Hi Angela,
Well, I believe to say I know nothing of any language is a bit harsh not to mention your last paragraph. Why so angry? I will readily admit that I have much to learn and maybe I didn't communicate some of my thoughts well or in some cases accurately, but let's try not to make blanket or personally hurtful statements. I tried to tell you I wasn't an apologist!! Hahaha! But, in all seriousness I thank you for the education.
My statement about no feminine or masculine form in Aramaic was based on my understanding that there was only one word in Aramaic to describe the word "rock". Based on what you said above I obviously misspoke so what is the feminine form of Kepha? I can't find it anywhere so I'm hoping you can help. Since I could find only one version I aligned with thinking that meant no distinction between masculine/feminine in Aramaic like there is in the Greek language. I knew that there was Petros/Petra and I didn't realize that there was the same masculine/feminine form in Aramaic so if Kepha is the masculine form what is the feminine? My bad in not understanding fully, no deceiving intention on my part and I apologize.
Since I was under the impression that there was just 1 word to describe Peter/Rock in Aramaic it seemed rational to me that Jesus said to Peter, "You are Kepha and upon this kepha I will build My church". As you pointed out I was wrong so how would you write out what Jesus said in Aramaic? Does it have something to do with the term "bedrock" that you mentioned? That's the part that was hard for me to follow.
And I apologize for not being clear as I never said the NT was written in Aramaic as you seem to have interpreted, but that the Aramaic words Jesus used would have to be translated to Greek. I love your use of facts as we know that Jesus spoke Aramaic because of what He said on the cross, but then you cross over into opinion that Jesus spoke Greek as "evidenced by the fact that there was no translator talking to Pontius Pilate" Even if I agreed with you I couldn't say this for sure. How do we know that there wasn't a translator? How do we know that Pilate hadn't somehow studied Aramaic? And finally how do we know what language Jesus spoke to Peter? I would imagine that the chances of Jesus speaking to Peter in Aramaic far outweigh the chances of speaking in Greek based on what we know of Peter's background. But, that's my opinion. We know for a fact that Jesus spoke Aramaic, but we simply can't say the same for Greek. We can make educated guesses, but the Bible doesn't have one recorded Greek utterance coming out of Jesus.
Thanks!
-Ernie-
You have a total misunderstanding of foreign languages. In Aramaic/Hebrew/Greek all nouns have gender. Masculine, feminine and neuter! These genders are not about people! Like in English, Daniel is a boy’s name, and Danielle, is the “femninized” form.
NO! They simply are genders, which have nothing to do with people. So, petra in Greek means “bedrock.” Petros in Greek means a pebble or loose stone. Even people who spoke those languages really have no idea why those genders are attached to those words. They could just as easily be neuter or the opposite. So, when Jesus specifies he is the Petra or bedrock, the gender is not the issue. The issue is that Jesus was saying he was the foundation of the church, which Petros, (the small rock or pebble) had proclaimed. Jesus is the Christ. Peter proclaimed Christ!
So Kephas is JUST masculine. There is no “feminine” form. It is just a gender. If it had been neuter, would you be asking this question? Probably! Just try and get it through your head. Gender has really no meaning, except the fact that it is very important in terms of grammar, and parsing nouns, pronouns, adjective and verbs, etc. Further, different languages, have different genders for the same noun. The prominent example that comes to mind, is the the Spirit in Hebrew is ruach, which is feminine. But Spirit in Greek, pneuma which is neuter. Apparently, Spiritus in Latin is masculine, and in German, Geist is masculine.
So, for us, what does that mean? It means that for unknown reasons different languages have different genders for the Spirit. No need to assign meaning to those differences, other than the fact, that the Holy Spirit is a person.
The reason I was angry, is that you were parroting things from those Catholic websites I was reading, about Kephas, which were based not on scholarship, but on upholding erroneous Catholic doctrine. That of “Peter” being the foundation of the church, rather than Jesus. You might find it interesting to note, that in Egypt, in the Alexandrian tradition, Mark was the apostle sent to Egypt and is revered as the “foundation” of the church. Not because of any Scripture, but because Mark did go to Egypt, and stayed there. So, if you want Peter as the founder of the church in Rome (which I am ambivalent about!) that is fine. BUT, he is not the “foundation” of the universal church, the bedrock, because only Jesus can lay claim to that title. Thomas is supposedly the discipline who went to India to proclaim the gospel, so he might be considered the founder of the church in India, although not much of that church remains.
Your final statement which I bolded, is ludicrous! The entire NT is full of statements by Jesus in Greek. True, some probably were made in Aramaic, particularly when Jesus addressed the crowds of his own people, like during the Sermon on the Mount. BUT, Jesus was a carpenter before he started his ministry at age 30. Most of the carpentry being done, was by the Romans. Likely, Jesus worked for Romans, and they would have communicated in Greek. Because, as I have laboriously pointed out, over and over, GREEK WAS THE LANGUAGE OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE!
In fact, tablets and ordinary correspondence recovered in archeological sites, like shopping lists, and laundry lists are all written in Greek. Koine Greek was the language everyone spoke to communicate. That is why John, a fisherman writes in Greek. Although it is a far simplier Greek, than say what Luke wrote, or what the writer of Hebrews wrote. These things do not come across in English, but they certainly do in Greek. Paul is also well above the writing level of John, but not as complex as Luke. In fact, in second term Greek, 1 John 1, is always an assignment to read, while Hebrews and Luke/Acts are left for 4th term, or the end of second year Greek. In fact, our professor, Bill Mounce was revising his 2nd year Greek reader, and he planned on taking the Hebrews 6 passage (a very controversial one, often debated on CC!) out of the reader, because it was so difficult!
There is an almost certainty that Jesus spoke Greek. He definitely had reading Hebrew, which all boys learned in the temple. He also tends to quote the Septuagint, the Greek OT, much more than the Hebrew OT. That is true of all the apostles. They all quote the LXX (Greek OT) much more than the Hebrew. That indicates that it was in common usage, and probably they studied it in school. Because they were quoting from memory, and Greek is the version that was most familiar.
Of course, we do not know that Jesus spoke Greek to Pilate, from the text. But no governor learned the common language, so Pilate did not know Aramaic. It seems to me, that since none of the 4 accounts in the gospels refer to any kind of translator, and the fact that Jesus obviously spoke Greek, since that was the lingua franca (common language) of the day, as evidenced by quoting the LXX, there is an extremely high probablity that Jesus and Pilate spoke in Greek, and for that matter, that Pilate addressed the crowd in Greek, and they understood. (Try and remembering the conquering Romans were not benevolent to the point of learning every local language in every country they were sent to!). But, it is not 100% for sure, I will give you that. Only 99%. LOL
My suggestion is that you study the history of the OT and the NT, and maybe learn a bit of Hebrew and Greek, before you come onto a real Christian site, making pronoucements that are pulled out of thin air, and have no foundation in history or language.
Again, you make up, or grab things to support your doctrine, which is a series of half truths and outright lies passed down over the centuries, by your church. The Bible on the other hand, has over 6000 extant manuscripts, and other than small copyist mistakes, it remains vitually unchanged from the earliest fragments of John in the Rylands papryus, dated to 100 AD, to today’s Greek. And although there are certainly differences between translations, none affects doctrine. If you were to read something else in this forum besides this Catholic thread, you would see all kinds of English translations being used, and other than the occasional deep study of the original languages, there is very little argument about the authencity of translations. (The exceptions being the Jehovah’s Witness false transation, the NWT, and some who think only the KJV is the right version to read!)
So, start with the original languages and the Bible. Forget about church conferences, creeds, and what was handed down. Then learn real history, through study of archeological and documents from those days. If you compare them to what the Catholic Church says, you will find the RCC is wrong in so many ways. In other words, I am going to take the bible, in its original form, and the Bible as accurately translated, over any council of “gathered bishops” from different church locales, and their opinions. Now, I am not saying that countering Arius was wrong. Certainly, the divinity of Christ is essential in our doctrine, the RCC has that right! But high Christology is not the only doctrine that matters.
Soteriology, or how we are saved, is also a crucial doctrine! So, do you believe the gospel according to Rome? Grace dispensed only by the church in the form of erroneous sacraments? Or do you believe in grace dispensed by the power of the Holy Spirit?
Your salvation hangs in the balance! Grace is given only by God! Not by temple or cathedral priests, who are merely sinful (and in the case of the Catholic Church, often extremely sinful, with pedophila not only not dealt with, but passed from parish to parish, and the leaders never reporting it to police! Sorry just watched a documentary on that last night! For that reason alone, the Catholic Church is to be condemned. Bishops unrepentant in protecting their pedophile priests, and refusing to acknowledge the horrific harm they have caused!)
”
For by grace you are saved through faith, and it is not of yourself, it is the gift of God.” Eph. 2:8-9
This gift is from God. No need for a hierarachial structure propping up its lies with more lies. Grace - for anyone who believes and straight from God. No intermediary needed! That is the truth, and the message of the Bible.
PS. Have you ever even read the whole Bible, from cover to cover? If not, that might be a good starting point for you. If so, try reading it 50 times, like I have. It might penetrate your soul and free you of this cult of Catholicism.
