Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The Eastern Canons
#1
Hi Paul,
I am in the process of puuting together a response pointing out the inaccuracies of this link.
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/NTcanon.html#XVII">http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/ ... .html#XVII</a><!-- m -->

I am hoping that if the facts are presented more accurate information will be posted there.

There seem to be a number of problems, any suggestions?
These are the ones that I see.
1. There is no evideence there even was a syriac diatessaron
2.There is no evidence it was ever used in any church (let alone being the only one used)
3.No evidence Rabulla rooted it out.
4. There is evidence it was not supressed in the persian church
5.It obviously in use by east and west long before Rabullas time.

Is this statement correct.

"After the Council of Ephesus in 431 A.D., the Eastern Syrian church, in turn divided between the Nestorian and the Syrian Orthodox Churches, broke away, and retained this canon of only 22 books (the Peshitta) until the present day."

Any other thoughts?

Michael
Reply
#2
Shlama Akhi Michael,

judge Wrote:1. There is no evidence there even was a syriac diatessaron

Well, there actually is plenty of evidence of an Aramaic Diatesseron. And that the Damkhaltey ("Diatesseraon" in Latin) was a harmony of the 4 Peshitta Gospels. ( see http://www.peshitta.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=401 )

judge Wrote:There is no evidence it was ever used in any church (let alone being the only one used)

It was used almost exclusively in some geographical areas under the control of Rabbula of Edessa (Syrian Orthodox Church - Monophysites.) He obliterated it from areas under his control.

judge Wrote:No evidence Rabulla rooted it out.

He rooted it out in his corner of the world - the Eastern edge of the Byzantine empire. He had no control of it over the border in Persia (a different empire) where the CoE reigned.

judge Wrote:There is evidence it was not supressed in the persian church

Absolutely. It was translated into Arabic in the 11th century, from the original Aramaic. ( again, see: http://www.peshitta.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=401 )

judge Wrote:It obviously in use by east and west long before Rabullas time

Yes, absolutely. And it was a harmony of the Peshitta gospels.

judge Wrote:Is this statement correct.

"After the Council of Ephesus in 431 A.D., the Eastern Syrian church, in turn divided between the Nestorian and the Syrian Orthodox Churches, broke away, and retained this canon of only 22 books (the Peshitta) until the present day."


Only slightly. The statement makes the assumption that such a thing as "the Eastern Syrian church" even existed. There was never such a thing as "the Eastern Syrian church" - there was the "Syrian church" in Syria, residing in the Byzantine empire....and then there was a totally different church called "the Church of the East" in the Sassanid Persian empire. Two totally unrelated and different churches.

judge Wrote:Any other thoughts?

Yes, the article places lots of emphasis on what "Cyril of Jerusalem", "Athanasius of Alexandria" and "Clement of Rome" did for the Western canon. None of that made a hill of beans worth of difference in Persia - where the independent Church of the East formed their own canon long before those people were even born.
+Shamasha Paul bar-Shimun de'Beth-Younan
[Image: sig.jpg]
Reply
#3
Paul Younan Wrote:Shlama Akhi Michael,



judge Wrote:Is this statement correct.

"After the Council of Ephesus in 431 A.D., the Eastern Syrian church, in turn divided between the Nestorian and the Syrian Orthodox Churches, broke away, and retained this canon of only 22 books (the Peshitta) until the present day."


Only slightly. The statement makes the assumption that such a thing as "the Eastern Syrian church" even existed. There was never such a thing as "the Eastern Syrian church" - there was the "Syrian church" in Syria, residing in the Byzantine empire....and then there was a totally different church called "the Church of the East" in the Sassanid Persian empire. Two totally unrelated and different churches.

Thanks for the clarifications Paul.
So is it that western scholars have never really understood the COE and it's relation to other "syrian" churches?

Is this the problem IYHO that the syrian churches are all gouped as tough they were one body when this was not/never the case?
Reply
#4
judge Wrote:
Paul Younan Wrote:Shlama Akhi Michael,



judge Wrote:Is this statement correct.

"After the Council of Ephesus in 431 A.D., the Eastern Syrian church, in turn divided between the Nestorian and the Syrian Orthodox Churches, broke away, and retained this canon of only 22 books (the Peshitta) until the present day."


Only slightly. The statement makes the assumption that such a thing as "the Eastern Syrian church" even existed. There was never such a thing as "the Eastern Syrian church" - there was the "Syrian church" in Syria, residing in the Byzantine empire....and then there was a totally different church called "the Church of the East" in the Sassanid Persian empire. Two totally unrelated and different churches.

Thanks for the clarifications Paul.
So is it that western scholars have never really understood the COE and it's relation to other "syrian" churches?

Is this the problem IYHO that the syrian churches are all gouped as though they were one body when this was not/never the case?
Reply
#5
The people who try and group the Syrian Orthodox Church (Byzantine) and the Church of the East (Persian) generally fall into one of two categories:

(1) Those who are geographically and historically challenged

(2) Those who desire to downplay the independent history of the Persian Church, or to assimilate it into their own.

There are various reasons for the existence of category two. For the sake of following my own rules, I'll let you imagine what they might be. Always consider the source of such statements, and you will "get" it.

For the record, there has never been, is not now, nor will there ever be an "Eastern Syrian Church." There is no such nationality or geography as "Eastern Syrian."

There is a geographic location known as Syria and another one known as Persia (old Assyria, Babylonia, etc.) Two different empires with two different churches.
+Shamasha Paul bar-Shimun de'Beth-Younan
[Image: sig.jpg]
Reply
#6
Paul Younan Wrote:For the record, there has never been, is not now, nor will there ever be an "Eastern Syrian Church." There is no such nationality or geography as "Eastern Syrian."

There is a geographic location known as Syria and another one known as Persia (old Assyria, Babylonia, etc.) Two different empires with two different churches.

Thanks again Paul, one last question.

So there is the 1.COE (wrongly referred to as Nestorian)
2.the SOC, (which is/was centred where?)...and
3.the "western monophysite syrain church. What is that?

I ahve taken these terms from the link I posted.
Reply
#7
(1) CoE, wrongly referred to as "Nestorian", centered in Persia.

(2) SOC, wrongly referred to as "Jacobite", centered in Syria.

(3) "Western Monophysite Syrian Church" is a synonym for #2.
+Shamasha Paul bar-Shimun de'Beth-Younan
[Image: sig.jpg]
Reply
#8
Hi again Paul and thanks for your replies.

judge Wrote:There is no evidence it was ever used in any church (let alone being the only one used)
Paul Wrote:It was used almost exclusively in some geographical areas under the control of Rabbula of Edessa (Syrian Orthodox Church - Monophysites.) He obliterated it from areas under his control.

The link makes the argument that the doctrine of Addai says that the diatesseron was the only "gospel" used by Syriac Churches early on.


But the Law,79 and the Prophets, and the Gospel, which ye read every day before the people, and the Epistles of Paul, which Simon Peter sent us from the city of Rome, and the Acts of the twelve Apostles, which John, the son of Zebedee, sent us from Ephesus; these Books read ye in the churches of Christ, and with these read not any others, as there is not any other in which the truth that ye hold is written, except these books, which retain you in the faith to which ye have been called.


<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/addai_2_text.htm">http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/addai_2_text.htm</a><!-- m -->

Is it commonly accepted this refers to the Diatessaron and is this document associated with those geographical areas that Rabulla rooted out it from?
Reply
#9
Shlama Akhi Michael,

Yes, this story deals with Edessa (in the Roman empire.) Edessa contained the community that later became the SOC during Rabbula's time (he later earned the nickname - "the Tyrant of Edessa.")

The CoE was centered in the regions of Arbela and Babylon (across the border in the Persian empire.)

Abgar was king of Edessa (a Roman client kingdom), while Nersai was king of Assyria (a Persian client kingdom, with its capital in Arbela.) (ref. footnote #65)

As you probably already know - bishops, metropolitans and the other church hierarchy in those days were assigned to cities and regions. No bishop in the Roman empire had any jurisdiction over Christian communities in Persian cities. Likewise, no bishop in the Persian empire had any jurisdiction over Christian communities in Roman cities.

This is the reason why Rabbula could not have possibly had any role in destroying copies of the Diatesseron in the Persian empire, where the CoE had its own bishops who were his enemies.
+Shamasha Paul bar-Shimun de'Beth-Younan
[Image: sig.jpg]
Reply
#10
shlomo oh Paul,

The Syriac Maronites and the Assyrians actually do share some religious text.

We share a document which is called by many names, but which is the same:

-Assyrian: The Hallowing of Addai and Mari/The Anaphora of the Blessed Apostles.

-Maronite: The Anaphora of Peter III (Sharar)/The Anaphora of the Disciples at the Death of the Mother of God. <- some believe that it was composed by the Twelve Apostles.

We also share the Peshitta! <!-- s:biggrin: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/biggrin.gif" alt=":biggrin:" title="Big Grin" /><!-- s:biggrin: -->

I also believe the ancient book of directions was used both by the Assyrian and the Maronites.

The Syriac Maronite hymns differ in sound from the sounds of the Syriac Orthodox/Catholic (the Syriac Orthodox/Catholic sounds have been hellenised), where as the Syriac Maronite conserved the ancient sounds which are similar to that of the Assyrians (but as time passes, and due to our interaction with Latinization our hymn sounds have been sped up a bit)

Actually there's even an ancient document where the Patriarch of the Syriac Maronite Church sent a letter to the Patriarch of Assyrian Church calling him "my Syriac brother". It's too bad that I don't have a copy of that manuscript.

There might be some other stuff, but I'll have to do some research.

poosh bashlomo,
keefa-moroon

Paul Younan Wrote:Shlama Akhi Michael,

Yes, this story deals with Edessa (in the Roman empire.) Edessa contained the community that later became the SOC during Rabbula's time (he later earned the nickname - "the Tyrant of Edessa.")

The CoE was centered in the regions of Arbela and Babylon (across the border in the Persian empire.)

Abgar was king of Edessa (a Roman client kingdom), while Nersai was king of Assyria (a Persian client kingdom, with its capital in Arbela.) (ref. footnote #65)

As you probably already know - bishops, metropolitans and the other church hierarchy in those days were assigned to cities and regions. No bishop in the Roman empire had any jurisdiction over Christian communities in Persian cities. Likewise, no bishop in the Persian empire had any jurisdiction over Christian communities in Roman cities.

This is the reason why Rabbula could not have possibly had any role in destroying copies of the Diatesseron in the Persian empire, where the CoE had its own bishops who were his enemies.
Reply
#11
Shlama Akhan Abudar,

Oh absolutely. There are many things we have in common with each other and other groups like the Syriac Orthodox and even the Melchites. However, my point was mainly on jurisdiction. The two groups of believers in the two different empires had different leadership....and no bishop had jurisdiction across any border.

This is why I said, it would have been impossible for Rabbula to have completely suppressed the Damkhalty. He had absolutely no authority in Persia. Not only didn't he have any authority whatsoever - they hated his guts, and they probably would have killed him if he even stepped foot into Assyria or Babylon.

This is why you still see the Damkhalty in existence in the CoE up until the 11th century - a full 600 years after Rabbula was dead.
+Shamasha Paul bar-Shimun de'Beth-Younan
[Image: sig.jpg]
Reply
#12
bshayno wbashlomo ahan Paul,

That sounds good. You're right Rabbula wouldn't have been able to control what happend in the Assyrian Church.

I like the proof that you've showed about Old Scratch in regards to Rabbula.

Tell me aho deelan, how are you feeling?

poosh bashlomo,
keefa-moroon

Paul Younan Wrote:Shlama Akhan Abudar,

Oh absolutely. There are many things we have in common with each other and other groups like the Syriac Orthodox and even the Melchites. However, my point was mainly on jurisdiction. The two groups of believers in the two different empires had different leadership....and no bishop had jurisdiction across any border.

This is why I said, it would have been impossible for Rabbula to have completely suppressed the Damkhalty. He had absolutely no authority in Persia. Not only didn't he have any authority whatsoever - they hated his guts, and they probably would have killed him if he even stepped foot into Assyria or Babylon.

This is why you still see the Damkhalty in existence in the CoE up until the 11th century - a full 600 years after Rabbula was dead.
Reply
#13
Shlama Akhan,

No surgery yet, they are still deciding what they want to do as far as the type of surgery they will recommend - I'm hoping that it's not too painful a procedure. They might do some minimally invasive surgeries first, and if those do not work, then they might do the "big" surgery. I find out for sure on the 25th of this month. Thanks for your continued prayers.
+Shamasha Paul bar-Shimun de'Beth-Younan
[Image: sig.jpg]
Reply
#14
tayboota dmaran wtahnanta dkene wzadeqe 'amakh ah whabr Paul byawme meteete!

keefa-moroon


Paul Younan Wrote:Shlama Akhan,

No surgery yet, they are still deciding what they want to do as far as the type of surgery they will recommend - I'm hoping that it's not too painful a procedure. They might do some minimally invasive surgeries first, and if those do not work, then they might do the "big" surgery. I find out for sure on the 25th of this month. Thanks for your continued prayers.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)