Wow, such a heated thread. Well, I'll throw my two cents in...
I consider myself Egyptian. Yes, I know that's a nationality not an ethnicity, but it is the most accurate answer that I can give.
Because I was born into the Coptic Orthodox faith, I will state to others that I am Coptic when they want a better answer than Egyptian, but it does not bother me if someone chooses to call me an Arab.
Honestly folks, Egypt has been invaded sooooo many times over the last few thousand years, plus it was considered one of the greatest nations in past ages (which brought in many immigrants from the known world.) So unless someone comes from a very, very remote village, very few, if any, are of a pure race anymore.
Of course the same could be said of almost all nations in the world, so the whole hang up with ethnicity is somewhat pointless, unless you're referring to recent ethnicity (last few hundred years.)
So unless someone here has a full and accurate family tree record going back to the time of the Pharaohs, no one here really knows what ethnicities are running through their blood.
There are LOADS of groups like this. Even some are muslims who say they are Egyptian and Not Arabs.
Let's face it. The world loves Egypt. They hate Saudis and Arabs. Who are Arabs? Kuwaiti's, Saudi's, Qatari's, Yemini's, .
These are Arabs.
ANyway, after 9/11, no one wants to be an Arab. Lol.. and worst part is that no one wants to be a muslim either.
LOL.. THERE ARE SO Many muslim Egyptians living outside of Egypt (even IN Egypt) that call themselves COPTIC Muslim - ONLY to avoid being seen as an Arab and a Muslim. THEY ARE ARABS, aTHEY ARE MUSLIMS.!! There's no hiding it.
I think we need a facebook page called: "Muslim Egyptians are NOT Coptic"
dear zox, and dear averybody, i think this is a very tricky question! the need of identify the cultural roots of egyptian people or indeed the coptic, looking into historical records is quite understandable. there is nothing wrong about building the sense of one's own cultural identity. the complication, however, occurs when we pay attention to the way the question was formulated, namely: 'are coptic christians arabs?'.. when we are confronted with such a question we must be aware of one or more of the following things: 1. the xenophobic dimension of this question unwittingly surfaces just like the tip of the iceberg. given the historical dynamics in terms of formation of the egyptian people/culture, the psychological need of dissociation from the oppressor is quite understandable. however, we must accept who we are in the light of our past. denial of the past, or rejection of it, does not chance the reality of who we are, at least not for the better. i am not hereby suggesting that coptic people should accept that they are arabs, not at all! what i am saying is that coptic people cannot claim ethnic/cultural purity, if they are to consider real historical facts. 2. a true christian should not be too concerned about his/her cultural identity/heritage for his own sake. whilst it is important to develop and maintain a cultural understanding of our sense of identity, a christian should be able to accept whatever the background imposed on his/her life, and live for christ, whatever cultural circumstances we might find ourselves in. st. Paul teaches us that IN CHRIST there is no greek or jew, slave of free, and by extension... arab or coptic. in the light of this teaching, the original question becomes indeed challenging. it is just the same as asking... 'should christians swear at gadgets and not at God?..' christians should not swear at all, period!! but this question ignores this basic thing and tries to divert attention from the real problem to the excuses we have for our shortcomings, in the first place. similarly, in stead of recognizing that being a CHRISTIAN is more important than our cultural/historical background, we begin to stir into the wounds of the history and thereby trying to divert attention from to fact that christians are not coptic, greek or jews, to the dangerous monster of glamorized xenophobia, (discased in religious jargon) which lies under the surface waiting to devour. 3. saint Paul had no problems with being a jew and being a roman at the same time, despite of the history of oppression from romans over jews. he said that being a jew is nothing when it comes to our new identity in Christ. similarly, being coptic is equally nothing when it comes to being in Christ. 4. mabsoota's point is quite relevant and should be further detailed.
Hence, what do we do with this question now?.. where do we go from here?.. any ideas? ..
[quote author=georgeyoussef link=topic=9459.msg118965#msg118965 date=1283656129] Wow, such a heated thread. Well, I'll throw my two cents in...
I consider myself Egyptian. Yes, I know that's a nationality not an ethnicity, but it is the most accurate answer that I can give.
Because I was born into the Coptic Orthodox faith, I will state to others that I am Coptic when they want a better answer than Egyptian, but it does not bother me if someone chooses to call me an Arab.
Honestly folks, Egypt has been invaded sooooo many times over the last few thousand years, plus it was considered one of the greatest nations in past ages (which brought in many immigrants from the known world.) So unless someone comes from a very, very remote village, very few, if any, are of a pure race anymore.
Just so you know, coptic means egyptian. Even muslims who are in egypt now are coptic. They just don't like to admit it. But we are Coptic Orthodox Christians.
Of course the same could be said of almost all nations in the world, so the whole hang up with ethnicity is somewhat pointless, unless you're referring to recent ethnicity (last few hundred years.)
So unless someone here has a full and accurate family tree record going back to the time of the Pharaohs, no one here really knows what ethnicities are running through their blood.
Our Lord was a Jew. He conducted Himself within the cultural precincts of being a Jew. I even feel He was a patriot.
For all of the previous kumbaya postings, we are not Arab. I repeat for umpteenth time: Egypt and its aspects are identified as being Hamitic. In its history it was known as the Hamitic Kingdom. Arabs are Semites.
We are not semites, because we are not sons of Schem, but rather Ham.
British definition was stupid, because it was sponsored by imperialistic and arrogant inflations upon different populations.
[quote author=Ioannes link=topic=9459.msg119241#msg119241 date=1284268232] [quote author=TITL link=topic=9459.msg119240#msg119240 date=1284252736] We're descendants of Ham? I thought his generation was cursed.
No. Copts, Ethiopians, and all other cool people, cept jews, are Semetic.
But..
[quote author=ilovesaintmark link=topic=9459.msg119230#msg119230 date=1284248660] Our Lord was a Jew. He conducted Himself within the cultural precincts of being a Jew. I even feel He was a patriot.
For all of the previous kumbaya postings, we are not Arab. I repeat for umpteenth time: Egypt and its aspects are identified as being Hamitic. In its history it was known as the Hamitic Kingdom. Arabs are Semites.
We are not semites, because we are not sons of Schem, but rather Ham.
British definition was stupid, because it was sponsored by imperialistic and arrogant inflations upon different populations.
Coptics are Hamites. Genesis is quite specific: Misriam was one of the sons of Ham. He is the progenitor to the people of Egypt. That is where you get the name for Egypt--Misr.
[quote author=ilovesaintmark link=topic=9459.msg119345#msg119345 date=1284512857] Jews and Arabs are Semites.
Coptics are Hamites. Genesis is quite specific: Misriam was one of the sons of Ham. He is the progenitor to the people of Egypt. That is where you get the name for Egypt--Misr.
[quote author=peterfarrington link=topic=9459.msg119359#msg119359 date=1284550143] Genesis 10:6 And the sons of Ham; Cush, and Mizraim, and Phut, and Canaan.
Lol.. come on Fr. Peter..
You guys know what I mean: How is it iLoveSaintMark assumed that Mizraim (from his name) came Misr??
[quote author=peterfarrington link=topic=9459.msg119371#msg119371 date=1284568474] Well I'd expect you guys to know the origin myths of your own country??????
I know why Britain is called Britain for instance.
Best wishes
Father Peter
lol.. easy Fr. Peter,
I had no idea that Egypt was called Egypt because of Ham.
England is called England because the main people's who conquered the country in the 5th and 6th centuries were the Angles. This is why we have regions such as East Anglia.
The other peoples who invaded with them were the Jutes and the Saxons. The Jutes especially dominated the area of Kent where live, which was named for the ancient British tribe which lived there, the Cantiaci. This area was already so well known because of trade with the continent that it kept its name even after it was taken over. The main town is still called Canterbury, which means essentially the town of the Cantiaci. Just a few miles from where I live is a Roman villa that had a church built within it. So Kent has been Christian for at least 1700 years.
As you know, many of the counties are named after the Saxons, so we have Sussex (the land of the South Saxons), Wessex (the land of the West Saxons), Middlesex (the land of the Middle Saxons) etc. The country was made up of many small kingdoms. Oftem one king would have the overlordship of all the Angles and Saxons. The first of these over-kings, or Bretwaldas, was King Ethelberht of the Kingdom of Kent who also was the first Anglo-Saxon king to become a Christian.
Anyhow, we are England and English, because of the Angles who conquered us in the 5th and 6th centuries. Although most of our genetic background remains British because the earlier inhabitants mostly just changed their masters and stayed where they were. Certainly my own ancestors have lived in East Anglia for at least 500 hundred years, and quite probably have been there for 2000 years, only moving to London in the 19th century.
The ancient Egyptian name of the country is Kemet (km.t), which means "black land", referring to the fertile black soils of the Nile flood plains, distinct from the deshret (dšṛt), or "red land" of the desert. The name is realized as kīmi and kīmə in the Coptic stage of the Egyptian language, and appeared in early Greek as Χημία (Khēmía).
[quote author=peterfarrington link=topic=9459.msg119394#msg119394 date=1284585457] Does this mean anything to you folks?...
The ancient Egyptian name of the country is Kemet (km.t), which means "black land", referring to the fertile black soils of the Nile flood plains, distinct from the deshret (dšṛt), or "red land" of the desert. The name is realized as kīmi and kīmə in the Coptic stage of the Egyptian language, and appeared in early Greek as Χημία (Khēmía).
Do you call Egypt Kemet?
Thanks very much Fr. Peter, I just would like to point out that [coptic]Kymi [/coptic] is better pronounced as /kama/ or /kami/ rather than /keemi/ which is a flawed Greco-Bohairic pronunciation. Needless is it to point out that even the Greek pronunciation evolved, and even though it may be pronounced the way you taught us that doesn't link to how it is pronounced by Egyptians. [coptic]oujai qen `P[C[/coptic]
Actually Copt means Christian Egyptian. Muslims in Egypt usually call themselves Arabs, and we Christian Egyptians call ourselves Coptic. Even Muslims call us Coptics, not Arabs. The language Arabic as well as the tradition were forced on us by the Arab when they conquered Egypt in 600s AD. The Coptic language is derived from Greek and Hieroglyphics. True both of them were pagan languages but after St. Mark the Evangelist spread Christianity in Egypt, the country converted to Christianity. Our ancestors were the Egyptians that were living at that time, not the Arabs who conquered Egypt later. Therefore Arabs do have mix of Arab and Egyptians. But for us, we are not considered Arabs since we are the descendants of the Egyptians who were living in Egypt before the Arab conquest.
Dear mroufael, The Coptic language wasn't derived from Greek and Hieroglyphics, as you pointed out. The early Egyptians after converting to Christianity took the Greek words, and some Greek "loan" words to incorporate in the Egyptian language (i.e. they were not Greek anymore, but rather Copticised Greek words - hence the big argument nowadays of the proper pronunciation of Greek words, and the flawed argument about Greco-Bohairic as well). Coptic is simply the stage of evolution of the late Demotic scheme of writing which used icons and iconographs as I am sure you well know... [coptic]oujai qen `P[C[/coptic]
Comments
I consider myself Egyptian. Yes, I know that's a nationality not an ethnicity, but it is the most accurate answer that I can give.
Because I was born into the Coptic Orthodox faith, I will state to others that I am Coptic when they want a better answer than Egyptian, but it does not bother me if someone chooses to call me an Arab.
Honestly folks, Egypt has been invaded sooooo many times over the last few thousand years, plus it was considered one of the greatest nations in past ages (which brought in many immigrants from the known world.) So unless someone comes from a very, very remote village, very few, if any, are of a pure race anymore.
Of course the same could be said of almost all nations in the world, so the whole hang up with ethnicity is somewhat pointless, unless you're referring to recent ethnicity (last few hundred years.)
So unless someone here has a full and accurate family tree record going back to the time of the Pharaohs, no one here really knows what ethnicities are running through their blood.
So bottom line, we're all mutts. ;)
George
I just found a facebook group called "EGYPTIANS ARE NOT ARABS"! wow!!
Its not just me thinking about this!!
http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/search/?flt=1&q=Egyptians are not Arabs&o=69
There are LOADS of groups like this. Even some are muslims who say they are Egyptian and Not Arabs.
Let's face it. The world loves Egypt. They hate Saudis and Arabs. Who are Arabs? Kuwaiti's, Saudi's, Qatari's, Yemini's, .
These are Arabs.
ANyway, after 9/11, no one wants to be an Arab. Lol.. and worst part is that no one wants to be a muslim either.
LOL.. THERE ARE SO Many muslim Egyptians living outside of Egypt (even IN Egypt) that call themselves COPTIC Muslim - ONLY to avoid being seen as an Arab and a Muslim. THEY ARE ARABS, aTHEY ARE MUSLIMS.!! There's no hiding it.
I think we need a facebook page called: "Muslim Egyptians are NOT Coptic"
i think this is a very tricky question!
the need of identify the cultural roots of egyptian people or indeed the coptic, looking into historical records is quite understandable. there is nothing wrong about building the sense of one's own cultural identity. the complication, however, occurs when we pay attention to the way the question was formulated, namely: 'are coptic christians arabs?'..
when we are confronted with such a question we must be aware of one or more of the following things:
1. the xenophobic dimension of this question unwittingly surfaces just like the tip of the iceberg. given the historical dynamics in terms of formation of the egyptian people/culture, the psychological need of dissociation from the oppressor is quite understandable. however, we must accept who we are in the light of our past. denial of the past, or rejection of it, does not chance the reality of who we are, at least not for the better. i am not hereby suggesting that coptic people should accept that they are arabs, not at all! what i am saying is that coptic people cannot claim ethnic/cultural purity, if they are to consider real historical facts.
2. a true christian should not be too concerned about his/her cultural identity/heritage for his own sake. whilst it is important to develop and maintain a cultural understanding of our sense of identity, a christian should be able to accept whatever the background imposed on his/her life, and live for christ, whatever cultural circumstances we might find ourselves in. st. Paul teaches us that IN CHRIST there is no greek or jew, slave of free, and by extension... arab or coptic. in the light of this teaching, the original question becomes indeed challenging. it is just the same as asking... 'should christians swear at gadgets and not at God?..' christians should not swear at all, period!! but this question ignores this basic thing and tries to divert attention from the real problem to the excuses we have for our shortcomings, in the first place. similarly, in stead of recognizing that being a CHRISTIAN is more important than our cultural/historical background, we begin to stir into the wounds of the history and thereby trying to divert attention from to fact that christians are not coptic, greek or jews, to the dangerous monster of glamorized xenophobia, (discased in religious jargon) which lies under the surface waiting to devour.
3. saint Paul had no problems with being a jew and being a roman at the same time, despite of the history of oppression from romans over jews. he said that being a jew is nothing when it comes to our new identity in Christ. similarly, being coptic is equally nothing when it comes to being in Christ.
4. mabsoota's point is quite relevant and should be further detailed.
Hence, what do we do with this question now?.. where do we go from here?.. any ideas? ..
Wow, such a heated thread. Well, I'll throw my two cents in...
I consider myself Egyptian. Yes, I know that's a nationality not an ethnicity, but it is the most accurate answer that I can give.
Because I was born into the Coptic Orthodox faith, I will state to others that I am Coptic when they want a better answer than Egyptian, but it does not bother me if someone chooses to call me an Arab.
Honestly folks, Egypt has been invaded sooooo many times over the last few thousand years, plus it was considered one of the greatest nations in past ages (which brought in many immigrants from the known world.) So unless someone comes from a very, very remote village, very few, if any, are of a pure race anymore.
Just so you know, coptic means egyptian. Even muslims who are in egypt now are coptic. They just don't like to admit it. But we are Coptic Orthodox Christians.
Of course the same could be said of almost all nations in the world, so the whole hang up with ethnicity is somewhat pointless, unless you're referring to recent ethnicity (last few hundred years.)
So unless someone here has a full and accurate family tree record going back to the time of the Pharaohs, no one here really knows what ethnicities are running through their blood.
So bottom line, we're all mutts. ;)
George
For all of the previous kumbaya postings, we are not Arab. I repeat for umpteenth time: Egypt and its aspects are identified as being Hamitic. In its history it was known as the Hamitic Kingdom. Arabs are Semites.
We are not semites, because we are not sons of Schem, but rather Ham.
British definition was stupid, because it was sponsored by imperialistic and arrogant inflations upon different populations.
We're descendants of Ham? I thought his generation was cursed.
No. Copts, Ethiopians, and all other cool people, cept jews, are Semetic.
on the other hand 'kumbaya' is not an argument in itself any more valid than saying that jews are not semitic...
may god bless us all!..
[quote author=TITL link=topic=9459.msg119240#msg119240 date=1284252736]
We're descendants of Ham? I thought his generation was cursed.
No. Copts, Ethiopians, and all other cool people, cept jews, are Semetic.
But..
[quote author=ilovesaintmark link=topic=9459.msg119230#msg119230 date=1284248660]
Our Lord was a Jew. He conducted Himself within the cultural precincts of being a Jew. I even feel He was a patriot.
For all of the previous kumbaya postings, we are not Arab. I repeat for umpteenth time: Egypt and its aspects are identified as being Hamitic. In its history it was known as the Hamitic Kingdom. Arabs are Semites.
We are not semites, because we are not sons of Schem, but rather Ham.
British definition was stupid, because it was sponsored by imperialistic and arrogant inflations upon different populations.
Coptics are Hamites. Genesis is quite specific: Misriam was one of the sons of Ham. He is the progenitor to the people of Egypt. That is where you get the name for Egypt--Misr.
Jews and Arabs are Semites.
Coptics are Hamites. Genesis is quite specific: Misriam was one of the sons of Ham. He is the progenitor to the people of Egypt. That is where you get the name for Egypt--Misr.
Gosh, that is is really interesting. Thanks mate.
Where did you get this from anyway?
Our Lord abolished any curse.
Scripture is also very specific: 'Out of Egypt, I have called my Son.'
How could the Son be cursed?
Genesis 10:6 And the sons of Ham; Cush, and Mizraim, and Phut, and Canaan.
Lol.. come on Fr. Peter..
You guys know what I mean: How is it iLoveSaintMark assumed that Mizraim (from his name) came Misr??
I know why Britain is called Britain for instance.
Best wishes
Father Peter
It is not an assumption. It is cited by many of our bishops, including His Holiness. There is no controversy. Coptics are Hamites; not semites.
Well I'd expect you guys to know the origin myths of your own country??????
I know why Britain is called Britain for instance.
Best wishes
Father Peter
lol.. easy Fr. Peter,
I had no idea that Egypt was called Egypt because of Ham.
So - do you know why England is called England?
The other peoples who invaded with them were the Jutes and the Saxons. The Jutes especially dominated the area of Kent where live, which was named for the ancient British tribe which lived there, the Cantiaci. This area was already so well known because of trade with the continent that it kept its name even after it was taken over. The main town is still called Canterbury, which means essentially the town of the Cantiaci. Just a few miles from where I live is a Roman villa that had a church built within it. So Kent has been Christian for at least 1700 years.
As you know, many of the counties are named after the Saxons, so we have Sussex (the land of the South Saxons), Wessex (the land of the West Saxons), Middlesex (the land of the Middle Saxons) etc. The country was made up of many small kingdoms. Oftem one king would have the overlordship of all the Angles and Saxons. The first of these over-kings, or Bretwaldas, was King Ethelberht of the Kingdom of Kent who also was the first Anglo-Saxon king to become a Christian.
Anyhow, we are England and English, because of the Angles who conquered us in the 5th and 6th centuries. Although most of our genetic background remains British because the earlier inhabitants mostly just changed their masters and stayed where they were. Certainly my own ancestors have lived in East Anglia for at least 500 hundred years, and quite probably have been there for 2000 years, only moving to London in the 19th century.
Father Peter
The ancient Egyptian name of the country is Kemet (km.t), which means "black land", referring to the fertile black soils of the Nile flood plains, distinct from the deshret (dšṛt), or "red land" of the desert. The name is realized as kīmi and kīmə in the Coptic stage of the Egyptian language, and appeared in early Greek as Χημία (Khēmía).
Do you call Egypt Kemet?
No.
Our Lord abolished any curse.
Scripture is also very specific: 'Out of Egypt, I have called my Son.'
How could the Son be cursed?
Just because the Son was called out of Egypt doesn't make Him a Hamite.
Jesus was a jew, a Semite.
We aren't cursed either, apparently, http://suscopts.org/q&a/index.php?qid=842&catid=477
Who are the Canaanites nowadays? Muslims? :p
Does this mean anything to you folks?...
The ancient Egyptian name of the country is Kemet (km.t), which means "black land", referring to the fertile black soils of the Nile flood plains, distinct from the deshret (dšṛt), or "red land" of the desert. The name is realized as kīmi and kīmə in the Coptic stage of the Egyptian language, and appeared in early Greek as Χημία (Khēmía).
Do you call Egypt Kemet?
Thanks very much Fr. Peter,
I just would like to point out that [coptic]Kymi [/coptic] is better pronounced as /kama/ or /kami/ rather than /keemi/ which is a flawed Greco-Bohairic pronunciation. Needless is it to point out that even the Greek pronunciation evolved, and even though it may be pronounced the way you taught us that doesn't link to how it is pronounced by Egyptians.
[coptic]oujai qen `P[C[/coptic]
I never said Our Lord was a Hamite. He was most definitely a Jew and a Semite.
Please read the posts before making comments.
I was merely pointing out that one of the great points is that He was called from Egypt.
The language Arabic as well as the tradition were forced on us by the Arab when they conquered Egypt in 600s AD. The Coptic language is derived from Greek and Hieroglyphics. True both of them were pagan languages but after St. Mark the Evangelist spread Christianity in Egypt, the country converted to Christianity. Our ancestors were the Egyptians that were living at that time, not the Arabs who conquered Egypt later. Therefore Arabs do have mix of Arab and Egyptians. But for us, we are not considered Arabs since we are the descendants of the Egyptians who were living in Egypt before the Arab conquest.
The Coptic language wasn't derived from Greek and Hieroglyphics, as you pointed out. The early Egyptians after converting to Christianity took the Greek words, and some Greek "loan" words to incorporate in the Egyptian language (i.e. they were not Greek anymore, but rather Copticised Greek words - hence the big argument nowadays of the proper pronunciation of Greek words, and the flawed argument about Greco-Bohairic as well). Coptic is simply the stage of evolution of the late Demotic scheme of writing which used icons and iconographs as I am sure you well know...
[coptic]oujai qen `P[C[/coptic]
Nationality wise, I am European! THANK GOD! But if I wasn't European, I'd definately be ashamed, if not embarassed to be considered an "arab".
Does anyone else feel this way??