In the efforts of about all sectarians and digressives to bolster up error, they reject New Testament Greek—the very language in which the Christian Scriptures were written—and depend wholly and solely upon a misinterpretation of English versions! In this, they make gods of the translators, and honor them with as much infallibility as the Catholics honor the Pope!

But it is somewhat surprising to see the Catholic clergy, with all their learning, commit the same kind of foolery. In the "Question Box," by Conway, with a Preface by Cardinal Gibbons, we find this in their effort to make of Peter the "rock" upon which Messiah said He would build His church:

"The study of Syriac in the past century has told us that in the vernacular of Palestine in our Lord’s time Syriac was the language used, and in that version of the Scriptures (the Peshito) the same word is employed for Peter and rock, thus: ‘Thou art Keoha, and upon this Keoha I will build my church.’ Thus scholarship again robs the old-time controversalist of one of his pet arguments against the Primacy" (p. 199).

What of it if Syriac were the language used in Palestine, at the time of the discourse of Jesus to Peter? The New Testament was written in Greek, not Syriac. In the Greek, two Words— PETROS (Peter, a fragment of a rock) and PETRA (a solid rock) are used. The Syriac Kepha is a form of the Aramaic CEPHAS and the word PETROS is the Greek form of the same word. But not so of PETRA! The fact that inspiration used two distinct words, with different meanings, forever sets aside the Catholic contention.

Besides this, the grammatical construction will not allow such an interpretation. "THOU art Peter." "Thou" is in the second person. "Upon THIS rock." "This" is in the third person. PETROS (Peter) is masculine gender; PETRA (rock) is femine. This again upsets the Catholic doctrine. "Thus scholarship again robs the old-time" Catholic "of one of his pet arguments" in favor of "the Primacy"!