Replies

ABSOLUTELY AMEN! WELL PUT:

That’s how you guys get your perverted understanding of the scriptures...You insert ‘other words’...

And here’s an example of your ‘other words’...

He said, “You are Peter, and upon this rock that you are, I will build my Church.”

First off, I’m not interested in ‘other words’...I’m interested in the words that Jesus said...And I’m not interested in the words that you guys insert that Jesus did not say...And Jesus did not say, ‘this rock that you are’...

You have false theology that you construct from adding words that don’t belong there...

This becomes even clearer if we use “rock” instead of “Peter”:

Well sure it does, if you want to continue to pervert the God breathed scriptures to line up with your religion...

“You are the rock, and upon this rock I will build my Church.” What’s so strange about that?

What’s strange about that is THAT is not what Jesus said...

Jesus said, ‘You are Peter’...IF you must go with the Greek meaning, Peter means little rock...

Jesus said, ‘upon THIS’ rock...Jesus is the big, massive rock...Jesus was contrasting Himself with Peter so no one would get confused and claim a church was being built on Peter...Jesus didn’t say, ‘you are a Peter’...He said you are Peter...

If the name Peter was meant to say rock, we wouldn’t call Peter by the name of Peter...His name would be Rock...Or little Rock...Maybe Peter was part Indian...Maybe he was called Peter little rock...

I’ll stick with what God actually says...

Jesus said, in Aramaic "You are Kepha, and on this kepha I will build my Church."

You do show ignorance in your phrase. Jesus didn't use the ENGLISH word Peter (Modern English didn't come about until 1700+ years later and even Old English was 1000 years in the future), but in ARAMAIC. In ARAMAIC Jesus renamed Shimeon KEPHA So Matthew 16:18 was this: ‘You are Kepha, and on this kepha I will build my Church'

You do follow that, right. The new name of this disciple WAS ROCK (KEPHA in the original language)

Iscool --> you are reading the text in ENGLISH when the original was in Aramaic and/or Koine Greek. All of your errors and the other sola scriptura errors is because of this and other incorrect assumptions. Because of THIS fault of yours we say sola scriptura is in error, because you do NOT read the bible, you read what you want to see in an English Bible, with it's translation errors.

Let me repeat this once more, your statement was If the name Peter was meant to say rock, we wouldn't call Peter by the name of Peter...His name would be Rock... how about if we start using Aramaic and say that St.Peter in ARamaic is St. Kepha and Kepha = rock --> would you understand it now?
If kepha means the same as petra, why don’t we read in the Greek, ‘You are Petra, and on this petra I will build my Church’? Why, for Simon’s new name, does Matthew use a Greek word, Petros, which means something quite different from petra?" Greek and Aramaic have different grammatical structures.

In Aramaic you can use kepha in both places in Matthew 16:18. In Greek you encounter a problem arising from the fact that nouns take differing gender endings.

"You have masculine, feminine, and neuter nouns. The Greek word petra is feminine. You can use it in the second half of Matthew 16:18 without any trouble.

But you can’t use it as Simon’s new name, because you can’t give a man a feminine name

. You have to change the ending of the noun to make it masculine. When you do that, you get Petros, which was an already-existing word meaning rock.

Is that clear enough -- you use two because of the grammatical structure in KOINE GREEK.

STOP trying to use English grammar to explain texts which were spoken in Aramaic and written in Koine Greek -- both the grammar systems differ from English.

If you spoke a language other than English or Spanish (which are both relatively simple grammatically), you would see that grammar can differ wildly across languages)