For that matter, produce a "young" Greek document, one written in the 1st century AD for instance.
Till then the exact wording and it's meaning is pure speculation on the part of Protestants and Catholics.
BTW the Catechism Of The Catholic Church is more in agreement with the Protestant position that the "Rock" in question was Peter's confession of faith. But then, you know better.
You: The problem will be solved when you produce the original Aramaic document. Do you have one or are you speculating?
There is no speculation whatsoever. We know what word was used by Christ because, in addition to a translation of the Aramaic "Kepha" into "Petros," there are nine instances in the New Testament where Kepha is not translated at all, but left alone with only an addition of the letter "s," to make the word possible to use under the rules of Greek grammar. John 1:42, 1Cor. 1;12, 1Cor 3:22, 1Cor. 9:5, 1Cor 15:05, Galatians 1:18, Gal. 2:9, 11 and 14 ALL use the word "Kephas." Don't let that "C" fool you in your English translation, ALL of these usages are spelled "Kephas" or its declined derivative in the Greek (indeed, some of them are flat-out "Kepha," as in 1Cor. 1:12 and 1Cor. 15:5). The "C" derives from the Latin translation, which made its way into English. Since this word is used so prominently, and since the only possible Aramaic derivative is "Kepha," we therefore know that the word Kepha was used in Matthew 16:18. Furthermore, the rules of Aramaic grammar would indicate that the form of "Kepha" was the same in the two places where it it used in this sentence: "Thou art Kepha, and on this Kepha I will build my Church."
We don't need an original document in Aramaic. There are far too many Hebraicisms and Aramaicisms in Matthew for there to be any doubt that it was written in one or the other of those languages first, and subsequently translated into Greek. But, even if this were not so, the abundance of instances where "Kephas" is used throughout the rest of the NT leaves NO DOUBT WHATSOEVER what the original word was when Jesus spoke what is found in Matthew 16:18.
"BTW the Catechism Of The Catholic Church is more in agreement with the Protestant position that the "Rock" in question was Peter's confession of faith. But then, you know better.
Jesus DOES choose Peter based on Peter's faith! Who denies this? Faith comes by grace, does it not? Jesus clearly indicates that Peter's ability to correctly discern His identity comes as a gift from the Father, does He not? So, obviously, Peter's grace-fueled, faith-based confession of the Christ is the reason why he is chosen. But the man Peter is the one upon whom Christ will build His Church. Simon must be as a Rock, emulating the true "Rock" who is Christ Himself. Therefore, after acknowledging that Simon could not come to his conclusion without the grace-fuled faith from the Father needed for it, Jesus says that he, Peter, IS the Rock upon which Christ will build His Church, and to him does Christ bestow the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven.
Look, forget Aramaic or Greek grammar considerations for a minute. Let's stick with English. If I said to you: "I say to you that you are Rock, and upon this Rock I will build my Church," to what do you suppose the second "Rock" refers? Is it not obvious that the answer is the first "Rock" in the same sentence? Simon's confession of faith is two whole sentences before this! It is FAR more tortured a grammatical route to insist that the second "Rock" refers to something last mentioned two sentences previous!
Sure, no one denies that the basis for Jesus' decision to single-out Peter is referenced to his faith, but the office He is conferring is placed upon the man, not merely an intangible. The man Peter was to govern the Church in Christ's stead after the Ascension. A man who was a tangible, living, breathing, go-to guy. If the Church was built merely on his confession of faith, and not on him in any tangible way, how would this help everyone else looking for guidance and leadership from Peter? In no other way but the fact that the man called Peter would be consulted, so you wind-up back at the Church being built upon the man, anyway!