Qnoma?...definition

[Paul Younan]

Shlama Akhi Dave,

You admit that even Aramaic speaking Christians differ widely on the meaning of "qnoma", as they differ widely in their theologies.

Admit? What was there to admit? The matter is public record for the last 15 centuries! That you are personally discovering it now is an altogether different matter!

I also quoted the world's pre-eminent Aramaic scholar, who demonstrated (in front of the delegates of the SOC) that their understanding of Qnoma changed, while the understanding of the CoE remained the original, archaic meaning.

Do you have any proof contradicting Prof. Brock's testimony? If so, I would love to see it....since apparently, you know more about Aramaic than native speakers or professors who have studied it their entire career!

You could have been useful to the delegates of the SoC at Pro-Oriente, because they had nothing to say when Prof. Brock presented his solid evidence!

Come now, Paul , we haven't argued quite that long yet ! <!-- s --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/happy.gif" alt="" title="Happy" /><!-- s -->

<!-- s --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/happy.gif" alt="" title="Happy" /><!-- s -->

Seriously, I should expect to find something more definitive in scripture, if only two verses- one stating Jesus has a human qnoma , and another somewhere stating He has a divine qnoma. Any verse that states He has two qnome (which, you must admit, is rather unusual), would clear this up.And given the uniqueness of this supposed phenomenon of two qnome in one Person, I should expect such a statement in scripture before I accept it as church doctrine.That would clinch the matter. As it is, there are no such statements.

You didn't read my explanation about psyche. You also mention the "uniqueness of this supposed phenomenon of two qnome in one Person" - yet you fail to realize that the Incarnation is a unique phenomenon, indeed. <!-- s --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/happy.gif" alt="" title="Happy" /><!-- s -->

I do not accept any division in Meshikha; Personally, I believe His Deity is human and His Humanity Divine- one nature , one qnoma , one person , and that those three are One ! (Talk about oneness !)

Then you believe in the Eutychian heresy condemned by the council of Chalcedon.

I find it strange that some (not yourself) believe in God's absolute unity (singularity,really) and yet put Yeshua Meshikha on a disection board and separate Him into 2 keyana , 2 qnome and a parsopa - 5 parts !

And I find it strange that you (yourself) believe in three "persons" in God! That you have disected God and made Him into three different "persons" (in the English sense, of course!)

As you know, John wrote his major epistle to refute this heresy. "This is He that came through water and blood, Yeshua Meshikha" There was no part of Him untouched by the events of baptism and crucifixion.

Then you apparently believed that God was dead for three days. Oh my.

Can Jehovah not suffer ? "They shall gaze upon Me Whom they have pierced..." , saith Jehovah.

That they pierced the object of the Incarnation means that Jehova suffered? Aren't you stretching things a tad bit?

Will God judge me for believing this ? Far be it ! I would rather fear that I should take part in piercing Him again by my ignorance and impassiveness toward His suffering.

Whether or not God will judge you is up to him, to me you are a fellow brother in Meshikha who is unfortunately unwilling to allow the Aramaic language to be itself.

As for the Eutychian heresy, the CoE condemned it in rather wise words:

???The heretics, that is, in their stubbornness, venture to ascribe the properties and sufferings of the nature of the manhood of Christ to the nature and qnoma of the Godhead and Essence of the Word, which occasionally, because of the perfect union which the manhood of Christ had with his Godhead, are ascribed to God economically, but not naturally.???

As did the Western Church during the council of Chalcedon:

Therefore, following the holy fathers, we all with one accord teach men to acknowledge one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, at once complete in Godhead and complete in manhood, truly God and truly man, consisting also of a reasonable soul and body; of one substance with the Father as regards his Godhead, and at the same time of one substance with us as regards his manhood; like us in all respects, apart from sin; as regards his Godhead, begotten of the Father before the ages, but yet as regards his manhood begotten, for us men and for our salvation, of Mary the Virgin, the God-bearer; one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten, recognized in two natures, without confusion, without change, without division, without separation; the distinction of natures being in no way annulled by the union, but rather the characteristics of each nature being preserved and coming together to form one person and subsistence, not as parted or separated into two persons, but one and the same Son and Only-begotten God the Word, Lord Jesus Christ; even as the prophets from earliest times spoke of him, and our Lord Jesus Christ himself taught us, and the creed of the fathers has handed down to us.

And scholars think there are no more Eutychians left in the world! You should write to them and let them know the movement is still around!