If I had my druthers, it’d say “upon this stone” so to make easier the connection between Bible use of the term “cornerstone” and Peter’s status upgrade.
In my catechism class I spend a fair amount of time on these translation issues.
To add to what you wrote:
We can see some interesting uses of the Aramaic word כיפא
kēfa’ in the Dead Sea Scrolls. In the
Job Targum found in Cave 11 in Qumran (11QtgJob aka 11Q10, cols. 32.1; 33.9, cf. Job 39:1, 28), for example,
kēfa’ is used to translate the Hebrew word סֶ֣לַע
sel[sup]a[/sup]‘ (‘rock’, ‘crag’, ‘cliff’, ‘mountain’). The word also shows up in the Aramaic fragments of the book of Enoch found in Cave 4. For instance, 4QEn[sup]e[/sup] aka 4Q206, frg. 5, col. 3.19 reads:
[w‘mr s]lq lr‘š k]p ḥd rm “[and the sheep: climbed to the sum[mit of] a certain
high [cr]ag.” (cf.
1 Enoch 89:29 “And that sheep ascended to the summit of that lofty rock, and the Lord of the sheep sent it to them.”) 4QEn[sup]c[/sup] aka 4Q204 (frg. 4.3) has *
tnyn‘ wslq lr‘š kp‘ dn “climbed up [again for] a second time to the summit of that
crag.” (cf. 1 Enoch 89:32 “Then that sheep who conducted them went away, and ascended the top of the rock.”) Lastly, 4QEn[sup]a[/sup] aka 4Q201, col. 2.18:
[wlm]drk ‘l ‘prh w‘]l [kp]yh l‘ tškḥwn mn ḥmth] “and you are not able to tread upon the dirt or upon the
[roc]ks/stones on account [of the heat]” (cf. 1 Enoch 4 “And you seek shade and shelter by reason of the heat of the sun, and the earth also burns with growing heat, and so you cannot tread on the earth, or on a rock by reason of its heat.”) We can see that the word
kēfa’ has quite a broad meaning depending on the context, as the 1 Enoch example shows: it could mean a huge mass of rock, a “crag” that is part of a mountainous or hilly region upon which one could climb on to small “rocks/stones” one could step over.
Now for the the Septuagint. In Job 30:6, for instance, חֹרֵ֖י וְכֵפִֽים
ḥōrê…ḵēfîm (“holes…of the rocks”) is translated as τρῶγλαι πετρῶν
trōglai petrōn; in Jeremiah 4:29, וּבַכֵּפִ֖ים עָל֑וּ
ûḇakēfîm ‘ālû “they climb among rocks” is rendered as ἐπὶ τὰς πέτρας ἀνέβησαν
tas petras anebesan. Also Sirach 40:15: “The branch of violence shall not be unpunished, for the root of the godless is on the tooth of a rock/crag.” (Hebrew: אֶל שֵׁ֑ן
סֶ֣לַע ‘el šēn sel[sup]a[/sup]‘; Greek: ἐπ᾽ ἀκροτόμου
πέτρας ep’ akrotomou petras “sharp-point of a rock”)
As I mentioned on another thread, I recommend reading Fr. Joseph A. Fitzmyer’s
To Advance the Gospel: New Testament Studies, especially the chapter “Aramaic
Kepha’ and Peter’s Name in the New Testament” (the chapter is also found in
Text and Interpretation: Studies in the New Testament Presented to Matthew Black, BTW), as well as
Saint Peter: The Underestimated Apostle by Martin Hengel and Thomas Trapp and
The Remembered Peter in Ancient Reception and Modern Debate by Markus Bockmuehl for some discussion about Peter’s name/s (especially
Cephas). Bockmuehl summarizes the present academic situation rather nicely:
Peter’s Aramaic name
Kēfa’ has been the subject of far more extensive discussion, partly because its ecclesiological significance was for a long time deeply contested between Catholic and Protestant interpreters. The blossoming of ecumenical dialogue and of Roman Catholic biblical studies since Vatican II has meant that the confessional wind has for some time been more conducive to genuine progress and consensus. The exegetical dividing lines no longer fall among predictably denominational lines. The meaning of the Aramaic term כיפא as “rock” or “crag” has been reasonably demonstrated in the Targums and Dead Sea Scrolls, although the implications are still ignored by some recent commentators who deny that
kēfa’ could be something one builds upon. This is not of course to say that all the difficulties have been removed. One of the major disagreements concerns the authenticity of Jesus’ saying about Peter as the Rock in Matt 16.18; on this matter the major multi-volume commentaries of the last decade continued to reach opposing conclusions. Another abiding problem is the significance of the wordplay employed in that verse.
The clincher is that
Kepha is not attested as a non-Christian personal name in Hebrew or Aramaic sources from the Second Temple or rabbinic periods. We do have a sole surviving pre-Christian instance of
kēfa’ apparently being used as a proper name in a 5th century BC Aramaic text from Elephantine in Egypt. Fr. Fitzmyer compares this instance of
kēfa’ with the Hebrew
Ṣur (“rock”) which is repeatedly attested in the Old Testament. However, as Bockmuehl argues, “it remains the case that nearly half a millennium of history and culture separates Elephantine from first-century Palestine, where the evidence suggests that Cephas was not current as a name.”
Contra Fitzmeyer, Bockmuehl proposes that
The term Cephas would have remained perfectly intelligible in Jewish circles throughout the rabbinic period, so that the name
Šim’ōn Kēfa’ could still be readily understood and interpreted in the later legends of the
Toledot Yeshu. In the absence of evidence for Cephas as a Jewish name, however, this remains as Peter’s most distinctive epithet – his nickname rather than a proper name. Somewhat contrary to Fitzmyer’s inquiry, it seems likely to have been of interest precisely because it was
not a familiar personal name. It is this that characterized him in the Aramaic-speaking churches of Judaea, and which ironically survived even Paul’s move into the Gentile world.*