Some points, like "on this rock (petra, feminine gender, and equating with a massive, miles-long geological escarpment)" does not fit at all with "Thou art Peter (petros, masculine gender, might equate with a stone that you or a front-end loader can pick up regarding weight, but here could be well noted for its density) which serendipitally fits Simon bar Jona not only because as a nickname it is necessarily masculine in gender, but in quality it could refer to a mind somewhat lacking in nimbleness and teachability.
Compare Simon "Peter"s writing to that of, say, Levi, who put together a fine synopsis of Jesus' life and ministry. In fact, Peter did not even write an account. It had to be done by John Mark, his disciple, and even then, in a less literate way than Paul or Luke, men of high educability.
Do you get the point? The situation in Matthew 19 was not one in which Jesus created a new sobriquet for Simon. Jesus had already given that label to Peter two years before when they first met, and Jesus named him "Kefas"(in Aramaic) which by interpretation is "Petros" in Greek (see John 1:42), or in English "Stone."
But for sure, it did not call to mind Peter as being morally strong or unmoveable in determination or consistent in loyalty. His reputation was not distinguished by those qualities, as seen in reading the New Testament very carefully.
Like I have said before, the Bible has already been translated.
How can any one claim to believe in sola scripture which
I do and then not believe any thing Jesus said.
I believe the Bible Is translated right we don’t need any
more.
How people can swear that all scripture comes from God and then think God was not smart enough to make sure it was translated right is more than I can understand.