Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
27 books mentioned in Nestorian tablet (?)
#1
Dear Akhan Shamasha Paul Younan

I would just like to ask your assistance in helping me understand what I have read today, and anyone who can answer

In the book, The Church of the T'ang Dynasty by John Foster It has an appendix wherein he gives his translation of what I assume is the famous (at least famous amongst us) Nestorian Monument in China, I will quote and omit some parts just so you get the sense of the writing:

"Whereupon (one person of) our Trinity became incarnate:
The Illustrious Honoured-One, Messiah,
hid away His true majesty,
and came into the word as a man (or among men).
...His mighty task once done, at noonday He ascended to heaven.
The scriptures left in twenty seven books,
take up the work of creation and open the spiritual realm...

Those words in brackets are John fosters.

So the context is talking of Messiah, and they said the scriptures are 27 books. I had read that the Roman Catholics wrote over the monument in Chinese. What do you say about this?

Thank you for your good help

Sami
Reply
#2
As I understand it, the situation is this. The church of the East, has , as far back as we know, a 22 book Nt canon. This is evidenced for example in the fact that Aphrahat never quotes from the other 5 books.
There is a thread here, somewhere, quoting Professor Gwynne to that effect.

The Western churches, arrived at a 27 book canon independently. Some time, around the 6th century IIRC, the COE accorded those other 5 books some respect, but not as far as making them part of their canon.

try this thread...<!-- l --><a class="postlink-local" href="http://www.peshitta.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1672">viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1672</a><!-- l -->

<!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile -->
Reply
#3
Thanks for reply Judge,

I understand the CoE's position on the 22 book canon, which is why this text perplexed me.
If the CoE has a 22 book canon, why on this Nestorian monument do they say they have the scripture in 27 books?

Sami
Reply
#4
Sami Rabia Wrote:Thanks for reply Judge,

I understand the CoE's position on the 22 book canon, which is why this text perplexed me.
If the CoE has a 22 book canon, why on this Nestorian monument do they say they have the scripture in 27 books?

Sami

Shlama Akhi Sami Rabia:
Can you post a picture of the actual monument? Let's take a good look at it together.

Shlama,
Stephen Silver,
Dukhrana Biblical Research
<!-- w --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dukhrana.com">www.dukhrana.com</a><!-- w -->
Reply
#5
Shlama all,

I have a detailed picture of a rubbing of the monument on my computer at home. When I get off work I can try to post that, although it's 4MB, maybe too big, or I can just cut out the relevant pieces.

bar Sinko
Reply
#6
bar Sinko Wrote:Shlama all,

I have a detailed picture of a rubbing of the monument on my computer at home. When I get off work I can try to post that, although it's 4MB, maybe too big, or I can just cut out the relevant pieces.

bar Sinko

Thanks that would be good, but can anyone here read Chinese?

This is an image I found on google
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://eastasian.lib.umn.edu/Nestorian%20Stele%20large.JPG">http://eastasian.lib.umn.edu/Nestorian% ... 0large.JPG</a><!-- m -->

This site has another translation:
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/eastasia/781nestorian.html">http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/eastasia ... orian.html</a><!-- m -->
Their translation read's
Twenty-seven sacred books [the number in the New Testament] have been left, which disseminate intelligence by unfolding the original transforming principles

This quote is also interesting
and Persians observing the splendor came to present tribute; the ancient dispensation, as declared by the twenty-four holy men [the writers of the Old Testament]

Blessings
Reply
#7
The Nestorian Monument was unearthed in the town of Zhouzhi in Shaanxi China in 1623 A.D. (Ming Dynasty). The monument, now stored in the Forest of Steles in Xian, was set up by the earliest (known) Christian Missionary to China. A Nestorian monk, Olopen came to China in 635 A.D. during the Tang Dynasty (618-907 A.D.). The Nestorian faith was known to the Chinese as 'Qing Jiao'. Olopen built a temple in Changan, called the Da Qin Temple. The stone monument, measured 2.36 meters tall, 0.86 meter wide and 0.25 meter thick was carved in 781 A.D. The introduction read, '(Let's) praise (the Lord) that the Da Qin faith has been popular in China.' The inscription on the monument was written by a follower called Lu Siuyan and was about 1780 words in length. It mentions the early activities of Christianity in China and the Christian doctrine. On two sides of the bottom of monument, the names of 128 followers are listed in Syrian. The contents of the monument has been translated into many languages and it is invaluable to the study of the spread and development of Christianity in China.
Reply
#8
Shlama all,

Thankfully, I can read Chinese. I can finally offer something on this forum!

The characters in question are the middle two of this image:
[Image: Nestorian%20stele%20%E5%BB%BF%E4%B8%83.jpg]
Chinese reads top to bottom, then right to left. The upper character ??? means "twenty" and the lower one ??? means "seven".

The character for seven ??? appears in three other places in the stele:
[Image: Nestorian%20stele%20%E4%B8%83%231.jpg] [Image: Nestorian%20stele%20%E4%B8%83%232.jpg] [Image: Nestorian%20stele%20%E4%B8%83%233.jpg]

In contrast, we can see an example of the character for "two" ??? in three places:
[Image: Nestorian%20stele%20%E4%BA%8C%231.jpg] [Image: Nestorian%20stele%20%E4%BA%8C%232.jpg] [Image: Nestorian%20stele%20%E4%BA%8C%233.jpg]

The first thing to notice is that to convert a two ??? into a seven ??? requires someone to erase one of the horizontal strokes, extend the other, and add a vertical stroke with a hook to the right. Since this is carved into a stone, I'm not sure how one could erase strokes.

Supposing erasure is possible, the seven ??? in question is a slight bit atypical. On the monument, the characters are in a grid that lines up horizontally as well as vertically. The seven ??? character is positioned a bit high in its square area. This could be because the top stroke of a two ??? character was reused for the seven ??? character, but the same is true of the twenty ??? character above it, which is also short. Also, the seven ??? character above seems to be slightly imperfect in its vertical stroke, though a forger would have every incentive to make the change as neat and convincing as possible, unless he were of course unable to write Chinese characters with sufficient skill.

Thoughts?

See a full image of the stele by following this link
https://netfiles.uiuc.edu/sinkovit/share...0stele.jpg

bar Sinko
Reply
#9
Shlama Bar Sinko, and thank you very much, everyone for your replies, and also yours as it is so useful.
I will have to read read what you have said in more detail when I have some time, but are you saying then that it clearly states 27 books?

Thank you

Sami



bar Sinko Wrote:Shlama all,

Thankfully, I can read Chinese. I can finally offer something on this forum!

The first thing to notice is that to convert a two ??? into a seven ??? requires someone to erase one of the horizontal strokes, extend the other, and add a vertical stroke with a hook to the right. Since this is carved into a stone, I'm not sure how one could erase strokes.

Supposing erasure is possible, the seven ??? in question is a slight bit atypical. On the monument, the characters are in a grid that lines up horizontally as well as vertically. The seven ??? character is positioned a bit high in its square area. This could be because the top stroke of a two ??? character was reused for the seven ??? character, but the same is true of the twenty ??? character above it, which is also short. Also, the seven ??? character above seems to be slightly imperfect in its vertical stroke, though a forger would have every incentive to make the change as neat and convincing as possible, unless he were of course unable to write Chinese characters with sufficient skill.

Thoughts?

See a full image of the stele by following this link
https://netfiles.uiuc.edu/sinkovit/share...0stele.jpg

bar Sinko
Reply
#10
Shlama akhi Sami Rabia,

That's correct. In the first image, the the two middle characters clearly read twenty-seven ??????. After that I was addressing the speculation that the Jesuits who discovered the monument later altered the text. I was considering if it were possible that the original text was 22 ?????? and was altered later to 27 ??????.

If one can erase strokes, it could be done, but since this is carved in stone, I don't see how that's possible.

bar Sinko
Reply
#11
Thank you bar Sinko, this is very interesting , and to me a bit perplexing.

Does anyone else have some insight into how this can be?

in other words, what mean these stones?
Reply
#12
It seems to me important to understand whether the 7th Century "Nestorians" used the 27 book NT. Here is what I found at Wikipedia. I am notr sure it is accurate.

Otto



Nestorianism is a general term for related forms of Christianity practiced in various parts of Asia since the 5th century. Nestorianism is associated with the Christological view advanced by Nestorius, Patriarch of Constantinople from 428 ??? 431, which emphasizes the disunion between the human and divine natures of Jesus. However, even from the beginning, not all Christians labeled "Nestorians" adhered to Nestorius' doctrine, leading some modern scholars to prefer other terms, such as "Church of the East", "Persian Church", etc.

Nestorius and his teachings were condemned at the First Council of Ephesus in 431 and the Council of Chalcedon in 451, leading to the Nestorian Schism in which Nestorius-supporting Churches of the East broke with Chalcedonian Christianity. Following the schism, many of Nestorius' supporters relocated to Sassanid Persia, which became the center of a vibrant sect. Nestorian Christianity spread through Persia, entering Central Asia and India at a relatively early date. Nestorian Christianity was introduced to the Mongols and China in the 7th century, and was a significant religious influence during the time of the Mongol Empire and China's Yuan Dynasty in the 13th century. These groups generally maintained some ties with the Persian establishment, and are linked together in contemporary sources, but structure and practice were loose and diverse, and not all churches followed the doctrine of Nestorius.

Nestorianism largely died out in the Middle Ages, but survives in the Assyrian Church of the East, which reveres Nestorius but does not follow all historically Nestorian doctrine. The church has approximately 170,000 members, mostly in Iran, Iraq, and Syria.
Reply
#13
Shlama,

It seems to me that the most logical explanation is the one that answers the question.
Was stone "erased"?
Probably NOT.
So, by the 7th or 8 th Centuries perhaps the 27 Book canon had gotten into most "Nestorian" Churches too.
I know that that's probably not gonna go down very well here, but just maybe, it's what actually (and really) happened!

Shlama, Syriac Questioner
Reply
#14
I just re-read your first post bar Sinko, and I can see what you mean. I really don't know enough about CoE to offer an opinion or explanation.
Reply
#15
SyriacQuestioner Wrote:So, by the 7th or 8 th Centuries perhaps the 27 Book canon had gotten into most "Nestorian" Churches too.

Well we know that even today COE people use 27 books. It is just that they only regard 22 of them as canonical.
I am not sure that this monument shows that the 27 books were considered canonical, although it does show that, as today, 27 books were read and studied, and revered.

As I mentioned, we do have evidence that early COE churches had a 22 book canon (Aphrahat and the COE liturgy for example). Further we know that today, only 22 books are considered canonical.

What evidence do we have that 27 books were at any time considered canonical as opposed to being revered?

If the other five books were elevated to the status on canon, then who did this, and further who took them out of the canon later on?
Without answers to these questions we seem to be left with no real case that they were ever considered canonical by so called "Nestorians".
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)