Rose42,
In your Protestant pea-brain, all you are is a heretical Protestant, believing in a man-Made doctrine from Martin Luther and his man-Made KIV Bible.
What a lying crock of hog-wallop compost rose42 . . .
Please, . . . What a copy-cut-&-paste job from a notorious anti-Catholic website link, you don't say . . . more man-Made Protestant Heretical hog-wallop compost . . .
Look in your bible again, look where Jesus called Simon Bar Jonah in Aramaic, "Cephas," "Rock."
And I say to thee: That thou art "Caphas-Rock"; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
Matthew 16:
Jesus Spoke Aramaic Jesus did not speak in Greek, and He said "Caphas-Peter" upon this rock I will build my church.
Jesus did not say upon myself I will build my church.
No Rose you can twist and turn, lie, convolute any argument you want.
You are absurd rose42.
All the Apostles spoke Aramaic
Paul spoke Aramaic.
The common Jewish person in the time of Jesus, in the Middle-east either spoke Aramaic, New Testament koine Greek, and not the Old Testament Septuagint Greek, Latin and only in the synagog or Temple, Hebrew was only spoken.
The book of Matthew and Mark was first written in the Aramaic then translated to the Greek and Hebrew languages
(For he who worked through Peter for the mission to the circumcised worked through me also for the Gentiles),
And when they perceived the grace that was given to me, James and Cephas and John, who were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised;
Galatians 2:8-9
Peter and Cephas are both said in two separate verses, Why ?
Thats because Paul also spoke in the common tongue of the day Aramaic . . .
He first found his brother Simon and told him, “We have found the Messiah” (which is translated as Christ). 42Andrew brought him to Jesus, who looked at him and said, “You are Simon son of John. You will be called Cephas” (which is translated as Peter).
John 1:42
What I mean is that each one of you says, “I belong to Paul,” or “I belong to Apol′los,” or “I belong to Cephas,” or “I belong to Christ.”
1 Corinthians 1:12
Whether Paul or Apol′los or Cephas or the world or life or death or the present or the future, all are yours;
1 Corinthians 3:22
Do we not have the right to be accompanied by a wife, as the other apostles and the brethren of the Lord and Cephas?
1 Corinthians 9:5
And that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve.
1 Corinthians 15:5
Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas, and remained with him fifteen days.
Galatians 1:18
And when they perceived the grace that was given to me, James and Cephas and John, who were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised;
Galatians 2:9
Paul Rebukes Peter at Antioch, But when Cephas came to Antioch I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned.
Galatians 2:11
But when I saw that they were not straightforward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas before them all, “If you, though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you compel the Gentiles to live like Jews?”
Galatians 2:14
Your Fundamentalist friend is wrong to assert there is no evidence to support the idea of an Aramaic original. In fact, the evidence is quite to the contrary. Since we have no autographs of this or any other New Testament book, it's wise to look at what the early Church had to say on the subject. Catholic apologists, theologians, and Scripture scholars of the second through fifth centuries provide us with a wealth of information on this subject.
Around 180 Irenaeus of Lyons wrote that
Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect, while Peter and Paul were preaching in Rome and laying the foundation of the Church. After their departure, Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, did also hand down to us in writing what had been preached by Peter. Luke also, the companion of Paul, recorded in a book the Gospel preached by him. Afterwards John, the disciple of the Lord, who also had leaned upon his breast, did himself publish a Gospel during his residence at Ephesus in Asia. (Against Heresies 3:1:1)
Fifty years earlier Papias, bishop of Hieropolis in Asia Minor, wrote, "Matthew compiled the sayings [of the Lord] in the Aramaic language, and everyone translated them as well as he could" (Explanation of the Sayings of the Lord [cited by Eusebius in History of the Church 3:39]).
Sometime after 244 the Scripture scholar Origen wrote, "Among the four Gospels, which are the only indisputable ones in the Church of God under heaven, I have learned by tradition that the first was written by Matthew, who was once a publican, but afterwards an apostle of Jesus Christ, and it was prepared for the converts from Judaism and published in the Hebrew language" (Commentaries on Matthew [cited by Eusebius in History of the Church 6:25]).
Eusebius himself declared that "Matthew had begun by preaching to the Hebrews, and when he made up his mind to go to others too, he committed his own Gospel to writing in his native tongue [Aramaic], so that for those with whom he was no longer present the gap left by his departure was filled by what he wrote" (History of the Church 3:24 [inter 300-325]).
https://www.catholic.com/qa/was-matthews-gospel-first-written-in-aramaic-or-hebrewRose42 wrote:
ChristisstilltherockDoc.Nomatterhowmuchyouspamyoucan'trefuteGod'sword.Themostdisputedtextonecclesiolog(the doctrine of the church)isMatthe16:13–20.ProtestantsandEasterOrthodoxaikecontesttheuseofChrist’saffirmofPeterbyRomanCatholicstoestablis the papacy.Unfortunately, we can consider the issues raised by today’s passage only in brief. Foremost among these is what Jesus does not say in His commendation of Peter. Though invested with authority in verse 19,
Peter is not thereby given supreme authority over the church universal. As a steward over God’s house, Peter’s keys give him (but not only him) authority among God’s people. For example, he can assure repentant sinners of divine pardon,
not because he is able to forgive sin, but because he proclaims the free Gospel of forgiveness. Therefore, the keys also enable him to assure the impenitent that they can by no means inherit the kingdom of God. Yet Peter’s keys also belong to every apostle and, in a qualified sense, church leaders today as well (18:15–20; Eph. 2:19–20).
Furthermore, Matthew 16:13–20 says nothing about Peter passing on a “unique” office to successive bishops, and it gives no support for papal infallibility.Historic Protestantism recognizes such truths, and often says that Peter’s confession is the rock to which Jesus refers. This makes good sense, but we err if we say that Peter himself is not in any sense a rock upon which the church is built (Eph. 2:22). There is a play on words in the original Greek text: Peter’s name, Petros, is based on petra, that is, “rock” (v. 18). In other words, Jesus declares, “Simon, you are the rock, and on this rock I will build my church.” Peter has primacy in the church — a historical primacy, not papal primacy. Aside from being the first to confess Christ, Peter is the first apostle to extend the Gospel to the Gentiles (Acts 10), and his leadership and teaching set the stage for the church’s expansion and maturity (chap. 1–15; 1 and 2 Peter). Thus, we conclude with John Calvin: “It is a foolish inference of the Papists, that he received the primacy, and became the universal head of the whole Church. Rank is a different thing from power, and to be elevated to the highest place of honor among a few persons is a different thing from embracing the whole world under his dominion.”
https://www.ligonier.org/learn/devotionals/peter-rock/ChristisstilltherockDoc.Nomatterhowmuchyouspamyouc... (
show quote)