User talk:Doubtingtom

Dear Doubtingtom, I had to remove some puerile defamatory material added by you to the St Thomas Christians talk page regarding the Hindu community of Kerala. There is nothing "rational" in your "perspectives, analysis and synthesis" concerning that content. Let us first look at the "rationality" involved in your community. If you believe that Rama is a figment of imagination, what about Noahs Ark, the historicity of a Jesus figure, the pseudo-dogmatic Biblical history of the their mythical world, overturned by science time and time again?, there is so much I could describe to you, which is to be taken literally in your religion. At least Hindu Malayalis provided us with Aryabhata and Madhava of Sangamagrama, mathematics, which you describe yourself a student of, and astronomy, compared to burning at the stake of many prominent scientists by the church who present the truth conflicting with Christian dogma. Sure, you may criticise Velu Thampi Dalawa for any vague reason, though which amongst the Syrian Christian community can even be remembered, forget criticizing any. Velu Thampi speaks for Hindu dominance through out all spheres of society, even after millenia of exposure to immigrants and immigrant culture on Kerala's coast.

Now as a mathematics student, you have probably worked out that one of the biggest myths created the Syrian Christian community is that were converted from Nambudiri Brahmins. Forgetting no reasonable motive to convert, basic mathematics can be used to find mismatches between St Thomas' mythical arrival in Kerala, 52 AD, and Nambudiri arrival in Kerala, in the 7th Century AD, so this is quite a large anachronism. It is rather obvious that the formerly Avarna (mostly Ezhava members of Travancore) once converting, used the myth to afford them the privileges of the clean caste, later revoked, to their benefit, however a small Syriac and Persian genetic presence is likely among the community, though phenotypes would suggest otherwise. Ezhavas are the only community apart from Syrian Christians who share the same burial practices in Kerala.

Moving on to the visit of St Thomas to Kerala, another famous myth perpetuated by the Syrian Christian community. Heres a compilation of sources to read through:

"What India gives us about Christianity in its midst is indeed nothing but pure fables." -Dr. A. Mingana in The Early Spread of Christianity in India.

Ancient writers used the designation "India" for all countries south and east of the Roman Empire's frontiers. India included Ethiopia, Arabia Felix, Edessa in Syria (in the Latin version of the Syriac Diatessaron), Arachosia and Gandhara (Afghanistan and Pakistan), and many countries up to the China Sea. In the Acts of Thomas, the original key text to identify St. Thomas with India (which all other India references follow), historians agree that the term India refers to Parthia (Persia) and Gandhara. The city of Andrapolis named in the Acts, where Judas Thomas and Abbanes landed in India, has been identified as Sandaruk (one of the ancient Alexandrias) in Baluchistan.

Eminent historian cautions India's Christians

Bishop Stephen Neill, eminent historian who spent years in India researching the St. Thomas legend, was deeply pained by the spurious St. Thomas histories circulated among India's Christians by various Christian scholars. He writes, "A number of scholars, among whom are to be mentioned with respect Bishop A.E. Medleycott, J.N. Farquhar and the Jesuit J. Dahlman, have built on slender foundations what may be called Thomas romances, such as reflect the vividness of their imaginations rather than the prudence of rigid historical critics." And to the Christian faithful he observes, "Millions of Christians in India are certain that the founder of their church was none other than the apostle Thomas himself. The historian cannot prove it to them that they are mistaken in their belief. He may feel it right to warn them that historical research cannot pronounce on the matter with confidence equal to that which they entertain by faith.

Various Eastern Churches claim that St. Thomas personally brought Christianity to China and Japan in AD 64 and 70 respectively.

The Pope's original statement given out at St. Peter's, before it was amended on the Vatican website, reflected the geography of the Acts of Thomas, i.e. Syria, Parthia (Persia/Iran) and Gandhara (Western India/Pakistan). There is no historical evidence to support the tradition that St. Thomas came to South India, and on Nov. 13, 1952 Vatican officials sent a message to Kerala Christians stating that the landing of St. Thomas at Cranganore on Nov. 21, 52 A.D. was "unverified". When author Ishwar Sharan sought confirmation of this official statement in 1996, the Vatican's reply was disingenuous and noncommittal, the Prefect of the Congregation for the Causes of Saints saying that he needed more information and that the life of St. Thomas was the object of historical research and not within his Congregation's competence.

Earlier, in 1729 the Bishop of Madras-Mylapore doubted whether the tomb in San Thome Cathedral was that of St. Thomas and wrote to the Sacred Congregation of Rites in Rome for clarification. Rome's reply was not published. Again, in 1871 the Roman Catholic authorities at Madras were "strong in disparagement of the special sanctity of the localities [viz. San Thome, Little Mount, and Big Mount identified by the Portuguese after 1517] and the whole story connecting St. Thomas with Mailapur." However, in 1886 Pope Leo XIII stated in an apostolic letter that St. Thomas "travelled to Ethiopia, Persia, Hyrcania and finally to the Peninsula beyond the Indus", and in 1923 Pope Pius XI quoted Pope Leo's letter and identified St. Thomas with "India". These papal statements also reflect the geography of the Acts of Thomas, as does Pope Benedict's statement, and make no reference to South India. In fact, the India they refer to is now Pakistan.

The 4th century merchant Thomas of Cana was popularly known as Thomas of Jerusalem, and in that he was the founder of the Christian church in India, a number of historians have concluded that he was identified with the the 1st century apostle Thomas by India's Syrian Christians sometime after his death and became their Apostle Thomas in India.

Marco Polo is the first author in history to identify St. Thomas with South India and a seashore tomb in an unnamed town on the Coromandel coast. All previous accounts of St. Thomas had followed the Acts of Thomas and had the apostle buried in the unnamed desert country of the Zoroastrian king Mazdai (in Persian), Misdaeus (in Greek), in a royal tomb on a mountain containing the sepulchers of ancient Persian kings (from which the relics were stolen and returned to Mesopotamia). Marco Polo also states in Il Milione that St. Thomas was a Muslim saint from Nubia and that he had been killed by accident by a native pagan hunting peacocks. Therefore, the Muslim St. Thomas ("Thuma" or "Thawwama" in Arabic, meaning "born twin" as does "Thoma" and "Thama" in Syriac and "Didymus" in Greek) was the victim of a hunting accident and not a martyr. This story by Marco Polo only adds to the tangled mass of fables concerning St. Thomas, his travels, and his doubtful end.

Friar Odoric of Pordenone, who visited Mylapore in 1322, did not find any St. Thomas church or tomb in the town but describes a Hindu temple filled with idols on the sea beach.

Clearly there is plenty to doubt about Doubting Thomas' visit to Kerala.

So in conclusion, I am worried that despite describing yourself as "inclined to be rational in my perspectives, analysis and synthesis" you are a faithful Syrian Christian, and that your expectation that "the Christian communities to be reasonable and try to digest stories and legends with a modicum of sanity and realism." is in vain, considering obscurantist Syrian Christians have a huge amount of fables and myths with much larger implications in their arsenal that completely dwarf any among the Hindu community.

Ayyapan was not the result of a gay union, this is clearly an attempt to offend, rather he was a combination of Vishnu and Shiva. Remember, Hindus do not have to literally believe in the existence of Ayyapan (any Hindu belief can be taken figuratively), though Christians have to literally believe in the descent of all human beings from Adam and Eve, and that the entire world was submerged in water in a recent age with the exception of a peak, and many other beliefs. It can clearly be seen which set of beliefs are more in line with reason.

Regards, Trips (talk) 06:51, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Reply

Trips has missed the woods for trees. I do not propose to go into a point-by-point reply. But let me add - and this may confuse you - I am not neither a "faithful Syrian Christian" nor even a "Syrian" Christian. I could be described, for want of a more accurate term, as an agnostic. I have no faith in your Rama or Noah or Abraham, or in your literal or figurative interpretations of the Ayyappan myth. All these I read with a knowing smile and nothing more. Essentially, I do not accept things without reason. Hence the pseudonym "Doubting Tom". This has nothing to do with the Doubting St Thomas the Apostle.

But if you are interested in knowing the religion into which I was born - yes, I am a Christian. And I visited Lourdes etc just out of curiosity - like the atheist Dr Alexis Carrel (Nobel Prize winner) visited the place some years ago. I have visited many a famous temple in India too, all with a sense of curiosity and humour.

My advice to you is that hold your judgement of people before knowing them sufficiently well.

I may add here that, purely in deference to your concern, I have removed the possible "inflammatory" materials from my post, although I do not personally subscribe to your views.

You have produced an impressive array of "references", most of which I consider as just of opinion quality and hence discardable.

Best wishes.Doubtingtom (talk) 16:16, 9 August 2008 (UTC)