Ask a Question - or - Return to the Defending the Faith Forum Index

Question Title	Posted By	Question Date
Peter-Petros, Petra. Do they have different meanings?	Mike	Sunday, May 27, 2012
Question: I was wondering if you could please give me a solid refutation/rebuttal to the following from Wikipedia..it would be very greatly appreciated. The refutation or rebuttal position would be that there is no difference between Petros and Petra contrary to what is below. Thank you very much! "Other theologically conservative Christians, including Confessional Lutherans, also rebut comments made by Karl Keating and D.A. Carson who claim that there is no distinction between the words petros and petra in Koine Greek. The Lutheran theologians state that the dictionaries of Koine/NT Greek, including the authoritative[65] Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich Lexicon, indeed list both words and the passages that give different meanings for each. The Lutheran theologians further note that: We honor Peter and in fact some of our churches are named after him, but he was not the first pope, nor was he Roman Catholic. If you read his first letter, you will see that he did not teach a Roman hierarchy, but that all Christians are royal priests. The same keys given to Peter in Matthew 16 are given to the whole church of believers in Matthew 18"
Question Answered by Bro. Ignatius Mary, OMSM(r) Dear Mike: Petros is the masculine form of the name in Greek. Petra is the feminine form. Both mean "rock." More specifically the masculine form, Petros, means in Greek, "little pebble", whereas the femininine form, Petras, means a larger rock. Protestants like to argue these things because they are desparate to disprove Catholic teachings. These so-called Bible Christians are not only remarkably ignorant of the Bible, but they also have little respect for it. In this case, the Protestants claim that the Scriptures do not support the Catholic teaching on the Papacy. They would be wrong. In fact, I converted from a Baptist preacher to a Catholic because it was proven to me by the Bible and the Bible alone that the Catholic teaching on the papacy was not only supported in Scripture, but that is mandated by God. Protestants cannot accept that Biblical fact because if they did, they would have to join the Catholic Church or be hypocrites and risk their souls to hell. That was the place I was in. I chose to follow truth, the Bible, and converted to the Catholic Church. In the silly arguments over Peter's name in Greek, we must remember that Jesus spoke in Aramaic, not Greek. When Matthew was telling the story in Greek he had no choice but to use the masculine form for rock (little pebble) because Peter was male. In the Aramaic language there is no problem with the the word "rock" as there is in Greek. Since Jesus used Aramaic, the passage in Scripture actually reads, "Simon, Thou art Kepha* and upon this Kepha I will build my Church."* It is the same word, thus Jesus is clearly and unmistakenly saying that he has appointed Simon Peter to be the rock upon which Jesus would build his Church. Any "bible" Christian that refutes this is a hypocrite and chooses his own Pride over the plain sense of God's word. But, the Biblical evidence does not stop there. Jesus went on to say that he was giving Peter the "keys". Jesus was quoting from Isaiah 22:21-23, which is about the secession of the office of Prime Minister. "Keys" are a symbol of authority. Jesus did not give the keys to all Christians. This is a singular gift to the Prime Minister. Is everyone a Prime Minister? The Prime Minister has his subordinate ministers (the bishops) who also have a key of authority. Matthew 18 gives episcopal authority to the bishops, not authority to the Masses. God is a God of order, not chaos. If everyone has the keys, then how is the faith protected when there are 32,000 denominations who contradict one another. How can the cake be baked when there are 32,000 cooks in the kitchen. How can there be all chiefs and no Indians? How can a business be run if everyone is the boss? This assertion that everyone has the keys is not only unBiblical, but is beyond moronic, it is intellectual dishonesty and cowardice. In order to avoid utter chaos, there has to be "Supreme Court" that definitively settles theological disputes. That supreme court is the Magisterium. We know this because God has always had a Prime Minister and Magisterium. Jesus even mentions the papacy that preceded the Christian era in Matthew 23:2-3 — "The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses' seat; so practice and observe whatever they tell you, but not what they do; for they preach, but do not practice." Moses' seat, the chair of Moses, was where the Magisterial authority resided during the Mosasic Covenant. Jesus said that the people are to obey whoever sits on the Chair of Moses, even if the person sitting in it is personally a hypocrite. This verse also give us a small clue to infallibility, since the person sitting in the Chair of Authority must be obeyed no matter what. In Matthew 18 Jesus addresses the issue of a recalcitrant sinner. If the person will not listen then he is to be taken to the "Church". The only other place Jesus refers to the authority of the Church is in Matthew 16 when Peter is made the first Prime Minister. If everyone is pope, then how can we take a person to Church authorities when everyone is an authority? This assertion that everyone has the keys is just moronic. There is a series of pamphlets about the papacy you should read. Do not fret over arguing with morons, St. Paul tells us to avoid unproductive argumentation. Just posit the truth as persuasively as you can and let it go. We must remember the we do not convince anyone of anything. The job of convincing belongs to the Holy Spirit. Our job is to be the messenger. God Bless, Bro. Ignatius Mary

Question Title

Posted By

Question Date

Peter-Petros, Petra. Do they have different meanings?

Mike

Sunday, May 27, 2012

Question:

I was wondering if you could please give me a solid refutation/rebuttal to the following from Wikipedia..it would be very greatly appreciated. The refutation or rebuttal position would be that there is no difference between Petros and Petra contrary to what is below. Thank you very much!

"Other theologically conservative Christians, including Confessional Lutherans, also rebut comments made by Karl Keating and D.A. Carson who claim that there is no distinction between the words petros and petra in Koine Greek. The Lutheran theologians state that the dictionaries of Koine/NT Greek, including the authoritative[65] Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich Lexicon, indeed list both words and the passages that give different meanings for each. The Lutheran theologians further note that:

We honor Peter and in fact some of our churches are named after him, but he was not the first pope, nor was he Roman Catholic. If you read his first letter, you will see that he did not teach a Roman hierarchy, but that all Christians are royal priests. The same keys given to Peter in Matthew 16 are given to the whole church of believers in Matthew 18"

Question Answered by Bro. Ignatius Mary, OMSM(r)

Dear Mike:

Petros is the masculine form of the name in Greek. Petra is the feminine form. Both mean "rock." More specifically the masculine form, Petros, means in Greek, "little pebble", whereas the femininine form, Petras, means a larger rock.

Protestants like to argue these things because they are desparate to disprove Catholic teachings. These so-called Bible Christians are not only remarkably ignorant of the Bible, but they also have little respect for it.

In this case, the Protestants claim that the Scriptures do not support the Catholic teaching on the Papacy. They would be wrong. In fact, I converted from a Baptist preacher to a Catholic because it was proven to me by the Bible and the Bible alone that the Catholic teaching on the papacy was not only supported in Scripture, but that is mandated by God.

Protestants cannot accept that Biblical fact because if they did, they would have to join the Catholic Church or be hypocrites and risk their souls to hell. That was the place I was in. I chose to follow truth, the Bible, and converted to the Catholic Church.

In the silly arguments over Peter's name in Greek, we must remember that Jesus spoke in Aramaic, not Greek. When Matthew was telling the story in Greek he had no choice but to use the masculine form for rock (little pebble) because Peter was male. In the Aramaic language there is no problem with the the word "rock" as there is in Greek. Since Jesus used Aramaic, the passage in Scripture actually reads, "Simon, Thou art Kepha and upon this Kepha I will build my Church." It is the same word, thus Jesus is clearly and unmistakenly saying that he has appointed Simon Peter to be the rock upon which Jesus would build his Church. Any "bible" Christian that refutes this is a hypocrite and chooses his own Pride over the plain sense of God's word.

But, the Biblical evidence does not stop there. Jesus went on to say that he was giving Peter the "keys". Jesus was quoting from Isaiah 22:21-23, which is about the secession of the office of Prime Minister. "Keys" are a symbol of authority. Jesus did not give the keys to all Christians. This is a singular gift to the Prime Minister. Is everyone a Prime Minister? The Prime Minister has his subordinate ministers (the bishops) who also have a key of authority. Matthew 18 gives episcopal authority to the bishops, not authority to the Masses. God is a God of order, not chaos. If everyone has the keys, then how is the faith protected when there are 32,000 denominations who contradict one another. How can the cake be baked when there are 32,000 cooks in the kitchen. How can there be all chiefs and no Indians? How can a business be run if everyone is the boss? This assertion that everyone has the keys is not only unBiblical, but is beyond moronic, it is intellectual dishonesty and cowardice.

In order to avoid utter chaos, there has to be "Supreme Court" that definitively settles theological disputes. That supreme court is the Magisterium. We know this because God has always had a Prime Minister and Magisterium. Jesus even mentions the papacy that preceded the Christian era in Matthew 23:2-3 — "The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses' seat; so practice and observe whatever they tell you, but not what they do; for they preach, but do not practice."

Moses' seat, the chair of Moses, was where the Magisterial authority resided during the Mosasic Covenant. Jesus said that the people are to obey whoever sits on the Chair of Moses, even if the person sitting in it is personally a hypocrite. This verse also give us a small clue to infallibility, since the person sitting in the Chair of Authority must be obeyed no matter what.

In Matthew 18 Jesus addresses the issue of a recalcitrant sinner. If the person will not listen then he is to be taken to the "Church". The only other place Jesus refers to the authority of the Church is in Matthew 16 when Peter is made the first Prime Minister. If everyone is pope, then how can we take a person to Church authorities when everyone is an authority? This assertion that everyone has the keys is just moronic.

There is a series of pamphlets about the papacy you should read.

Do not fret over arguing with morons, St. Paul tells us to avoid unproductive argumentation. Just posit the truth as persuasively as you can and let it go. We must remember the we do not convince anyone of anything. The job of convincing belongs to the Holy Spirit. Our job is to be the messenger.

God Bless,
Bro. Ignatius Mary