[OLD REGGIE]

I figured you'd be happy if both the KJV and RSV agree. The only one I know of that doesn't say that is the Living Bible so if you want to go down that road.... I suspect Mack won't go with you. :)

Are you aware of some version that does NOT include the Aramaic?

I am aware of no instance where the RSV or KJV uses "Kephas". What are you talking about? Is it that you are saying "Cephas" (Stone) is Aramaic?

KJV
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.

RSV
42 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).

[IMRight]

Wait. Now you're questioning an English transliteration of the Aramaic? So now there is not Petros/Petra argument because Jesus said "Peter" and "Rock"?

[malakhi]

I am aware of no instance where the RSV or KJV uses "Kephas". What are you talking about? Is it that you are saying "Cephas" (Stone) is Aramaic?

In English transliteration of Hebrew and Aramaic, the "K" is rendered either with "K" or with "C". Thus you will sometimes see tanakh and sometimes tanach. It is purely a matter of preference.