𖤓 Philip Thomas Bartholomeus 𖢗

𝗗𝗘𝗕𝗨𝗡𝗞𝗜𝗡𝗚 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗞𝗨𝗥𝗗𝗜𝗦𝗛 𝗨𝗦𝗘 𝗢𝗙 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗧𝗘𝗥𝗠 "𝗡𝗘𝗦𝗧𝗢𝗥𝗜𝗔𝗡" 𝗧𝗢 𝗗𝗜𝗦𝗖𝗢𝗡𝗡𝗘𝗖𝗧 𝗔𝗦𝗦𝗬𝗥𝗜𝗔𝗡𝗦 Although you'll commonly see Kurds saying we being called "Nestorians" in some instances would disprove our Assyrian origin, they don't realize the sources that they themselves use rather identify the Nestorians as a religious instead of a racial group, and the Nestorians in most of these supposed sources are ethnically said to be of the same Ancient Assyrians. Beyond relying on 1600s-1900s European travelogues and colonial writers whose biased claims constantly contradict authentic Ottoman, Arab, and Persian historical accounts of the Assyrian Christians. Kurds simply cannot find any other legitimate sources to support their claims regarding Assyrians being Nestorians with disconnected traces to Ancient Assyrians. Strip away this outdated 19th-century Orientalist race science, and they completely lack any indigenous historical continuity or evidence to prove their claims against Assyrians. They have absolutely nothing left to stand on. Nestorius was Assyrian. Ancient and medieval records consistently identify him by his Mesopotamian origin and from Germanicia a city in the province of Syria Euphratensis of the same supposed Syriac Stock of Assyrians. gedsh.bethmardutho.org/Nesto… dev.gedsh.bethmardutho.org/e… Literally the Sasanian Empire record explicitly calls him a theologian of Syrian/Assyrian origin, while other historical accounts describe the Nestorian faithful as the direct descendants of the old Chaldeans and Assyrians. Assyrians are genetically proven to be the direct descendants of the Ancient Assyrians/Mesopotamians. With up to 85% direct frequency identicality between the two. teapaw.org/PlatosDisciple/status/… teapaw.org/MiroCyo/status/2024643… Ancient DNA from Bakr Awa (Neo-Assyrian period, 7th–6th c. BC) confirms modern Assyrians are genetically closer to this imperial heartland sample than Kurds, proving long-term continuity. dnagenics.com/blog/ancient-m… Ancient Assyrian Y-DNA is dominated by J2 (specifically descended from J-M304) and R1b-L23. Modern Assyrians retain these exact haplogroup lineages where J-M304 ranges 36-55%, and R1b (including/specifically R1b-L23) ranges 30-40%. en.wikipedia.org/api/rest_v1… such studies proving around 75-95% of Ancient Assyrian haplogroups are identical to modern Assyrian ones. Kurds, by contrast, show distinct haplogroup frequencies, with R1b dropping to as low as 4-16%. The 2017 Dogan study proved that Assyrians, Ezidis, and Shabaks possess a direct, unbroken genetic continuity with ancient Mesopotamian stock. Crucially, the researchers actively differentiated these specific indigenous populations from surrounding groups, effectively excluding Kurds entirely. doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone… The Nestorians and their Rituals (Volume 1, p. 179) notes that Assemani uses the term "Chaldeans or Assyrians" to describe the Nestorians, and that this proves the Chaldeans were of the same family with the Assyrians and descended from the Ancient Assyrians who were converted to Christianity by the Apostle Thomas, as "Nestorian" was a religious label not a ethnic one. en.wikisource.org/wiki/Page%… This already destroys the modern sectarian label. "Nestorian" has always been a religious designation, never an ethnicity, as even British colonial records concede, they "constitute a religious rather than a racial minority". qdl.qa/en/archive/81055/vdc_… and in the same passage say they are of the Assyro-Chaldean race (which in the same book are descended from Ancient Assyrians) Most crucially, the very sources Kurds cite for their arguments admit that the Nestorians, or the Assyrians as they are now generally called are one and the same people, confirming that the name Kurds weaponize as a slur is merely a theological tag attached to Assyrian blood. archive.org/stream/MN41565uc… Joseph Simon Assemani who was the Maronite Orientalist and Vatican librarian used "Chaldeans," "Assyrians," and "Nestorians" interchangeably as names for the same people in Bibliotheca Orientalis Clementino-Vaticana (specifically Vol. IV, p. 1). archive.org/download/b248735… Modern Assyrians are virtually indistinguishable from Ancient Assyrians, and there is overwhelming scientifical and historical evidence. Ancient DNA from Bakr Awa proves continuous Y-DNA haplogroups like J2 and R1b, confirming a direct, unbroken Mesopotamian genetic lineage.

The Storm God had revealed himself to the Hellenes as Zeus, and to the Syrians as Hadad. The Goddess of Love and Beauty had revealed herself to the Hellenes as Aphrodite, and to the Syrians as Atargatis.

"Hadad, worthy of all praise, we must reckon a divine intellect: simple, unmixed, and free of all composition. For he does not have understanding as one thing and being as another, nor does he think now one thing and now another; his understanding is his being, and his being is his act of thinking. Being one, he knows all things in one way, and by knowing them makes and orders them. From him proceed the forms and the harmony of the whole, as from a single fountain. Therefore the ancients rightly named him Zeus; for he is Zeus, the paternal and demiurgic cause, who governs all things by understanding himself."

B-but saar!!!!!!!!!!!

𝐏𝐎𝐑𝐏𝐇𝐘𝐑𝐘 𝐑𝐄𝐅𝐔𝐓𝐄𝐒, 𝐂𝐎𝐍𝐃𝐄𝐌𝐍𝐒, 𝐀𝐍𝐃 𝐃𝐈𝐒𝐌𝐀𝐍𝐓𝐋𝐄𝐒 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐃𝐎𝐂𝐓𝐑𝐈𝐍𝐄𝐒 𝐎𝐅 𝐎𝐑𝐈𝐆𝐄𝐍 𝐀𝐍𝐃 𝐏𝐇𝐈𝐋𝐎 𝐎𝐅 𝐀𝐋𝐄𝐗𝐀𝐍𝐃𝐑𝐈𝐀: 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐀𝐓𝐓𝐀𝐂𝐊 𝐎𝐍 𝐒𝐓𝐎𝐈𝐂 𝐀𝐋𝐋𝐄𝐆𝐎𝐑𝐘 𝐈𝐍 𝐁𝐈𝐁𝐋𝐈𝐂𝐀𝐋 𝐄𝐗𝐄𝐆𝐄𝐒𝐈𝐒 "As an example of this absurdity take a man whom I met when I was young, and who was then greatly celebrated and still is, on account of the writings which he has left. I refer to Origen, who is highly honored by the teachers of these doctrines. For this man, having been a student of Ammonius, who had attained the greatest proficiency in philosophy of any in our day, derived much benefit from his teacher in the knowledge of the sciences; but as to the correct choice of life, he pursued a course opposite to his. For Ammonius, being a Christian, and brought up by Christian parents, when he gave himself to study and to philosophy straightway conformed to the life required by the laws. But Origen, having been educated as a Greek in Greek literature, went over to the barbarian recklessness. And carrying over the learning which he had obtained, he hawked it about, in his life conducting himself as a Christian and contrary to the laws, but in his opinions of material things and of the Deity being like a Greek, and mingling Grecian teachings with foreign fables. For he was continually studying Plato, and he busied himself with the writings of Numenius and Cronius, Apollophanes, Longinus, Moderatus, and Nicomachus, and those famous among the Pythagoreans. And he used the books of Chaeremon the Stoic, and of Cornutus. Becoming acquainted through them with the figurative interpretation of the Grecian mysteries, he applied it to the Jewish Scriptures." —Porphyry, Against the Christians, Book 3 cited in Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 6.19 Porphyry opposes Origen and Philo for illegitimately hijacking Greek philosophical methods, specifically Stoic allegory, to interpret Jewish scriptures. He himself sees this as a fraudulent attempt to elevate a barbarian text, arguing Greek rationalism shouldn't validate foreign myths, exposing their forced synthesis as intellectually bankrupt.

Mark my words, Porphyry would humble Origen, Ammonius Saccas, Philo of Alexandria, Hypatia, Numenius, and so on easily. Even Plotinus is nowhere near as philosophically formidable than Porphyry. If you believe Hypatia is near the level of Porphyry, you are deluded. She herself isn't as great as Ammonius Saccas or Plotinus, and you think she can reach Porphyry? Look at the surviving texts; his logical rigor and polemical brutality were unmatched. Hypatia was a local Alexandrian teacher, while Porphyry was a universal intellectual titan. Porphyry himself could dismantle her whole philosophy in a few days if he wrote a treatise against her. YET THERE IS ONE GREAT DIVINE MAN WHO HUMBLED PORPHYRY. The Great Divine Iamblichus. He completely shattered Porphyry's objections. Iamblichus alone stands as the supreme philosophical titan.

𝐂𝐎𝐍𝐓𝐄𝐍𝐃𝐈𝐍𝐆 𝐀𝐍𝐃 𝐃𝐄𝐁𝐔𝐍𝐊𝐈𝐍𝐆 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐀𝐁𝐑𝐀𝐇𝐀𝐌𝐈𝐂 𝐃𝐎𝐂𝐓𝐑𝐈𝐍𝐄 𝐎𝐅 𝐄𝐓𝐄𝐑𝐍𝐀𝐋 𝐒𝐔𝐅𝐅𝐄𝐑𝐈𝐍𝐆 P1: The God of the Bible is purported to be the ultimate definition of infinite Love, Goodness and Justice. C1: If that is actually true, Him actively sustaining an eternal torture chamber for His own creations is a direct contradiction of His nature. It's simply impossible. P2: Human actions, sins, and lifespans are strictly finite and bound by time. C2: Punishing a finite crime with an infinite, unending sentence is a massive injustice thereby it turns God into a sadistic and cosmic tyrant. P3: Classical theology actually teaches that divine punishment is medicinal and meant to purify, correct, and restore the soul. C3: Endless, sadistic retribution serves absolutely no corrective purpose. It is just eternal vengeance, which is completely incompatible with a loving God. P4: Metaphysically speaking, evil isn't a real entity; it's just a privation as a lack of good and being. C4: Inorder for Hell to be eternal, evil would have to be a permanent, eternal reality. This gives Satan an eternal victory over God, and violates the absolute supremacy of the Good. P5: True Divine Omnipotence must mean God ultimately conquers death, sin, and evil completely. C5: If eternal suffering is real, then God's will is permanently thwarted by the devil. The universe ends in a dualistic stalemate where evil just co-exists with good forever, thus and thereby imposing dualistic limitations on the Omnipotence of God. Summing it up, the entire doctrine of eternal suffering collapses under its own weight. It's a philosophical dead end that directly contradicts the nature of an infinitely good and loving Creator. This is exactly why some Christians like St. Isaac of Nineveh and Origen rejected it. Isaac argued that divine justice isn't about endless sadism; he taught that even the corrupted evil souls, and Satan himself, will ultimately be consumed and healed by the overwhelming fire and infinite, incomprehensible, and ineffable Ocean of God's infinite all-encompassing Love.

Kurdish "history" posts be like:

𝐋𝐔𝐂𝐈𝐀𝐍 𝐎𝐅 𝐒𝐀𝐌𝐎𝐒𝐀𝐓𝐀 𝐖𝐀𝐒 𝐀𝐍 𝐀𝐒𝐒𝐘𝐑𝐈𝐀𝐍 𝐅𝐑𝐎𝐌 𝐒𝐘𝐑𝐈𝐀 Lucian of Samosata, a 2nd-century AD Hellenized writer, explicitly identifies himself as an "Assyrian born." This primary source completely destroys the Kurdish claim that Ancient Assyrians went extinct millennia ago. If we were wiped out by Medes, Lucian couldn't have claimed to come from our ethnicity. We survived as a continuous people in Roman Syria, proving modern Assyrians are the true indigenous heirs, not a 19th-century British invention. Source: Syrian Goddess (De Syria Dea)

"Hence, if all things are instantaneously perceived by it, its perceptions have nothing to do with the past and the future, but subsist in an indivisible untemporal now; so that the simultaneous, both according to multitude, and according to temporal interval, are present with intellect. Hence, too, all things subsist in it according to one, and in one, without interval, and without time. But if this be the case, there is nothing discursive or transitive in its intellections, and consequently they are without motion. Hence, they are energies according to one, subsisting in one, and without increase or mutation, or any transition." —Porphyry, Auxiliaries to the Perception of Intelligible Natures, p. 237, 44. The Divine Intellect does not discursively see things but timelessly and indivisibly sees them in an eternal now without change. As Porphyry explicitly argues, its perceptions have absolutely nothing to do with past or future. Instead, all things subsist simultaneously within an untemporal, indivisible "now." Its intellections are strictly non-discursive, meaning they are entirely motionless. They are singular, immutable energies lacking any transition, increase, or mutation.

“Iamblichus demands that ‘partless’ and ‘inexistent’ should be taken as applying to two different times, assigning [to time] partlessness in accordance with the formal principles, which remain motionless in themselves, and inexistence in accordance with the motions that proceed from them, since these do not preserve the partless and unmoved essence [of the formal principles], and [also] partlessness in accordance with the activity and perfection that remains in the essences, and inexistence in accordance with the inclination away from being towards generation, since [this time] has not preserved the purity of the first essence.” —Simplicius, Iamblichus apud Simplicium, In Phys., 787.10–17 As Simplicius explains that Iamblichus posits two kinds of times, of which the first is transcendent and essential as the motionless, partless, and unmoved Monad in the intelligible realm, acting as the perfect cause of temporal reality, serving as the first essence. The second is physical time, characterized by "inexistence" because it is the fragmented, flowing measure of material generation. It lacks true being, failing to preserve and inclining away from the pure, partless perfection of its transcendent source which is a first essence.

“[Iamblichus] explains the definition: ”A certain motion” refers not to one [motion] out of many (for the other motions will be [thus] excluded from time), nor to the community of the many [motions] (for this is not one), but to that which is truly single and pre-exists all others as the monad of motions, which is rightly primary and cause of all other motions; it is the first change of the soul, which is born as the soul projects to itself the formal principles [of all generated things]. The number of this motion does not supervene or come from outside, as Aristotle thinks, but is set above motion in a rank of cause and advances it according to fitting measures, being an essence advancing an essential activity and, as it were, bringing to birth the self-moving projections of the essential formal principles of the soul’.” —Simplicius, Iamblichus apud Simplicium, In Phys.,786.13–22 Unlike physical time, which Aristotle reduces to a mere external measure or number of sequential movements, the Essence of Time is an ontological cause set above motion. According to Iamblichus, it is the first self-moving of the Soul, an essential activity that births the formal principles of all generated things. It does not supervene from outside; rather, it is the transcendent, unifying source that grants motion its measure and order. Physical time is merely the fragmented, material shadow of this singular, immaterial Monad.

Kurds saying "ISIS owns you"

Kurds are mentally deranged.