Posts: 84
Threads: 14
Joined: Jan 2009
Reputation:
0
Peace and Blessings,
This is proof that Syriac Christians, like Greeks, changed words around in their books to accord with their biases:
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://syrcom.cua.edu/Hugoye/Vol12No2/HV12N2Penn.pdf">http://syrcom.cua.edu/Hugoye/Vol12No2/HV12N2Penn.pdf</a><!-- m -->
Kevin
Posts: 483
Threads: 118
Joined: Sep 2003
Reputation:
0
Kara Wrote:Peace and Blessings,
This is proof that Syriac Christians, like Greeks, changed words around in their books:
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://syrcom.cua.edu/Hugoye/Vol12No2/HV12N2Penn.pdf">http://syrcom.cua.edu/Hugoye/Vol12No2/HV12N2Penn.pdf</a><!-- m -->
Kevin
Well from what I can see that article doesn't have much to say about the peshitta, except that it varies from the Old Syriac.
So if someone altered the peshitta to make it more like the greek texts because he was under the influence of byzantine theology then , in your words that would be shameful.
So if Rabbulla changed the peshitta to bring it into line with his greek speaking byzantine texts and friends then does that mean that just he (and those in on it) are shameful, rather than "Syriac Christians" WRT the peshitta?
Posts: 84
Threads: 14
Joined: Jan 2009
Reputation:
0
Quote:Well from what I can see that article doesn't have much to say about the peshitta, except that it varies from the Old Syriac.
So if someone altered the peshitta to make it more like the greek texts because he was under the influence of byzantine theology then , in your words that would be shameful.
So if Rabbulla changed the peshitta to bring it into line with his greek speaking byzantine texts and friends then does that mean that just he (and those in on it) are shameful, rather than "Syriac Christians" WRT the peshitta?
Peace and blessing, Judge
This article does not address the textual integrity of the Peshitta. Rather, it addresses the integrity of Syriac "readers" who handled and effaced manuscripts to release cognitive dissonance. In other words, this is proof that some ancient Syriac Christians could alter their texts under the right circumstances, in spite of their strong prohibitions against the alterations of manuscripts. As social psychology teaches us, a person's attitude is a weak indicator of his or her actions in a given situation.
The moral is that human is human, regardless of culture and ethnicity.
Posts: 483
Threads: 118
Joined: Sep 2003
Reputation:
0
Kara Wrote:In other words, this is proof that some ancient Syriac Christians could alter their texts under the right circumstances, .
Some (maybe even most) of the alleged alterations, like those pointed out by Bart Ehrman (who is referenced in the article you linked to) are not alterations at all, but variations caused by the greek being a translation of the peshitta.
As has been pointed out on this forum before, perhaps the clearest case of alteration in the Nt is hebrews 2:9 and Acts 20:28.
These alterations occur in Syriac and greek texts. So it is no secret really that christains who spoke Syriac, did on occaision alter even the NT.
Posts: 84
Threads: 14
Joined: Jan 2009
Reputation:
0
Quote:Some (maybe even most) of the alleged alterations, like those pointed out by Bart Ehrman (who is referenced in the article you linked to) are not alterations at all, but variations caused by the greek being a translation of the peshitta.
As has been pointed out on this forum before, perhaps the clearest case of alteration in the Nt is hebrews 2:9 and Acts 20:28.
These alterations occur in Syriac and greek texts. So it is no secret really that christains who spoke Syriac, did on occaision alter even the NT.
Did you read the entire article? Syriac Christians, threatened by their Muslim overlords, altered their texts to self-affirm themselves. As for the Greek being a translation of the Peshitta, it is without doubt that you're convinced. This is great, but understand that your conclusion is based on correlational reasoning, such as:
a) The Greek texts has semitic structures. The Peshitta has semitic structures. Therefore, the Greek must be a translation of the Peshitta
b) The Greek texts lacks certain semiticisms, whereas the Peshitta preserves them, therefore the Greek must be a corruption of the Peshitta.
This is like saying: "The sky is blue, therefore, the color blue must come from the sky."
We must agree to disagree.
Posts: 61
Threads: 9
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
Hello Kevin,
I did not read the article you posted, but I will just go ahead and assume it was written by someone that doesn't even correctly understand the theology of the Church of the East. Moreover, historically there is only one branch of the Holy Church that was established outside of the Roman influence (i.e. the Church of the East). Furthermore, for the first 600 years of our existance there was no such thing as Muslims, so how can you rationally think that they influenced our religious texts when (at least according to you) it was already standardized a century before Muhammad even was born! That is the type of ignorance that bothers me when Westerners try to explain Eastern history to Easterners.
Imagine me telling you that I know more about you than you do (yet I have never met you and don't understand your language), simply because I study the way one of your cousins acts! Unfortunately, that is exactly what you and so many others do when comparing us using the Syriac Orthodox Church as the "authority" of all Aramaic speaking communities.
I honestly mean no disrespect to you or any of my brothers and sisters in Christ, but objective reasoning precludes me from taking anything you say with anything other than a grain of salt.
God Bless,
-Nimrod Warda-
Posts: 84
Threads: 14
Joined: Jan 2009
Reputation:
0
Nimrod,
Peace and blessings. Although you disagree with me, you're still a gentleman, which speaks to your character. Thank you for being cordial. Regarding the article, it has little to do with religious texts, such as the Peshitta. It demonstrates that some Syriac Christians altered several other of their manuscripts, such as letters, poetry, etc, to self-affirm themselves in the face of Islamic rule. At the end of the article, it shows pictures of the altered manuscripts.
Kevin
Posts: 2,812
Threads: 271
Joined: Sep 2003
Reputation:
2
Shlama Kevin. Haven't we been saying for ten years on this forum that some Christians of Aramaic heritage have altered their copies of scripture for various reasons?
Posted with TouchBB on my iPhone
Posts: 84
Threads: 14
Joined: Jan 2009
Reputation:
0
Paul Younan Wrote:Shlama Kevin. Haven't we been saying for ten years on this forum that some Christians of Aramaic heritage have altered their copies of scripture for various reasons?
Posted with TouchBB on my iPhone
Peace and blessings, Paul.
I can only recall, time and time again, of the suggestion that it is beyond Syriac Christians to alter their books. This suggestion was meant to set the Syriac tradition apart from the Greek tradition. It laid the groundwork for one of your arguments against Old Syriac, since the parchment displayed signs of erasing in the background. This, for you, was one reason why Old Syriac and the Peshitta beared no genetic relationship because assuming that the Peshitta was always the authoritative version for the Syriac Church, they would never treat it as they evidently treated "Old Scratch."
Kevin
Posts: 2,812
Threads: 271
Joined: Sep 2003
Reputation:
2
Not to mention the CoE in the Parthian empire would have said, "Leo Who?"...."Chalcedon what?"
That this was the Jacobites/Monophysites in the Byzantine empire is beyond question.
Kevin, not all "Syriac" Christians are the same. You're talking about several different groups across two distinct geographic areas. Maronite in Lebanon. Arameans in Syria. Assyrians in north Iraq. Chaldeans in south Iraq. Melkites in Syria. Then there are the various groups in India, etc.
We are not "Syriac" - we are "Assyrian". Totally different. Not the same people, not the same Church, not the same country, not the same history.
+Shamasha Paul bar-Shimun de'Beth-Younan
![[Image: sig.jpg]](http://www.peshitta.org/images/sig.jpg)
Posts: 84
Threads: 14
Joined: Jan 2009
Reputation:
0
Paul Younan Wrote:Not to mention the CoE in the Parthian empire would have said, "Leo Who?"...."Chalcedon what?"
That this was the Jacobites/Monophysites in the Byzantine empire is beyond question.
Kevin, not all "Syriac" Christians are the same. You're talking about several different groups across two distinct geographic areas. Maronite in Lebanon. Arameans in Syria. Assyrians in north Iraq. Chaldeans in south Iraq. Melkites in Syria. Then there are the various groups in India, etc.
We are not "Syriac" - we are "Assyrian". Totally different. Not the same people, not the same Church, not the same country, not the same history.
Peace and Blessings,
Paul, on a personal note, I am glad to hear from you. I hope you and your family are well. How old are your children now? God has granted them favor by making them yours! First, I want to apologize if I have offended you by referring to Assyrians as "Syriac." I placed all of the aforementioned groups under the name "Syriac" as a means of convenience, not as a racial slur. Pardon my error.
I will investigate your claim about the COE and the Council of Chalcedon.
Posts: 84
Threads: 14
Joined: Jan 2009
Reputation:
0
Peace and Blessings,
In regards to the COE, I am changing my course of research. Paul says that the CoE has always been virtually isolated from the other Aramaic-speaking groups. My goal is to confirm or refute his statement with solid research. I will first consider the school of Edessa and the school of Nisibis.
Kevin
Posts: 61
Threads: 9
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
Kevin,
With regard to your comment... "In regards to the COE, I am changing my course of research. Paul says that the CoE has always been virtually isolated from the other Aramaic-speaking groups. My goal is to confirm or refute his statement with solid research. I will first consider the school of Edessa and the school of Nisibis." ...I just wanted you to realize that there was in fact "relations" between us and other branches of the Holy Church, but this was mostly done to maintain a Christian brotherhood. That said, when it comes to authority and doctorine we have always been independant, but have agreed with others as well (i.e. Theodore of Mopsuestia, Nestorius, etc). The funny thing is that is why we were "kicked out" of the school of Edessa (a border city which we "shared" with those that are under the authority of Antioch) and established the school of Nisibis further EAST. Basically, what I am saying is that you need to be a bit cautious in taking everything you read as Gospel (yes, that is another pun). My own personal suggestion would be that you take a step back and realize that the Church of the East is kind of unique in it's understanding of God and our scripture, being a Semetic church.
May God bless you and keep you near,
-Nimrod Warda-
Posts: 84
Threads: 14
Joined: Jan 2009
Reputation:
0
Assalamu 'alaykum wa rahamatullahi wa barakatuhu,
Nimrod, I will take your word for it. It is unwise to tackle this and the main thesis of this forum. It is best to choose my battles. Besides, it is a bit disrespectful for me to dispute your heritage.
May God grant you and yours Paradise
Kevin
Posts: 84
Threads: 14
Joined: Jan 2009
Reputation:
0
Rafa,
Neither Paul nor Nimrod can refute this claim. Please refer to A.D. Lee's Information and Frontiers: Roman Foreign Relations in Late Antiquity
I am going to transcribe a quote from Samuel N. C. Lieu's review of the book:
The events surrounding the martyrdom of the Catholicos Babowai in 484 charged with treachery, and the role played by his rival Barsauma, the bishop of Nisibis, who was later accused of being a paid agent of the King of Kings, are clearly relevant here and deserve to be mentioned in connection with the complex role of the Church in the frontier regions. Babowai was elected Catholicos of the Persian Church in Iraq (which then had not yet fully embraced Nestorianism) under the tolerant Hormizd III in 457, but as a convert from Zoroastrianism he was not favoured by Peroz (459-84) and when persecution broke out he wrote to the Roman emperor Zeno requesting intercession. The letter, hidden in the cane of a monk, was intercepted at Nisibis which indicates that the Church probably exercised more effective border-control than the Persian marzban, whose vigilance the Catholicos had every hope of evading. The disclosure of the letter led to the arrest of Babowai and his eventual execution when he refused to re-apostasize to Zoroastrianism. Barsauma, the bishop of Nisibis who hankered after the Catholicate, was generally alleged to have brought the exposure to the notice of Peroz and gained a reputation as a majot informer for the King of Kings. As a high- ranking official he kept a close eye on cross- border movements, especially those of the Arabs, and he was sufficiently trusted by the Persian authorities to conduct missions to the Byzantine capital. Although our sources do not explicitly accuse him of undertaking intelligence gathering for the Shahanshah, it would have been extremely likely that he would have transmitted some information of importance ta his master Peroz to bolster his claims of loyalty vis a vis the treachery of Babowai. The cross- frontier travels of another famous graduate of the School of Nisibis, the Catholicos Mar Aba cannot simply be noted as yet another instance of the ease with which clerics could cross frontiers in pursuit of higher theological ot medical training (cf. Lee, 58-9). The Persian authorities knew their loyalty could be trusted and, in the case of Mar Aba, he was unlikely to have gained much sympathy for the cause of Nestorian Christians from an orthodox Justinian whose wife Theodora was a known Monophysite sympathizer. The entire Babowai episode which is so germane to the subject of Lee's book and illustrates so well the complex and conflicting loyalties of the frontier Christian communities inexplicably receives no coverage in the relevant section.
|
