Posted on 01/11/2018 6:54:52 PM PST by Salvation
A rose; by any other name; would be called something else.
It makes no difference what Petros is
Jesus spoke in Aramaic, that’s what cephas is.
It being wrote in Greek does not change the meaning
of an Aramaic word.
Thank you for your effort, and for showing my lack of complete thoroughness.
I checked the Greek Textus Receptus over again, and finally found it there.
If ravenwolf had done as I asked, he would have found it, too. Now we are all edified by your scrutiny.
BTW, wherever did you get the idea that "Cephas" means "rock"? Please, I would be grateful if you would tell me where you found this definition.
(Even in Aramaic.)
In the Bible dictionary.
Let’s use a different ability.
Lets say you have a. Beautiful mexican girl friend,
you heard that I was trying to romance her so you tell
her not so bright brother to tell me to stop seeing her.
Her brother knows he will not remember what you told him
so he writes it down in his half Spanish and Indian duplex.
When he sees me sure enough he has forgot so he gets the
note and trys to put it back into English for me.
alto seeing my girl, stop an see my girl if you go through
the village.
In his interpretation he has completely changed what you said.
so are you going to admit that his interpretation is correct?
Oh, by the way we did have a grand ole time and she was so
beautiful, thanks a lot.
BTW, wherever did you get the idea that “Cephas” means “rock”? Please, I would be grateful if you would tell me where you found this definition.
Meaning of name Cephas
Etymology : Means “rock” in Aramaic
Saint :
Origin : Biblical
Cephas
/ / / /
Share Tweet Save
Centurion Cesarea
Cephas [N] [H] [S]
a Syriac surname given by Christ to Simon ( John 1:42 ), meaning “rock.” The Greeks translated it by Petros, and the Latins by Petrus.
When Cephas is translated by the Holy Spirit to mean “stone”,
I might have a hard time believing you are the holy spirit.
At any rate you are right, it does mean stone in greek but it means rock in aramaic which is the language Jesus spoke
which is shown by the fact that he used the word cephas which is aramaic.
HMMMmmm...
Just WHY did Jesus use different names in such proximity?
Something subtle we are not catching here???
BTW, wherever did you get the idea that "Cephas" means "rock"?
Even the ECFs didn't get into THIS much detail on what 'rock' means!
As regards the oft-quoted Mt. 16:18, note the following Early Church Fathers promise in the profession of faith of Vatican 1:
• Basil of Seleucia, Oratio 25:
'You are Christ, Son of the living God.'...Now Christ called this confession a rock, and he named the one who confessed it 'Peter,' perceiving the appellation which was suitable to the author of this confession. For this is the solemn rock of religion, this the basis of salvation, this the wall of faith and the foundation of truth: 'For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Christ Jesus.' To whom be glory and power forever. — Oratio XXV.4, M.P.G., Vol. 85, Col. 296-297.
• Bede, Matthaei Evangelium Expositio, 3:
You are Peter and on this rock from which you have taken your name, that is, on myself, I will build my Church, upon that perfection of faith which you confessed I will build my Church by whose society of confession should anyone deviate although in himself he seems to do great things he does not belong to the building of my Church...Metaphorically it is said to him on this rock, that is, the Saviour which you confessed, the Church is to be built, who granted participation to the faithful confessor of his name. — 80Homily 23, M.P.L., Vol. 94, Col. 260. Cited by Karlfried Froehlich, Formen, Footnote #204, p. 156 [unable to verify by me].
• Cassiodorus, Psalm 45.5:
'It will not be moved' is said about the Church to which alone that promise has been given: 'You are Peter and upon this rock I shall build my Church and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it.' For the Church cannot be moved because it is known to have been founded on that most solid rock, namely, Christ the Lord. — Expositions in the Psalms, Volume 1; Volume 51, Psalm 45.5, p. 455
• Chrysostom (John) [who affirmed Peter was a rock, but here not the rock in Mt. 16:18]:
Therefore He added this, 'And I say unto thee, Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church; that is, on the faith of his confession. — Chrysostom, Homilies on the Gospel of Saint Matthew, Homily LIIl; Philip Schaff, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf110.iii.LII.html)
• Cyril of Alexandria:
When [Peter] wisely and blamelessly confessed his faith to Jesus saying, 'You are Christ, Son of the living God,' Jesus said to divine Peter: 'You are Peter and upon this rock I will build my Church.' Now by the word 'rock', Jesus indicated, I think, the immoveable faith of the disciple.”. — Cyril Commentary on Isaiah 4.2.
• Origen, Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (Book XII):
“For a rock is every disciple of Christ of whom those drank who drank of the spiritual rock which followed them, 1 Corinthians 10:4 and upon every such rock is built every word of the church, and the polity in accordance with it; for in each of the perfect, who have the combination of words and deeds and thoughts which fill up the blessedness, is the church built by God.'
“For all bear the surname ‘rock’ who are the imitators of Christ, that is, of the spiritual rock which followed those who are being saved, that they may drink from it the spiritual draught. But these bear the surname of rock just as Christ does. But also as members of Christ deriving their surname from Him they are called Christians, and from the rock, Peters.” — Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (Book XII), sect. 10,11 ( http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/101612.htm)
• Hilary of Potier, On the Trinity (Book II):
Thus our one immovable foundation, our one blissful rock of faith, is the confession from Peter's mouth, Thou art the Son of the living God. On it we can base an answer to every objection with which perverted ingenuity or embittered treachery may assail the truth."-- (Hilary of Potier, On the Trinity (Book II), para 23; Philip Schaff, editor, The Nicene & Post Nicene Fathers Series 2, Vol 9.
I do not believe Jesus needs any one interpreting what he said
unlike some people I think he was smart enough to know what he
said and why,
For instance he most likely told the writer of John to leave the Aramaic name of cephas the way it was because he realized
that the religious leaders would deliberately change it if they could.
Jesus called Simon Cephas in John 1:42 and cephas means rock in Aramaic which is what Jesus spoke.
John 1:42 is the only scripture I am concerned with I will let
you professors go to each other’s throats with the rest.
Catholics don't believe Adam ever existed. Didn't you know that?
Shame on you!
“Jesus spoke in Aramaic, that’s what cephas is.”
No doubt He spoke Aramaic. Likely Greek, the trade language and likely Hebrew.
More I mportantly, the Holy Spirit inspired the NT in Greek, and chose those words we see recorded in the manuscripts.
Catholics don't believe in Adam and Eve. Or Noah and the ark. Or the Tower of Babel. Or Jonah's great fish. That's how they know they are Catholics and not "brain-dead bibliolators!"
Having begun in the Spirit, they were not to circumcise their flesh (foreskins), as required by God under the Abrahamic Covenant and confirmed by God in the Law of Moses, unless they were in fact Jews (like Timothy but not Titus). The fleshly observance of the Law of Moses would profit them nothing. Instead, they were to obey the Gospel and the commandments as taught by the Apostles.
Liturgical chrstianity in a nutshell: the actual commandments, rituals, and rites found in the Bible are henceforth forbidden, but post-biblical commandments, rituals, and rites (which weren't delivered from G-d's very own Mouth but which developed slowly over time) are different. They're good!
Does everyone get it now?
The Protestant argument against the historical post-biblical rites and ceremonies are merely the Pauline anti-Torah argument carried to a more logical conclusion! Unfortunately, neither liturgicals nor Protestants seem to notice this.
In other words, the Catholic/Orthodox church invented Protestantism when it rejected the authoritative Mosaic Tradition.
Protestants merely take that reasoning to its logical conclusion.
And chose the words we see? You mean like cephas which is Aramaic.?
Also like you said after all of those years of the trade language and the scriptures before that being wrote in Greek
it is strange about one word being in Aramaic.
I have no doubt it was the act of the holy spirit saying to
the religious leaders, oh no you don’t, not so easy any way.
Even back then there were most likely ambitious people trying
to take the place of Peter and the other apostles.
It was a name...
...but we ask follow up questions of the Holy Spirit about His choice of words. :-)
Yoy still don’t get the point that the Apostle John, writing the inspired words under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, translated/interpreted Cephas as stone, not rock. That is not me translating it. It is just me quoting directly from the Bible. And nowhere in the New Testament is there any other translation of Cephas, but this one. You cannot set aside the Bible’s interpretation without getting called on it.
(Too tired to follow this thread any more tonight.)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.