a hollow rock: ???????????
the Rock; Cephas (that is, Kepha), .......
that is all we really need, nothing more.
Every now and then a word will actually change the meaning of scripture, for instance changing Slept to sleeping may make it appear that the Resurrection had not happened yet.
And of course that is why the scribes and pharisees changed it in many versions of the Bible.
John 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.
This was translated from the Greek, but Cephas comes from the Greek so no interpretation is needed.
And your opinion of Peter does not matter to me, if it is not in scripture please preach it to the new converts, they will probably buy it in their anxiety to be anti Catholic..
You do not seem at all to know the difference between "transliteration," "translation," "interpretation," and "application."
I see you are not going to be reasonable, but you are going to argue with me on this and with Scripture, as Simon did think he was wiser than his Teacher.
"Cephas" is not a Greek word. The Chaldean/Aramaic word "Kay-fa" that Jesus determined that Simon was to be called was transliterated into Greek letters so that said in Greek it sounded as the Chaldean word was pronounced. They did add the fins letter "sigma" (our "s") to make it devlinable in Greek, according to its use in the sentence. John translated it into Greek as the word "petros" which meant to the first century Greek-speaker the same as it means to an English speaker of 1600 or of today: "stone."
But the translators of the KJV transliterated the Greek "Kayfas" (spelled kappa, eta, phi, alpha, sigma) into the English alphabet as "Cephas" (the C being the hard sound like "k" as in "candy" or "Carl"; replaced the eta with "e" to sound like "ay" as in "whey"; and used ph in English in place of "phi" to give the "f" sound, as in "Philadelphia").
Correctly pronounced in English, the word spelled "Cephas" in the KJV is pronounced "kay-fass". If you didn't know this, when reading it aloud you would probably have said "See-fus", which is how nearly all today's semiliterate hillbillies would use it (without having the slightest inkling of what it meant, or why it was only Paul other than John to use it in writing to the New Testament churches.
But now that you know it, to turn back to an ignorant approach is inexcusable. Even to God, Who knows all this. And it is your job to pass it on, not to withhold it, as you indicated is your intent:
And your opinion of Peter does not matter to me, if it is not in scripture please preach it to the new converts, they will probably buy it in their anxiety to be anti Catholic . . ."
What I wrote is not at all anti-Catholic, unless a part of Catholicism is elevating some humans to be gods. And, yes, what I wrote about is in the Scriptures, right under your nose, but apparently you have not the sense or training to know it.
Like "Peter."
Some other people would way, "Thank you, sir, for your labors in the effort to improve my education." As I do to others in this forum who have improved mine immeasurably.