Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
christology
#1
Dear Paul,

Not only am I your newest member, but all the syriac ( or aramaic) christianity is very appealing and also new to me. It has been a couple of years since my baptism in Alexandria Egypt, so, should I say anything siding me with stupid, well I appologise in advance.

By now you know I am an oriental orthodox, yet the weird dude in my head kept asking, without deniying te LXX, where was the aramaic, for everyone kept talking about it without leting you know more. I say, if the LORD spoke aramaic after the Incarnation, then He spoke it to our fathers before I too. Since I am of the idea that hebrew is a dialect of aramaic that changed later on. Please help me out here and give me your opinion.

1.- Do you know anything regarding the conversations between the Coptic church and the Assyrian church?
2.- It seems to me that what Nestorius said and what the Church of the East say is really not the same and have different meanings. What is your take on the Bassar of Eraklites?
3.- What would you say if I told you that I found adifference between ( hebrew) yahid and ehad? and they relate to the greek monos and mya? here it goes:

monos and yahid: one as in quality and simple. Monos is also masculine.
mya and ehad : one as in from two, synthetic(?). Mya is femenine.

We oriental orthdox say one from two, that is the meaning of Tewahido in ethiopic, or St. KyrillosI ( Cyril) formula: MYA PHISIS TOU THEOU, LOGOU SESARKOMENE, ONE NATURE OF GOD, WORD INCARNATE.

Why do I bother you with this Poul, well when I read in your gospel interlinear the shema, it said something as :
SHMA H ISRIL MRIA ALHN MRIA HD HU.
I hope that the transliteration is ok. But if the aramaic is as the hebrew I mean ehad, then it talks about not a simple one, and since I always concidered this comandment to be Christological in character , then it is in Deuteronomy that I find the oldest confession of the myaphisis. What would you make of this and thank you and the guys for such an amazing page.

Maran ahta,
Kyrillos.
Reply
#2
Shlama (greetings) Akhi (my brother) Kyrillos,

kyrillos Wrote:Dear Paul,

Not only am I your newest member, but all the syriac ( or aramaic) christianity is very appealing and also new to me. It has been a couple of years since my baptism in Alexandria Egypt, so, should I say anything siding me with stupid, well I appologise in advance.

Very interesting. Are you Coptic/Egyptian by birth?

kyrillos Wrote:By now you know I am an oriental orthodox, yet the weird dude in my head kept asking, without deniying te LXX, where was the aramaic, for everyone kept talking about it without leting you know more. I say, if the LORD spoke aramaic after the Incarnation, then He spoke it to our fathers before I too. Since I am of the idea that hebrew is a dialect of aramaic that changed later on. Please help me out here and give me your opinion.

Imagine if the Quran was written in Latin, while the followers of Muhammad insisted that he spoke Arabic.

What kind of witness to Muhammad would the Quran be in that case, written in a language other than what he supposedly spoke?

Pretty ridiculous, huh?

kyrillos Wrote:1.- Do you know anything regarding the conversations between the Coptic church and the Assyrian church?

Unfortunately, they are not going very well. His Holiness, Pope Shenouda has made it clear that the Coptic Church will not enter into discussions with the Church of the East until it anathematizes Nestorius, which the Church of the East is not willing to do of course.

So it stands today where it stood 1,500 years ago. <!-- sHuh --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/huh.gif" alt="Huh" title="Huh" /><!-- sHuh -->

kyrillos Wrote:2.- It seems to me that what Nestorius said and what the Church of the East say is really not the same and have different meanings. What is your take on the Bassar of Eraklites?

Well, first and foremost Nestorius was a Greek man. He was Patriarch of Constantinople, not Babylon. He was not a member of the Church of the East, and he didn't even understand our language (nor do we understand his language.)

Having said that, the Church of the East has an understanding of Christology that is very close to the understanding of Nestorius. That's because he was educated by Theodore of Mopsuestia, who was in Syria and followed the Antiochene school of thought (as opposed to the Alexandrian.)

I think the Bazaar of Heracliedes was an incredible find. For the first time in history, we have been able to read Nestorius' own words and from his own mouth understand his Christology - and not according to his opponenets.

kyrillos Wrote:3.- What would you say if I told you that I found adifference between ( hebrew) yahid and ehad? and they relate to the greek monos and mya? here it goes:

monos and yahid: one as in quality and simple. Monos is also masculine.
mya and ehad : one as in from two, synthetic(?). Mya is femenine.

We oriental orthdox say one from two, that is the meaning of Tewahido in ethiopic, or St. KyrillosI ( Cyril) formula: MYA PHISIS TOU THEOU, LOGOU SESARKOMENE, ONE NATURE OF GOD, WORD INCARNATE.

So that's the origin of "myophysite!" I can see know the preference of that term to "monophysite", and the important distinction. Thanks for pointing that out. I will no longer refer to the Oriental Orthodox as "Mono-physite" but as "Myo-physite".

kyrillos Wrote:Why do I bother you with this Poul, well when I read in your gospel interlinear the shema, it said something as :
SHMA H ISRIL MRIA ALHN MRIA HD HU.
I hope that the transliteration is ok. But if the aramaic is as the hebrew I mean ehad, then it talks about not a simple one, and since I always concidered this comandment to be Christological in character , then it is in Deuteronomy that I find the oldest confession of the myaphisis. What would you make of this and thank you and the guys for such an amazing page.

Maran ahta,
Kyrillos.

That's a very interesting connection, especially in light of the fact that God said "Let US make man in OUR image, in OUR likeness."

Take care.
+Shamasha Paul bar-Shimun de'Beth-Younan
[Image: sig.jpg]
Reply
#3
Shlama akhi Paul,

To be sincere, I am Mexican, and so that would make me coptic only by second birth.

Regarding Nestorius:
1.- I was under the impresion he was either a jew or a native of Mesopotamia who got educated after his convertion in the tradition of the school of Antioch. And after the second ecumenical( ekumene means the roman world) council, it came to be that the Patriarch of New Rome had to be from the antiochian tradition, consacrated by the Patriarch of Alexandria and used to be (?) selected by the emperor or sometimes Old Rome. This is the political background I see Nestorius in. Tight,hu?

2.- Theodore of Mopsuestia said: One person, two natures, one will, one action, acording to documents I got. Basically the same as the maronites. On the other hand, Nestorius said: One person of union, two persons, two natures, two wills, two actions. And his person of union seems to me what we call in mexican law : moral person,for example, you and I make a partnership to publish books, that partnership would be the moral person, but you are you and not me or the moral person.

One more coment on the One Nature:
1.- Monophisis would mean that we worship and belive in only a god, or only a man. This is no christian at all.
2.- We worship the GODMAN, not mixed or separated.

What are your relations to:
1.- Chalzedonian orthodox.
2.- Catholics.

H.H. Mar Dinka IV and H.H. John Paul II signed a comon statement of belife inwhich they mention(parafrase!):

"We catholics call Mary Theotokos, or Mother of God, since Jesus is the God-man(one person two natures). and the Church of the East calls her the Mother of Christ our God."

What is your opinion since the catholics have been signing this kind of statements with everyone, saying that we have the same faith.

My name, Kyrillos, is a derivative of Kyrios( Lord). So if lord is Mor( west syriac?) or Mar( east syriac?) and Maran is our Lord, what woul be my name in syriac?

How would you say th prayer:" Our Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on me a sinner." in syriac? And what is it`s hirtory in the COE?

In one of your forums, you mentioned that there are two traditions regarding the origin of the Peshitta O.T., one Hyram of Lebanon asking for a translation, the other the translation coming fron Babylon with the Ezra crew. Which one do you agree with, and does the Church of the East aprove a particular one?

If Peter founded the Church at Antioch, did he start a comunity as well in Seleucida-Ctesiphon, or how does it conect with the antiochean throne of Peter?

Pray for me.

May the Lord bless you and keep you,
Kyrillos.
Reply
#4
Shlama Akhi Kyrillos,

kyrillos Wrote:Regarding Nestorius:
1.- I was under the impresion he was either a jew or a native of Mesopotamia who got educated after his convertion in the tradition of the school of Antioch. And after the second ecumenical( ekumene means the roman world) council, it came to be that the Patriarch of New Rome had to be from the antiochian tradition, consacrated by the Patriarch of Alexandria and used to be (?) selected by the emperor or sometimes Old Rome. This is the political background I see Nestorius in. Tight,hu?

Nestorius was a Greek man born in Germanica, an ancient village in Anatolia (what is now "Turkey"). He was a Pontic Greek. He spoke and wrote in Greek. He was not a Semite.

kyrillos Wrote:2.- Theodore of Mopsuestia said: One person, two natures, one will, one action, acording to documents I got. Basically the same as the maronites.

That is a formula similiar to the one used by the Church of the East.

kyrillos Wrote:On the other hand, Nestorius said: One person of union, two persons, two natures, two wills, two actions. And his person of union seems to me what we call in mexican law : moral person,for example, you and I make a partnership to publish books, that partnership would be the moral person, but you are you and not me or the moral person.

I've read everything I can about Nestorius, including his own words and I've never seen anything refer to two "persons." What is your reference?

kyrillos Wrote:One more coment on the One Nature:
1.- Monophisis would mean that we worship and belive in only a god, or only a man. This is no christian at all.
2.- We worship the GODMAN, not mixed or separated.

We worship the subject of the Incarnation, Emmanuel, "God with Us", which is God and Man in two seperate natures united together in one Person.

kyrillos Wrote:What are your relations to:
1.- Chalzedonian orthodox.
2.- Catholics.

The Church of the East is not in communion with any other Church at this time. It is independent.

kyrillos Wrote:H.H. Mar Dinka IV and H.H. John Paul II signed a comon statement of belife inwhich they mention(parafrase!):

"We catholics call Mary Theotokos, or Mother of God, since Jesus is the God-man(one person two natures). and the Church of the East calls her the Mother of Christ our God."

What is your opinion since the catholics have been signing this kind of statements with everyone, saying that we have the same faith.

I personally think it vastly oversimplifies the issues involved - but I'm glad that dialogue in brotherly fashion is happening instead of exchanges of anathemas!

kyrillos Wrote:My name, Kyrillos, is a derivative of Kyrios( Lord). So if lord is Mor( west syriac?) or Mar( east syriac?) and Maran is our Lord, what woul be my name in syriac?

Your name in Aramaic would be "Marutha."

kyrillos Wrote:How would you say th prayer:" Our Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on me a sinner." in syriac? And what is it`s hirtory in the COE?

In Aramaic you would say "Maran, ith-rakhem alee, khataya."

kyrillos Wrote:In one of your forums, you mentioned that there are two traditions regarding the origin of the Peshitta O.T., one Hyram of Lebanon asking for a translation, the other the translation coming fron Babylon with the Ezra crew. Which one do you agree with, and does the Church of the East aprove a particular one?

The origin of the Peshitta OT is a big mystery. By the time the Church of the East adopted it from former Jews who founded the church in Babylon, it's history was obscure. We're not sure who made it, but it contains many Hebraicisms so probably Mesopotamian Jews and Israelites made it before Christianity arrived in the region. The Church then adopted it as it's own (like the history of the LXX, except we don't know who made the Peshitta OT or when it was made.)

kyrillos Wrote:If Peter founded the Church at Antioch, did he start a comunity as well in Seleucida-Ctesiphon, or how does it conect with the antiochean throne of Peter?

The Church of the East, because it was in a different empire from Roman or Byzantine churches, did not share any history with them at all. We have no connection whatsoever to the See at Antioch, Alexandria or Rome.

Mar Shimon Keepa ("Peter") was a busy man who went to every place where the Jews were to preach to them since he was the Apostle to the "circumcised." The largest population of Jews outside of Palestine during that time was in Babylon. There was a HUGE population there from the captivity - even until recently (1948), there was a large population of Jews in Mesopotamia who had been there since the days of the captivity.

Mar Shimon Keepa founded the apostolic see at Babylon (or, as it was known in Sassanid Persian times as "Seleucia-Ctesiphon", but the Jews and other Semites continued to call it "Babylon.") Keepa 5:13

Take care Akhi.
+Shamasha Paul bar-Shimun de'Beth-Younan
[Image: sig.jpg]
Reply
#5
Hi Paul I'm glad I came across your site it's chock full of good informations.
Paul i have quetion for you about the christology of saint Nestorious on the trem which he used on pros?pa and pros?pon from his book bazaar .
my question is, is there any difference between pros?pa and pros?pon
Reply
#6
Hi mdenkhaya. No the word prosopon was loaned into Aramaic from Greek because in Aramaic there was no cognate for "person" in the sense the Greeks used the word.

Posted with TouchBB on my iPhone
Reply
#7
The word "Christology" comes from two Greek words meaning "Christ / Messiah" and "word" - which combine to mean "the study of Christ."It demonstrates why Jesus is the atoning sacrifice for our sins. Christology teaches us that Jesus had to be man so that He could die - and had to be God so that His death would pay for our sins.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)