Christ is The Rock

[Roman]

1 Corinthians 1:12 Now this I say, that every one of you saith: I indeed am of Paul; and I am of Apollo; and I am of Cephas; and I of Christ.

1 Corinthians 3:22 For all things are yours, whether it be Paul, or Apollo, or Cephas, or the world, or life, or death, or things present, or things to some; for all are yours;

Corintians 9:5
Have we not power to carry about a woman, a sister, as well as the rest of the apostles, and the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?

Why does Paul refer to Peter as Cephas (Aramaic Kepha=Rock)?

42 And he brought him to Jesus. Now when Jesus looked at him, He said, "You are Simon the son of Jonah. You shall be called Cephas" (which is translated, A Stone).
NKJV

Note this verse above. Some claim that cephas is translated "Rock", but even scripture itself refutes that point quite directly and shows that Cephas means "stone".

Tomas..is this in the Scriptures that we have received...or is this commentary? This is just an honest question...I have read different versions of the Bible...and I have yet to see this addition in any other translation.

God bless

 

[Toms777]

1 Corinthians 1:12 Now this I say, that every one of you saith: I indeed am of Paul; and I am of Apollo; and I am of Cephas; and I of Christ.

1 Corinthians 3:22 For all things are yours, whether it be Paul, or Apollo, or Cephas, or the world, or life, or death, or things present, or things to some; for all are yours;

Corintians 9:5
Have we not power to carry about a woman, a sister, as well as the rest of the apostles, and the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?

Why does Paul refer to Peter as Cephas (Aramaic Kepha=Rock)?

Does he?

John 1:42
42 And he brought him to Jesus. Now when Jesus looked at him, He said, "You are Simon the son of Jonah. You shall be called Cephas" (which is translated, A Stone).
NKJV

[quote:56dce]42 And he brought him to Jesus. Now when Jesus looked at him, He said, "You are Simon the son of Jonah. You shall be called Cephas" (which is translated, A Stone).
NKJV

Note this verse above. Some claim that cephas is translated "Rock", but even scripture itself refutes that point quite directly and shows that Cephas means "stone".

Tomas..is this in the Scriptures that we have received...or is this commentary? This is just an honest question...I have read different versions of the Bible...and I have yet to see this addition in any other translation.[/quote:56dce]

It is in the Bible, the text of the scripture itself. Not a commentary.

John 1:42
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.
KJV

Tom

 

[Toms777]

Just as a follow-up, I had a look at my Greek New Testaments, both the Textus-Receptus, and the Westcott Hort versions, to try to verify if this ending is in fact part of the original text. Both the T-R and W-H have the ending to the verse and in both texts state that Cephas is translated as "petros" ("petros" is the specific word found in both versions of the Greek text). "Petros", as can be verified from many sources, is translated as a piece of a rock, or stone. I verified this by consulting Vine's Complete Expository Dictionary, Strong's Concordance and BGAD, as well as a number of other less known sources. All agree on the meaning of "petros".

Therefore, from this verse, we have a clear and specific statement of what was intended to be the meaning of Peter's name.

 

[Roman]

I had a look at my Greek New Testaments, both the Textus-Receptus, and the Westcott Hort versions, to try to verify if this ending is in fact part of the original text. Both the T-R and W-H have the ending to the verse and in both texts state that Cephas is translated as "petros"

When were these Greek New Testaments promulgated?

I ask because most Greek scholars acknowlege that 'petros' and 'petra' are synonymous in the Koine Greek that the New Testament was written in.

What about John 1:42? Isn't it a little strange that the Gospel of John was written in Greek, yet he used the Aramaic word (the Greek transliteration of Kepha) Cephas?
This doesn't make sense to me. John's gospel was written in Greek...so why didn't he use the word Petros if there was a distinction to be made?

Furthermore, 'Kepha' is an Aramaic word that literally means 'rock'. If nothing else, it would strike me peculiar that John would the change his language for no particular reason...

 

[francisdesales]

What about John 1:42? Isn't it a little strange that the Gospel of John was written in Greek, yet he used the Aramaic word (the Greek transliteration of Kepha) Cephas?
This doesn't make sense to me. John's gospel was written in Greek...so why didn't he use the word Petros if there was a distinction to be made?

Furthermore, 'Kepha' is an Aramaic word that literally means 'rock'. If nothing else, it would strike me peculiar that John would the change his language for no particular reason...

Good luck. This has already been addressed, but the "audience" is not listening... I hope you have better luck.

Regards

 

[Toms777]

I ask because most Greek scholars acknowlege that 'petros' and 'petra' are synonymous in the Koine Greek that the New Testament was written in.

To be honest, I have studied this a lot, and I have not seen a single Greek scholar who says that petros and petra are synonymous. I have numerous resources at my fingertips here and all are in agreement. I gave you some highly recognized and highly respected references earlier that all agree on this point.

What about John 1:42? Isn't it a little strange that the Gospel of John was written in Greek, yet he used the Aramaic word (the Greek transliteration of Kepha) Cephas?
This doesn't make sense to me. John's gospel was written in Greek...so why didn't he use the word Petros if there was a distinction to be made?

We could ask a lot of what if's, but that John wrote what he did under teh inspiration of the Holy Spirit and we have what we have. We must deal with it. When we get to meet him in heaven, we can make inquiries of him then, but for now, we have to deal with the text.

Furthermore, 'Kepha' is an Aramaic word that literally means 'rock'. If nothing else, it would strike me peculiar that John would the change his language for no particular reason...

Let's have another gander at the context of that passage.

John 1:42
Now when Jesus looked at him, He said, "You are Simon the son of Jonah. You shall be called Cephas" (which is translated, A Stone).
NKJV

Note that it is the words that Jesus chose to use, not John. John then penned the record under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. You can question whether Jesus chose the right word or not, but to be honest, I really think that Jesus chose the word that he intended to choose. Thus we have a crystal clear indication of what Jesus intended when he spoke to Peter.

Did Jesus translate properly? Because we have the involvement of Jesus, John and the Holy Spirit in telling us what the meaning was, I think that this would be pretty hard to argue against. Regardless as to whether you believe that Jesus made an error in translation, the point remains that Jesus told us what He meant.

 

[Dan Edwin]

The original post was not sent with any intent of causing discord among the members in Christ, but rather to draw us closer together as members one of another. The post was in no way sent to attack or belittle anyone, but to share understanding from the Bible as we believe has been revealed. We're sorry if we have troubled any by this. So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another (Romans 12:5).

The following is a portion of a reply to another thread that more clearly shows the church as the holy city New Jerusalem, the bride of Christ.

And I John saw the holy city, New Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. (Revelation 21:2) The holy city New Jerusalem prepared as a bride, is the church, the bride of Christ the Lamb.
And there came unto me one of the seven angels which had the seven vials full of the seven last plagues, and talked with me, saying, Come hither, I will show thee the bride, the Lamb's wife. And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and showed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God, (Revelation 21:9-10)
The bride is the Lamb's wife (the church), the holy city New Jerusalem.

And had a wall great and high, and had twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels, and names written thereon, which are the names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel: (Revelation 21:12) We see the twelve sons of Jacob as the twelve gates of entry into the holy New Jerusalem.

And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb (Revelation 21:14).

By showing the church as New Jerusalem built on the Apostles as the foundations, we see the Apostle Peter as one of twelve foundations ("stones") upon which Christ (the chief cornerstone) would build His church.

Trust the Lord and God bless

 

[Toms777]

The church existed in the 1st century, but the New Jerusalem comes after the current earth is destroyed. The apostles are not shown as the foundation,

1 Cor 3:11-12
11 For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
NKJV

but rather their names are ON the foundation.

Rev 21:14
14 Now the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them were the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.
NKJV