Mark 3:16

‘And he gave to Simon the name Peter.'

This is a typical piece of Mark's literary roughness that later manuscripts have sought to improve on. Simon is assumed to have been appointed and in his appointment it is the description of his new name that is given, to indicate that he had become a new man. Mark was satisfied that he had already indicated that Simon was a uniquely called disciple, and that everyone knew he was one of the twelve, and now simply indicates that this Simon whom he has previously talked about is the one well known as Peter. The new name was first given to him when he met Jesus after being introduced to Him by Andrew in John 1:42. So we must read it as indicating ‘Simon, to whom He had given the new name Peter'. No one needed to be told that Peter had been appointed one of the twelve as Mark's comment verifies.

The name given was actually Cephas (kepha) which means a rock (John 1:42), but when translated into Greek becomes petros (masculine - which means small rock) and not petra (feminine - a large foundation rock, rocky ground). This was, of course, because Simon was male. However the distinction is maintained in Matthew 16:18, where petros could have been used both times (as a translation of kepha if Jesus was there speaking in Aramaic), but where the switch is made to petra signifying that the rock there was either:

1). Peter's statement (the most probable), opted for by 44 out of 76 of the early fathers, which explains the change to petra.

2). Christ (far less probable) opted for by 17 out of 76 of the early fathers, but in that case puzzling as to why there was a change to petra.

Thus 59 out of 76 of the early fathers agreed that the rock was not Peter himself, in spite of the then importance of Peter. See our discussion on Matthew 16:18. This was not Protestant bias.

Jesus chose Peter not only to be one of the twelve, but also one of the inner three of Peter, James and John (Mark 5:37; Mark 9:2; Mark 14:33). He clearly saw in him one who would in the end prove to be a rock, once he had conquered his impetuosity and occasional unreliability (Mark 8:32; Mark 14:37; Mark 14:68; Mark 14:70; Galatians 2:11 following). Perhaps the giving of the name was intended to make him consider his need to do exactly this. He is always named first and became the natural spokesman of the twelve (Mark 8:29; Matthew 17:24; John 21:3; Acts 1:15; Acts 2:14; Acts 8:14 (with John)), although we should note in Acts how there is a continual emphasis on the twelve acting together. Furthermore Peter's position was not seen as such that he could not be challenged. See for example Acts 11:2 - where he had to back up his position with reason, not by claiming special personal God-given authority - and see also Galatians 2:11 where he temporarily failed and had to be rebuked.