A
aball1035
Guest
People say that only in ancient Greek poetry these words were “small pebble” and actual “rock”. Otherwise, they were synonyms. Can anybody give me evidence for this?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
C
CWBetts
Guest
Something to consider is the Jesus wasn’t speaking in Greek, he was speaking in Aramaic. In Aramaic, the words are the same: cephas, which is the name Paul uses when talking about Peter. So the Petros/Petra argument is a non-argument.People say that only in ancient Greek poetry these words were “small pebble” and actual “rock”. Otherwise, they were synonyms. Can anybody give me evidence for this?
N
NotWorthy
Guest
The use of “petros” for “small pebble” had died out by the 8th century BC, if I remember correctly. I heard of a Protestant apologist who actually claimed that in came back in vogue for about 100 years (you guess which 100 years he’s talking about…).People say that only in ancient Greek poetry these words were “small pebble” and actual “rock”. Otherwise, they were synonyms. Can anybody give me evidence for this?
Anyway, “Lithos” is what the New Testament authors used for “pebble” or “small rock”. I think its used some 17 times in the NT under these circumstances. As for “Petros” and “Petra”, yes, they were synonymous for “rock”. The only determinant on which word to use was whether the article was feminine or masculine.
S
SFH
Guest
Not to mention that St. Matthew’s Gospel was originally written in Aramaic, so the passage would have read Cephas in both places.Something to consider is the Jesus wasn’t speaking in Greek, he was speaking in Aramaic. In Aramaic, the words are the same: cephas, which is the name Paul uses when talking about Peter. So the Petros/Petra argument is a non-argument.
N
NotWorthy
Guest
At the risk of sounding nit-picky, the Aramaic was “Kepha”. “Cephas” was the Greek rendering of the Aramaic “Kepha”.Not to mention that St. Matthew’s Gospel was originally written in Aramaic, so the passage would have read Cephas in both places.
It’s like “John” is rendered “Sean” in Irish and “Juan” in Spanish.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.