Peter, the Rock

[Simeon_Hovey]

Does anyone have a copy of Eusebius or a hyperlink to his Ecclesiastical History? (That isn’t Latin or Greek.) He wrote the first book of history on the Christian Church (approx AD 270)? If someone has a copy/link, I’d like to see what Eusebius have to say on this thread? (Because of a variety of arcane collegial rules, MT, MK, LK and JO &etc are not considered history books.)

I haven’t read Eusebius since the early 1990’s so my memory is a little cloudy (<- English understatement!). While I recall bits and pieces of it, one thing that is clear is that by this time the Roman Catholic Church is the established church of the western realm; it is also clear that the church of AD 270 is not the church as it is today. And I seem to recall that Eusebius provides a comprehensive list of the first Popes up to date for his times.

Also, following is a quote of the literal Greek, translated into English letters, of the first half of MT 16:18:
kago de soi lego oti su ei petros kai epi tauth th petra oikodomhso mou thn ekklhsian

Please note the letters “th” before petra. In every bible I’ve ever seen the translation of “th” is omitted; “th” means “the”, thus we have: “and I also say to thee that thou art a [petros] and upon this *the *[petra] I will build my ekklhsian” From Young’s Literal Translation (YLT). Please note that English punctuation IE commas and caps have been omitted from this verse because the Greek MS has no such punctuation. Rather Greek punctuates the letters, which is why I wish that one of the font types provided is Symbol so that we could show the complete literal Greek characters.( I’ve requested that Symbol be added to the types, but if more requests were made it might help in getting it added. So please write a post to your administrators asking for the font type Symbol.)

Also note the last word, “ekklhsian” which is a compound secular word:

a. ek - meaning to cry out or call forth [for a]
b. klhsian - meeting of some group or community of people.

I think it’s critical to add ekklhsian to our discussion because, after determining Peter’s position, we must then ask what Jesus means by, “upon this petra I will build my ekklhsian”?

YLT MT 16:18:
“and i also say to thee that thou art a petros and upon this the petra I will build my ekklhsian”

I’ll have to do some research on ekklhsian (Textus Receptus) or ekklhsia as its given in Strong’s King James version (KJVSL).

Finally I think it’s a fluke that we know Simon [properly Symeon in the Hebrew] as Peter, because if Latin didn’t have the proper name of Peter, it created an accident of translation, and we would have known this disciple as symeon, simon or cephas (JO 1:42)

 

[erikd]

Does anyone have a copy of Eusebius or a hyperlink to his Ecclesiastical History? (That isn’t Latin or Greek.) He wrote the first book of history on the Christian Church (approx AD 270)? If someone has a copy/link, I’d like to see what Eusebius have to say on this thread? (Because of a variety of arcane collegial rules, MT, MK, LK and JO &etc are not considered history books.)

This is the link to the Church History books:

newadvent.org/fathers/2501.htm

As far as this verse in particular, here’s a quote from Eusebius:

**Eusebius of Caesarea [265-340 AD]
Oration in Praise of Constantine **

Again, who so present an avenger of crimes against himself; so that, as the immediate consequence of their impiety, the entire Jewish people were scattered by an unseen power, their royal seat utterly removed, and their very temple with its holy things levelled with the ground? Who, like our Saviour, has uttered predictions at once concerning that impious nation and the establishment of his church throughout the world, and has equally verified both by the event? Respecting the temple of these wicked men, our Saviour said: “Your house is left unto you desolate”: and, “There shall not be left one stone upon another in this place, that shall not be thrown down.” And again, of his church he says: “I will build my church upon a rock, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” How wondrous, too, must that power be deemed which summoned obscure and unlettered men from their fisher’s trade, and made them the legislators and instructors of the human race!

newadvent.org/fathers/2504.htm

I haven’t read Eusebius since the early 1990’s so my memory is a little cloudy (<- English understatement!). While I recall bits and pieces of it, one thing that is clear is that by this time the Roman Catholic Church is the established church of the western realm; it is also clear that the church of AD 270 is not the church as it is today. And I seem to recall that Eusebius provides a comprehensive list of the first Popes up to date for his times.

1. After the martyrdom of Paul and of Peter, Linus was the first to obtain the episcopate of the church at Rome. Paul mentions him, when writing to Timothy from Rome, in the salutation at the end of the epistle.
Church History Book III Chapter 2

9. As to the rest of his followers, Paul testifies that Crescens was sent to Gaul; but Linus, whom he mentions in the Second Epistle to Timothy 2 Timothy 4:21 as his companion at Rome, was Peter’s successor in the episcopate of the church there, as has already been shown.
10. Clement also, who was appointed third bishop of the church at Rome, was, as Paul testifies, his co-laborer and fellow-soldier.
Church History Book III Chapter 4

After Vespasian had reigned ten years Titus, his son, succeeded him. In the second year of his reign, Linus, who had been bishop of the church of Rome for twelve years, delivered his office to Anencletus. But Titus was succeeded by his brother Domitian after he had reigned two years and the same number of months.
Church History Book III Chapter 13

Eusebius goes into the more Bishops or Rome as the books progress, I highly recommend this whole set of books.

Also, following is a quote of the literal Greek, translated into English letters, of the first half of MT 16:18:
kago de soi lego oti su ei petros kai epi tauth th petra oikodomhso mou thn ekklhsian

Please note the letters “th” before petra. In every bible I’ve ever seen the translation of “th” is omitted; “th” means “the”, thus we have: “and I also say to thee that thou art a [petros] and upon this *the *[petra] I will build my ekklhsian” From Young’s Literal Translation (YLT). Please note that English punctuation IE commas and caps have been omitted from this verse because the Greek MS has no such punctuation. Rather Greek punctuates the letters, which is why I wish that one of the font types provided is Symbol so that we could show the complete literal Greek characters.( I’ve requested that Symbol be added to the types, but if more requests were made it might help in getting it added. So please write a post to your administrators asking for the font type Symbol.)

Unfortunately the Greek characters won’t come out on this website, but you can use the strong’s numbers for any of these words for further review:

18:  <2504>  <1161> {AND I ALSO}  <4671> {TO THEE}  <3004> (5719) {SAY,}  <3754> {THAT}  <4771> {THOU}  <1488> (5748) {ART}  <4074> {PETER,}  <2532> {AND}  <1909> {ON}  <3778>  <3588> {THIS}  <4073> {ROCK}  <3618> (5692) {I WILL BUILD}  <3450>  <3588> {MY}  <1577> {ASSEMBLY,}  <2532> {AND}  <4439> {GATES}  <86>  <3756> {OF HADES}  <2729> (5692) {SHALL NOT PREVAIL AGAINST}  <846> {IT.}

The word in question is number 3588:

3588 ho {ho} including the feminine he {hay}, and the neuter to {to} in all their inflections, the definite article;; article 1) this, that, these, etc. Only significant renderings other than “the” counted.

 

[NotWorthy]

Let’s not forget St. Irenaeus of Lyonne felt the need to list the Bishops of Rome in chronological order, to validate the teachings of the Catholic Church. This was done late in the 2nd century.

BTW, if I recall correctly, Hippolytus wrote a history of the Church fully 100 years before Eusebius, although not quite as extensive. But at least his writings weren’t filled with subjective, biases towards Constantine.

 

[erikd]

Let’s not forget St. Irenaeus of Lyonne felt the need to list the Bishops of Rome in chronological order, to validate the teachings of the Catholic Church. This was done late in the 2nd century.

It’s one of my favorite writers, the first Church Father I studied. “Against Heresies,” Book III, Chapter 3, paragraph 3.

newadvent.org/fathers/0103303.htm

 

[Huiou_Theou]

"… I will build my church upon a rock, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

Well, now, there appears to be a gratuitous a found in the NewAdvent text. I wonder what justification there is for doing that little insertion?
*

Unfortunately the Greek characters won’t come out on this website, but you can use the strong’s numbers for any of these words for further review:

I just cut and paste.

ἈἉἊἋἌἍἎἏἀἁἂἃἄἅἆἇ
ἘἙἚἛἜἝἐἑἒἓἔἕ
ἨἩἪἫἬἭἮἯἠἡἢἣἤἥἦἧ

ἰἱἲἳἴἵἶἷἸἹἺἻἼἽἾἿ
ὈὉὊὋὌὍὀὁὂὃὄὅ
ὙὛὝὟὐὑὒὓὔὕὖὗ
ὨὩὪὫὬὭὮὯὠὡὢὣὤὥὦὧ

There is a neat Java program that will do it too, but Microsoft got p***d at Sun Microsystems a few years ago, and XP Java (even pro) and several other variants mysteriously DO NOT WORK on windows machines. Don’t know if this was fixed in Vista or the new one – I can’t get either to run on my computers anyhow

 <3778>  <3588> {THIS}
…
The word in question is number 3588:
…
3588 ho {ho} including the feminine he {hay}, and the neuter to {to} in all their inflections, the definite article;; article 1) this, that, these, etc. Only significant renderings other than “the” counted.

Um, so what was your point about 3588? I got lost.
I think you mean (in whichever form you prefer )

ταυτη<3778> τη<3588>
ταύτῃ<3778> τῇ<3588>**
ΤΑΥΤΗ<3778> ΤΗ<3588>**

http://img14.imageshack.us/img14/26...mageshack.us/img14/2686/matthew16x18sinai.jpg
**Sorry, the facsimile was kind of poor. There are better ones on line, but I’m feeling lazy…Here’s the text cleaned up in unicals – and unicode.

****ΚΑΓΩΔΕΣΟΙΛΕΓΩΟΤΙΣΥΕΙΠΕΤΡΟΣΚΑΙΕΠΙΤΑΥΤΗΤΗΠΕΤΡΑΟΙΚΟΔΟΜΗΣΩΜΟΥ
ΤΗΝΕΚΚΛΗΣΙΑΝΚΑΙΠΥΛΑΙΑΔΟΥΟΥΚΑΤΙΣΧΥ?ΥΣΙΝΑΥΤΗΣ

Parsed text w/ english translation of EVERY word.

**καγ-ω{I-like-wise} δε{but} σοι{to-you1} λεγ-ω{I am saying continuously}
οτι{that/because} συ{you1} ει{you-are-continually} πετρ-ος{rock1M} και{and} επι{on/upon} ταυτ-η{this1F} τ-η{the1F} πετρ-α{rock1F/Collect} οικοδομη-σω {I-shall-build} μου{of-me/mine) τ-ην{the 1F} εκ-κλησι-αν{out-called1F – synonymous w/ Church)
και{and} πυλ-αι{gatesPFn} `αδ-ου{of-Hades/Sheol/Hell/1M} ου{not} κατα{under/against/according} ισχυ-σ-ου_σιν{they-shall-be-strong/able} αυτ-ης{of-her1Fg}.

The genitive of αυτ-ης can’t apply to the previous (plural) verb because of the singular, nor can it apply to Hades because that is masculine. The only word I see which can take a genitive singular αυτ-ης is κατα; meaning “under her” or “against her”, also, in a combatitive way, (accord), sometimes meaning agreeing-with-her.

Translation:
blessed you-are-always, Simon barJona, because flesh and blood never un-cover(ed) to-you except-for the Father of-mine; the-Father in the heavens.

But likewise to-you, I-am-saying-always, because YOU, you-are-always rock, and upon this, the rock, I-shall-build of-mine the out-called; and Hade’s gates will-not-be-strong under her.

I find it odd that the traditional sense of translations is that Hell is attacking the house of God – but in this particular statement, The Greek really suggests Hell is in a defensive position – trying to block the church OUT. Gates were one of the last lines of defense for a city; and also a place of judgment. So this is twofold – the accuser Satan who judges at his gates, will fail in his accusations; and secondly his defense of his captives is weak/unable to check the invasion.

Now, to that quote you put up…

ΤΑΥΤΗ<3778> is the dative case of “THIS” – I have no clue why Strong’s says ΤΗ<3588> means “this” – for 3588 actually is the dative of “THE” not “THIS”.

I also note the English sub-brackets {???} of your post for ΤΑΥΤΗ<3778> is empty! – any idea of why?

The translation using strongs makes Jesus sound like a stutterer – “and upon THIS THIS rock … ?!”
How do you read it?

 

[NotWorthy]

It’s one of my favorite writers, the first Church Father I studied. “Against Heresies,” Book III, Chapter 3, paragraph 3.

newadvent.org/fathers/0103303.htm

I like Irenaeus as well! You always knew where he stood on matters… especially when dealing with heretics, eh?

 

[erikd]

Well, now, there appears to be a gratuitous found in the NewAdvent text. I wonder what justification there is for doing that little insertion?
*

I believe that Eusebius was trying to make an emphasis here and therefore the “gratuitous” is on the part of Eusebius not necessarily Newadvent.

I just cut and paste.

ἈἉἊἋἌἍἎἏἀἁἂἃἄἅἆἇ
ἘἙἚἛἜἝἐἑἒἓἔἕ
ἨἩἪἫἬἭἮἯἠἡἢἣἤἥἦἧ

ἰἱἲἳἴἵἶἷἸἹἺἻἼἽἾἿ
ὈὉὊὋὌὍὀὁὂὃὄὅ
ὙὛὝὟὐὑὒὓὔὕὖὗ
ὨὩὪὫὬὭὮὯὠὡὢὣὤὥὦὧ

There is a neat Java program that will do it too, but Microsoft got p***d at Sun Microsystems a few years ago, and XP Java (even pro) and several other variants mysteriously DO NOT WORK on windows machines. Don’t know if this was fixed in Vista or the new one – I can’t get either to run on my computers anyhow

Thanks for the info on the software. The reason I could not copy and paste is because I use a great program called the “Faith Database” for a lot of my information. Unfortunately it did not allow me to cut and paste the actual Greek characters.

Um, so what was your point about 3588? I got lost.
I think you mean (in whichever form you prefer )

ταυτη<3778> τη<3588>
ταύτῃ<3778> τῇ<3588>**
ΤΑΥΤΗ**<3778> ΤΗ<3588>

I was answering post #41.

http://img14.imageshack.us/img14/26...mageshack.us/img14/2686/matthew16x18sinai.jpg
**Sorry, the facsimile was kind of poor. There are better ones on line, but I’m feeling lazy…Here’s the text cleaned up in unicals – and unicode.
**
ΚΑΓΩΔΕΣΟΙΛΕΓΩΟΤΙΣΥΕΙΠΕΤΡΟΣΚΑΙΕΠΙΤΑΥΤΗΤΗΠΕΤΡΑΟΙΚΟΔΟΜΗΣΩΜΟΥ
ΤΗΝΕΚΚΛΗΣΙΑΝΚΑΙΠΥΛΑΙΑΔΟΥΟΥΚΑΤΙΣΧΥ?**Υ****ΣΙΝΑΥΤΗΣ

Parsed text w/ english translation of EVERY word.

**καγ-ω{I-like-wise} δε{but} σοι{to-you1} λεγ-ω{I am saying continuously}
οτι{that/because} συ{you1} ει{you-are-continually} πετρ-ος{rock1M} και{and} επι{on/upon} ταυτ-η{this1F} τ-η{the1F} πετρ-α{rock1F/Collect} οικοδομη-σω {I-shall-build} μου{of-me/mine) τ-ην{the 1F} εκ-κλησι-αν{out-called1F – synonymous w/ Church)
και{and} πυλ-αι{gatesPFn} `αδ-ου{of-Hades/Sheol/Hell/1M} ου{not} κατα{under/against/according} ισχυ-σ-ου_σιν{they-shall-be-strong/able} αυτ-ης{of-her1Fg}.

The genitive of αυτ-ης can’t apply to the previous (plural) verb because of the singular, nor can it apply to Hades because that is masculine. The only word I see which can take a genitive singular αυτ-ης is κατα; meaning “under her” or “against her”, also, in a combatitive way, (accord), sometimes meaning agreeing-with-her.

Translation:
blessed you-are-always, Simon barJona, because flesh and blood never un-cover(ed) to-you except-for the Father of-mine; the-Father in the heavens.

But likewise to-you, I-am-saying-always, because YOU, you-are-always rock, and upon this, the rock, I-shall-build of-mine the out-called; and Hade’s gates will-not-be-strong under her.

I find it odd that the traditional sense of translations is that Hell is attacking the house of God – but in this particular statement, The Greek really suggests Hell is in a defensive position – trying to block the church OUT. Gates were one of the last lines of defense for a city; and also a place of judgment. So this is twofold – the accuser Satan who judges at his gates, will fail in his accusations; and secondly his defense of his captives is weak/unable to check the invasion.

Now, to that quote you put up…

ΤΑΥΤΗ<3778> is the dative case of “THIS” – I have no clue why Strong’s says ΤΗ<3588> means “this” – for 3588 actually is the dative of “THE” not “THIS”.

I also note the English sub-brackets {???} of your post for ΤΑΥΤΗ<3778> is empty! – any idea of why?

The translation using strongs makes Jesus sound like a stutterer – “and upon THIS THIS rock … ?!”
How do you read it?

Since my Greek language skills are non-existent I would say I read it the same as you. Simeon Hovey, who’s on this thread is studying Greek and perhaps would like to weigh in on this question.

 

[erikd]

I like Irenaeus as well! You always knew where he stood on matters… especially when dealing with heretics, eh?

Yes, he never left any doubt. It seems the field of apologetics was a little different and the apologies were certainly much stronger and much more critical than those of today. My personal preference is the apologetics of yesterday but I had to adapt to the apologetics environment of today’s standards.

 

[NotWorthy]

Yes, he never left any doubt. It seems the field of apologetics was a little different and the apologies were certainly much stronger and much more critical than those of today. My personal preference is the apologetics of yesterday but I had to adapt to the apologetics environment of today’s standards.

Let’s see. There was no:
a) Political Correctness.
b) Moral Relativism
c) inclusivism

sigh

 

[Huiou_Theou]

I believe that Eusebius was trying to make an emphasis here and therefore the “gratuitous” is on the part of Eusebius not necessarily Newadvent.

Eusebius Werk (a german collection of Eusebius' works):

http://img200.imageshack.us/img200/6638/eusebiuswerk.jpg

Ummm … it is NOT Eusebius that is being gratuitous. Upon THE rock is what he says,( The middle red word THn is “THE” ) although he chooses not use the dative (sort of bad grammar), but on the other hand he spells rock Petran rather than Petra – which is actually more correct.

Catholic Answers also has the catholic encyclopedia online, but I haven’t subscribed – I wonder if theirs contains the error as well…
One should only translate “a” when the definite article is not used, AND there is reason to believe it is any of interchangeable items – so the translation hosted by New Advent is wrong none the less.

Thanks for the info on the software. The reason I could not copy and paste is because I use a great program called the “Faith Database” for a lot of my information. Unfortunately it did not allow me to cut and paste the actual Greek characters.

Ahhh! I see.
I know the feeling. Well, if you need to cut and paste a few letters of Greek to replace the blocks to make a point – you can use those I put up… or you can do web searches for the passage using Google, and include Greek in the line.
Then just cut and paste the Strong’s numbers. (or PM me and I can send it to you.)

Since my Greek language skills are non-existent I would say I read it the same as you. Simeon Hovey, who’s on this thread is studying Greek and perhaps would like to weigh in on this question.

I hope so, perhaps I can help him along with a few minor points that appear to be mixed up in his analysis – but then, Strong’s usually seems to do that to people…
So Vague you can make scripture say just about anything…

 

[erikd]

Ummm … it is NOT Eusebius that is being gratuitous. Upon THE rock is what he says,( The middle red word THn is “THE” ) although he chooses not use the dative (sort of bad grammar), but on the other hand he spells rock Petran rather than Petra – which is actually more correct.

Catholic Answers also has the catholic encyclopedia online, but I haven’t subscribed – I wonder if theirs contains the error as well…
One should only translate “a” when the definite article is not used, AND there is reason to believe it is any of interchangeable items – so the translation hosted by New Advent is wrong none the less.

I have a keen interest in the writings of the early Church and I never caught this. Thanks for pointing it out, I need to do some research on this to see where it came from and where the error lies. I must admit I just took for granted that the information was correct as it came from a reliable source. Good call.

 

[erikd]

Let’s see. There was no:
a) Political Correctness.
b) Moral Relativism
c) inclusivism

sigh

I guess if St. Irenaeus was alive today he would answer your comment with something like: “aahh, the good old days of apologetics, when you could say what you meant without the fear of rebuke for who would rebuke the truth?” Just hypothesizing.

 

[Simeon_Hovey]

Ummm … it is NOT Eusebius that is being gratuitous. Upon THE rock is what he says,( The middle red word THn is “THE” ) although he chooses not use the dative (sort of bad grammar), but on the other hand he spells rock Petran rather than Petra – which is actually more correct.

Catholic Answers also has the catholic encyclopedia online, but I haven’t subscribed – I wonder if theirs contains the error as well…
One should only translate “a” when the definite article is not used, AND there is reason to believe it is any of interchangeable items – so the translation hosted by New Advent is wrong none the less.

Ahhh! I see.
I know the feeling. Well, if you need to cut and paste a few letters of Greek to replace the blocks to make a point – you can use those I put up… or you can do web searches for the passage using Google, and include Greek in the line.
Then just cut and paste the Strong’s numbers. (or PM me and I can send it to you.)

I hope so, perhaps I can help him along with a few minor points that appear to be mixed up in his analysis – but then, Strong’s usually seems to do that to people…
So Vague you can make scripture say just about anything…

To all

I haven’t forgotten the thread, I just got so buried and spread out in another thread about transubstantiation of the host that my brain stopped working for a day or two.

Another resource I use is the 10 Volume Theological Dicitionary of the NT. Unfortunately this only translates words considered to be of “spiritual signigicance” so a hyperlinked Strong’s is all I have for the grammar, that and Berry’s Interlinear Greek to English NT.

Following is my translation of the Greek it’s from the Textus Receptus, so if someone can help me out I’m grateful for anything to guide me in further understanding the logos.

kago de soi lego oti su ei petros kai epi tauth th petra oikodomhso mou thn ekklhsian

and I also to thee say that thou art petros and on this the rock/petra I will build my the assembly

petros: a small stone
petra: a chain of granite mountains, cliff, or a person of strong moral character.
ekklhsian: a secular compound word meaning 1) to call or cry out 2) for some assembly or gathering.

At all events if’s 4:25AM and this is the best I have to offer at the moment. I look forward to getting my head out of transubstantiation for awhile, there seemed to be a developing relationship between mass feedings, crossing seas and lakes that leads up to the Holy gift of the Eucharist. The spreadsheets and 4 column comparisons I’ve put together, and tryng to sort them out into a meaningul coherent, linear history is daunting, but they merit further study. Hi Ho, Hi Ho it’s off to learn I go.

Or as we said in the army, Hoo-uh! Simeon
.

 

[Huiou_Theou]

To all

I haven’t forgotten the thread, I just got so buried and spread out in another thread about transubstantiation of the host that my brain stopped working for a day or two.

Following is my translation of the Greek it’s from the Textus Receptus, so if someone can help me out I’m grateful for anything to guide me in further understanding the logos.

kago de soi lego oti su ei petros kai epi tauth th petra oikodomhso mou thn ekklhsian

and I also to thee say that thou art petros and on this the rock/petra I will build my the assembly

petros: a small stone
petra: a chain of granite mountains, cliff, or a person of strong moral character.
ekklhsian: a secular compound word meaning 1) to call or cry out 2) for some assembly or gathering.

At all events if’s 4:25AM and this is the best I have to offer at the moment. I look forward to getting my head out of transubstantiation for awhile, there seemed to be a developing relationship between mass feedings, crossing seas and lakes that leads up to the Holy gift of the Eucharist. The spreadsheets and 4 column comparisons I’ve put together, and tryng to sort them out into a meaningul coherent, linear history is daunting, but they merit further study. Hi Ho, Hi Ho it’s off to learn I go.

Or as we said in the army, Hoo-uh! Simeon
.

We’re not dealing here with variants of text issues, if you look back at post #47, the second half, I think you’ll find that the NA26 which is there, matches even the Codex Sinaiticus which is in JPEG format (but single capitals, lowercase did not exist in the 400’s) note that the words and even the spelling agree – although it is in purely capitals vs. mixed case in the newer texts w/ accents added to help with meter, or whatever. The only mark that is critical, in general, is the rough breathing – when it comes to the meaning of words.

In your translation – there are a few words of disagreement, eg: the sentence actually starts:

But I-likewise I-say…

“But” is sometimes translated “and” – however, it is not wise to do so until the menaing of the statement is fully understood; It may mean “but” and not “and” in this case – a distinction, rather than a continuation.

There are two verbs in this sentence, so that Jesus’ saying must refer back in LINKENESS to what Simon Peter said. Jesus is in some way copying what Peter just said; since Peter’s saying refers to the promises of scripture – then too, Jesus’ saying has several things one ought to be looking for: eg; aspects:

1. It is a revelation.
2. It fulfills scripture and a promise of some kind
3. The subjects Peter brings up – intentionally or not – can be tied in various degrees to Jesus’ statement.

For this reason, I encourage you not to translate this sentence in isolation – but also include the sentence before it. These two are linked in their meaning and separating them may be doing violence to the meaning.

kago de soi lego oti su ei petros kai epi tauth th petra oikodomhso mou thn ekklhsian

that thou [thou] art petros and on this the rock/petra I will build my the assembly

There is a double repetition of the pronoun YOU/THOU,
su: is you,
ei: is “You are continuously” – Often it means “if” – but that rendering does not fit the grammar, so “You are continuously” is the meaning.
I hesitate to say that “you, YOU-are” is required in translation – but I haven’t studied other examples where this occurs – in my normal reading of texts, this is extremely rare – but notice, in the sentence previous (Mt 16:16) where Peter speaks – the DOUBLE “Thou/you” also exists – reinforcing that Jesus is using Peter’s statement as a template of some kind for what Jesus is saying back to Peter.

The double “thou” can be translated as a single one, if one take the second usage as a verb – and the first as a pronoun; but again – this is not something I have seen many examples of.

You have a dictionary which says Petros is “little pebble” – and Petra means a massive stone, etc. This is purely misinformation. Petra/os is a kind of rock – just as we distinguish marble from sandstone. It is most commonly rendered “flint” or “flinty” as a general rule. eg: I set my face like FLINT. etc.

There are counter examples I can show, where a “Petros” is way to large for a human being (one) to carry – and (in scripture) where the feminine form of Petra (in a compound word) is handheld size. Several protestant scholars recognize that a non-catholic apologist misread some ambiguous statements by a classical Greek scholar, and made up the “stone” vs. “pebble” distinction based on a single example which does not actually prove what it was thought to prove. This apologetic finds its way into dictionaries/lexicons as a sort of desperate move to discredit Matthew 16:18. But it is more for those who already want to believe there is a distinction, rather than those who actually check background and source material inside and outside of scripture.

The word “ek” is a prefix meaning out; Klesia – is a calling.
Literally it is “out-calling”; In German, it is always translated “church” kirke. (sp?)
But there is a problem there; My brother in law in his schools was taught against the establishment of a church being intended in the OT – yet a quick look at the Greek version of the text shows that on mount Saianai, that is the word that is used regarding the formal governmental structure set in place by Moses.
The word is related to para-klete; often people say “advocate” or one who calls out beside you (eg: in court). But it could also mean, to call TO ones side; eg: as in the out-called hear the voice of the Holy-Spirit – and that is the destination of the out-calling.

I’ll stop here for a moment, because you perhaps have questions – or would like certain pieces of grammar shown by example from other locations in scripture.
I am also going to spend a little time looking at other locations of double “thou”; and see if there is anything idiomatic about the double “THEE” – for it stick out as very odd in the Greek, though nothing is wrong with it, and so it is worth examining as a possible clue.

Peace to you,
–Andrew Robinson.

 

[Simeon_Hovey]

Andrew

Thank you for you time, study, (name removed by moderator)ut and sharing your insights.

One thing I want to make clear is that I make no claim to being right, I’m here to help, be helped and to learn how to be a better servant of our Lord. So I always stand to be corrected.

Do you have a copy of the TDNT?

Regarding petros/petra the TDNT covers 5 pages in fine print. My best interpretation of the literal meaning of petros is that it’s a small rock, the TDNT says it’s about the size of a rock used in a sling shot.

Sadly only MT 16:18, goes into any detail about the naming of Simon; MK, LK, and JO tell us very little with Mark saying the most.

MK 3:16 “And he put on Simon the name Peter; and James of Zebedee, and John the brother of James, and he put on them names–Boanerges, that is, `Sons of thunder;”

I think that getting into interpreting these texts will always involve a certain amount of guess work based on nuances of lanquages that we, having never been fluent nor having anyone who can be fluent because no one is alive who spoke the lanquage. [Maybe this isn’t appropriate for this thread but it’s a subject near and dear to me.] I’m reminded of a few years ago when I was in a VA spinal cord/physical therapy unit (Livermoor CA), and a misunderstanding between myself and a doctor from India nearly got me put into a psychiatric lock down unit simply because she didn’t understand the nuances of the word “could.” Also this doctor didn’t believe in severe pain, she thought it was a mental health issue. I also learned that I was wrong in my naive belief that the one place it would be safe to talk about wartime experience would be in a VA Hospital. Had I been put in what I later learned was called the “Black Box”, that I would be searched and that my smoking priviledges would be taken away. And the VA can’t figure out why 6000 vets/year are now commiting suicide (fully 1/5 of all US suicides). In one year alone we’ve literally lost far more GI’s from suicide than from the war.

And all of this was because of a foreigner who didn’t understand the word “could.”

I should also add the only reason I can walk again and live on my own is because of the power of Christ. I fully believe in miracles.

Simeon

 

[NotWorthy]

Andrew

Thank you for you time, study, (name removed by moderator)ut and sharing your insights.

One thing I want to make clear is that I make no claim to being right, I’m here to help, be helped and to learn how to be a better servant of our Lord. So I always stand to be corrected.

Do you have a copy of the TDNT?

Regarding petros/petra the TDNT covers 5 pages in fine print. My best interpretation of the literal meaning of petros is that it’s a small rock, the TDNT says it’s about the size of a rock used in a sling shot.

I’m not sure what the TDNT means, but I understand that the Greek for a small rock was “Lithos” as demonstrated about 16 - 18 times in the New Testament.

The usage of “Petros” for small rock has lost its usage roughly 700 years before the time of Christ.

 

[Simeon_Hovey]

I’m not sure what the TDNT means, but I understand that the Greek for a small rock was “Lithos” as demonstrated about 16 - 18 times in the New Testament.

Sorry TDNT is the Theological Dictionary of the New Testment, it’s 10 volumes of terms that are of theological sigficance in the NT.

I did a quick check on lithos, it’s used roughly 60x, doing a very quick scan it seems to mean some kind of rock or stone. Strongs 3037 lithos: apparently a primary word; a stone (literally or figuratively):–(mill-, stumbling-)stone.

The usage of “Petros” for small rock has lost its usage roughly 700 years before the time of Christ.

The word petros is used 157 times in my KJV Strong’s hyper-linked version of the NT.

Finally, I hope that we don’t lose sight of the forest because of two trees named petros and petra.

Simeon

 

[NotWorthy]

The word petros is used 157 times in my KJV Strong’s hyper-linked version of the NT.Finally, I hope that we don’t lose sight of the forest because of two trees named petros and petra.

Simeon

What is the context of the 157 usages of petros?

 

[Huiou_Theou]

Andrew

Thank you for you time, study, (name removed by moderator)ut and sharing your insights.

You’re quite welcome.

One thing I want to make clear is that I make no claim to being right, I’m here to help, be helped and to learn how to be a better servant of our Lord. So I always stand to be corrected.

I have no way of claiming to be “right” either, other than exhaustive searches and cross referencing. I just have a way to claim that I have GOOD evidence of what I post – otherwise, I am the same as you; and I have been corrected.

Do you have a copy of the TDNT?

Not on hand; I can access it at the catholic University in Portland – but considering the meds I am on have made me loose (as in misplace) both my license and my birth certificate – I won’t be going there soon. Ones needs the birth certificate to replace the license, and one needs a license to get a new copy of the birth certificate…
Good thing my mother is still alive…

Regarding petros/petra the TDNT covers 5 pages in fine print. My best interpretation of the literal meaning of petros is that it’s a small rock, the TDNT says it’s about the size of a rock used in a sling shot.

And that is quite false. It can be that small, but the word has nothing to do with the size – for example look at this passage from the LXX:

Isaia 5:28 ων τα βελη οξεια εστιν και τα τοξα αυτων εντεταμενα οι ποδες των ιππων αυτων ως στερεα πετρα ελογισθησαν οι τροχοι των αρματων αυτων ως καταιγις
Isaia 5:28 Whose arrows are sharp, and all their bows bent, their horses’ hoofs shall be like flint, and their wheels like a whirlwind:

Now, the chariots here are showing signs of being compared to Ezekiel’s chariot of God – which I am studying; but the thing is, it would not make sense that the feet (hoof) of the horses would be like giant immobile cliffs, or a massive immobile foundation – they very point is that they are on the move. Again, note the translation of “petra” here is “flint”. It suggests the hardness, and unbreakability, or (alternately) perhaps the sparking which flint and lightning storms would have in common. In Yahweh’s chariot, the cherubim (horses) have brass feet that have fire going between the cherubim, and a whirlwind within a wheel.

Also see Isaiah 50:7, Setting a face like “flint” – something hard to damage when one strikes it.

Also look here:
Isaia 51:1 ακουσατε μου οι διωκοντες το δικαιον και ζητουντες τον κυριον εμβλεψατε εις την στερεαν πετραν ην ελατομησατε και εις τον βοθυνον του λακκου ον ωρυξατε

In this particular case, the female rock refers to Abraham and possibly Sarai (a married couple). The Greek writers did not hesitate to use a female word to represent Abraham – although not his name; they had the option of using a masculine form and didn’t.

Sadly only MT 16:18, goes into any detail about the naming of Simon; MK, LK, and JO tell us very little with Mark saying the most.

Actually, John tells us something magnificent:
John 1:42 ηγαγεν αυτον προς τον ιησουν εμβλεψας αυτω ο ιησους ειπεν συ ει σιμων ο υιος ιωαννου συ κληθηση κηφας ο ερμηνευεται πετρος
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 rock.

The word Cephas (κηφας) in Greek, is commonly taken to a phonetic spelling of an Aramaic word – Kepha – which is not a pebble, but a ROCK.

But let’s suppose for a moment, it is just a Greek mis-spelling. What word could it possibly be in Greek if it is not Aramaic for BIG rock?

The only one I know is κηφαλη – which means “Head”. I can’t imaging a Greek reader missing the active pun there. Peter the “Head”.

I think that getting into interpreting these texts will always involve a certain amount of guess work based on nuances of lanquages that we, having never been fluent nor having anyone who can be fluent because no one is alive who spoke the lanquage.

But we have very large repositories of KOINE greek with which to compare things against, and what is remarkable – is that often one CAN rule out certain meanings and nuances when there is enough text to work with.

The common word for throwing stone is masculine petros – but fully spelled –
it is really: πετρο-βολ-ος

In one year alone we’ve literally lost far more GI’s from suicide than from the war.

Doesn’t suprise me. I went to white sands to bring a tactical solution to a 50% failure rate of IED explosive jammers – it was tested beyond mil810 – but had to be formally tested. People were dying; it cost my brother $12K loan, I did the work for free, and the last I checked – the competitor who claimed to have “fixed” the problem, was still shipping defective units.

But my brother’s buddy from Iraq is the kind who can’t stand to see someone else get the awards, like my brother. Scuttled us – and we were in it for cheap; we wanted to save lives, not get rich. I too would be suicidal if not for my faith. I feel like I let everyone down.

Another grant came up requesting the same technology as I had already produced – actually it is an old reliable design, I was too depressed and broke to do the really good stuff, but still it was well over a 100x faster than what the military requested.

My rejection notice said “The device is too SLOW”. Apparently 3uS is longer than 1mS to some electrical engineer in the military… morons. They obviously read advertising glossies and have no idea what a design tradeoff is; or how stupid the approach they selected will be – the Irony of the rejection listing is just dizzying.

Anyway,
Here, one more thing of Petros and the size of the stone…
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=578078&highlight=petros#post578078

I think you will find that thread worth reading in its entirety. Come to think of it, now that I can upload Jpegs, I ought to take the photos and put them on line here the next time I get to UofP.
Unfortunatly, I just lost my $400 Sony digital camera – makes taking quick shots impossible – and I’m too broke to replace it…

 

[Simeon_Hovey]

I’ll stop here for a moment, because you perhaps have questions – or would like certain pieces of grammar shown by example from other locations in scripture.

Peace to you,
–Andrew Robinson.

Andrew

And I have to stop now to pay some bills.

Simeon