Your appeal to DA Carson as a "renowned Greek scholar" is fallacious and misleading. DA Carson was NOT analysing the Greek but was making a common error of converting Greek to Aramaic then trying to formulate and argument from the Aramaic. There is NO proof that Jesus was speaking in Aramaic only speculation but actually makes no differenc. The FACT of the matter is that the Holy Spirit inspired the New Testament to be written in Greek, a language that makes a distinct difference between Petra and Petros.
Translating the Greek which was inspired by the Holy Spirit into Aramaic or Hebrew to try to formulate an argument is second guessing the Holy Spirit and changing what He inspired to be written. Not a wise move.
There is also another problem with the DA Carson attempt to work Aramaic into the argument. Even if Jesus was speaking Aramaic it proves nothing. While Kepha can be translated Petros in Greek it is not proven that Jesus used Kepha for petra as there are other words in both Hebrew and Aramaic for petra. Even DA Carson admits such as seen here
Your appeal to Carson is worthless.
Who is Michael Taylor? What are his credentials. This random blogger can't even credibly answer his critics under the blog post you cite.
Carson is a recognized, credentialed Greek scholar, and he's hardly alone in his assertion. c.f. Blomberg, Keener, Cullmann and Albright.
It would seem Taylor's only credential is saying what you want to hear.
Furthermore, it is outright dishonest to claim Carson "was NOT analysing the Greek."
. . . The Greek makes a distinction between petros and petra simply because it is trying to preserve the pun, and in Greek the feminine petra could not very well serve as a masculine name” (D.A. Carson, Matthew, Frank E. Gaebelein, ed. The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Vol. 8, [Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1984], p. 368).
That is analyzing Greek by definition.
As Carson IS referring to the Greek, one has to wonder where this question of Aramaic is coming from other than answering critics desperate to find SOMETHING to impeach his credibility. His argument about the Greek doesn't NEED to include anything about Aramaic.
These demonstrable facts make your entire contention about "second guessing the Holy Spirit" utterly moot.
I understand seeing a pet dogma get run over is distressing, but making a dogma out of "he didn't get a ticket for speeding; he got a ticket for driving a car that was going too fast" should never have been adopted in the first place.