordance it says
Cephas.
Of Chaldee origin (compare keph); the Rock; Cephas (i.e. Kepha), a surname of Peter -- Cephas.

All your link says about "stone" is that is how the KJV translates it. But we know that already.

Nope; it was the confession of Peter that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God (see John 20:31).

That doesn't say anything about Rock being Peter's confession of faith.

 

[justbyfaith]

I think that the fact that you deny that the kjv is a valid translation makes you like what was prophesied in 2 Timothy 4:3...in going to a different translation to get your doctrine, you are heaping to yourself teachers (in the translators of these other translations) to tell you what your itching ears want to hear.

Those who accept the kjv as inspired will know that I have won the point.

You are only going to have people agreeing with you who also agree with you that the kjv is not inspired and inerrant. And those people are not my primary audience anyway; so you can have them.

 

[Mungo]

I think that the fact that you deny that the kjv is a valid translation makes you like what was prophesied in 2 Timothy 4:3

I didn't say the KJV is a not a valid transaction. I said that particular bit of the translation is faulty.
There is no perfect translation. They all have faults depending on the skills and bias of the translators and the manuscripts they have to work on. The KJV translators only had a few very late manuscripts to work with.

..in going to a different translation to get your doctrine, you are heaping to yourself teachers (in the translators of these other translations) to tell you what your itching ears want to hear. [

That is just plain silly.
That makes a false assumption that everyone has to start with the KJV. I don't. I normally use the RSV.

Those who accept the kjv as inspired will know that I have won the point.

The KJV is not inspired. Only the original manuscripts were inspired. Over time copyists and translators make errors. Our knowledge is imperfect.

You are only going to have people agreeing with you who also agree with you that the kjv is not inspired and inerrant. And those people are not my primary audience anyway; so you can have them.

Thinking that the KJV is inspired and inerrant is just plain bonkers.

 

[BloodBought 1953]

The only way you are going to get a reward from God is if you preach the gospel that He gave to the church to preach to the world..


Your “Gospel “ is the “ gospel Of Lucky Repentance”..... nothing you say, do, or believe Counts for anything in the end—- is all comes down to to whether or not you had the “Good Fortune” or “Luck” to repent of all of your sins before you died...God help that man who died from a sudden attack and did not have the time or SUPER Memory to repent of all of his sins.... keep this in mind, Newbies....this is his way to get to Heaven....he doesn’t mention it as much as he used to.....he moved on to another False Teaching: you wanna get your sins forgiven? Keep the Law! The exact antithesis of everything the Bible teaches......

 

[theefaith]

Matt 24:13