posted 28 December 2004 12:44 AM            

Surely by now youve had time enough to look up the Jewish Revolt
and see it had nothing to do with the Copts or religion but was
a civil disturbance on the order of a race riot instigated by the
Hebrews against the Greeks and quelled by the Romans who in
the end addressed the grievances of the Hebrews.

quote:

---

Originally posted by supercar:

• Did the dispell of Jews, destruction and conversion of Temples into churches occur or not?
  

So you are denying that dispelling of Jews didn't occur?

[This message has been edited by supercar (edited 27 December 2004).]

---

Your statement that the Jews were dispelled by the Copts is an
historical fiction calling your credibility into account.

How can we have a nondogmatic discussion of history when errors
of interpretation are glossed over instead of corrected or retracted?

posted 28 December 2004 12:58 AM            

quote:

---

alTakruri:
How can we have a nondogmatic discussion of history when errors of interpretation are glossed over instead of corrected or retracted?

---

Tell me about it, as you have clearly shown that you are a master at that.
Using assumptions and Crackpot scholarship is something you need to break away from. The whole premises of your "arguments", actually face-saving tactics, is based this on.

quote:

---

alTakruri:
How long will you dodge the bullet?

---

I believe that is the question, you should be asking yourself.

posted 28 December 2004 01:11 AM            

Your statement that the Jews were dispelled by the Copts is an
historical fiction calling your credibility into account.

How can we have a nondogmatic discussion of history when errors
of interpretation are glossed over instead of corrected or retracted?

When will you admit you were wrong about the Copts dispelling the Jews.

posted 28 December 2004 01:14 AM            

quote:

---

alTakruri:
When will you admit you were wrong about the Copts dispelling the Jews.

---

Using assumptions isn't enough eh? Quote me on where I said "Copts" dispelled the Jews?
Lying can only take you so far.

posted 28 December 2004 01:21 AM            

There was no dispelling of Jews, supercar, you are wrong about
that, no matter how you try to mask your statement that the
early Egyptian Christians did so.

posted 28 December 2004 01:24 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:
There was no dispelling of Jews, supercar, you are wrong about that, no matter how you try to mask your statement that the early Egyptian Christians did so.

---

I'll leave the masking job to you. But do you have proof that dispelling of Jews never occurred in light of these revolts and unrests? And I am still waiting for the quote!

posted 28 December 2004 01:39 AM            

You prove your own assumption that the Jews were dispelled
supercar,
there are no historical records of any such event.

At least not in

Menahem Stern
Greek and Latin Authors on Jews and Judaism 3 vols
Jerusalem: Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanity, 1976

or any history book I know of.

Why is it so hard to just admit you erred? Theres no shame in
that supercar. Historians constantly revise their inaccurate views.

posted 28 December 2004 01:56 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:
The Jews were not dispelled and you have no proofs that they were,whereas an examination of the history of the Jews of Alexandria upholds my statement that is was the most vibrant community in that era.

You prove your own assumption that the Jews were dispelled supercar, there are no historical records of any such event.

---

Just because you fail to provide any proof of that not happening, doesn't mean it didn't. Why don't you get off your high horses, and admit that. History doesn't start with your knowledge, nor does it end there.

There are other historians out there you know, who appear to have some information on this. Whether they are credible or not, is another matter. But it goes to show, that just because you say that something isn't out there, that the world comes to a full stop in relation to your knowledge.

"Here is a take on expelling of Jews:
Born in Alexandria, Egypt, Cyril received an excellent religious and humanistic education in one of the world's most cosmopolitan cities of its day, but his intellectual arrogance and stubbornness caused him difficulties. Cyril pillaged and closed the churches of a heretical group with which he quarreled, expelled the Jews from Alexandria, and sparred with the Roman prefect Orestes. Cyril fought with almost everyone and spent much of his later life quarreling with various heretics. To the modern reader, such fierce disputes appear senseless, and rational people willing to seek common cause over a cup of tea could have settled many, but that was not the atmosphere of fourth-century Alexandria. Emerging Christianity was one of several competing religious and philosophical systems, and within Christianity there were divergent doctrinal tendencies, each with strong advocates. What would later become orthodoxy was then being hammered out on the anvil of sharp discourse among church leaders"

Source:Frederick Quinn, St. Cyril of Alexandria," Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 4, 1908, online edition 1999 by Kevin Knight.

quote:

---

alTakruri:
Why is it so hard to just admit you erred? Theres no shame in that supercar.Historians constantly revise their inaccurate views.

---

posted 28 December 2004 02:07 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:
Folk are constantly chastised here for referencing wikipedia or the britanica and you bring the 1908 catholic encyclopedia?

---

posted 28 December 2004 02:27 AM            

Yes, in the Byzantine era 415 the Jews faced retaliation from Cyril
for attacking Christians. It was not in the context of a blind rampage
of conversion or intolerance on the part of early Egyptian Christians.
Not that there was any love lost between Christian and Jew and
the Jewish riots were just the excuse Cyril needed.

posted 28 December 2004 02:32 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:
I have been thinking the timeframe of your statements to be in the formative stages of Christianity in Egypt not the Byzantine era.

Yes, in the Byzantine era 415 the Jews faced retaliation from Cyril for attacking Christians. It was not in the context of a blind rampage of conversion or intolerance on the part of early Egyptian Christians.
Not that there was any love lost between Christian and Jew and the Jewish riots were just the excuse Cyril needed.

---

Whatever the context, it occurred. That is the bottom line here. It was mentioned in the excerpt.

posted 29 December 2004 05:19 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:
And neither are they any less [b]a "true descendant" of the
Pharoahs than the other 90% of Egyptians, which some deny them
solely because of their miscegenation.

[/B]

---

I would give props to the non-miscegenated Egyptians when it comes to being a "true descendant" of the Pharoahs. Those whose features approximate phenotypic depictions in ancient Egyptian artwork should be the ones to brag about being "true descendants" of the Pharoahs. Ancient Egyptians typically look African, quite unlike most Copts who are mostly mixed with Greeks and other foreigners.

posted 29 December 2004 05:27 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by neo*geo:
Quite a few Egyptians are mixed with southern European ancestry but it is my opinion that the Copts are just as diverse as Egyptian Muslims.

Upper Egyptian Coptic Priest

---

Yes, because Egyptian muslims mixed with Arabs and other Middle Easterners. Modern Egypt is a mixed race society, which is a testament to the historical phases the country has gone through.

posted 29 December 2004 06:08 PM            

quote:

---

kembu:
I would give props to the non-miscegenated Egyptians when it comes to being a "true descendant" of the Pharoahs. Those whose features approximate phenotypic depictions in ancient Egyptian artwork should be the ones to brag about being "true descendants" of the Pharoahs. Ancient Egyptians typically look African, quite unlike most Copts who are mostly mixed with Greeks and other foreigners.

The problem with the Copts is that they think they are more related to the ancient Egyptians than other Egyptians because the Copts supposedly did not mix with Arabs. Now, I am not counting those Coptic converts who had once been ethnically arabized.

---

Let's just say that the tropically-adapted (Africoid) looking Egyptians, whether it be "Copts" or "Muslims", racially come close to the appearance of Ancient Egypt founders. They don't necessarily have to have the so-called "forest Negro" features to be considered Africoid (a scientifically defunct term itself) or black (in our social construct). As far as Ancient Egyptian culture is concerned, some say it is the Fellahin that have perserved the most, while there are "Copts" who claim to be the true preservers of Ancient Egyptian culture. The only problem with the saying that "Copts" are the "true" descendants of Ancient Egypt when compared to other Egyptians, is that "Copts" is very generalized. It has now become a euphemism for Christians, when in history, it applied to virtually any Egyptian who was not a Muslim. Not all non-Muslims then, were Christians. I equate "Copts are the true descendants of Ancient Egypt" with "Muslims are the true descendants of Ancient Egypt". However, the Fellahin is not as generalized as "Muslims" or "Christians". These are folks, who for the most part were denied priviledged social status, compared to other Egyptians. They have a history of not mixing as much with foreign invaders, as other Egyptian communities. They have also preserved quite a bit from the past, in terms of culture. Now, a Fellahin can be of a Christain faith or a Muslim one. Anyone who recognizes this, will immediately see what is wrong with saying either "Copts" or "Muslims" represent the "true" descendants of Ancient Egypt. More often than not, various "Copts" are guilty of this type of saying than "Muslims", i.e., from the perspective of religious nationalism. In any case, in terms of culture, just about any Egyptian can claim to be a member of a group, which has preserved the Ancient Egyptian culture the most, even if some of these folks don't have ancestry as far back.

posted 29 December 2004 10:22 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by supercar:
However, the Fellahin is not as generalized as "Muslims" or "Christians". These are folks, who for the most part were denied priviledged social status, compared to other Egyptians. They have a history of not mixing as much with foreign invaders, as other Egyptian communities.

---

posted 29 December 2004 11:21 PM            

quote:

---

neo*geo:
Copts have a history of not mixing with other groups as well. Intermarriage to non-Coptic Christians is rare and marriage to Muslims is almost non-existant...

---

You keep missing the point that "copts" was a reference to all non-Muslims. Now, its become a euphemism for Christians. You are now basically telling me all christians in Egypt have not mixed with foreign invaders. Nevermind the fact that very first christians in Egypt were in foreign settled sections of Egypt. I don't know when it will become clear that Christians is just as generalized a term as "Muslims" of Egypt.

Let me resort to petty diagrams, as an effort to make this very simple:

Christians could = a Fellah or some other Egyptian, including elite Egyptians.

Muslim could = a Fellah or some other Egytian, including elite Egyptians.

Where as Fellahin = mainly peasants in rural sections of Egypt. Of course now, some have found their way into cities, but have been historically at a disadvantage compared to others. Many of these folks historically have had less foreign admixture, compared to other sections of Egypt's population.

Maybe now you see the picture; maybe you don't!

posted 30 December 2004 06:37 AM            

quote:

---

Copts have a history of not mixing with other groups as well. Intermarriage to non-Coptic Christians is rare and marriage to Muslims is almost non-existant.

---

Yes, but let's no forget that during the Christian era and Islamic era in Egypt there was mixing with foreign populations like Syrians and Armenians with Coptics who lived in the cities of Cairo and Alexzandria.

Historical records show that many of the soliders in Amr Ibn Alas' were actually Christians and intermingling with Christian Egyptians and Christian members of Amr's army did occur.

During the Islamic era many Coptics were in prominent positions in the cities,and did intermingle with Syrians and Armenians. Infact, in Wadi Natron there is a Monestary there shared by both Syrian and Coptic Christians.

Intermarriage in recent times with Coptics and Greeks is no unheard of. The prominent Doss family in Cairo has lots of Greek admixture in their family. As do many like the Ebeids,Khayaat,wissa,and other prominent families.

Both the Muslim and Coptic Fellahin scattered across Middle and Upper Egypt have little mixture with foreigners. Except maybe some slight admixture from the Greco-Roman period through intermarriage. The Arab bedouins imported into Upper Egypt looked down upon and would not dare mix with the Fellahin. Even today their identity is distinct and based on a caste system. Bedouins despised farmers,and would not dare settle down with the Fellahin.

The people living in the cities had little contact with the Upper Egyptian fellahin,and looked down upon them. None of these people would dare intermingle with the farmers in the countryside.

Let me also make the distinction between the Fellahin from the Delta and Middle and Upper Egypt. The Northern Egyptian Fellahin living in the Delta are more mixed than those in Upper Egypt. Northern Egyptian Fellahin have intermingled in some regions a greater extinct with Arabs in the Eastern Delta region.

posted 30 December 2004 05:31 PM            

A troubled religious minority

LIVING together is not always easy. After 14 centuries of cohabitation, Egypt's Muslim majority and Christian minority know this full well. Still, both communities were surprised at the nationwide passion roused by a simple marital dispute in the grimy delta town of Abul Matamir, 145km (90 miles) north of Cairo.

The trouble began when the wife of a local Coptic priest sued for divorce. Told by her church that she could not have one, despite the fact that her purportedly abusive husband had lost both legs to diabetes, 47-year-old Wafa Constantine threatened to convert to Islam. Then she disappeared.

Belief and holy writ
Dec 29th 2004

The rumours spread that she had fallen victim to a supposed wave of forced conversions. The hubbub reached a climax in early December with violent demonstrations at Cairo's Coptic cathedral and the departure of Pope Shenouda III, head of the Coptic Church for 33 years, into self-imposed exile in a desert monastery.

Calm, and Pope Shenouda, have returned to the streets of Cairo. Security officials say that Ms Constantine has also gone back to the church, where she is now in the care of nuns. Yet the case has opened a range of sensitive issues, from Coptic claims of discrimination to calls from within the church for reform, including an end to its strict ban on divorce.

With some 10m adherents, most of them in Egypt, the Coptic Orthodox church is the largest in the Middle East. Strong attendance and a dramatic revival of monasticism attest to its vibrancy. Yet the church has suffered sporadic sectarian clashes. And if Coptic Christianity has kept pace with the rise of fervour among Egypt's Muslims, it has also remained rigidly hierarchical and conservative.

In recent years the church, backed by strident émigrés in the West, has successfully lobbied Egypt's government to ease past restrictions on such things as the building of churches and the broadcasting of services on state television. It has won back property confiscated during land reforms in the 1950s. Sectarian squabbles have grown less frequent and bloody since the government crushed an Islamist insurgency in the 1990s. Yet Copts still complain that they are politically disfranchised and subjected to petty discrimination.

Muslims tend to dismiss such gripes, pointing to the success of prominent Coptic businessmen, and to the fact that most Muslims, too, have little say in Egypt's far-from-democratic politics. Discrimination also hurts Muslims, such as the tiny Shia minority, and Islamists who try to circumvent legal bans on religiously-based political parties. Besides, even some Copts admit to suspicions that the rumpus over Ms Constantine is a kind of smokescreen designed to obscure real strains inside the church. Like marital problems, these tensions are quite familiar to all Egyptians: the issues of reform, liberalisation and succession. Pope Shenouda is 81, five years older than President Hosni Mubarak. http://www.economist.com/index.html?uviewed=1

posted 03 January 2005 06:57 AM            

http://www.pbase.com/lilliasa/family_pictures_in_egypt&page=all

http://www.pbase.com/poppieboy/holy_family_tour__egypt

http://www.pbase.com/poppieboy/inbox