The Inside Assyria Discussion Forum #5

=> reply to maggie

Posted by pancho (Guest) - Wednesday, February 21 2007, 16:13:16 (CET)
from 189.162.12.50 - dsl-189-162-12-50.prod-infinitum.com.mx

Mexico -

Windows XP -

Internet Explorer
Website:
Website title:

=> Re: Please read rarefully and ALL the way to the end

Re: Please read rarefully and ALL the way to the end
Posted by Maggie (Guest) - Tuesday, February 20 2007, 23:20:53 (CET)

You wrote:
"He writes that the word “Chaldean” was of earlier use than Assyrian to describe our people, known till then as Nestrorians, and that the Roman Catholic Church chose that word as the description of the place or geographical location where the central church was located...and NOT, as we rushed to use it, as an ethnic title."

This is a complete falsehood.

…I think there’s something you’re missing here. It isn’t enough for you to call people liars and paid agents…in fact you sound very like a certain Fred Aprim not to mention Sargon Dadeeshoo, Peter BetBooHoo and the rest of them…according to all of you, ALL of you are liars telling falsehoods…you have to give a reasoned argument…which is what Dr Joseph did…he called no one a liar or paid agent…he spoke calmly, rationally and was carefully considered and reviewed by people who wouldn’t give you or me the time of day…if we’re going to strive to attain to a level of equal style, knowledge, content and grace…we have to do better…not worse.

The ancient term "Chaldean" meant a profession, ONLY, as in "astronomers".

..this is one interpretation, also “magicians”...and Dr Joseph takes it into account.

The words UR of Chaldea means "Cradle of Stars" as in the Milky Way, the same as URMIA means cradle of water, (UR MIA). This group of astronomers were ASSYRIANS, and the learned men of Assyria. There NEVER was a city called CHALDEA, NEVER. Therefore, we can say the ancient Chaldeans were a group of scientists, more specifically astronomers within the Assyrian Empire.

…no one said there was a city called Chaldea, but there is mention in the bible of a Chaldea and history tells us of a Chaldean tribes who briefly seized control in Babylon…but you’re missing the point…Dr Joseph says that the use of the term “Chaldeans” to describe a sect of Nestorians was a mistake…one made by the Catholic Church which picked the word out of the bible…as in “Ur of The Chaldees”..it doesn’t matter to his point if the Chaldeans were race car drivers, or Flamenco dancers..the point is that the term was applied to Nestorians erroneously…for they had always
been known and called themselves Suraye.

Here is what the CATHOLIC encyclopedia writes about the Christian Chaldeans: The name of former Nestorians now reunited with the Roman Church. The name of former Nestorians now reunited with the Roman Church. Ethnologically

..there is the error…according to Dr Joseph…the term Chadean was used by the pope in its geographical sense, as a place…the mistake came when it was assumed that the geographical name also created or implied an ETHNIC group…that is the mistake.

they are divided into two groups (Turco-Persian and Indian), which must be treated apart, since in their vicissitudes one group differs considerably from the other. The first group is usually known as Chaldeans, the second as Christians of St. Thomas (also called the Syro-Malabar Church).

I. NAME AND TERRITORY OF CHALDEANS
Strictly, the name of Chaldeans is no longer correct; in Chaldea proper

..is “Chaldea proper” a city? Because you just said there was never any such thing.

, apart from Baghdad, there are now very few adherents of this rite, most of the Chaldean population being found in the cities of Kerkuk, Arbil, and Mosul, in the heart of the Tigris valley, in the valley of the Zab, in the mountains of Kurdistan.

..this is all pointless…it doesn’t have any bearing on the point of the chapter I was trying to discuss…after the error was made all sorts of additional errors commenced and multiplied..what you’re doing is telling me the “history” of those errors as if it was HISTORY…real history…and it isn’t…not according to Dr Joseph…it’s the history of the “errors” made about Chaldeans that you’re giving me…not the history OF Chaldeans, as that term came to apply to Catholic Nestorians…do you see the difference?

It is in the former ecclesiastical province of Ator (Assyria) that are now found the most flourishing of the Catholic Chaldean communities.

..that may be true…but that isn’t the point(and by the way there is no “Ator” province recognized by anyone but you and others like you, that also is part of the error)…I can call you Humpty Dumpty and then proceed to write a history of you as Humpty Dumpty…but you aren’t turned into a big egg because of my mistake.

The point is that the very term Chaldean, as applied to a sect of a religious minority known from the very earliest days as exclusively Nestorian, by the Catholic church as a way of setting apart those Nestorians who reconciled with it…was the error…you can go on detailing the “history” of these people using this erroneous name…but that doesn’t change the fact that calling them Chaldean at all was a gross error.

The native population accepts the name of Atoraya-Kaldaya (Assyro-Chaldeans)

…Dr Joseph knows this…so does Roux and everyone else….but the issue is WHY and HOW did they ever come to this realization…who told it to them and why? What they “accept” is also besides the point…the POINT is how they came to accept it…Americans “accept” that there were good reasons to go to war with Iraq…..so?

while in the neo-Syriac vernacular Christians generally are known as Syrians. The territory now occupied by these Chaldeans belonged once to the ancient Sassanid Empire of Persia, later Omayyad and then the Abbassid caliphs of Islam. Turkish and Mongol invasions, and later efforts to reconstruct the former Kingdom of Persia shattered effectually the earlier political unity of this region; since the end of the sixteenth century the territory of the Chaldeans

..it is not and never has been the “territory” of the Chaldeans…not unless you mean the Chaldean tribes of long long ago…you yourself said there was NO city ever called Chaldea…which of us is confused?

..it was in the 16th Century that the term Chaldean was placed above the door of the Catholic Church the reconciled Nestorians came back to…and it derived its name as a result of the whim of the pope to call it by the geographical area where the central church was built…which was soon perverted into the ETHNIC name of the congregation…I realize you don’t LIKE it…but stop dancing around the central point in order to confuse and maybe “save” our Yoot.

All you have done is call everyone a liar and amateur and paid agent, based on nothing more than your feelings or what you have heard others say…and then, rather than challenge the points at issue, you merely repeated the errors all over again…it is not necessary to give me the history of the Chaldeans since the 16th Century when the whole point is that they were NOT the ethnic Chaldeans they claim they are now…no more than we are the ethnic Assyrians we say we are.

has been under Turkish or Persian rule. In fact, however, a number of the mountain tribes are only nominally subject to either.

…interesting and thank you…but what has this to do with the point at issue?

THIS MEANS there NEVER was a territory or region called Chaldea, otherwise ALL Chaldeans would be in Southern Iraq, not Atour, which is northern Iraq!

…this is still not the point, you’re using one set of errors to “prove” a another error…Dr Joseph’s point is that it was a mistake to call the Nestorians, who reconciled, Chaldeans. In the 16th century nothing had been excavated in Iraq yet…people knew about the Assyrians and Chaldeans from their bibles…and in the bible it most definitely states that there as a place called Chaldea…I could care less if the bible got it wrong or right…the point is that the pope who plunked this name on his Nestorians believed it…and that’s what we’re discussing…the fact that he used a geographic name to set apart a Catholic Church for reconciled Nestorians…who much later decided they WERE the Chaldeans…

It makes no difference if there ever was or wasn’t a Chaldea, city or state…what matters is that the pope GAVE that name to his Nestorians…the error was his…but we’ve lived with the consequences…he could have called them Chinese…and we’d be saying today that just because a pope called a church Chinese did not mean the congregation of that church was or BECAME Chinese…kay?

Having established that,

…you must be joking! And YOU want to mentor bright young minds? What is it you think you “establishe”? Because from where I sit you completely missed the point...in fact you rolled right over it, presented your own fabled version, with ONE source, and now want to move on because you “established” something?

let us move to today's Chaldeans. The modern term "Chaldean" was designated by Rome in the last few hundred years, and means CATHOLIC, period! Nothing more and nothing less. Additionally, the Vatican mistakenly identified the See of the modern Chaldeans as being in Babylon by mistake, because they thought ancient Babylon is today's Baghdad.

…we all know that…

Chaldeans are Akkadians by origin, the same as Assyrians, so they were NEVER a seperate ethnicity.

…no one said they were. Have YOU read this book? Dr Joseph nowhere says there is a separate Chaldean anything…except church…he also says there’s no Assyrian ethnicity…just a Church.

Now let us read what the CATHOLIC Encyclopedia writes about Nestorians:

..okay, let’s…but then again, let’s not…I mean people don’t have to read all this over again…

Anyone would think you and not Roux or Joseph were paid by someone to plunk all this stuff down here…when none of it means anything to the point at hand…it seems you were merely looking to drown and confuse…

…one more time…we are not interested in what the people called the Chaldeans in the 16th Century did, EVER! I don’t care who led them where, or what he wore or ate…it is meaningless to the point at hand. It also doesn’t matter if there was or wasn’t a Chaldea, because the pope who granted this title BELIEVED there was and we are, after all, discussing errors.…the point was: That the term Chaldean was attached to the church established in a geographical location thought to be called, at one time, Chaldea…as per the bible, by the pope…who sometimes reads that book…and that with the passage of time the former Nestorians in this newly created Catholic congregation known as Chaldean Catholics, began to believe that they were the Chaldean people ETRHNICALLY.

This is the error, according to Dr Joseph, which I was discussing.

..had you understood this from the start you could have spared yourself a lot of trouble…me, I like trouble.

---------------------

- BACK TO INDEX - REPLY - QUOTE - EDIT - DELETE -

The full topic:

reply to maggie pancho - Wednesday, February 21 2007, 16:13:16 (CET)
- Re: reply to maggie Maggie - 02/21 20:15

Content-length: 11917
Content-type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded
Accept: image/gif, image/x-xbitmap, image/jpeg, image/pjpeg, application/x-shockwave-flash, application/vnd.ms-excel, applicatio...
Accept-encoding: gzip, deflate
Accept-language: es
Cache-control: no-cache
Connection: Keep-Alive
Cookie: *hidded*
Host: www.insideassyria.com
Referer: http://www.insideassyria.com/rkvsf5/rkvsf_core.php?.8Jfy.
User-agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1)