The Assyrian Church of the East

deusveritasest

Taxiarches
Joined
Feb 10, 2008
Messages
7,521
Reaction score
0
Points
0
ialmisry said:
Uh, no.  The Arab and Middle Eastern resident Greeks are Rum orthodox. The Syriac are "suryaan."
That's what I thought...

ialmisry said:
And they weren't "part" of the Assyrian church to break off from it.
Unless, perhaps, he has a similar ecclesiastically supremacist view as the EO and OO whereby the ACE is the last remaining representation of the original Apostolic faith.
 

deusveritasest

Taxiarches
Joined
Feb 10, 2008
Messages
7,521
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Alveus Lacuna said:
Rafa999 said:
The "Chaldeans" are Assyrians who transferred their allegiance to the Patriarch of Rome instead of the Patriarch of Babylon and also have a few things not allowed in the ACOE like Icons, and a slightly different canon from the ACOE (the last 5 NT books are not in the COE reading cycle but are pious books reccomended for reading and often cited to respect sister churches).
When did your church stop using icons?
What makes you think that they started at some point?
 

Irish Hermit

Merarches
Joined
Oct 11, 2003
Messages
10,980
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Middle Earth
Alveus Lacuna said:
Rafa999 said:
The "Chaldeans" are Assyrians who transferred their allegiance to the Patriarch of Rome instead of the Patriarch of Babylon and also have a few things not allowed in the ACOE like Icons, and a slightly different canon from the ACOE (the last 5 NT books are not in the COE reading cycle but are pious books reccomended for reading and often cited to respect sister churches).
When did your church stop using icons?
The Church ogf the East stopped using icons under pressure of conforming to surrounding Islamic society.  I have forgotten what centuries this was taking place.... anybody have a reference about this?    All that remained in the churches were quite simple crosses.

These days Assyrian faithful have icons in their home, the local Assyrian priest has an entire wall of them, but in the church itself he has only some quite plain wooden crosses.
 

PeterTheAleut

Hypatos
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 8, 2006
Messages
37,280
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
48
Location
Portland, Oregon
Rafa999 said:
The agnus Dei was introduced from Syria, they were all Assyrian. There is no point in searching exceedingly old manuscripts of the COE since it burns its manuscripts whenever they fall in disuse. This is why some of the best manuscripts were brought from the Middle East by Western missionaries, because only newer manuscripts are used. The Genocide of 1915 did not help matters either. We hold the oldest Christian liturgy in use in the ENTIRE world, the Anaphora of Mar Mari and Mar Addai who were disciples of Jesus.

On Papias: he said material was being TRANSLATED. It was his belief that Matthew was in Hebrew, this does not exclude the possibility of more material being in this tongue and being subject to translation.
But you never asserted the possibility that the Gospels of Mark, Luke, and John may have been translated from another language to Greek.  You asserted that Papias said that they definitely were.  Now you're backtracking from your original assertion.  Am I to read this as an admission that you can't prove your initial thesis?
 

PeterTheAleut

Hypatos
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 8, 2006
Messages
37,280
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
48
Location
Portland, Oregon
Rafa999 said:
Attention all Roman Catholics: by the decree of Mar Papa Nicholas IV in 1288, the Catholicos Patriarch of the East has jurisdiction over ALL Christians of the East, from Baghdad all the way to China. Failure to obey this most holy Papal Bull is reason enough for excommunication.

Thats for you papist  :D
I certainly think this Bull, but I wouldn't call it Papal.
 

PeterTheAleut

Hypatos
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 8, 2006
Messages
37,280
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
48
Location
Portland, Oregon
Rafa999 said:
King Abgar spoke Aramaic. The Didache was in Aramaic (our Syriac version=correct). I have proof, Eusebius in his history says he translated the letters and other documents from the Edessene Archive.
Well, if Eusebius said this and you have proof that he did, I'm sure you can post this proof here so we can read it ourselves.  Otherwise, you speak as a person with no credibility.

D'oh!  I forgot.  You guys burn evidence.
 

deusveritasest

Taxiarches
Joined
Feb 10, 2008
Messages
7,521
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Irish Hermit said:
The Church ogf the East stopped using icons under pressure of conforming to surrounding Islamic society.  I have forgotten what centuries this was taking place.... anybody have a reference about this?    All that remained in the churches were quite simple crosses.

These days Assyrian faithful have icons in their home, the local Assyrian priest has an entire wall of them, but in the church itself he has only some quite plain wooden crosses.
Again, I ask, where do you get the idea that the ACE actually did use icons at some point?
 

Irish Hermit

Merarches
Joined
Oct 11, 2003
Messages
10,980
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Middle Earth
deusveritasest said:
Irish Hermit said:
The Church ogf the East stopped using icons under pressure of conforming to surrounding Islamic society.  I have forgotten what centuries this was taking place.... anybody have a reference about this?    All that remained in the churches were quite simple crosses.

These days Assyrian faithful have icons in their home, the local Assyrian priest has an entire wall of them, but in the church itself he has only some quite plain wooden crosses.
Again, I ask, where do you get the idea that the ACE actually did use icons at some point?
A very small amount of information here, from Irish Melkite...

http://forums.catholic.com/showpost.php?s=4005385ac1dcc5e3af2381dd88ef69ab&p=3145428&postcount=64
 

ialmisry

Strategos
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
41,794
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Chicago
deusveritasest said:
ialmisry said:
Uh, no.  The Arab and Middle Eastern resident Greeks are Rum orthodox. The Syriac are "suryaan."
That's what I thought...

ialmisry said:
And they weren't "part" of the Assyrian church to break off from it.
Unless, perhaps, he has a similar ecclesiastically supremacist view as the EO and OO whereby the ACE is the last remaining representation of the original Apostolic faith.
....and can prove it.
 

minasoliman

Stratopedarches
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
May 24, 2004
Messages
20,198
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
NJ
I never thought using the native language to translate the gospels and other writings for people was a heresy to the Assyrian Church.

Rafa999, what's your native language?
 

Nazarene

High Elder
Joined
Aug 29, 2009
Messages
520
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
38
Location
Africa
ATTENTION EVERYONE

Please read this page: http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/timothy_i_apology_01_text.htm and please tell me what you think of it. It is a very theologically intense debate between Mahdi, the 3rd Abbasid Caliph and Mar Timothy I, the then Catholicos Patriarch of the COE which took place in 781 CE. If you still have doubts regarding what the COE really believes, and whether their Christology is compatible with EO and OO Christology then this 41 page debate should clear things up for once and for all - everything concerning what the COE really believe about Messiah and the Godhead is covered in there. Aside from a few typos, the fact that qnoma/qnome was mistranslated as person/persons (as usual!), and the uneccessary translation of yodh as iota, this is the real faith of the COE. So please read it and we'll talk.

Shalom.
 

bogdan

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Sep 9, 2009
Messages
1,614
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
USA
minasoliman said:
I never thought using the native language to translate the gospels and other writings for people was a heresy to the Assyrian Church.
That, alongside Rafa's insistence that God could not become man, makes the COE seem very similar to Islamic beliefs.

It emphasizes God's transcendence over and above his condescension to humanity. EO'y allows both aspects to sit side-by-side in harmony. The Akathist of the Annunciation says: "for thus did God condescend, and not merely descend".
 

Papist

Toumarches
Joined
Aug 24, 2006
Messages
13,771
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
39
Location
Albuquerque, New Mexico
bogdan said:
minasoliman said:
I never thought using the native language to translate the gospels and other writings for people was a heresy to the Assyrian Church.
That, alongside Rafa's insistence that God could not become man, makes the COE seem very similar to Islamic beliefs.

It emphasizes God's transcendence over and above his condescension to humanity. EO'y allows both aspects to sit side-by-side in harmony. The Akathist of the Annunciation says: "for thus did God condescend, and not merely descend".
In EO theology did God become incarnate through his Essence? Energies? Both?
 

Nazarene

High Elder
Joined
Aug 29, 2009
Messages
520
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
38
Location
Africa
bogdan said:
minasoliman said:
I never thought using the native language to translate the gospels and other writings for people was a heresy to the Assyrian Church.
That, alongside Rafa's insistence that God could not become man, makes the COE seem very similar to Islamic beliefs.

It emphasizes God's transcendence over and above his condescension to humanity. EO'y allows both aspects to sit side-by-side in harmony. The Akathist of the Annunciation says: "for thus did God condescend, and not merely descend".
Read the debate mentioned above between a COE Patriarch and a Muslim Caliph and see for yourself if the COE's beliefs about God are really that similar to the that of the Muslims.
 

Alveus Lacuna

Taxiarches
Joined
Sep 17, 2008
Messages
7,416
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Missouri, USA
Nazarene said:
It is a very theologically intense debate between Mahdi, the 3rd Abbasid Caliph and Mar Timothy I, the then Catholicos Patriarch of the COE which took place in 781 CE.
First, 781 is certainly after the delusional Muhammad's heresies came to have an overwhelming amount of influence in the region.  I'd hardly call it a "pure" source that shows primitive Nazarene Christianity.

Secondly, why are you using the BCE/CE system?  It was created by apostates and non-Christians as a way to remove the confession of the lordship of Jesus Christ from public dialog.  It is just surprising to me as a confessing "Christian" (I use the quotes only because I know many of you Messianics are not comfortable with all the theological baggage that is attached to it), you would opt for this system.
 

witega

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Sep 9, 2008
Messages
1,617
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Nazarene said:
ATTENTION EVERYONE

Please read this page: http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/timothy_i_apology_01_text.htm and please tell me what you think of it. It is a very theologically intense debate between Mahdi, the 3rd Abbasid Caliph and Mar Timothy I, the then Catholicos Patriarch of the COE which took place in 781 CE. If you still have doubts regarding what the COE really believes, and whether their Christology is compatible with EO and OO Christology then this 41 page debate should clear things up for once and for all - everything concerning what the COE really believe about Messiah and the Godhead is covered in there. Aside from a few typos, the fact that qnoma/qnome was mistranslated as person/persons (as usual!), and the uneccessary translation of yodh as iota, this is the real faith of the COE. So please read it and we'll talk.

Shalom.
Nazarene,

I still think you are looking in the wrong place. Most of us are not nearly as concerned about what Mar Timothy in the 8th century or Mar Babai in the 7th century believed as in what Patriarch Dinkha IV and the flock under him believe *now*. To the extent that the current COE points to various historical documents as 'authoritative', then they are useful for understanding this--but only if we understand how the current COE interprets those documents.

To put it another way, the Baptists point to the historical texts of the New Testament and say 'we believe that. Absolutely. 100%'--but when we explore how they interpret those texts we find that how they interpret those texts is not consonant with the Orthodox (and historical) interpretation of those same texts.

So Mar Timothy may or may not have been absolutely 'orthodox' in his beliefs (obviously, I haven't had time to look at the text), but we still have an actual member of the COE making statements that are simply unacceptable from an Orthodox POV. Perhaps Rafa999 misunderstands the actual teachings of his church. Perhaps he is accurately representing the teaching of his church which has lost the understanding held by Mar Timothy. Perhaps you are the one misinterpreting Mar Timothy reading him through the distorting lens of a questionable translation and your own preconceptions. But only reference to what the COE says and teaches now will explain why there is a discrepancy.
 
Top