It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
To say Greek hymns are foreign and don't belong to our heritage, without providing any manuscript, archaeological, or scholarly evidence is unintelligent.
To say OB is our heritage, without defining what OB is, or showing the different pronunciation patterns within OB, is unintelligible.
Saying God speaks one language is down right stupid and beyond unintelligent
Saying Jesus spoke Coptic, without any manuscript, archaeological or historical evidence is also stupid and unintelligent.
Since GB has become the de facto pronunciation within the religious domain, even though it has a dubious history, it must remain the pronunciation until EVERYBODY chooses to use OB. Until then, the least we should do is be intelligent about what Coptic is not what it should be or what a minority claims it is without evidence.
The contention is these are modern hymns and not part of our heritage. If we need to come up with new hymns why not produce them ourselves in Coptic. Why do we go to other Churches and borrow their hymns. Do we lack the artistic skills?Now do you dispute the fact that these hymns were borrowed?
Normally the transition from a dead to an extinct language occurs when a language undergoes language death while being directly replaced by a different one. For example, Native American languages were replaced by English, French, Portuguese, or Spanish as a result of colonization. The Coptic language, replaced by Arabic in its native Egypt, was once thought to be extinct.Language extinction may also occur when a language evolves into a new language or family of languages. An example of this was Old English, a forerunner of Modern English.By contrast to an extinct language which no longer has any speakers, a dead language may remain in use for scientific, legal, or ecclesiastical functions. Old Church Slavonic, Avestan, Coptic, Biblical Hebrew, Ge'ez, Latin, and Sanskrit are among the many dead languages used as sacred languages.
Really? How do you say Vnou]?
There are manuscripts before Eryan Moftah that say Ebnoda, some say Ebnote, some say Abnoda, some say Abnode.
Are you sure you know what OB is?
What about ev,y? We've discussed this before. You maintain it's euke, but the same root word found in oueu,y is pronounced owaw shee.
And there is some evidence that this reconstruction was different in earlier centuries.
Unless you can find a manuscript that says Bishop so and so added these Greek hymns, then it is only speculative evidence you have.
Could it not be just as possible that Copts sang To lithos, Tonsynanarkhon, evfrensentho way before the 18th century union with the Greek Church?
Could it not be possible that hymns, like Omonogenes, were sung in Greece, Constantinople, Syria, Egypt, Jerusalem, grew in a tradition of their own without an abrupt introduction. Should we believe that one person artificially added Omonogenis to all of these churches? Or could it be possible that since the entire Christian world was bilingual, and these popular hymns were sung throughout history and only were only introduced into the Coptic rite in the 18th century?
No it could not be possible. Because these hymns did not appear in any manuscripts prior to 1850.
Other than some liturgy hymns, the Bible and the Psalmody, we don't have any references prior to 1850. Should we remove all hymns without manuscript reference to include these hymns?
It's the opposite. Tou dipno is a 6th century hymn. Eiparthenos was written by Romans in the 6th century. All the other Greek hymns are very old in the Greek Church, including To litho, ton synanarkhon, anixo, en iordano, enti genesis, etc. Hymns that are specific to the Coptic church are Ke eperto, Meghalo, Gennethlion, the glorification hymns.
Tou dipno is a 6th century hymn. Eiparthenos was written by Romans in the 6th century. All the other Greek hymns are very old in the Greek Church, including To litho, ton synanarkhon, anixo, en iordano, enti genesis, etc.
Typically these hymns were written before the Schism and that is why they are common among the Traditional Churches.
Exactly. These hymns belong to the Greek Church and they should stay that way.
I'm telling you that Greek was integral to Egypt for thousands of years. We can't consider the presence of Greek as foreign.
I am also tell you that there is plenty of references to these Greek hymns prior to 1850 in the Greek, Syrian, Russian churches. And if lack of reference is your criteria for removing hymns then Coptic hymns with no references before 1850 should be removed too.
Ton synanarkhon, To litho and and the rest of these Greek hymns we are talking about fall into this category since they are witnessed in all Apostolic Churches: Greek, Syrian, Russian, etc.
Give me one reference to any hymn written before the schism. Only the Agbeya, Trisagion and the Sanctus (Holy, Holy, Holy) are before the schism. Omonogenis is controversial. Some say it was written by St Athanasius, some say by St Severus. If it was St. Severus then it's after the schism. The Chalcedonians say it was Emperor Justinian who wrote it. Other than these hymns, give me a reference to any Coptic hymn that is written before the schism.