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

Three Questions to Paul

Archived: Read only    Previous Topic Next Topic
Home Forums Peshitta Topic #850
Help Print Share
syriac
 
Send email to syriacSend private message to syriacAdd syriac to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

Three Questions to Paul

Jan-31-2002 at 09:13 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

Shlama Paul

I have three questions to ask you:

1)How similar is "the Church of the East"to the Judaism, both in the religion, the practices and the customs of
our church...Do we have something in common?

2) If the Peshitta is written in the language of our Lord Jesus and his deciples, then why do we speak in a dialect that belongs to the East aramaic group, when the language of Jesus belonged to the Westaramaic group?

Since we have the tradition that some of the diciples spread the Gospel, the Aramaic New Testament in the language of Jesus to our people.

3) When was our New Testament (Peshitta) translated, could it be derived from an older version?


Syriac

Print Top

 
Forums Topics  Previous Topic Next Topic

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

1. RE: Three Questions to Paul

Jan-31-2002 at 10:03 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #0
 
Shlama Akhi Emanuel,

I'm waiting for you to send me your postal address so that I can mail a copy of that book to you. Please send it to pyounan@peshitta.org

>1)How similar is "the Church of
>the East"to the Judaism,
>both in the religion, the
>practices and the customs of
>our church...Do we have something in
>common?

We have very many things in common. We can start by talking about practices of purity, if you'd like. In Judaic practice this topic is sometimes called "The laws of Niddah."

Is your family in the Church of the East or the Syriac Orthodox Church? The reason I ask is because I am very familiar with the practices of the COE but I'm not very familiar with the SOC.

>2) If the Peshitta is written
>in the language of our
>Lord Jesus and his deciples,
>then why do we speak
>in a dialect that belongs
>to the East aramaic group,
>when the language of Jesus
>belonged to the Westaramaic group?

This is a common misconception. Actually there's two misconceptions here.

The first thing we have to realize is that there was 2 major dialects at that time in Israel. A "Northern" and a "Southern". The Northern dialect was closest to what Assyrians spoke because it was actually Assyrians in Galilee and Samaria who Jesus grew up with. The "Samaritans" are nothing but Assyrians and Babylonians who were transplanted to northern Israel after the 10 Tribes were taken captive to Beth Nahrin (Mesopotamia/Assyria.) See 2 Kings 17:23-24.

So you see, Jesus grew up in the North where the Assyrian (Eastern) dialect was spoken.

That's why Shimon Keepa's dialect was recognized during the trial. That's why the people couldn't understand what Jesus was saying on the Cross.

In the south - the Judeans spoke Southern Aramaic. They did not live among Assyrians - and their dialect is more properly called "Chaldaic" since they came back from captivity in Babel. They spoke how the Chaldeans spoke - while Jesus and the Disciples who were mostly Galileans spoke the major dialect from Galilee - which is identical to what the Assyrians speak because they lived among Assyrians and Babylonians (2 Kings 17:23-24)

So the language of the Peshitta - our Assyrian dialect of Aramaic - is the same language that Maran Eshoa spoke.

That's why the Peshitta doesn't have glosses or need to explain where he says "Talitha Qumi" or "Alahi Lmana Shwaqthani" - how would we say these things? Exactly the same way! The Peshitta needs no explanation.

The term "Eastern" and "Western" Aramaic is not valid until much later when those terms were used to distinguish between the Eastern and Western dialects of the Aramaic-speaking Church.

But in Jesus' time - there was no such thing, except that our language was different from the one spoken in Judea. But the language of the Peshitta is identical with the language of "Galilee of the Nations" (Assyrians, Babylonians, etc.)

That's why the Jews despised the Samaritans so much - they are not ethnically Hebrew people even though they follow the books of Moses. They are ethnically Assyrians.

>Since we have the tradition that
>some of the diciples spread
>the Gospel, the Aramaic New
>Testament in the language of
>Jesus to our people.

Of course - they would give us the Gospel in our own language - which just happened to be the same language of the Jews and Galileans at the time. Except our dialect is closest to that of Galilee at the time and pretty distinct from the dialect of Judea - which is more properly called Chaldaic.

>3) When was our New Testament
>(Peshitta) translated, could it be
>derived from an older version?

Our tradition is unanimous that the Peshitta is the original New Testament that was handed down to us from the Apostles themselves - in their language and in the language of Mshikha.

There is absolutely no indication anywhere that the Peshitta is derived from an older version - nor that an older version exists.

If this was a translation from something else - we would have known about it. The fact is - there's no historical documentation whatsoever that this occured. History is silent on this matter.

You're looking at the original.

Fk^rwbw 0ml4

Peshitta.org

Print Top
syriac
 
Send email to syriacSend private message to syriacAdd syriac to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

4. RE: Three Questions to Paul

Feb-04-2002 at 09:12 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #1
 
Shlama Paul

Thanks for your reply. I am pleased with you answers. This can be very intresting for me, I think. You asked about my postal adress. I'm sorry that it took so long, telling you. But I have hotmail and you can email me at akpinaremanue70@hotmail.com.

Yes, me and my family are members of the SOC. I dont know so much about it but I can try to seek for informations about our church. Is it any particular you whant to know?

Now, even though I am not a member of the COE, I am after all interested in it
In your letter, we were discussing about the similarity between the COE. you mentioned "The laws of Niddah."Could you please tell me more about it and more about similarities between the COE?

Correct me if I am wrong, the apostles handed down the Gospel to us, probably in the early first century. It does not make any sense. Our earliest extant versions of the New Testament Peshitta date to the 5th century AD. Did they first write down the old peshitta, since it is dated from 1st 2nd century AD and THEN wrote down the New Testament?

Please, help me I am confused!

Syriac

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

6. RE: Three Questions to Paul

Feb-04-2002 at 09:38 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #4
 
Shlama~Shlomo Akhi Emanuel,

>
>Yes, me and my family are
>members of the SOC. I
>dont know so much about
>it but I can try
>to seek for informations about
>our church. Is it any
>particular you whant to know?
>

Sure - but I'll ask them in separate posts. Mostly I would love to know more about any traditions of Aramaic primacy that exist in the SOC.

>
>In your letter, we were discussing
>about the similarity between the
>COE. you mentioned "The laws
>of Niddah."Could you please tell
>me more about it and
>more about similarities between the
>COE?
>

Sure. In our churches, for instance, there is a general practice that women of child-bearing age do not stand on the altar area (madb-kha). I'm pretty sure this is the same in the SOC - right?

Also - have you ever noticed that women in our culture who are menstruating generally do not even approach to take Qurbana/Qurbono?

This is because the Apostles taught us a very ancient form of worship which we still practice and that maybe even comes from the time when Yonah preached in Nineveh or when our king and queen in Adiabene converted to Judaism before Christianity and the majority of the people with them.

There are many, many other things we share in common with ancient Jewish practice, Akha.

>Correct me if I am wrong,
>the apostles handed down the
>Gospel to us, probably in
>the early first century.

That's very true. All traditions from all of our churches verify this.

>It does not make any sense.
>Our earliest extant versions of
>the New Testament Peshitta date
>to the 5th century AD.
>Did they first write down
>the old peshitta, since it
>is dated from 1st 2nd
>century AD and THEN wrote
>down the New Testament?

I'm not sure I understand the problem.

You see Akha - yes you are right that the oldest Peshitta found, so far, is from around the 5th century.

But the oldest Hebrew Torah, before your/our beloved SOC bishop Yeshu Shmuel discovered the Dead Sea Scrolls, was the 11th century!

You know also that our people of all denominations have been slaughtered incessantly for the last 2,000 years. The last major one, which we call Seypa/Seyfo, was in 1914-1918 when 2/3 of our population was wiped out by fanatical Islam. Every 50 years we had a massacre Akha! It's amazing anything has survived!

Remember - we did not live in the Roman Empire when Constantine brought an end to the persecutions! We suffered under the Sassanid Persians, Zoroastrians, Magians, Arabs, Kurds and Turks during the different centuries!

So many ancient manuscripts and churches and monasteries have been lost. Only by God's grace have we, the few who are left, survived to even tell about it.

I'm not surprised that more Greek fragments have been found that are older than the Aramaic. If we had enjoyed tolerance from the 5th-century onwards, like the Greek and Roman churches after Constantine did, we would have many manuscripts from the 2nd through 4th centuries still around, too.

But we cannot expect people who are fleeing the sword to care more about preserving books than taking their families out of harm's way!

Anyway - keep the faith. They are out there and will be found some day.

Fk^rwbw 0ml4

Peshitta.org

Print Top
syriac
 
Send email to syriacSend private message to syriacAdd syriac to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

8. RE: Three Questions to Paul

Feb-07-2002 at 12:28 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #6
 
Shlama Paul

<Sure. In our churches, for instance,
<there is a general practice that women
<of child-bearing age do not stand on the
<altar area (madb-kha). I'm pretty sure this is <the same in the SOC - right?

In this point, I think that our church (SOC)differs from CoE. We have a different church tradition. In fact, no woman is allowed to stand on the altar(madb-kha)at all. So it does not matter if she is child bearing. Except the priest, diacons, the choir, bishops etc, which all of them are men. The reason is that we can not make women to be priest, diacons etc. We can find the reason in Bible too. Jesus, when he gave the missions to his twelve desciples to go and preach among the people, they all were men. In fact, the whole bible gives a patriarchal view. You see, the men of the bible were more represented than the women. But it depends in which point of view one see it.

<Also - have you ever noticed that women in our <culture who are menstruating generally do not <even approach to take Qurbana/Qurbono?

It is true, this custom appear in our church as well. But it counts the sinners too. when a person commit a sin and take Qurbana/Qurbono, he or she receive the body of Jesus. Since Jesus was free from sin, it is inconceivable to take Qurbono, because it gives opposite effect.

I think the Catholics in the past had a negative view of the women. That is a another history. If you would like, I tell you more about. But you maybe are aware of it.
It explains certainly why the women dont take Qurbono when they are menstruating.

<I'm not sure I understand the problem.

The reason why I asked that question, was that I discovered a source which told about peshitta. The source is from "Encyclopedia Britannica". Here a quote from the source:

"Of the vernacular versions of the Bible, the Old Testament Peshitta is second only to the Greek Septuagint in antiquity, dating from probably the 1st and 2nd centuries AD. The earliest parts in Old Syriac are thought to have been translated from Hebrew or Aramaic texts by Jewish Christians at Edessa, although the Old Testament Peshitta was later revised according to Greek textual principles. The earliest extant versions of the New Testament Peshitta date to the 5th century AD and exclude The Second Letter of Peter, The Second Letter of John, the Third Letter of John, The Letter of Jude, and The Revelation to John, which were not canonical in the Syrian church." 28.

If it is as you said, that our Gospel is the same Gospel, the desciples handed us. Then it must mean that the original Gospel must been written first in the early 1st century AD, the same time when the apostels made missions. And our earliest New Testament Peshitta manuscript from the fifth century is in other words a manuscript which have been written down by different authors in different times as copies from the original. So the old manuscripts are disapeared as you say. I think I understand now. Or how do you construe the source above? Am I right now?

If the peshitta is not derived from a older version, then what is "Old syriac"?. Can you please tell me about that language?

Syriac

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: Three Questions to Paul

Feb-07-2002 at 12:54 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #8
 
Shlama Akhi Emanuel,

>In this point, I think that
>our church (SOC)differs from CoE.
>We have a different church
>tradition. In fact, no woman
>is allowed to stand on
>the altar(madb-kha)at all. So it
>does not matter if she
>is child bearing.

You are correct Akha - I just check with my priest and he said the same thing too. I thought young girls were allowed to but I guess not. I could swear I've seen them on the altar occasionally, though. Maybe the Qasha didn't see them?

><Also - have you ever noticed
>that women in our <culture
>who are menstruating generally do
>not <even approach to take
>Qurbana/Qurbono?
>
>It is true, this custom appear
>in our church as well.
>But it counts the sinners
>too. when a person commit
>a sin and take Qurbana/Qurbono,
>he or she receive the
>body of Jesus. Since Jesus
>was free from sin, it
>is inconceivable to take Qurbono,
>because it gives opposite effect.
>

Us too. So you see this is one thing that we share with ancient Jewish practice - what they call the "Laws of Niddah" which means the "Laws of Separation." A woman who was menstruating would not be allowed to approach the temple area or any consecrated thing until the time of her purification was passed. We still carry on this tradition today.

Now, whether that tradition we inherited through our conversion to Judaism in Jonah's time, in the time of Queen Helena of Adiabene or later by the Apostles doesn't matter - the fact is that the tradition must hark back to some Judaic context. And the fact that the Syriac Orthodox Church keeps the same practice is very important. I wonder about the other churches of the Middle East like the Maronites or Chaldeans?

>If it is as you said,
>that our Gospel is the
>same Gospel, the desciples handed
>us. Then it must mean
>that the original Gospel must
>been written first in the
>early 1st century AD, the
>same time when the
>apostels made missions.

Yes, absolutely.

>And our
>earliest New Testament Peshitta manuscript
>from the fifth century is
>in other words a manuscript
>which have been written down
>by different authors in different
>times as copies from the
>original.

Absolutely.

>So the old manuscripts
>are disapeared as you say.

Or, maybe, waiting to be found just like the Dead Sea Scrolls were lost for over 2,000 years - until they were discovered by Mor Yeshu Shmuel of the Syriac Orthodox Church in Jerusalem 85 years ago.

>I think I understand now.
>Or how do you construe
>the source above? Am I
>right now?

I put 0% faith in the source mentioned above because it is not from our tradition - and the only source about our tradition that's worth anything is one that comes from our tradition.

In other words - I will not allow foreigners to write our own history for us. We know our own history and we did not have to wait for the Greek Christians to give us back the Aramaic words of Christ translated into Greek - only so we could translate them back into Aramaic.

That sounds ridiculous - doesn't it?

Just like Moshe's words were preserved in their original Hebrew, just like Mohammad's words were preserved in their original Arabic - Meshikha's words were preserved in their original Aramaic - HIS language and ours.

>If the peshitta is not derived
>from a older version, then
>what is "Old syriac"?. Can
>you please tell me about
>that language?

The term "Old Syriac" does not refer to a different language - it's the same exact dialect of the Peshitta. Nor is it older. It's the same language and the same script - 100% the same.

The "Old Syriac" is simply the attempt of a scribe who ran out of paper to give an Aramaic rendering of the Bezan Greek manuscript of the New Testament.

It was just a reference work - nothing more, nothing less.

Instead of "Old Syriac", the symbols "OS" should stand for "Old Scratch-paper".

Here is a look at the manuscript:


Akha - would any of our churches or scribes accept a manuscript of the New Testament that was written on scratch paper - over the scratched-off story of the martyrdom of a saint?

Or would this manuscript be tossed out the window?

Western scholarship is so desperate to give an explanation as to how the Peshitta arrived on the scene - that they have to make up completely idiotic theories that the Peshitta is a revision of the "Old Syriac" - when the two versions do not have anything to do with one another!

And none of our churches accepts this manuscript - not yours, not mine, not the Chaldeans or the Maronites or the Syriac Catholics. Nobody but "Western Scholars" accept this manuscript as authentic.

That's why it was found in a Greek Orthodox monastery in Egypt after 1,600 years - and as far as I'm concerned - they can have it!

I will not consider "Old Scratch-paper" - that has dozens of spelling and grammatical errors, as authentic - nor will I place "Old Scratch-paper" on equal footing with the Peshitta - the unanimous choice of all the Aramaic-speaking churches.

Fk^rwbw 0ml4

Peshitta.org

Print Top
syriac
 
Send email to syriacSend private message to syriacAdd syriac to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

10. RE: Three Questions to Paul

Feb-08-2002 at 11:56 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #9
 
Shlama Paul

You are correct Akha - I just check with my priest and he said the same thing too. I thought young girls were allowed to but I guess not. I could swear I've seen them on the altar occasionally, though. Maybe the Qasha didn't see them?

Print Top
syriac
 
Send email to syriacSend private message to syriacAdd syriac to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

11. RE: Three Questions to Paul

Feb-08-2002 at 11:56 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #9
 
Shlama Paul

You are correct Akha - I just check with my priest and he said the same thing too. I thought young girls were allowed to but I guess not. I could swear I've seen them on the altar occasionally, though. Maybe the Qasha didn't see them?

Print Top
syriac
 
Send email to syriacSend private message to syriacAdd syriac to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

12. RE: Three Questions to Paul

Feb-11-2002 at 02:57 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #9
 
Shlama Paul

Sorry it took so long for me to write to you

<You are correct Akha - I just check with my <priest and he said the same thing too. I thought <young girls were allowed to but I guess not. I <could swear I've seen them on the altar <occasionally, though. Maybe the Qasha didn't see <them?

The priest that you mentioned maybe saw them near to the altar, because they stay little further away from the altar and the male choir.

<I wonder about the other churches of the Middle <East like the Maronites or Chaldeans?

Do you mean their tradition at the altar or basic informations about them? Im not sure what you mean. If so, here are some informations about them.

The chaldean christians

trace their origin in the Church of the East. Many bishops of the church within the CoE joined the Catholicism during the 14th century. This led to a division during the 16th century and a new direction was created. This new church was going to be called the Chaldean Catholic church and became and is united with the Roman Catholic Church. Today, the seat of the chaldean patriarch is situated in Baghdad.

The liturgical language of the Chaldean Church is Syriac. The liturgical books are those of the ancient Nestorian Church, corrected in the sense of Catholic orthodoxy. Unfortunately, without doctrinal necessity, they have in some places been made to conform with Latin usage. Religiously and morally the Chaldeans are on a level with the other Catholic communities of the Oriental Rite.
Chaldean christians exist in Iraq, which is their centre.

The maronites

are a christian group in Libanon. They got their name after the patriarch, St. John Maron or Maro (Arabic Marun(in the begining of the 5th century AD), but the church was probably first established during the Monophysitian struggles and the Council of Constantinople 680 AD. Since 13th century, the maronites are united with Rome. They are governed by a patriarch of their own. Except in Lebanon there are maronites in USA and Syria and also in Cyprus. In the liturgy they are still using the syriac language. Many of the priests, who are not sufficiently learned to perform the Liturgy in Syriac, use Arabic instead, but Arabic written in Syriac characters (Karshuni). The liturgy is of the Syrian type, i.e., the liturgy of St. James, but much disfigured by attempts to adapt it to Roman usages.

For more informations about the chaldean christians and maronites do you find at https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09683c.htm

<That sounds ridiculous - doesn't it?

You know, I agree with you. The source was a little bit confusing. It didnt make sense, only when you explained it, it began to dawn up on me.

<Here is a look at the manuscript

What part of the New Testament do this old manuscript come from? and is there any particular difference between the old one and the new one?

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

7. RE: Three Questions to Paul

Feb-06-2002 at 00:24 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #4
 
Shlama Syriac,

>Correct me if I am wrong,
>the apostles handed down the
>Gospel to us, probably in
>the early first century. It
>does not make any sense.
>Our earliest extant versions of
>the New Testament Peshitta date
>to the 5th century AD.
>Did they first write down
>the old peshitta, since it
>is dated from 1st 2nd
>century AD and THEN wrote
>down the New Testament?
>
>Please, help me I am confused!
>
>Syriac

There is also another way of understanding why few ancient Aramaic manuscripts have survived:

Think about it -there arent many old Torah Scrolls around either. With the exception of the Dead Sea scrolls (as Akhi Paul has mentioned) ancient Torah scrolls generally do not exist.

In common practice among Jewish scribes of every era (regardless of persecution) aging scrolls are retired (buried, to be exact!)

The reason for this is the following: as scrolls age, the ink and parchment dry due to normal wear and tear. As the ink dries, it is not uncommon for the ink to actually flake off the parchment. The scribes, not wanting any word or even letter be possibly confused with another, will immediately want the torah scroll pulled out of use and destroyed to minimize any possibility of erroneous readings and the reproduction of such. A fresh, new accurate Torah is produced, thereby insuring each generation accurately possesses the word of God as error-proof as possible.

This tradition basically eliminates the existence of very old manuscripts.

I am very confident (I'm sure Akhi Paul can elaborate) that scribes of the ancient Semitic Churches of the East followed very similar practices.

-Dean


Print Top
James_Trimm
 
Send email to James_TrimmSend private message to James_TrimmAdd James_Trimm to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

2. RE: Three Questions to Paul

Jan-31-2002 at 11:30 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #0
 
>Shlama Paul
>

Since this wad addressed to Paul I thought it only fair to let him reply first.

>I have three questions to ask
>you:
>
>1)How similar is "the Church of
>the East"to the Judaism,
>both in the religion, the
>practices and the customs of
>
>our church...Do we have something in
>common?
>

If you refer to basic practices of Judaism: eating Kosher, observing a seventh days Sabbath, Observing the Jewish festivals, etc. you will not find these to be practices of the CoE. They do not wear tzitit, use teffelin, or place a mezuzah on their door.

They do have many practices which a Jew would recognize as basicly Christian. They worship weekly on Sunday, they observe Christian Holidays such as Christmas which Jews regard as being of Pagan origin. They observe weekly eucharist. etc.

We do have some things in common. Liturgical worship in ARamaic for example. Also I ahve heard that the CoE has a practice of taking doe from the corban (eucharist) and saving it for the next batch so that the original batch is supposed to go back to the first century. I have heard that the same custom was done with the showbread of the Temple. It is also similat to the ashes of the read heafer ritual in which ashes were saved from each red heifer to be mixed with the next batch goin all the way back to Moses who got the first ashes from YHWH.

>2) If the Peshitta is written
>in the language of our
>Lord Jesus and his deciples,
>then why do we speak
>in a dialect that belongs
>to the East aramaic group,
>when the language of Jesus
>belonged to the Westaramaic group?
>

I will not get into a big debate with Paul on this. I think he might be largely correct. I also know other possible answers to this question that could also be correct.

>
>Since we have the tradition that
>some of the diciples spread
>the Gospel, the Aramaic New
>Testament in the language of
>Jesus to our people.
>
>3) When was our New Testament
>(Peshitta) translated, could it be
>derived from an older version?
>

Can of worms. I and some others believe that the Old Syriac text is more primitive but Paul definitely doe NOT agree and we may never know for sure.

>
>
>Syriac


Print Top
howard
 
Send email to howardSend private message to howardAdd howard to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

3. RE: Red Heifer

Jan-31-2002 at 12:00 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #2
 
Shlama
On a slight tangent here, I heard some years ago that one of the problems with re-establishing Temple worship was that no 'ashes from the red heifer' were now in existance to sanctify 'holy water', which is required to sanctify the red heifer's ashes in order to produce 'holy water' ... (circular argument )
Is this true? Is there any solution?

Maran Atha
Howard

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

5. RE: Three Questions to Paul

Feb-04-2002 at 06:28 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #0
 
Shlama Akhay,

If I may comment on a question meant for Paul:

One thing you'll find surprisingly similar between a synagogue and the Church of the East is not so much whats there, but whats NOT!

Upon walking into to any CoE church, you'll notice the lack of any icons, statues or graven images.

This was particularly important to me, a Jew raised in a religious home.

Additionally, the days of the week, months of the year and elements of the respective liturgies and phrases used therein are very similar, if not the same.

Also, names of church/temple positions are very similar such as: Rabi Qasha, shamasha and Kahane. Also the name of the Church itself Adatha carries over perfectly from the Hebrew Adat for congregation!

-Dean

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