Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

105 Neutral


About Addai

  • Rank
    Junior Member
  • Birthday 07/07/1967

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    near Charlotte NC
  • Interests
    Christian theology and Church history, psychology, computer games

Recent Profile Visitors

860 profile views
  1. One thing people don't realize is that manuscript preservation traditions differ across cultures and empires. In the Western Roman empire the Jews and Christians tended to bury the old manuscripts, while in the East manuscripts were treated more like Americans treat the flag (Your suppose to burn a damaged flag), they carefully recopied the text that was showing wear and burned the original when it was completed. The problem with these kind of discussions is many Christians etc. have a mind set that mirrors that of Atheist Evidentialists, its a kind of "seeing is believing" materialistic empiricism. That approach would be fine if manuscripts preservation traditions were universal, but unfortunately they are not. I will also add that there are certain variances between the ancient Greek codexes that do not make sense if Greek was the original language. Besides the quote from Josephus, Eusebius also quotes from Papias who mentions of sayings of Christ in Aramaic and a gospel written "in the tongue of the Hebrews".
  2. OK more thing I've found reading the various Aramaic NT boards etc. I've read there seems to be more poetry etc. found in the words of Christ in the Aramaic. Christ really does come across as "The Son of David" as someone who is a gifted poet, and not just some kind of wise sage. There are various poetic structures like acrostics, puns and rhyming found in a number of the red letter verses of Christ where he seems to be making his point not just in the literal message but through the poetry, rhyme, puns etc.
  3. Another insight from George Lamsa's work (which is admittedly flawed in some areas). One of the old chestnuts comes about the saying about "It's Easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than a rich man to go to heaven". The word for camel, in Aramaic is something like "gamla" and that word also means "rope" (There is less vocabulary in that language where words often have to do double duty etc.) Anyway that passage you might have guessed was rendered as "It is easier for a rope to go through an eye of the needle than a rich man to go heaven". In theory a rope can be pruned down to the size of a single thread that can go through the eye of an needle, so it is suggested that the passage is a statement about people's willingness to part with such things for the sake of the kingdom of God.
  4. I've read Aramaic translations before ocasionally they do make a big difference. here's an example Romans 5:7 Very rarely will anyone die for a righteous person, though for a good person someone might possibly dare to die. reads more logically in Aramaic translations as "Very Rarely will anyone die for a unrighteous person, though for a righteous person someone might dare to die." This sort of thing actually is easily explained if Aramaic was the original source language the words look almost identical except for one letter and the letters fro righteous and unrighteous are very similar to each other. If you are interested in this sort of thing you should check out some old web/ message boards like. http://peshitta.org/
  5. Addai


    Your food looks good! I grew up with that sort of cooking. We ate a lot of Hungarian, my dad's family was from Slovakia (the town of Gelnica) and my late Grand mother many years ago was a governess to a rich Hungarian family. They had their own Hungarian chef. (were talking before World War II or during the Early war years). One thing I remember about the Family recipe that my Oma learned from the Hungarian chef the Ghoulosh was suppose to have 3 different kinds of meat. Usually some left over pork, and some beef, the third kind often could be Kielbasa or maybe some leftover chicken if that was around. Another thing my grand parents did that made their cooking very good was they made use of all their meet drippings, leftover bones, broth water from other cooking. So that made their stuff extra good them not wasting elements from past dishes rather than pouring them down the sink, into the garbage etc. for quick clean up.
  6. I will respond to the Sabbath part of the OP by posting my response to an email from my brother who asked a few weeks ago a number of theological questions including that one. quote 2) Why do we not keep the Sabbath day holy? Quote There’s actually several issues involved in this question that I will break it down into a number of different answers based on various points. 1A) Because this was not a formal requirement given to the Gentiles that received the Gospel in the “Jerusalem Counsel” recorded in the book of Acts 15: 19 “It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. 20 Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood. 21 For the law of Moses has been preached in every city from the earliest times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath.” Commentary: if you notice the Gentiles were going “to church” so to speak where they heard such things preached “on the Sabbath”, but this is not laid out as a formal requirement made by the Jerusalem counsel in the book of Acts (which was presumably speaking by the Holy Spirit). 1B) If the previous point is insufficient, I would also add other verses of saint Paul where he speaks of the necessity of keeping Jewish Holy Days such as: Colossians 2:16, Galatians 4:9-10. 1C) Besides all that there is the “Judaizer” conflict that is all over the New Testament and early Christian history. All the verses where Paul is speaking against people “using works” are essentially referencing people who rejected the Jerusalem Counsel of the books of Acts and were requiring believers to be circumcised, go Kosher, etc. including all the Sabbath keeping stuff. 2) My second answer is that Christians DO KEEP THE SABBATH IF THEY FOLLOW THE LITURGICAL TRADITION OF EARLY CHRISTIANITY. This is the exact reason we have a “weekend”, instead of just having the Jewish Sabbath off, we get the Jewish Sabbath and “The Lord’s Day” (The Day that Christ rose from the dead) off. So, this is actually better than just having one day off, we as Christians get 2 days off. The problem however is that people have taken these days purely for themselves thus they don’t get the spiritual benefit from them.
  7. It all based on the supposed prophesy of saint Malachy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prophecy_of_the_Popes
  8. It's funny how this guy's suspension for "offensive" and "insensitive" remarks is not stopping the network from running a holiday Duck Dynasty marathon.
  9. Addai


    I will be posting some threads on my favorite Christian chants here and there in the weeks and months ahead. Why chant? some of you might ask... Well besides being beautiful, I think there is often more theological and biblical content in them than what can be typical of modern Christian music. And since many have not really listened to them before they are also new and exciting (relatively speaking). My favorite version of the Beatitudes, unfortunately its only a 30 second sample http://www.liturgicamusic.com/store/public/demos/AJ096_05.mp3 You can find the full album here and they also sell the songs separately. http://www.liturgicamusic.com/store/process.php?pname=ShowAlbumDetailsProcess-Start&CategoryID=6&AlbumID=61 A pretty good you tube version of the full chant
  10. To the OP I subscribed to the preterist view that the number of the beast is a reference to Nero Cesar(Neron Kaisar) coming from the Hebrew and Greek numeric system. (To some degree the literal man, but also that person as a type of a future leader).
  11. Not sure I can tell you a specific of Faith. When I was a teenager I was in your boat. I doubted my faith and really considered my self a secret agnostic from my Junior high school year into transferring into college from my local junior college. I basically attended church because it was "politically correct" as far as living with my folks went. I tried experimenting with things. Mostly looking at some Eastern religious ideas, Taoism was my favorite in college. Basically what happened to me was I found out that I was better off with God than without him. I of course had a charismatic christian friend that witnessed to me during that time. I don't think he really fully knew my condition about considering myself an agnostic at this time, since he knew my back in my former Lutheran days. Anyway, I think it important to get to the place where you can choose things for yourself. Being raised Christian is a blessing, but at times it can be counter productive (when it seems your being coerced into it).
  12. To the OP Turning the other cheek, prayer, trying to love people unconditionally is all good and should be encouraged. But coming from my own experience, I also believe in "setting boundaries". Many people come from bad childhoods, have had bad parenting, or are otherwise immature for some other reason and they end up taking that with them into adolescence or adulthood. These people can make careers out of trying to push your buttons, manipulate you, push you around etc. Because of this I think it is the duty of any good Christian to set some firm standards of what is tolerable behavior. This can be done in a Christ like way (at least with practice) and in many ways you can actually be doing the person a favor as far as helping them develop some social skills and emotional maturity that are necessary ingredients for success in life.
  13. To the OP Yes Christians should be nice. I think most of the damage does not come from the average "Christian on the street" (with exceptions given to people like the Westboro Baptists naturally), but Christians in specific areas of authority. 1) Christian Parochial schools and "Christian" parents. 2) Clergy (Especially those that make the papers and TV with scandals, or who have outlandish ministerial TV shows). 3) "Christian" Nations that do not live up to their Faith. (i.e. - Gandhi being turned off from Christianity because the cruelty of the British, the treatment of the Native Americans and African slaves by the U.S. etc.)
  14. I believe that the Fall is one of the major causes for suffering in the World. (I actually liken the affects of original sin to be a bit like radioactive fallout that we all must live with to some degree or another) Romans 8 20 For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope 21 that[h] the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the freedom and glory of the children of God. 22 We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. Besides that there are issues of human agency and responsibility. People by their own actions cause a lot of it. People likewise can be victims of the actions and negligence of others. (God allows some of this for reasons of free will. And ultimately can use it for the higher good). Suffering can at times be directly "part of God's redemptive plan" (like the pool of Siloam. Captivity in Egypt etc.) There are a number of potential benefits that can be attained from it. But even that I see is God ultimately taking the curse of the Fall and using it for good. God is like a martial arts master of Judo, Akido or Tai Chi who is able to turn the attacks of the enemy against them and thus prove his ultimate mastery.
  15. To the OP I don't believe in debating with atheists. I do believe in discussing issues including aspects of faith and life with them if they are open to such things. And I agree with the basic notion of apologetics and practice it myself. Debating though has a lot of one-upmanship, which is problematic and counterproductive. Not to mention there is the issue of "who frames the issue" (as far as stacking the deck in their favor, leading horses to water etc.). I will qualify a bit, and say that on occasion I think debating is beneficial. If you are facing an opponent who has a very stereotyped view of things then that is something that can be readily dealt with by presenting various counter evidence. But in general I think it's better to handle things in a friendly contrarian manner, rather than trying hard "to set the person straight". But in general I do agree with this scripture as far as arguing is concerned (including debating) Proverbs 26:17 Like one who grabs a stray dog by the ears is someone who rushes into a quarrel not their own.
  • Create New...