Why Peter was called Cephas in opposition to Peter

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Post Reply
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Why Peter was called Cephas in opposition to Peter

Post by Giuseppe »

Robert Stahl notes a curious fact: Peter is called Cephas, despite of the fact that in Hebrew 'peter' means "the first born one", a title who would be very apt for the first apostle.

But if Peter is "Peter" because he is the First for right of birth (he is the first born), hence predestined from the birth to become the First,...

...then a Paulinist would disagree: for a Paulinist, it is Paul who was predestined from the birth (read Galatians 1).

Hence, the our Paulinist would have given to Peter the name of Peter not as his original name, but only as a late surname given by Jesus:

These are the twelve he appointed: Simon (to whom he gave the name Peter),

(Mark 3:16)

...hence eclipsing deliberately the fact that Peter was Peter ('the first born) from the first day.

Debt to Stahl for this view (but note that Stahl has the Fourth Gospel preceding Mark).
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Why Peter was called Cephas in opposition to Peter

Post by Giuseppe »

If therefore 'Cephas' is a reductive title for Peter, given to the latter only with the first gospel, then the Pauline passages in Galatians 1:18 and 2:9, where a 'Cephas' is mentioned:

Then after three years, I went up to Jerusalem to get acquainted with Cephas and stayed with him fifteen days.


James, Cephas and John, those esteemed as pillars, gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship when they recognized the grace given to me. They agreed that we should go to the Gentiles, and they to the circumcised.


...would postdate the first gospel.

Meaning that Galatians is a forgery.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Why Peter was called Cephas in opposition to Peter

Post by Giuseppe »

I would be inclined to follow Stahl in the idea that Peter and Paul are two icons of two rival factions.
  • Peter was created as the 'first born', the true heir of Jesus.
  • Paul was created as the 'the least', the last who will become the first, pace the "first born".
The rivarly between the little ones and the adults, between Gentilizers and Judaizers, between gentiles and Jews, between the dogs and the sons, between the last and the first, is the same rivarly where Paul and Peter lose definitely their own identity as real historical figures, if they ever had one.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Why Peter was called Cephas in opposition to Peter

Post by Giuseppe »


◄ 6363. peter
Strong's Concordance
peter: firstling
Original Word: פֶטֶר
Part of Speech: Noun Masculine
Transliteration: peter
Phonetic Spelling: (peh'-ter)
Definition: that which separates or first opens

https://biblehub.com/hebrew/6363.htm

Compare:


Exodus 13:2:

“Consecrate to me every firstborn [=Hebrew PETER] male. The first offspring of every womb among the Israelites belongs to me, whether human or animal.”

1 Corinthians 15:2
5 and that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.

So Peter is the first born, while Paul is not only the last born, but the abortion.

Too much divine coincidence here, sorry.
Post Reply