Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- All Categories 13.8K
- General Category 10.9K
- General Announcements 184
- Faith Issues 3.4K
- Coptic Orthodox Church 2.5K
- Personal Issues 1.4K
- Prayer Requests 423
- Random Issues 1.8K
- Introductions 294
- Non-Orthodox Inquiries 232
- Youth Corner 606
- Hymns 2.5K
- Hymns Discussion 2.5K
- Technicial Difficulties 368
- Technical Topics 368
third tribulation (Ontos)
Hello,
In the fourth part of Ontos, it says "James the Son of Alphaeus and Thaddaeus their relative, with Matthew their partner in the feared places, their third in the tribulations.)"
Anyone know what is meant here by "their third in the tribulations"?
http://tasbeha.org/media/index.php?st=Hymns/Fasts/Apostles/Higher_Institute_of_Coptic_Studies/08.Ondos_-_Complete_Hymn.359.mp3
thanks,
bishoy
In the fourth part of Ontos, it says "James the Son of Alphaeus and Thaddaeus their relative, with Matthew their partner in the feared places, their third in the tribulations.)"
Anyone know what is meant here by "their third in the tribulations"?
http://tasbeha.org/media/index.php?st=Hymns/Fasts/Apostles/Higher_Institute_of_Coptic_Studies/08.Ondos_-_Complete_Hymn.359.mp3
thanks,
bishoy
Comments
Hello,
In the fourth part of Ontos, it says "James the Son of Alphaeus and Thaddaeus their relative, with Matthew their partner in the feared places, their third in the tribulations.)"
Anyone know what is meant here by "their third in the tribulations"?
James is first;
Thaddaeus is second;
Matthew is the third.
their third in tribulations means he is their partner in the tribulations they all had.
in the new southern khidmit shamas says: "with Matthias their partner and third partner in afflictions."
I was told that the verses between Ontos and Apokhrou were wrong...
Whoever told you this is just another person making a blanket statement.
[quote author=copticuser20 link=topic=12414.msg145408#msg145408 date=1317405284]
I was told that the verses between Ontos and Apokhrou were wrong...
Whoever told you this is just another person making a blanket statement.
noooo...don't tell him that.....this one day will make him search and find out why it's right or wrong.
there are talks about it. it's not they were "wrong" but rather inaccurate in some of the places the specific apostles preached.
[quote author=bishoykhali link=topic=12414.msg145407#msg145407 date=1317403311]
Hello,
In the fourth part of Ontos, it says "James the Son of Alphaeus and Thaddaeus their relative, with Matthew their partner in the feared places, their third in the tribulations.)"
Anyone know what is meant here by "their third in the tribulations"?
James is first;
Thaddaeus is second;
Matthew is the third.
their third in tribulations means he is their partner in the tribulations they all had.
in the new southern khidmit shamas says: "with Matthias their partner and third partner in afflictions."
Neither translation is correct since both translations ignored the Greek word cwcon which means "save". And in my opinion, there is no first, second or third, no tribulations and nothing that says "partner in afflictions." It has to do with the share of falling on Matthias and Thaddeus (with Matthew and James) saving the country.
I was in the process of studying this hymn too. But given the negative response I had about Agios Istin, I think it's better to leave it alone. People will do and say whatever they want, regardless if they know what it means. People will rely on a translation blindly, regardless of its accuracy. And what really gets under my skin is people want to ignore a bilingual textual, hymnological and linguistic history in favor of Coptic pride or Coptic linguistic purism. Why don't we actually learn Greek along with Coptic since our hymns and tradition are heavily bilingual?...But I digress from topic.
Neither translation is correct since both translations ignored the Greek word cwcon which means "save". And in my opinion, there is no first, second or third, no tribulations and nothing that says "partner in afflictions." It has to do with the share of falling on Matthias and Thaddeus (with Matthew and James) saving the country.
interesting.... OMG......i loved the paper....btw, can you send it to me please. who commented on this?....what did they say?
[quote author=copticuser20 link=topic=12414.msg145408#msg145408 date=1317405284]
I was told that the verses between Ontos and Apokhrou were wrong...
Whoever told you this is just another person making a blanket statement.
Actually I also heard this from a scholarly priest ...
...and scholarly priests sometimes make empty blanket statements.
Not one of the caliber who told me this ....
There is nothing wrong at all with any of the verses. This debate was started before on Coptichymns.net, and I was enthused to search for evidence, and guess what? I found everything in synexarium strictly matching the hymn. I just hope we don't start a debate about the synexarium needing corrections, at least not in this thread...
Oujai
Dear imikhail,
There is nothing wrong at all with any of the verses. This debate was started before on Coptichymns.net, and I was enthused to search for evidence, and guess what? I found everything in synexarium strictly matching the hymn. I just hope we don't start a debate about the synexarium needing corrections, at least not in this thread...
Oujai
There are historical mistakes in terms of matching the places and the apostles.
Ondoce is one of those hymns that did not exist before the 16th century and is probably a recent hymn the Coptic Church borrowed along with the other Greek hymns in the 19th century during the unification attempt with the Melekite Church.
Oujai
It is fine for me. I don't see a problem singing it wholly... is it Ibrahim Ayad who started the argument in the first place... can't remember...
Oujai
It is a nice hymn, I usually pray the first section, apokhrawu, and the last two verses.
Oujai
Dear imikhail,
There is nothing wrong at all with any of the verses. This debate was started before on Coptichymns.net, and I was enthused to search for evidence, and guess what? I found everything in synexarium strictly matching the hymn. I just hope we don't start a debate about the synexarium needing corrections, at least not in this thread...
Oujai
It's blanket statements like these that sound like fact but are baseless opinion. You can't say Ontos is right and the synaxarium is right and even though they clearly contradict each other it's not really a contradiction. Let's assume the synaxarium is absolutely correct. Show me where in the synaxarium that Philip or Bartholomew went to India like the third verse of Ontos says. The synaxarium date for St Bartholomew is Toot 1 and it says he preached in the Mediterranean coast and Egypt. The feast day for St Philip is Hatour 18 and it says he went to Africa. If you insist that the synaxarium is correct, then either Ontos describes events that are historically incorrect or the translation of Ontos is incorrect. Either way, you can't say that there is nothing wrong at all with all of the verses of Ontos.
Additionally, there are clear linguistic translation errors. The Greek word for India is India or Ινδία. Show me any word in the third verse of Ontos that even remotely resembles the Greek word Ινδία.
In my opinon the only problem with Ontos is not the historical information in the hymn, it is the translation. The hymn, if studied carefully, has a different meaning in the Greek than the one given by the Arabic translation.