Egypt

[Goodbook]

We are all baptized into Christ, in the holy spirit not a church denom, so I dont agree with those church denom traditions that contradict the bible.

One says they are of Paul, one of apollos, but christians are of Jesus.

To paraphrase the scripture... 1 Corinthians 3:4-5

 

[Goodbook]

Also 1 corinthians 1:10-17

 

[Goodbook]

Its not true that protestants ie. Non catholics and non othordox dont accept one another in fellowship if they were baptized by a different denom. Some may differ over the method of baptism eg by immmersion or pouring, but, they dont dispute the person is a christian or bar believers from partaking in the Lords supper.

The only ones I heard that do that are the exclusive brethren. There is actually groups called the open brethren and they welcome anyone who believes to fellowship.

 

[Goodbook]

It is actually rude to bar a fellow brother and sister from supping with you just because they were baptized not in your own church. A few of my sisters have commented on this at how badly they were treated by catholics in this regard, we thought we believed in the same God, but no, they want to be exclusive.

If you go to any protestant church they not going to quiz you on what church you were baptized in and then if its different, say sorry, NO LORDS SUPPER FOR YOU! It is up to the believer to choose whether to partake or not.

 

[Goodbook]

Anyway..lets stick to topic EGYPT.
Why do you go to an egyptian church if you dont speak the language and you not speak egyptian it seems strange do you not ask for interpretation as it says in the bible to do? If you are american and english speaking not egyptian speaking what is it about this church, esp if you do not even read Arabic?

That would be like me going to an exclusively chinese church when I dont even read chinese or speak fluently, the only reason would be cos my blood ancestors are chinese.

One of my friends husband reads arabic, hes actually kurdish. I found a new testament in arabic for him, dont know if hes reading it but pray he is.

 

[blackribbon]

It is actually rude to bar a fellow brother and sister from supping with you just because they were baptized not in your own church. A few of my sisters have commented on this at how badly they were treated by catholics in this regard, we thought we believed in the same God, but no, they want to be exclusive.

If you go to any protestant church they not going to quiz you on what church you were baptized in and then if its different, say sorry, NO LORDS SUPPER FOR YOU! It is up to the believer to choose whether to partake or not.

Umm...Lutheran IS protestant and YES, many do limit communion to those that have been confirmed through the Lutheran church. I don't have an issue with that because I kind of respect that they consider it sacred enough to care. I always ask if I am allowed to participate when I am visiting a church that isn't my own.

 

[dzheremi]

Anyway..lets stick to topic EGYPT.

Yes, let's. I am not in the slightest bit interested in debating what my church does. I am only here to provide information since this thread is about the country of origin of my Church, which I know other people on this website do not belong to and are probably not very familiar with.

Why do you go to an egyptian church if you dont speak the language and you not speak egyptian it seems strange do you not ask for interpretation as it says in the bible to do? If you are american and english speaking not egyptian speaking what is it about this church, esp if you do not even read Arabic?

Um...I do read Arabic. And the vast majority of our services in America are in English (quite purposely so; my own bishop, HG Bishop Youssef of the Southern United States diocese, has written and spoken extensively on why this must be so, and I remember seeing my own priest at St. Bishoy tell some of the Egyptians who wanted more Arabic that if they want that, they should move back to Egypt ). I mentioned both of these things in my earlier replies in this thread. You do not need to know Arabic or Coptic at all to attend any Coptic Orthodox Church in America. Our service books are printed in all three languages for those parts that may be said in any of the three, so that even if you don't speak or read Coptic or Arabic, you can always follow along with what is going on.

That would be like me going to an exclusively chinese church when I dont even read chinese or speak fluently, the only reason would be cos my blood ancestors are chinese.

No it wouldn't, because again, the majority of our services are in English.

If a person has trouble following our liturgies, it is probably going to be due to unfamiliarity with the structure of the service relative to whatever they're used to (Coptic Orthodox services are among the longest in all Christianity; the average Sunday liturgy is north of three hours, due to the number of readings and the very long, melismatic nature of Coptic hymn chanting), and the difficulty of switching comfortably between three languages, which honestly does take some getting used to at first. We tend to do okay, though. The switching between languages is not abrupt and can be predicted according to familiarity with the structure of the service (i.e., what parts are usually said in what language), or failing that, what language is used by the priest or deacon immediately preceding the people's response (e.g., if the prayer is in English, you give the response in English). Also, if you don't know the language, obviously nobody can force you to respond in it, so you just respond in your own language. We've had Ethiopians worship with us who don't know any Arabic, so they just do everything that's supposed to be in Arabic or Coptic in English. It's fine.

 

[Hawthorne]

Oh. I didn't see these most recent posts whilst I was composing mine...

Spoiler: Stuff about the Alexandrian MSS

Apparently the alexandrian manuscripts were different from the other manuscripts but thats a scholarly dispute I havent actually seen them myself so dont quote me Im not an expert!

They may have been older physically but the ones that were used were copied many times and handed down and thats why the older ones were preserved more cos they werent used. The reason why they werent used, and scholarship bears this out, was cos scriptures were omitted ie. they werent usable copies.

Were verses omitted in the Alexandrian manuscripts (e.g. the oft-maligned NIV) or does the received text (e.g. the KJV) contain verses added?

A common principle in textual criticism (which, admittedly, does have its detractors) is to prefer the more difficult reading when confronted with multiple manuscript variants. The idea is that later scribes were known to add explanatory glosses and interpolations; compare to the many targum paraphrases and rabbinic commentaries. Read some of Robert Alter's translations of the Hebrew Bible, and you'll find his commentary often addresses glosses by scribes amending the text.

A minor example (in all bibles) is found in pagan theophory, that is having the name of a pagan god as part of one's name*. According to 1 Chronicles 8:33, King Saul's son is Eshba'al whereas in Samuel, Ba'al is replaced with bosheth, or shame; thus Eshba'al becomes Ish-Bosheth. A similar phenomenon may be seen in Jerubaal (otherwise known as Gideon) and the god Ba'al-zebub and Beelzebul and possibly Jezebel.

SO, the accusations levelled against the Alexandrian manuscripts as they variously minimise the blood or deity of Jesus may indeed be used to question the authenticity of the received text.

* Michael, Gabriel, and Elijah are other examples of theophory.


This has nothing to do with Egypt, sorry...

 

[James of Arc]

I wonder how big Egypt was at its biggest time? I mean was it the world power at its current size or did it own all of the north of Africa?

 

[Goodbook]

Not sure but thats something you could find out. In the days of the Pharoahs I would say it was a world power to be reckoned with.

 

[Goodbook]

Thats fine sorry if theres a misunderstanding but ...the egyptian language was in heiroglyphs and of course in Moses time they would not have spoken or written in arabic since that was before islam took over Egypt.

All this probably shows I need to do some more research on egyptian history ancient and modern. I mean I can get it straight in my head when Im reading the bible but the disconnect is now what you see today of Egypt, those pyramids are still standing gathering dust but the pharoahs are long gone.

 

[Goodbook]

I am going to watch the prince of egypt cartoon movie.
At first in thought it was disney but no its dreamworks.
Disney doesnt touch the bible anyway, im sure if they did they would take liberties with it and try to copyright the characters.

 

[blackribbon]

I am going to watch the prince of egypt cartoon movie.
At first in thought it was disney but no its dreamworks.
Disney doesnt touch the bible anyway, im sure if they did they would take liberties with it and try to copyright the characters.

Most of the Bible isn't exactly rated "G" and do we really need to have the Bible animated?

 

[James of Arc]

When I was a teenager I my mom would make these awesome ham sandwiches that I called the Egyptian sandwich, because it was made by my mummy.

 

[Cearbhall]

Most of the Bible isn't exactly rated "G" and do we really need to have the Bible animated?

Is there a problem with that medium?

 

[blackribbon]

Is there a problem with that medium?

I personally think video in any form leaves a lot to the editors discretion and personal view points so I don't think any form of movie/animation is the best way to teach the Bible. However, the OP was talking about DISNEY...and Disney isn't likely to show a realistic crucifixion or Lot sleeping with his daughters or King David & Bathsheba's affair....etc ... I personally think that cleaned up versions (also dumbed down) for kids actually is part of the problem why people have a hard time with Christianity as they grow up and realize that life isn't a "clean" as those cartoons have them believing the Bible is. They also don't read the real book because they think they already know the Bible story. JMO

 

[Cearbhall]

I personally think that cleaned up versions (also dumbed down) for kids actually is part of the problem why people have a hard time with Christianity as they grow up and realize that life isn't a "clean" as those cartoons have them believing the Bible is. They also don't read the real book because they think they already know the Bible story. JMO

That's an interesting perspective. I can't say I agree, but I only have anecdotal evidence.

 

[blackribbon]

That's an interesting perspective. I can't say I agree, but I only have anecdotal evidence.

I hated history until I got to college and was told the "real story" which meant George Washington wasn't some goody two shoes but rather was a very complicated person...and that Ben Franklin was a big party boy...that I became fascinated with history because I can relate to their real humanity. Same goes with the Bible. It is impossible to live up Bible people perfection until you realize that God didn't use perfect people but rather real people in hard situations. I find I offend many Christians when I tell them what is really in their Bible. They haven't grown up from the children stories versions and defend them to the death (even when given the actual verses).

 

[MehGuy]

No, never been to Egypt.

I guess it would be cool. Although I think it would just depress me.

 

[Cearbhall]

I hated history until I got to college and was told the "real story" which meant George Washington wasn't some goody two shoes but rather was a very complicated person...and that Ben Franklin was a big party boy...that I became fascinated with history because I can relate to their real humanity.

It's unfortunate that your K-12 schools didn't make the effort to go beyond the textbook. But I suppose revisionism had to trickle down from the universities. I'd say it was around the beginning of high school when my parents started questioning everything they knew about history because of what I was learning.