Johannes Posted January 25, 2014 Report Share Posted January 25, 2014 Վերէւ ես ասի որ Աճառեանը կանտեսէ Արաբերէնը եւ կը հէնու 0սմանլի քամուսի, լրիվ անտեսեէլով Արամերէնը: Միթէ նա գիտեր՞ որ օսմանա արաբերէնը մեծ մասամ Արամերէն է: Յիսուս Արամերէն կը խօսէր:Երբ նա ըսաւ Տալիտա Քումի , դա նաշանակի Աղջնակ ելիր, կանքնիր, յարուցիր:Եւ երբ նա ըսաւ Eli, Eli lama Sabatini, Արաբերէն գիտցողները գիտէն որ այդ սա է: Ilahi, Ilahi lima sabaqni, Why did you get ahead of me, why did you leave me behin, why did you beat me at the foot race. Ինչու ինձ անցար, ինչու զիս ետ թողուցիր, ինչու ինձ յաղթեցիր մրցարշավի ընթացքին:Օհաննէս մեզ գրիր թէ այդ խօսքը ինչպէս գրուի Արաբատառلي, إيـلي إيـلي, لما سـبـقـتـني Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johannes Posted January 25, 2014 Report Share Posted January 25, 2014 (edited) Յովհաննես, Եղբայր, Ինձ սխալ հասկըցար։ The Wurm ice age period started approximately 40,000 years ago and ended approximately 13,000 to 10,000 years ago, depending on location. The Mammoth became mostly extinctԷ except for a few cold climate pockets in Asia at about that period, and the quite sophisticated the cave cultures of southern France exemplified by the Dordogne and Chauvet caves ended perhaps in the 40,000 to 30,000 year period. The opinion of many is that large migrations back to the east took place. Asia Minor and especially the Armenian Plateau were warmer and habitable regions that also offered security from many elements due to the topography. The neolithic period saw light in this era, an era that also saw Gobekli Tepe in addition to a very dense rock carving presence/culture that might very well be the ancestor of the later Mesopotamian/Ubbayid and the Kur-Arax (present day eastern Armenia and Artsakh, coincidentally) cultures. This is the period I am talking about. Սիրելի Յակոբ, շնորհակալ եմ: Լաւ չեմ հասկցած, թերեւս անգլերէն շատ չիմանալուս պատճառով: ,,,Ինչպէս կարելի է գաղթականները հայեր անուանել, հայախօս եւ դեռ բոլոր ազգերուն ծնող ազգ համարուիլ... Իմ կարդացած գրութիւններուն մէջ այդպէս կը մեկնաբանուի: Ես շատ հանդիպած եմ գիտաերեւակայական գրութիւններու, ուր հայանուն եւ օտարանուն հեղինակներ լուրջ-լուրջ կը յայտարարեն՝ բրիտները, բասկերը, կելտերը, գերմանները ծագումով Հայեր են: թուրքերն ալ էտրուսկներուն թուրքական ծագում կը վերագրեն, հիմնուելով էտրուսկեան tarquinia եւ նման տեղանուններու եւ այլ անուններու վրայ:ինչով տարբեր ենք թուրքերէն, պատմութիւն կեղծելու մէջ: Edited January 25, 2014 by Johannes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arpa Posted January 25, 2014 Report Share Posted January 25, 2014 I am so glad to see our friends Hagop and Johannes talking again after a long well deserved nap./մրափ. I dont intend to trivialize this serious and highly intellectual debate, but allow me to be a little silly I am so glad to see that my old buddy Hagop has waken up after a long nap. We do appreciate his highly intellectual and well researched contributions. Յագոբ Եղբայր ննջում՞, մրափում Էիր: It spares me from singing this silly ditty. ---- Յագոբ եղբայր, Յագոբ եղբայր արթնցիր Զանգակները կը հնչեն Դինկ դանկ դոնկ: Անգլերէն տարբերակը կասէ Օհան եղբայր: --- Are you sleeping, are you sleeping? Brother John, Brother John? Morning bells are ringing, morning bells are ringing Ding dang dong, ding da ng dong. ----- Add the Armenian Ը as Frere /Ֆրերը. And Jacques/Ժաքը: --- Frère Jacques, frère Jacques, Dormez-vous ? Dormez-vous ? Sonnez les matines ! Sonnez les matines ! Ding, daing, dong. Ding, daing, dong. --- And now, after all that levity I will step aside and let Hagop and Johannes continue. We are so appreciative/ գննահատ and grateful, երախտապարտ. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hagopn Posted January 25, 2014 Report Share Posted January 25, 2014 Գիտերեւայականը այն է, որ կ՚անտեսէ փաստը «քանի որ չի կարելի թուրքին նմանիլ։ Ամօթ է»։ Շատ մե՚ծ տարբերութիւն կայ, բայց չենք ուզեր տեսնել։ Մեզ կապիկի նման սորվեցուցեր են անտեսել։ Ինչքան ալ փաստ ներկայացուի, զսպանակի պէս Կապիկի ձգտումը կը վերադարնայ։ Ոչ մեկ ժամանակ հայախոս կամ «հայ լինելու» պնդումներ չեղան։ Հայաստանի եւ հայ մշակոյթի ազդեցութեան մասին է խոսքը, եւ հայ գաղթի հետքեր փնտրելն է հարցը։ Կներես որ անգելերենով պիտի շարունակեմ։ ռ եւ ր գիրերու սխալ տեղադրումը ինձ շատ կը չարչարէ։ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hagopn Posted January 25, 2014 Report Share Posted January 25, 2014 If we understand ծագում as origin in the absolute sense, then there would be a problem. "Yes. the Britons were Armenians." There are possibilities as to why the British monk Bede said what he said. Armenians didn't say it. Khorenatsi didn't say it. Bede the Monk wrote it! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Saxon_Chronicle Ivanov-Gamkrelidze found the IE homeland to be Armenia, Van and vicinity. The neolithic era began there. The Bronze first saw light there. The Iron Age first saw light there. So what do we do with this information? Ignore it? Hovaness, are you still worried about us looking like the ridiculous pan-Turks? I am truly surprised you don't see the difference. Tarqinia you say? The entire "Turan" and "Tarku" and so on series is also probably of Armenian origin! We have the "Torq" legend, the mythical giant, the king who sank ships by throwing boulders into the sea. Khorenatsi remembers him as Torgom, an actual king, who apparently was ruler of the Angegh Tun, the Eagle Clan or Dynasty who ruled Taron, which is most probably the Turan in the Shahname. And why can it not be? Because "amot e"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hagopn Posted January 25, 2014 Report Share Posted January 25, 2014 What about that interesting Annolied http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annolied#Bavarians_descended_from_Armenians ? Is that "fiction" as well? The Bavarian name apparently is possibly of Armenian origin! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yervant1 Posted January 25, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 25, 2014 In the early nineties, I told an Irish teacher that his ancestry was Armenian! He recoiled and gave me the dirty look as if saying me descended after your people in amazement to which I said don't kill the messenger, just go and study world history since you're a teacher. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johannes Posted January 25, 2014 Report Share Posted January 25, 2014 (edited) If we understand ծագում as origin in the absolute sense, then there would be a problem. "Yes. the Britons were Armenians." There are possibilities as to why the British monk Bede said what he said. Armenians didn't say it. Khorenatsi didn't say it. Bede the Monk wrote it! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Saxon_Chronicle Ivanov-Gamkrelidze found the IE homeland to be Armenia, Van and vicinity. The neolithic era began there. The Bronze first saw light there. The Iron Age first saw light there. So what do we do with this information? Ignore it? Hovaness, are you still worried about us looking like the ridiculous pan-Turks? I am truly surprised you don't see the difference. Tarqinia you say? The entire "Turan" and "Tarku" and so on series is also probably of Armenian origin! We have the "Torq" legend, the mythical giant, the king who sank ships by throwing boulders into the sea. Khorenatsi remembers him as Torgom, an actual king, who apparently was ruler of the Angegh Tun, the Eagle Clan or Dynasty who ruled Taron, which is most probably the Turan in the Shahname. And why can it not be? Because "amot e"? Here is http://www.britannia.com/history/docs/1-448.htmlMonk Bede said they came from Armenia, he didn't say they were Armenians. Britons are Celtic people. Անոնք իրապէս տարածուած էին Սեւ Ծովէն մինչեւ Իբերական թերակղզի:Galatians, celts, Galicia .... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galatia Edited January 25, 2014 by Johannes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johannes Posted January 25, 2014 Report Share Posted January 25, 2014 What about that interesting Annolied http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annolied#Bavarians_descended_from_Armenians ? Is that "fiction" as well? The Bavarian name apparently is possibly of Armenian origin!Այս ալ յիշենք «Արմինուս», «Հերման» http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arminius Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hagopn Posted January 25, 2014 Report Share Posted January 25, 2014 I interpret it as Bede having meant Armenians. Celts were prevalent in Europe, the Balkans, only a small part of Asia Minor, and simply were not from Armenia proper. My assumption is that an Armenian speaking legion that remained on the British isles, originally perhaps under Hadrian's command, was cause for this opinion. Others are more bold and say that the Britons were in fact another tribe of the Thraco-Phrygian group of whom Armenian is a member by relying on Ellis' linguistic analysis. The chronology of Celtic migration is up for grabs. Both languages are members of the IE group, but that is only relevant for relatively recent Armenian migrations. There are interesting mythological and linguistic links, aside from the glaringly similar political model, between Armenians and Celts. The only difference is that the Celts were more matriarchal in their mythology and political leanings than Armenians, something that Armenians also apparently once were. The deities, such as Ara, that were feminine and local for Armenians that later became masculine, remained feminine, almost unchanged among the Celts. Now you say that Bede actually meant to say that the Britons were Celts who came from Galatia. Galatia was a specific region of western Asia Minor where a small population of Gallic people, supposedly Celtoi, lived. Galatia simple was not Armenia! Unless, of course, Bede considered all of Asia Minor, the Armenian Plateau, the northwest Zagros, and the entirety of the Caucasus as Armenia, as the Arab chroniclers also often did. This is possible, but doubtful. Bede was specific: Armenia. There are those who try to explain away why Bede says Armenia. The Monkeys have done better than you -> They have said Bede misspelled Amerois ( or something like that, I can't remember the concoction) or some other nonsense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hagopn Posted January 25, 2014 Report Share Posted January 25, 2014 Besides, since there are theories that say the IE language first saw light in Armenia, the Celts could very well be the Գեղամ of Gavoukjian's theory. Gavoukjian's far-fetched assumptions still have entertaining possibilities. Since we are talking about a language family, then we cannot ignore the probability that these peoples were at some point related in some combination. Once upon a time, circa 4000 b.c., the village grew. Tatev Hayrik said, "Torgom, you inherit this portion. Gegham, I give you what later on they will call Galatia"--- Who says at what point the Celt and the Armenian began and the Mayr Lezu IE ended? Did they do it together? Were they ever related in blood? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hagopn Posted January 25, 2014 Report Share Posted January 25, 2014 (edited) Then there is the phenomenon of different Celtic groups having mutually unintelligible languages and vocabulary. Who is to say that the Britons were not originally Armenian speaking, who then lost their original language and were assimilated in the larger Gaelic speaking societies? According to the Bavarian migration theory, the Bavarians originally spoke a foreign language, an ARmenian dialect most likely, who later became German speakers. The Annolied says the following: "Duo sich Beirelant wider in virmaz, Die mêrin Reginsburch her se bisaz, Dâ vanter inne Helm unti brunigen, Manigin helit guodin, Die dere burg hû[h]din. Wiliche Knechti dir wêrin, Deist in heidnischin buochin mêri. Dâ lisit man Noricus ensis, Daz diudit ein suert Beierisch, Wanti si woldin wizzen Daz inge[m]ini baz nibizzin, Die man dikke durch den helm slûg; Demo liute was ie diz ellen gût. Dere geslehte dare quam wîlin êre Von Armenie der hêrin, Dâ Nôê ûz der arkin gîng, Dûr diz olizuî von der tûvin intfieng: Iri zeichin noch du archa havit Ûf den bergin Ararat. Man sagit daz dar in halvin noch sîn Die dir Diutischin sprecchin, Ingegin India vili verro. Peiere vûrin ie ziwîge gerno: Den sigin den Cêsar an un gewan Mit bluote mûster in geltan." The bold type emphasis is mine. Saint Anno also writes about the Noricum, thought to be a Celtic region, but closer scrutiny reveals no such thing. Thousands of towns and villages of "heretics" were exiled to the far regions of the Byzantine/Roman controlled realm during the various "heretic" rebellions (Tonrdakian, Pavlikian, even older ones, civil war, no matter how you choose to label it), and the banks of the Danube, the Black Forest, the Rhine region, the Rhone region, Anjou, and so on, saw these migrants settle. And what is with that French region of Lille and vicinity, Armentierre? Armentierre? Really? And we don't take a closer look? Is the Monkey/Banana reflex that strong? So who's to say a good number of European "mysteries" can't be explained this way. Even a superficial and cursory examination reveals a lot of Armenian presence. Edited January 25, 2014 by hagopn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hagopn Posted January 25, 2014 Report Share Posted January 25, 2014 What about them Armenian origin Bogomils of Bulgaria, the Cathar/Albinesgian "heresy"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yervant1 Posted January 25, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 25, 2014 hagopn thank you for all of this, I talk about this in my family circles and it always ends with laughter even though I'm very serious about it. My reasoning is why all of these people would mention Armenia and Armenians if there is no truth in it. I guess earlier people did not hate us as much as nowadays! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johannes Posted January 25, 2014 Report Share Posted January 25, 2014 (edited) ԻՍԿ ՄԵՆՔ ԿԸՍԵՆՔ Հայկը հարաւէն եկաւ.Նոյէն ծնաւ ԹորգոմՆոյը ո՞րտեղացի էր............... Այս ալ ուրիշ "հայ" մը - Արմանիակhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armagnac_(region)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armagnac_(brandy) Edited January 25, 2014 by Johannes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hagopn Posted January 25, 2014 Report Share Posted January 25, 2014 Yervant, I assume you have read Armen Ayvazyan's "controversial" book that dealt with the Turkish influence on Armenology in the USA, Canada, much of the west, Eastern block, and USSR? The English title is The History of Armenia as Presented in American Historiography: A Critical Survey. 1998 The Armenian is Հայաստանի պատմության լուսաբանումը ամերիկյան պատմագրության մեջջ. քննական տեսություն Of course, the book is only "controversial" to brainwashed Monkey Brigade Afraid to Touch The Banana. In his book he brings to light the proposal on Armenology made by Esat Uras, the president of the Turkish Historical Society in the 1980s. Esat Uras' proposal was that Armenia should be discredited as much as possible as a viable political unit, a state, a nation or nationality. it should be treated as a temporary, semi-nomadic, almost ephemeral presence, such as the Gypsy/Romani identity. They are working tirelessly to buy as many historians, and they have strong and rich allies. The Pink Elephant's leadership is traditionally very pro-Turkish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hagopn Posted January 25, 2014 Report Share Posted January 25, 2014 (edited) ԻՍԿ ՄԵՆՔ ԿԸՍԵՆՔ Հայկը հարաւէն եկաւ.Նոյէն ծնաւ ԹորգոմՆոյը ո՞րտեղացի էր............... Այս ալ ուրիշ "հայ" մը - Արմանիակhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armagnac_(region)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armagnac_(brandy) Distorted "histories" by Christian Biblical influenced oral testimony is not as reliable, particularly if it goes against all logic. Even if there is truth in Hayk's legend, then repatriation is probably how it should be interpreted. Armenians lived in Mesopotamia in great number probably. They in fact still had a state in the South of Mesopotamia under a rebellion Armenian king named Arakha, as Darius I recalls. Armenian king named Arakha in the vicinity of ancient Sumer? How so, you say? Our Monkeys avoiding the Banana even say that Armenian statehood began "as a consequence of Persian Satraps." This is utter nonsense, but it does remind me of pan-Turk "history" of Armenia. How do these Monkeys explain that Arakha the Armin (yes, Arakha the Armenian) lived in Darius 1's time as an Armenian king IN SUMER! I'll tell you. Read Gavoukjian's last chapter in Armenia, Subartu, and Sumer, and get perhaps his most valuable input on the topic: Migrations were mostly done downstream Tigris and Euphrates. Simple. Plain. Logical. It's easier to migrate downstream. Something the matter with that logic? Or are we, the Monkeys, going to argue against Gravity, the flow of rivers, the laws of nutritional needs of growing populations, and so on? Edited January 25, 2014 by hagopn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hagopn Posted January 25, 2014 Report Share Posted January 25, 2014 ԻՍԿ ՄԵՆՔ ԿԸՍԵՆՔ Հայկը հարաւէն եկաւ.Նոյէն ծնաւ ԹորգոմՆոյը ո՞րտեղացի էր............... Այս ալ ուրիշ "հայ" մը - Արմանիակhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armagnac_(region)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armagnac_(brandy) Che, che, amot e. Arman, Armen, Armentierre. Che, chellar. Amot e beh! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hagopn Posted January 25, 2014 Report Share Posted January 25, 2014 hagopn thank you for all of this, I talk about this in my family circles and it always ends with laughter even though I'm very serious about it. My reasoning is why all of these people would mention Armenia and Armenians if there is no truth in it. I guess earlier people did not hate us as much as nowadays! Earlier people were dealing with an entirely different Armenian and Armenia. Armenians then were stronger, prouder, more confident, leaders, movers, shakers, the most highly paid mercenaries, among the most trusted merchants, and so on. The Armenia of the Bagratuni alone outpopulated most European states of the time. It was, in fact, the largest single kindgom on record outside the direct influence of imperialism. The world was indeed different. Think of it if Armenia was a country with a population of 80 or so million with similar industrial potential it had in the 10th century. It would be the leader of weapons production, a leader in gold production, a leader in manufacturing. In other words, it would be a Germany or better, more experienced, even more stable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yervant1 Posted January 25, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 25, 2014 I have not read Armen Ayvazyan's book but I know about it, if I'm not mistaken we have here at Hyeforum some discussions about the case in point.Here I found this!http://hyeforum.com/index.php?showtopic=9631&hl=%22armen+ayvazyan%22 Also this onehttp://hyeforum.com/index.php?showtopic=17239&hl=%22armen+ayvazyan%22 I'm sure there are more out there!I have no doubt in my mind that not even for one second that there are strong forces out there trying to keep us back, I mean forces in plural because if the truth comes out, many countries have so much to lose in the public opinion if not financial. Doubters go ahead and make fun out it if you like, because I don't give a sh*t. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arpa Posted January 25, 2014 Report Share Posted January 25, 2014 We are so adapt in beating water -Ջուր ծեծել: This whole debate is, crudely put - Այրուած սրտի %^&*$ մխիթարանք: Crying over spilled milk. Վայ Կիկոս Ջան վայ: Like we taught the whole world including the Celts, the Britons, the Basque et al how to speak, while in the meantime, for over 40 millennia we did not have a written language.. How we, the Paulicians taught Martin Luther how to Protest. Old Martin was not massacred but the Paulicians and the Thondrakians were fraternally massacred. This is reminiscent of what Jesus said 2000 years ago about man gaining the whole world, but losing his own soul. Sadly, in our case, WE HAVE LOST NOT ONLY THE WORLD, BUT OUR VERY SOUL AS WELL. Զինչ օգտիցի մարդ՝ եթէ զաշխարհս ամենայն շահեսցի, եւ զանձն իւր տուժեսցի: Bible Verses about Gain The Whole World Matthew 16:26 For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johannes Posted January 25, 2014 Report Share Posted January 25, 2014 (edited) Distorted "histories" by Christian Biblical influenced oral testimony is not as reliable, particularly if it goes against all logic. Even if there is truth in Hayk's legend, then repatriation is probably how it should be interpreted. Armenians lived in Mesopotamia in great number probably. They in fact still had a state in the South of Mesopotamia under a rebellion Armenian king named Arakha, as Darius I recalls. Armenian king named Arakha in the vicinity of ancient Sumer? How so, you say? Our Monkeys avoiding the Banana even say that Armenian statehood began "as a consequence of Persian Satraps." This is utter nonsense, but it does remind me of pan-Turk "history" of Armenia. How do these Monkeys explain that Arakha the Armin (yes, Arakha the Armenian) lived in Darius 1's time as an Armenian king IN SUMER! I'll tell you. Read Gavoukjian's last chapter in Armenia, Subartu, and Sumer, and get perhaps his most valuable input on the topic: Migrations were mostly done downstream Tigris and Euphrates. Simple. Plain. Logical. It's easier to migrate downstream. Something the matter with that logic? Or are we, the Monkeys, going to argue against Gravity, the flow of rivers, the laws of nutritional needs of growing populations, and so on? Հայկ նահապետի առասպելի մէջ բազմաթիւ դէպքեր, դէմքեր, ժամանակներ իրար միացած, խառնուած, շփոթած կրնան ըլլալ. շատ ուրիշ ժողովուրդներու առասպելներուն պէս:Հարաւէն հիւսիս, Լեռներ ապաստանելուն մէջ, թերեւս խոռեան ցեղերու հերոսամարտի յիշատակներ են արձանագրուած, սեմական զաւթիչ ցեղերու «ակկադացիներ, քաղդէացիներ-ամորհացիներ, յետոյ արամէացիներ» արշաւանքներէն յետոյ պատահած դէպքերու մասին:Շումերները ընդունեցին սեմական լուծը եւ ստրկացան, Միտաննի եւ Արարատեան ցեղերը ըմբոստացան եւ ազատեցան: Կարծիք է: Edited January 25, 2014 by Johannes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hagopn Posted January 25, 2014 Report Share Posted January 25, 2014 Կառծիք է որ հիմք ունի։ Յիշենք որ մենք Հ հնչոիւնը ունինք, ուրեմն իրավունք ունինք Հուռի հնչելու Հուռիներու ցեղանունը։ Իսկ ի՞նչ գիտենք «հուռեան ցեղերի» մասին, բացի այն, որ իրենց լեզուն ոչ սեմական է՝ ոչ ալ ՀԵ։ Ըստ ո՞ր հեղինակային եւ վստահելի կերպարին։ Լոգ մի քանի կասկածելի գիտնականներու որոնց կարելի տեղադրել «Կապկամարզիչներու» շարքին, օրինակ, Դիակոնով։ Հայկական նեղգաղթ աւելի հաւանական է, քանզի հայկական ցեղերը աւելի հին ու շատ ներկայութիւն էն ունեցած ՀԱՅՔՈՒՄ եւ, իմ կարծիքով, Միջագետքում։ Կարդայ Peter Jensenի Armenier und Hittiter (այս ո՞ր ապուշը Ռն դրած է Rի տեղը ստեղնաշարի վրայ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hagopn Posted January 25, 2014 Report Share Posted January 25, 2014 We are so adapt in beating water -Ջուր ծեծել:This whole debate is, crudely put - Այրուած սրտի %^&*$ մխիթարանք: Crying over spilled milk. Վայ Կիկոս Ջան վայ:Like we taught the whole world including the Celts, the Britons, the Basque et al how to speak, while in the meantime, for over 40 millennia we did not have a written language..How we, the Paulicians taught Martin Luther how to Protest. Old Martin was not massacred but the Paulicians and the Thondrakians were fraternally massacred.This is reminiscent of what Jesus said 2000 years ago about man gaining the whole world, but losing his own soul.Sadly, in our case, WE HAVE LOST NOT ONLY THE WORLD, BUT OUR VERY SOUL AS WELL.Զինչ օգտիցի մարդ՝ եթէ զաշխարհս ամենայն շահեսցի, եւ զանձն իւր տուժեսցի:Bible Verses about Gain The Whole WorldMatthew 16:26For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul? I already responded to the the meaningless "literacy" argument. Those who developed the first written language committed cultural suicide because of the literacy. Yes, Sumer lost its independence to the illiterate Amorites because the literate class of merchants essentially had created a slave labor society, which only accelerated in its pace due to the literacy of the scribe class who mostly served the merchant/usurious classes. Examine their history closely. As to the lack of "literacy" among Armenian speaking peoples. Its ridiculous. Read again Peter Jensen and learn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johannes Posted January 25, 2014 Report Share Posted January 25, 2014 (edited) Կառծիք է որ հիմք ունի։ Յիշենք որ մենք Հ հնչոիւնը ունինք, ուրեմն իրավունք ունինք Հուռի հնչելու Հուռիներու ցեղանունը։ Իսկ ի՞նչ գիտենք «հուռեան ցեղերի» մասին, բացի այն, որ իրենց լեզուն ոչ սեմական է՝ ոչ ալ ՀԵ։ Ըստ ո՞ր հեղինակային եւ վստահելի կերպարին։ Լոգ մի քանի կասկածելի գիտնականներու որոնց կարելի տեղադրել «Կապկամարզիչներու» շարքին, օրինակ, Դիակոնով։ Հայկական նեղգաղթ աւելի հաւանական է, քանզի հայկական ցեղերը աւելի հին ու շատ ներկայութիւն էն ունեցած ՀԱՅՔՈՒՄ եւ, իմ կարծիքով, Միջագետքում։ Կարդայ Peter Jensenի Armenier und Hittiter (այս ո՞ր ապուշը Ռն դրած է Rի տեղը ստեղնաշարի վրայ)We wrote like that from the beginning http://hy.wikipedia.org/wiki/Խոխոռունիներ Խոռխորունիներ, Խոռխորունիք, նախարարական տոհմ հին Հայաստանում։ Տոհմական «հայրենիքը» (կալվածքը) եղել է Տուրուբերան նահանգի Խորխոռունիք գավառը։ Մովսես Խորենացու մոտ պահպանված ավանդական պատմությունը Խորխոռունիների նահապետ ու անվանադիրը համարում է Հայկ Նահապետի Խոռ որդին։ Edited January 25, 2014 by Johannes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.