Petros-Petra

We do have evidence that the name "Cephas" was used of Peter. It is not mere speculation.

 

But that does not mean the original was written in Hebrew or Aramaic. If one thinks this is the case then why not just translate all the Greek NT into Hebrew or Aramaic and use that as the way to determine the meaning?

We have to use what God left for us. Do you think it was an act of God that He left us those copies of Greek manuscripts? I do. That is what we should use.

 

I don't think that the original was written in Aramaic. I think it is likely that Matthew wrote a Greek translation of the conversation.

It is wise to consider the meaning of an underlying term, especially in translation. When the NT uses terms like "Lord" (kurios), it is wise to consider the Hebrew background, especially considering that the most of the authors were Hebrews.

Examining the Aramaic background does not undermine the inspiration of the Greek text. In fact, it is far more likely that the NT is influenced by Hebrew/Aramaic thought than by the elements of Greek poetry.

 

Aash,

the feminine argument holds no credibility because if you look at a Strong’s concordance, that same feminine noun is applied to actual rocks and stones, which have no gender. (Luke 8:6, Matthew 27:60, Romans 9:33, Revelation 6:15) just to name a few.

furthermore even if the gender argument held merit, when you consider Psalm 118:22, Ephesians 1:22, Ephesians 5:23, 1 Corinthians 11:3, Colossians 1:18, Colossians 2:10, it is irrefutable that not only is Christ the head of the church but the foundation of the church.