Are all the Prophets of Judachrislam essentially faithless?

[Barnabas]

Probably, they were bunnies in the one above, now they are pigs, warning, this hurts

[Fake Boris]

Aneeshm, where art thou?

[CrONoS]

Originally posted by Brachy-Pride
Hesychiasm is a relatively new development in church history, not something the catholic church killed.

Edit:
Elok is right! Hesychasm was developed by the desert father! Around 4th-5th century.

and, IF I'm right, there was exercise that was developed, around 14th century.

[CrONoS]

Originally posted by Brachy-Pride
Probably, they were bunnies in the one above, now they are pigs, warning, this hurts

why, oh, why...

[CrONoS]

Originally posted by Elok
Well, this should be an entertaining brawl, but I'd like to add St. Gregory Palamas to Molly's list of Xian intellectuals, which is currently heavily skewed to the West. Just because the RCC killed the mystical tradition in their part of the world, that doesn't mean it never existed.

we should also add all the church fathers and the desert father... Duns Scott. And also Origen, even if is not considered as a church father

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by molly bloom
When there were Jewish kingdoms, 'Judaism' was quite capable of 'going looney'- Dhu Nuwas in southern Arabia, for instance.

a very poorly documented episode. The ruler was apparently a convert to Judaism, running a kingdom of Jews, pagans, and monophysites who persecuted Orthodox Christians, shortly after the Byz empire had instituted persecution of the monophysites, and continued its persecution of the Jews. From what I can gather some historians think it was the monophysites looking for revenge more than the Jews.

Stands in contrast to the history of the Khazar kingdom, IIUC.

Heresson likes to cite the episode to minimize the relative importance of Christian antisemitism.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by molly bloom
Of course the difference is, I suppose, that with the exception of the Cochin Jews in southern India, there hasn't historically been a huge Jewish presence in the Indian sub-continent in the way there has been a Muslim one, and a Jewish empire didn't rule over the Hindus.

actually the difference is that with the exception of the Khazars, and the shortlived and poorly documented episodes in South Arabia and among the Berbers, Jews as a collectivitity (IE as opposed to individuals in muslim or christian states) didnt rule ANYWHERE from 146 CE to 1948.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by molly bloom


What a ludicrous set of statements.

Have you ever heard of St. Augustine, Thomas Aquinas or Boethius, to name but three ?

How about al Biruni, Ibn Sina and Ibn Rushd ?

.

I already mentioned Aquinas and Ibn Rashid.

Aneeshm, please dont praise the Jews and Judaism, it stirs up bad feeling a small people cant afford.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by molly bloom

al Biruni, 'A Description of India' , 1030 a.d.

Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.

1. Do we know al Biruni to be unbiased wrt to the Hindus?

2. Plus ca change - what lovely essentialism, as if Hinduism today, even (or especially) the more nationalist varieties hadnt been influenced by modern trends and tendencies.

[aneeshm]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


1. Do we know al Biruni to be unbiased wrt to the Hindus?

He accompanied an invading army. I don't think that makes for an exactly unbiased source. And he was devout - VERY devout - so that makes for another source of bias. Some of the things which he has written are absolutely sickening.

Though he is, in part, correct - Indians believe their country is THE best. Once upon a time, at the time of Biruni, it was true. In fact, until approximately 1750, the Indian agricultural labourer and industrial worker was better off than his counterpart in industrial Britain. I don't know how good these figures are, but it is said that during the years of British rule, India's economy shrunk from 23% of the world's total to 2% at the time of independence, and Britain's grew to 18%.

What lot of people don't realise that within another 50 years, India is going to reclaim her lost economic position. A people long oppressed are regaining, step by inexorable step, their freedom and dignity, and reclaiming the power which is their birthright.

[Barnabas]

I thought the genocides and killings of the old testament were going to be mentioned.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


1. Do we know al Biruni to be unbiased wrt to the Hindus?

We know that aneeshm quoted him in a past thread- in an attempt to denigrate Muslims, yet again.

Plus ca change - what lovely essentialism, as if Hinduism today, even (or especially) the more nationalist varieties hadnt been influenced by modern trends and tendencies.

Nothing of the sort. I keep forgetting that sarcasm and irony are alien to you.

Of course modern Hindu nationalism has been influenced- especially if current events are any guide by Fascism.

[aneeshm]

Originally posted by molly bloom

Nothing of the sort. I keep forgetting that sarcasm and irony are alien to you.

Of course modern Hindu nationalism has been influenced- especially if current events are any guide by Fascism.

I don't know where this idea comes from. Not a single prominent person associated with what is today called "Hindu nationalism" has EVER said that fascism was a good thing. The person who once referred to Hitler's efficiency positively, BEFORE the massacres and genocide started, and back when he was perceived as someone fighting for the German people, later said that what Hitler did was absolutely abhorrent, when he was in possession of the full facts. Why do you bring up this old canard again and again?

[Elok]

Originally posted by aneeshm
What lot of people don't realise that within another 50 years, India is going to reclaim her lost economic position. A people long oppressed are regaining, step by inexorable step, their freedom and dignity, and reclaiming the power which is their birthright.

Nope, no fascism here. How does one say "lebensraum" in Sanskrit?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by molly bloom


We know that aneeshm quoted him in a past thread- in an attempt to denigrate Muslims, yet again.


Nothing of the sort. I keep forgetting that sarcasm and irony are alien to you.

I keep forgetting you like the rhetorical trick of posting something nasty, and then claiming sarcasm when youre called on it.