Assyrian Forums
 Home  |  Ads  |  Partners  |  Sponsors  |  Contact  |  FAQs  |  About  
 
   Holocaust  |  History  |  Library  |  People  |  TV-Radio  |  Forums  |  Community  |  Directory
  
   General  |  Activism  |  Arts  |  Education  |  Family  |  Financial  |  Government  |  Health  |  History  |  News  |  Religion  |  Science  |  Sports
   Greetings · Shläma · Bärev Dzez · Säludos · Grüße · Shälom · Χαιρετισμοί · Приветствия · 问候 · Bonjour · 挨拶 · تبریکات  · Selamlar · अभिवादन · Groete · التّحيّات

How to win a debate.

Archived: Read only    Previous Topic Next Topic
Home Forums Peshitta Topic #952
Help Print Share

Paul Younanmoderator

 
Send email to Paul YounanSend private message to Paul YounanView profile of Paul YounanAdd Paul Younan to your contact list
 
Member: Jun-1-2000
Posts: 1,306
Member Feedback

How to win a debate.

Mar-23-2002 at 01:55 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

Shlama Akhay,

It's actually quite simple. I've learned alot from some participants on this forum (some of whom are no longer with us.) Here's the proven strategy to always "win" no matter what:


  1. Dispute the meaning of a word. If proven wrong, proceed to Step 2.
  2. Try to make the accusation that the text must have been tampered with. If you have no proof of this, proceed to Step 3.
  3. Claim that the current understanding must have evolved from the archaic to be something completely different. If you are shown otherwise, proceed to Step 4.
  4. Use the buffet-line scriptural approach. Choose your favorite readings from any number of conflicting sources and paste them together in just the right order to make your argument more palatable. Don't forget the Barbecue sauce. If this is unsucessful, proceed to Step 5.
  5. If all else fails, huddle behind King James (or something of a mythical origin like a long-lost "Hebrew Version.")

Walla! With this proven strategy, you will never "lose" a debate. Heck - it's been proven effective for nearly 2,000 years. If truth be sacrificed in the process - to hell with the truth. This is all about "being right", right?

Fk^rwbw 0ml4

Peshitta.org

Print Top

 
Forums Topics  Previous Topic Next Topic
jdrywood
 
Send email to jdrywoodSend private message to jdrywoodAdd jdrywood to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

1. win with KING JAMES

Mar-23-2002 at 09:37 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #0
 
ahki Paul,
You forgot step (6) use an opponents source document to prove KING JAMES is superior, like the example below:
Evidence that KING JAMES Translation influenced the PESHITTA INTERLINEAR and in proper Elizabethan ENGLISH at that:
no man lights a lamp and covers it with a vessel
or places it under the bed rather he places it on a lamp stand
so that all who enter will see its light.
Luke 8:16 Well done ahki Paul, one for the KING JAMES camp. :>

jdrywood osyqdw Nnxwy Nm aml4

Print Top

Paul Younanmoderator

 
Send email to Paul YounanSend private message to Paul YounanView profile of Paul YounanAdd Paul Younan to your contact list
 
Member: Jun-1-2000
Posts: 1,306
Member Feedback

2. ???

Mar-24-2002 at 05:41 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #1
 
My Interlinear English:

No man lights a lamp and covers it with a vessel or places it under the bed rather he places it on a lamp stand so that all who enter will see its light.

King James:

'No man, when he hath lighted a candle, covereth it with a vessel, or putteth it under a bed; but setteth it on a candlestick, that they which enter in may see the light.'


Astonishing the resemblance! I didn't even know I knew Elizabethan English! This borders on plagiarism!

R U OK ?

Fk^rwbw 0ml4

Peshitta.org

Print Top
judge
 
Send email to judgeSend private message to judgeAdd judge to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

3. what the...

Mar-24-2002 at 11:19 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #2
 

Hi there mr drywood!
I do from time to time take an interest in the posts here , and notice you have been quite active. I haven't read all of the posts, but I have read most I think, but I am still lost as to the point you are trying to get across.
This may be because I don't have the knowledge about these various texts that other posters here may have.
Can you please help me out? What exactly is/are the point/s you are trying to convey.

All the best................Michael

p.s. Apologies if I haven't understood or if I have somehow missed a post or two

Print Top
jdrywood
 
Send email to jdrywoodSend private message to jdrywoodAdd jdrywood to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

4. RE: ???

Mar-24-2002 at 11:19 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #2
 
To angry ahki paul
Im surprised you are still wrestling with me, thought you cut me off the posts or gave up on me or pealed the potato or something. }>
My English KJ sentence structure reads the same as your Peshitta, thats the point SVO:
No man lights a lamp and covers it with a vessel or places it under the bed rather he places it on a lamp stand so that all who enter will see its light.
Interesting, Luke 11:33 follows the same SVO structure and reads the same as King James, oh some flavour with same word meanings.
I know the King James is only a translation, the point being I am finding many good examples where the Textus Receptus or Byzantine text (Scriveners Greek) not only agrees with the Peshitta 99.8% of the time but where the corrupt GNT and Vaticanus B and all Papyri variants and all revisions since 1881 omit the text, the Byzantine fills the text in agreeing with the Peshitta most of the time. This is important for textual criticism and proves the tradition of the Byzantine Text (Textus Receptus) is as old or older than the Peshitta although this has yet to be scientifically determined. The areas of filling in may be due to the earliest italia texts which may be a translation of the Peshitta that is in its parts or as a codex. Note, the last six verses in Revelations have no Greek original and were later added due to the Italia documents not the Peshitta. To bad the Antiochean Syrians, Ignatius and Theophilus, didnt agree with Johns apocalypse, you Assyrians chumps were left out as a result but you did think up some nice titles like MarYah. By the way, you or angry Roth said that it is always 100% used for YHWH or Christ. TOO bad it doesnt. Check out this title for deity which has marah at Luke 10:21 Peshitta
0rm of heaven. Oh, how sweet it is! This means that the early latin texts of 120 C are following closely the Peshitta or vice versa. So as not to scalloped your potato eyes to much I thought it proper to let you guys know ahead of time what I am up too so that you can come up with step (7). I thought those other five were pretty good not realizing I had that special gift to deceive not only you but myself. I would rather think this comes naturally.
I will be cataloguing the filler texts over the next few weeks while Im sunning my baldhead at a Florida Bible school and whale beaching.
Yes! There is an astonishing resemblance in the Peshitta to the Byzantine Receptus Textus which you are not prepare to admit to
and Yes! The early latin, Greek Peshitta all others border on plagiarism!
R U OK ?

jdrywood osyqdw Nnxwy Nm aml4
P.S. To all my wrestling fans who would love to get in the ring at me. Round TWO is throw in the towels and rules bar none. :c


Print Top
Iakov
 
Send email to IakovSend private message to IakovAdd Iakov to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

6. RE: ???

Mar-25-2002 at 08:35 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #4
 
Mar Drywood,


>This is important for textual
>criticism and proves the tradition
>of the Byzantine Text (Textus
>Receptus) is as old or
>older than the Peshitta although
>this has yet to be
>scientifically determined.

When a theory lacks evidence it remains a theory. The fact is modern scholarship has abandoned the Majority (Byz/TR) Text in favor of the Papyri because the earliest evidence exists from Alexandria. Akh Paul could care less about Textual Criticism except where PNT appears to agree LXX over MT or Targums. In fact it provides great amusement for him to see these Zorbanians chasing their tail.

The fact is no Byz mss exists before the 7th century postdating the PNT by several hundred years.

The text postdates the Papyri by as much as 550 years.

Please don't bother akh Paul about GNT textual variances unless you intend to amuse him.

Shlama,
Yaqub

Print Top
jdrywood
 
Send email to jdrywoodSend private message to jdrywoodAdd jdrywood to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

8. RE: ???

Mar-25-2002 at 08:58 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #6
 
ki Orthodox ahkan,
That may be true about modern Greek primates putting Papyri before the orphans but the evidence proves otherwise. Why trust Papyri corruptions from an area of radical thinking from rejects who tampered with texts. Both you and Paul ignore the evidence of the early Italia which are nearest to Peshitta and were in the hands of apostles and bishops. None of the supposed early fathers 2nd century were bishops thats why I call them itinerants, people mainly pagan converts who went about spreading their own theories about Jesus being deity. Theres the crock of the problem. And consider this evidence. There are no orphans of the Papyri or Vat B or Sinaiticus aleph because they were known to be corrupt texts. So the Byzantine orphans (the mother documents worn out by use) maintained the earliest traditions of the west. True the early texts were Aramaic and copies made from them in early Latin and Byzantine but only these not Peshitta is recognized in the west. These orphans spread the gospel but God has ##### on the Peshitta forbearers because they slanted his only begotten by making him equal to himself. This is eastern bull perpetrated by false (anti) Christs mentioned by the way in two epistles rejected by the east. The Peshitta rejects Christ as Gods very Son thereby assigning exalted titles before their time ie MarYah. The early Latin and Byzantine does not call Jesus by the name Jesus Christ until Acts 3:6. Thereafter, the special title of Mar Yah was assigned. That is the apostles themselves did not even understand his titles or new name until later and not until the chief apostle Peter began to use it. So when you guys see this title of Mar Yah in the gospels you are looking at a gloss which I am documenting for my sixth book. This is cutting edge stuff and you guys are ignorant of the true gospel. You think the crap about the trinity and Mar Yah is gospel. Yah Yah Yah its more simple than that. Here it is:
You dont need to be Orthodoxy to be saved:
YOUR FAITH HAS GIVEN YOU LIFE GO IN PEACE. Luke 7:50

jdrywood 0syqdw Nnxwy Nm 0ml4

Print Top

Paul Younanmoderator

 
Send email to Paul YounanSend private message to Paul YounanView profile of Paul YounanAdd Paul Younan to your contact list
 
Member: Jun-1-2000
Posts: 1,306
Member Feedback

9. RE: ???

Mar-25-2002 at 09:18 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #8
 


  1. Dispute the meaning of a word. If proven wrong, proceed to Step 2.
  2. Try to make the accusation that the text must have been tampered with. If you have no proof of this, proceed to Step 3.
  3. Claim that the current understanding must have evolved from the archaic to be something completely different. If you are shown otherwise, proceed to Step 4.
  4. Use the buffet-line scriptural approach. Choose your favorite readings from any number of conflicting sources and paste them together in just the right order to make your argument more palatable. Don't forget the Barbecue sauce. If this is unsucessful, proceed to Step 5.
  5. If all else fails, huddle behind King James (or something of a mythical origin like a long-lost "Hebrew Version.") The important point is to assert that the original text is no longer with us. They will never defeat you with this final, fool-proof Step.

Akhi Iakov - interesting combinations of Steps 2 and 4 in Johnny's post, no?

Fk^rwbw 0ml4

Peshitta.org

Print Top
Iakov
 
Send email to IakovSend private message to IakovAdd Iakov to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

12. RE: ???

Mar-25-2002 at 10:50 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #8
 
Mar Drywood,

>ki Orthodox
>ahkan,

"Because our Orthodox brother?"
Orthodox?

>That may be true about modern
>Greek primates putting Papyri before
>the orphans but the evidence
>proves otherwise.

That's just it. What evidence? Preconceived ideas are not evidence.

>Why trust Papyri.

As Dr. Fee says, because where the different Papyri families agree they predate everything by as much as 250 years. That is where you have 99.8% agreement.

>corruptions from an area of
>radical thinking from rejects who
>tampered with texts.

Tampering. You even admit Byz corrects Peshitta. Talk about tampering.

Both you
>and Paul ignore the evidence
>of the early Italia which
>are nearest to Peshitta and
>were in the hands of
>apostles and bishops.

Perhaps that is because the western fathers quoted the GNT that more closely resembles Papyri.

>None of
>the supposed early fathers 2nd
>century were bishops thats why
>I call them itinerants, people
>mainly pagan converts who went
>about spreading their own theories
>about Jesus being deity.

You do not understand gnosticism then. Not in the least. If Philo reflects accurately Alexandria, and he does, then the Payri would want to prove that Jesus is 'not' deity but that he only appeared to be. You are closer to gnosticism than the all trinitarians. What is your argument?

Theres
>the crock of the problem.
>And consider this evidence. There
>are no orphans of the
>Papyri or Vat B or
>Sinaiticus aleph because they were
>known to be corrupt texts.
>So the Byzantine orphans (the
>mother documents worn out by
>use) maintained the earliest traditions
>of the west.

The ole wore em out therefore they don't exist argument. Therefore you lack evidence. Plain and simple. Papyri are the oldest-FACT, the various families agree over 99%-FACT. Modern scholarship consider TR to be corrupt because of the high number of glosses such as you mention in Jn 1:18.

The
>Peshitta rejects Christ as Gods
>very Son

What?


thereby assigning exalted
>titles before their time ie
>MarYah. The early Latin and
>Byzantine does not call Jesus
>by the name Jesus Christ
>until Acts 3:6.

You mean like Matt 1:1,18,;16:20;Mk 1:1 etc.
Remember Matt 16:16 Kepha calls him the M'shikha. Also his disciples of course would referred to him as Rabbi, master, or Mar. It makes perfect sense upon Kepha's statement for them to privately refer to him as Mar-Ya.

Thereafter, the
>special title of Mar Yah
>was assigned. That is the
>apostles themselves did not even
>understand his titles or new
>name until later and not
>until the chief apostle Peter
>began to use it.

After he stated who Y'shua really was Matt 16:19?

So
>when you guys see this
>title of Mar Yah in
>the gospels you are looking
>at a gloss which I
>am documenting for my sixth
>book.

And what would your proof be?


This is cutting edge
>stuff

One must know the biblical languages to critique them.


and you guys are
>ignorant of the true gospel.

Galatians 1:6
I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:

>You think the crap about
>the trinity and Mar Yah
>is gospel. Yah Yah Yah
>its more simple than that.
>Here it is:
>You dont need to be Orthodoxy
>to be saved:
>YOUR FAITH HAS GIVEN YOU LIFE
>GO IN PEACE. Luke 7:50

Galatians 1:7
Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.


Bwq9y

Print Top
jdrywood
 
Send email to jdrywoodSend private message to jdrywoodAdd jdrywood to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

15. RE: ???

Mar-26-2002 at 07:41 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #12
 
to stop wasting time Iakov
Zorbas Alexandrian Gnostic Texts do not a good Arian make. Check out:
Origins of Gnostism http://www.ourladyswarriors.org/dissent/defgnost.htm

jdrywood 04yby 0syq Nnxwy Nm 0ml4


Print Top
Iakov
 
Send email to IakovSend private message to IakovAdd Iakov to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

16. RE: ???

Mar-26-2002 at 00:19 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #15
 
Mar Drywood,

>Zorbas Alexandrian Gnostic Texts do not
>a good Arian make.

We know gnosticism, stoicism, and sophism but who are you?

The papyri show him to be completely God and completely man. Majority text, as has been demosntrated in KJV, is also clear on this fact. So in your attempt to show that Peshitta more closely resembles Majority Text, so as to disprove the 'trinitarian' view held in papyri,
you have inadvertently strengthened the papyri argument. Sorry.

Yaqub

Print Top

Paul Younanmoderator

 
Send email to Paul YounanSend private message to Paul YounanView profile of Paul YounanAdd Paul Younan to your contact list
 
Member: Jun-1-2000
Posts: 1,306
Member Feedback

11. RE: ???

Mar-25-2002 at 09:45 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #4
 
Shlama Akhi Yukhanan,

I'm not angry with you - I'm just disgusted that you would resort to statements like "Assyrian chumps" and "Angry Roths." I can take it though - but if you continue to insult others while all they do is to address you kindly then you have no reason to be here. I can honestly say that all you've done is degrade this forum to the level of a mud-wrestling match. I ask you, once again, refrain from insulting people. You can throw all the insults you want at a darkie like me - my skin is tough enough to take it - but be forewarned that others have the power to send you off to that bottomless pit.

Secondly - you have perfected the art of making Straw Men. Neither Andrew nor myself said what you insinuate we said when you said:

(Mar-Yah) is always 100% used for YHWH or Christ.

That implies that we said Mar-Yah is the only title used for YHWH or Meshikha. Neither of us ever said such a thing.

We said, and I repeat - Mar-Yah is a title reserved for God alone.

Don't misrepresent what someone says.

The rest of your useless post derives from Step 2 of "How to win a debate" and does not even deserve a response.

Like I've said before - I'm not here to argue with you about what the various Greek mss say. That's YOUR mess - I'll have NONE of it.

I'm here to tell you what the Aramaic of the Peshitta New Testament says. I'll debate that with you all day long. Whether you take it or leave it is up to you.

Ciao.

Fk^rwbw 0ml4

Peshitta.org

Print Top
Dean
 
Send email to DeanSend private message to DeanAdd Dean to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

5. RE: win with KING JAMES

Mar-25-2002 at 00:19 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #1
 
Hey drywood,

Its amazing how far youre willing to stretch and spin are you gymnast :P ?

At this point, Im not sure if anyone here knows what your even talking about anymore?

By the way, are you trying to say something in Aramaic on the bottom of your posts? You might want to check it!?!

-Dean


> ahki Paul,
>
>You forgot step (6) use an
>opponents source document to prove
>KING JAMES is superior, like
>the example below:
>Evidence that KING JAMES Translation influenced
>the PESHITTA INTERLINEAR and in
>proper Elizabethan ENGLISH at that:
>
>no man lights a lamp and
>covers it with a vessel
>
>or places it under the bed
>rather he places it on
>a lamp stand
>so that all who enter will
>see its light.
>Luke 8:16 Well done ahki Paul, one for the KING JAMES camp. :>
>

>jdrywood >face="Estrangelo (V1.1)" size="5"] osyqdw
>Nnxwy Nm aml4

>


Print Top
jdrywood
 
Send email to jdrywoodSend private message to jdrywoodAdd jdrywood to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

7. RE: ???

Mar-25-2002 at 08:35 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #5
 
ahki dean
Nice to hear from you again, Thanx for pointing that out, a couple of letters got crunched.
Trying to find something to get your teeth on. Hmmmmmm Theres no D.O. marker for Estrangla so does the accusative case suffice or another case ending that you know of?

jdrywood 0syqdw Nnxwy Nm 0ml4


Print Top

Paul Younanmoderator

 
Send email to Paul YounanSend private message to Paul YounanView profile of Paul YounanAdd Paul Younan to your contact list
 
Member: Jun-1-2000
Posts: 1,306
Member Feedback

10. RE: ???

Mar-25-2002 at 09:27 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #7
 
I repeat Akhan Dean's very good question - what are you trying to say ?

I get the "Shlama men Yukhanan" part - but what is 0syqdw ("and of wood ?")

If you're trying to say "Dry Wood" a good way would be 04yby 0syq


Fk^rwbw 0ml4

Peshitta.org

Print Top
jdrywood
 
Send email to jdrywoodSend private message to jdrywoodAdd jdrywood to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

13. RE: ???

Mar-26-2002 at 02:34 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #10
 


I think I took the word from the lexicon.
Anything wrong with Lamsas shorter version of drywood in Luke 23:31
04ybyb

jdrywood 04ybyb Nnxwy Nm 0ml4

Print Top

Paul Younanmoderator

 
Send email to Paul YounanSend private message to Paul YounanView profile of Paul YounanAdd Paul Younan to your contact list
 
Member: Jun-1-2000
Posts: 1,306
Member Feedback

14. RE: ???

Mar-26-2002 at 02:39 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #13
 
Shlama Akhi Yukhanan,

"Yabesha" is just an adjective that means "dry" or "withered". A leper's hand, for instance, could be "Yabesha."

To say "Dry Wood" would be "Qaysa" (wood) and "Yabisha" (dry).

In Aramaic, the adjective typically follows the noun, so it would be "Qaysa Yabisha."

Fk^rwbw 0ml4

Peshitta.org

Print Top
Dean
 
Send email to DeanSend private message to DeanAdd Dean to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

17. Poor Sport

Mar-27-2002 at 04:04 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #7
 
Last edited by Dean on Mar-27-2002 at 05:55 AM (GMT3)

Akhi drywood,

>Trying to find something to get
>your teeth on.

Dont flatter yourself drywood, your arguments arent that good!

I was just noticing that your attempt at an Aramaic signature wasnt making much sense, which pretty much was consistent with most of your recent posts.

Here's a tip drywood: Stay away from name-calling and derogatory comments!

Akhi Paul,
You might want to add a 6th bullet to your list -

6) If all else fails, resort to name calling and ethnic bashing!

-Dean

Print Top
jdrywood
 
Send email to jdrywoodSend private message to jdrywoodAdd jdrywood to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

18. RE: get your teeth on this

Mar-27-2002 at 07:51 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #17
 
teeth-ing mar Dean
Following is quoted from the Mishnah tractate Yadaim 4:5:
"The (Aramaic) version that is in Ezra and Daniel renders the hands unclean. If an (Aramaic) version was written in Hebrew, or if Hebrew was written in an (Aramaic) version, or in Hebrew script, it does not render the hands unclean. (The Holy Scriptures) render the hands unclean only if they are written in the Assyrian character, on leather, and in ink."

jdrywood 04yby 0syq Nnxwy Nm 0ml4


Print Top
Rob
 
Send email to RobSend private message to RobAdd Rob to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

19. RE: get your teeth on this

Mar-27-2002 at 09:55 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #18
 
Last edited by Rob on Mar-27-2002 at 09:57 PM (GMT3)

Shlama, jdrywood,

Perhaps you wouldn't mind translating this Mishnah for us. (That is, if you've got both the Hebrew font and skill)

v hklh
alv tymra alv tyrbi al ,yrpc ]ybtvk ]ya
,ybtk lkb ]vwl lkb btk . tynvy alv tydm
tyrvwa hbvtk ahtw di vb arqy al

Don't bite too hard now, you just might break a tooth! :c

Br

Print Top

Paul Younanmoderator

 
Send email to Paul YounanSend private message to Paul YounanView profile of Paul YounanAdd Paul Younan to your contact list
 
Member: Jun-1-2000
Posts: 1,306
Member Feedback

20. RE: get your teeth on this

Mar-27-2002 at 10:03 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #19
 
Shlama Akhan Rob,

I always knew Mishnaic Hebrew was very close to Aramaic - but my goodness, I understood every word.

Fk^rwbw 0ml4

Peshitta.org

Print Top
Dean
 
Send email to DeanSend private message to DeanAdd Dean to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

21. RE: get your teeth on this

Mar-27-2002 at 10:03 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #18
 
Last edited by Dean on Mar-27-2002 at 10:07 PM (GMT3)

drywood,

So now you're Jewish, huh? You follow the Torah sh'ba'al peh as prescribed by the Mishnah, the Gemorah and the teachings of the Rabbis?

Now, it does seem that youre NOT getting our point about disrespectful speech. You dont fail to take pot-shots at your fellow-posters and Im just wondering what makes you feel like these kind of comments are acceptable? Are you itching to get bounced or are you trying to see how far you can go before you get silenced? I havent noticed anyone here playing dirty like you have!

But now I think you've gone too far ... it appears that the quote from the Mishnah is being used by YOU to somehow drag Assyrians through the mud.

IS THAT YOUR INTENTION?

Would you like me to drum up some quotes from the Talmud that cast derogatory light on YOU and YOUR kind?

-Dean

>teeth-ing mar
>Dean
>Following is quoted from the Mishnah
>tractate Yadaim 4:5:
>"The (Aramaic) version that is in
>Ezra and Daniel renders the
>hands unclean. If an (Aramaic)
>version
>was written in Hebrew, or
>if Hebrew was written
>in an (Aramaic) version, or
>in Hebrew script, it does
>not render the hands unclean.
>(The Holy Scriptures) render the
>hands unclean only if they
>are written in the Assyrian
>character, on leather, and in
>ink."

Print Top
Rob
 
Send email to RobSend private message to RobAdd Rob to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

22. RE: get your teeth on this

Mar-27-2002 at 10:51 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #21
 
Shlama Akhi Dean,

You're right, he's up to no good!

But he has also shown his ignorance of the very passage he quoted!

Here's why: The Rabbi's taught that a holy Torah scroll renders the hands unclean. The 'Assyrian' character is actually the Mishnaic term for the square script used in the Hebrew Bible. The term 'Hebrew' in Mishnah, when referring to a script, means the old paleo-Hebrew script, which was not acceptable in thier eyes for a Torah scroll (more likely a polemic against Samaritans, who preserved this ancient script in thier Torah scrolls).

So, this usage of 'Assyrian' script that jdrywood takes as a slam on Assyria, is in reality a comment to Assyria for providing the script used in Torah scrolls!


Shlama,
Rob


Print Top

Paul Younanmoderator

 
Send email to Paul YounanSend private message to Paul YounanView profile of Paul YounanAdd Paul Younan to your contact list
 
Member: Jun-1-2000
Posts: 1,306
Member Feedback

23. RE: get your teeth on this

Mar-27-2002 at 10:53 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #22
 
:k

Fk^rwbw 0ml4

Peshitta.org

Print Top
Dean
 
Send email to DeanSend private message to DeanAdd Dean to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

24. Mudslinging

Mar-27-2002 at 11:34 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #22
 
Absolutely Rob,
The ancient (and probably the original) Torah was written in the paleo-Canaanite type script. In fact some of the Dead Sea scrolls, which were written in an older, more square script, retain the paleo where YHWH appears.

However, regardless of drywood's knowledge (or lack of) in this matter, I believe his intentions speak for themselves and reveal more and more about his character and agenda!

-Dean


Print Top

Paul Younanmoderator

 
Send email to Paul YounanSend private message to Paul YounanView profile of Paul YounanAdd Paul Younan to your contact list
 
Member: Jun-1-2000
Posts: 1,306
Member Feedback

25. Used to it.

Mar-28-2002 at 00:17 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #24
 
Shlama Khabray~Chaverim,

Don't worry about this guy. Obviously he's trying to drive a wedge between Jews and Gentiles on this forum.

Johnny - last call to behave. Don't underestimate the wrath of a patient man. You know all about my ruthless pagan ancestry!

Fk^rwbw 0ml4

Peshitta.org

Print Top
jdrywood
 
Send email to jdrywoodSend private message to jdrywoodAdd jdrywood to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

26. RE: Johnny in the corner

Mar-28-2002 at 02:05 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #25
 
OK I'LL be good. }>
I'll stay in the corner for awhile.
Tag two!

Print Top

Forums Topics  Previous Topic Next Topic


Assyria \ã-'sir-é-ä\ n (1998)   1:  an ancient empire of Ashur   2:  a democratic state in Bet-Nahren, Assyria (northern Iraq, northwestern Iran, southeastern Turkey and eastern Syria.)   3:  a democratic state that fosters the social and political rights to all of its inhabitants irrespective of their religion, race, or gender   4:  a democratic state that believes in the freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture in faithfulness to the principles of the United Nations Charter — Atour synonym

Ethnicity, Religion, Language
» Israeli, Jewish, Hebrew
» Assyrian, Christian, Aramaic
» Saudi Arabian, Muslim, Arabic
Assyrian \ã-'sir-é-an\ adj or n (1998)   1:  descendants of the ancient empire of Ashur   2:  the Assyrians, although representing but one single nation as the direct heirs of the ancient Assyrian Empire, are now doctrinally divided, inter sese, into five principle ecclesiastically designated religious sects with their corresponding hierarchies and distinct church governments, namely, Church of the East, Chaldean, Maronite, Syriac Orthodox and Syriac Catholic.  These formal divisions had their origin in the 5th century of the Christian Era.  No one can coherently understand the Assyrians as a whole until he can distinguish that which is religion or church from that which is nation -- a matter which is particularly difficult for the people from the western world to understand; for in the East, by force of circumstances beyond their control, religion has been made, from time immemorial, virtually into a criterion of nationality.   3:  the Assyrians have been referred to as Aramaean, Aramaye, Ashuraya, Ashureen, Ashuri, Ashuroyo, Assyrio-Chaldean, Aturaya, Chaldean, Chaldo, ChaldoAssyrian, ChaldoAssyrio, Jacobite, Kaldany, Kaldu, Kasdu, Malabar, Maronite, Maronaya, Nestorian, Nestornaye, Oromoye, Suraya, Syriac, Syrian, Syriani, Suryoye, Suryoyo and Telkeffee. — Assyrianism verb

Aramaic \ar-é-'máik\ n (1998)   1:  a Semitic language which became the lingua franca of the Middle East during the ancient Assyrian empire.   2:  has been referred to as Neo-Aramaic, Neo-Syriac, Classical Syriac, Syriac, Suryoyo, Swadaya and Turoyo.

Please consider the environment when disposing of this material — read, reuse, recycle. ♻
AIM | Atour: The State of Assyria | Terms of Service