What are the differences bewtween the Chaldeans and the Assyrians?
817876
The Chaldeans were the last people to rule Mesopotamia.   It is the word used to describe contemporary Assyrian people associated with the Chaldean Catholic Church.  \n\nThe Assyrians are Aramaic-speaking Christians who consider themselves to be indigenous inhabitants of Mesopotamia, and inheritors of the ancient culture of Assyria.   They are the result of the merging of different cultures, including Chaldeans.\n\nThe history is complicated.  I hope this is of some help.
987156
Actually, they are both quite similar.  The indigenous people in North America were living pretty much in peace with their neighbors when the White Man moved in and begin killing them off so they could take over their lands.\n\nThe Indians didn't believe in OWNING the land, but merely using the land and living on the land.  The Europeans, however, came to the New World LOOKING for lands they could confiscate.\n\nThe Palistinians were living on the land when Isreal dropped in on them... back in the BRONZE AGE... but it wasn't until after WW2 when the borders were drawn by England, America and other countries, to provide a homeland for the displaced Jews from war torn Europe and pushed the rightful owners of the lands, the Palistinians, off their ancestral homes and then build jewish settlements on top of them.
804726
There are a number of differences in the Shi`ah (Shiite) and the Sunni Juristic opinions. However, not all these differences can be termed as the "basic differences" in these two major sects of Islam. The basic difference in the two sects is that of the Shiite faith of the system of "Imamah". The Shiite faith of "Imamah" implies that after the Prophet  (pbuh), there shall be no other prophet, but the only true leader of the Muslims, at any given time, is an "Imam" who, like the prophets of God, is directly appointed by God. The appointment of the first "Imam" was made by God through the last Prophet (pbuh), while every subsequent "Imam" is appointed through the "Imam", who precedes him. Another qualification of the "Imam", according to the Shiite belief is that he shall belong to the family of the last Prophet (pbuh). The Shiite belief holds that the "Imams", like the prophets of God, are "ma`soom" (sinless, innocent) and, therefore, should be obeyed in all matters and under all circumstances. The "Imams", according to the Shiite faith, are thus not just the political leaders of the Muslims but also their religious leaders and clergy. The Sunni school, on the other hand, does not ascribe to any such belief. \n\nThis may, at first sight, seem to be a trivial difference between the two schools. However, a close analysis reveals that it amounts to a difference in the basic sources of religion and religious knowledge information and directives for the two schools. The Sunni school, because of its lack of belief in the institution of "Imamah" holds the last Prophet of God and the book revealed on him as the two primary sources of Islam, while the Shiite school, because of the importance and position it gives to the "Imams" holds them to be an autonomous source of their religion. Anything that an "Imam" says, anything that he does and anything that he narrates is "religion" for the Shiite school. Differing with an "Imam" in any matter is of about the same consequence as differing with a prophet. Not submitting to the directions of an "Imam" is as grave a sin as refusing to submit to the directions of a prophet of God. \n\nAs can be seen from the above explanation, the difference between the Shiite and the Sunni schools are not trivial. On the contrary, these differences are "very" basic. Nevertheless, the thing to do is not to condemn each other; or call each other "Kaafir" (infidel) or non-Muslim"; or air the fire of hatred and promote each other's killings, but to try and convince the other person as well as one's own self to accept whatever is right in the light of the Qur'an  and the true teachings of the Prophet  (pbuh), to promote empathy for each other's points of view and to try and stress the common points in each other's beliefs. \n\nIt should be interesting to note here that although these two sects have co-existed for centuries, yet the extent and gravity of sectarian violence has never been felt more than during the present times. The basic reason for this change in the situation is that a number of prominent scholars and knowledgeable personalities of both these sects have changed the roles that they played in the past. In the past, the differences of both the sects were a matter of intellectual debate between the scholars of these sects. The gravity of these differences was also fully known, but the scholars never promoted violence against each other. The situation has tremendously changed during the past few decades. The scholars of these sects now sit on their respective pulpits and use these differences as flames to burn the emotions and feelings of their addressees against the people of the other sects. They promote the killings of the followers of other sects by labeling these followers with various de
304878
Read the Old Testament.  It will give you a very good account as to why these two nations hate each other.  Exodus and Numbers are particularly good books to read.\n\nThe Arabs believe their land was stolen by the people of Moses, and the Israel Nation belives God gave them that land for their inheritance.
570955
They have huge issues with their religion. That is why for centuries they have killed or forcibly converted those who disagreed. But of course those weren't true Christians, although the resemblance was uncanny...
133808
Saddam was the Baathist party leader in Iraq.  Most Sunni's are Baathist as well.  That is the connection between the two.  Saddam is by no means a religious man.  It was on rare occasion that he even wore Arab garb.  The Sunni's enjoyed most of the perks under his watch.  Most of the army was Sunni, yet most of the Republican Guard were from his home town. These are the people that he trusted the most; these were his most loyal followers, it had nothing to do with religion. His relationship with all other segments of Iraqi society was at best, guarded.  The Kurds would have had his ass in a New York minute, given half the chance.  The Turkman had no particular edge with Saddam, and the Christians just stayed out of his way. The Shiites, particularly those in the south, had strong ties to Iran.  Iran's brand of Islam is predominately Shiite, so Saddam was not particularly friendly to the Shiites.  Saddam ruled with scare tactics and he was pretty effective with them.  He kept every one under control but at a high price.  The mass graves still pop up occasionally!
851246
Thanks to the Mesopotamians, who invented everything from the wheel , to glass, to math, etc.... We Assyrians are the decedents of the Mesopotamians, not the Arabs that live in the Iraq today. Those are descendants of the invading Arabs who wished to convert us to Islam, so my people wished to die, therefore they killed off thousands to millions of Assyrians, forever ended the Assyrian rule of Iraq, our homeland. If the Assyrians (who were the first people to accept Christianity) ruled Iraq/Mesopotamia, the Middle East would be a very different place today.
8411
Read the book of Revelations with a concordance. There's mentions of "the dragon of the East". And there's referrences of Assyrian armies attacking Israel. All in all, it's not a pretty picture for the future of our world.
1036616
There are also Jews, Babylons...etc.
168362
They have a big relationship with themselves.They are conservative and believing people.They dont like armenians and kurds anymore.But they live with these minorities with peace.They have a famous kitchen and an important Army.
493683
You gave the answer in your question.  What you've described are religious people. They are not necessarily the same as Christains.
1016380
Jews! Jesus was a Jew. \nChristianity came from a mix of Judiasm and Paganism...
919523
No.  They were separate creation of God that did not survive the flood.  They were sub-human species.  They were not in the human line of Adam.  They undoubtedly lived along side man and had some of the same features and habits, but that is where the similarities end.
1073965
completely different religions. Catholics are christians. Mormon, have a different bible. Look them up on the internet, you'll see find out for yourself
919088
The God of the Old Testament appears to have more than one personality. The identity of God seems to vary with the author. I see religion as an evolutionary process.
193447
First off, good question.  I'm not a muslim and my understanding of this issue is pretty basic, but I'll let you know what I know in case you don't get any better answers.\n\nFirst off, Shiite and Sunni Muslims have more in common than they have different.  They all trace their religiious heritage to Adam and to Abraham, along with Christianity and Judaism. Shiites and Sunnis also have some core religious principles in common, called the Five Pillars of Islam, including reference for the Prophet Mohammed as receiving the divine guidance of Allah and recording it in the Koran.  \n\nThe differences came about a few decades after the death of Mohammed when a dispute arose as to the line of succession from Mohammed.  Shiites trace their succession of religious leaders to Ali, who was the husband of Mohammed's granddaugther, while Sunnis trace the line of succession to another relative.  So, Ali and his martyrdom plays a very prominent role in Shia Islam but not in Sunni Islam.  You may have heard of the Shiite religious event of Ashura where they commemorate the death of Ali.\n\nDoctrinally, this distinction between the two in terms of the line of succession has resulted in Shiite Muslims relying more heavliy on a religious hierarchy traced back to Ali and Mohammed for conveying the word of Allah to people today.  Ayatollah Khomeni in Iran was perhaps the most famous example.  In contrast, Sunnis tend to believe that the word of Allah is more accessible to everyday Muslims.  The distinction is somewhat analogous to the religious hierarchy in the Catlholic church, when contrasted with some forms of Protestantism.  So, for example, a Shiite may be much more restricted in who he or she believes can authentically make a religous proclaimation (called a fatwah) than would a Sunni Muslim.\n\nIn my mind, the beliefs between Shiite Muslims and Sunni Muslims, and Christians and Jews for that matter, tend to have a lot more in common than they have differences.  Unfortuntely, people tend to focus (and often kill each other) based on the differences.\n\nHope this helps.
1182640
They are both about the same. They both hate Jews, they both think they are superior to everybody else and that they are the only ones who deserve to live free. They both tend to be very ignorant of everything including what is supposed to be their own beliefs and sacred texts.