Comments on: Ancient Christians in India

By: hindu

hindu — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 08:16:41 +0000

There are so many temple was thr from long in india. U can not convert all u know. We belive our god. So u go to heven. I wl also go haven with my god.

By: Hindu

Hindu — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 08:13:48 +0000

If you are changing ur religion that is not the solution live. u have work and earn money. Belive ur self first. Do’t convert any one more

By: Blesson

Blesson — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 18:56:48 +0000

hai friends there is a one church named Assyerian Church of the east or Chaldean syrian church of the east. Knowing the history of this church u can connect indian church history from begining.Still this church keep its identity .as a ancient church in the world . you can see old syriac and tradition following this church ,

By: K J Samuel

K J Samuel — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 03:56:55 +0000

Arvind’s contention that the whole thing is a myth is wrong. Of course there are grey areas, because these were not documented correctly. The reason why the Christians are called Syrian Christians is because the religion took shape only after Kanaa Thoma arrived in Kerala a couple of centuries later, and the crystallisation of Christianity happened then. Kanaa Thoma came from Syria, and hence the term Syrian Christians. In fact till a couple of decades ago, all our services were in the Syrian language (Suriyaani) .. as we term it.

By: Jason Goff

Jason Goff — Thu, 28 May 2009 11:39:48 +0000

This is heart warming that ancient texts are being preserved. I only wish the hidden texts throughtout the world would be preserved as well.
Especially the practical books/papers, not just the spiritual.
Ancient libraries around the world hold vast amounts of knowledge.

By: Abraham

Abraham — Tue, 12 May 2009 17:12:23 +0000

Wrong,Thomas. The split occurred when Portugese tried to convert the Nasranis (native christians) into catholicism. Cunen cross oath was one which resulted in 95% of Nazranis back to the old tradition. But a severe campaigning by the latins on late 17th Century brought many again to Catholicism. To satisfy them, Rome allowed them to continue the Syriac liturgy and created Syro Malabar Rite.

By: Thomas

Thomas — Sun, 10 May 2009 09:09:33 +0000

For a Western region its hard to believe christanity started long before in India than it started in Europe.The split of Syrian chrisians in kerala occured after the Kuunen cross oath..and the now groups formed like Syro Malabar christians,Orthodox Christians,Malankara Orthodox,Jacobites,Marthoma etc..
Ths as per my understandng…somebody correct if am wrng..

By: Mike Gray

Mike Gray — Sun, 10 May 2009 03:13:29 +0000

I understand that in Kerala before the portuguese arrived that the Thomas churches used a syriac text of the gospels called the gospel of the nasari. Does anyone know if this text or portions of it survives in any form in india today?

By: Varghese

Varghese — Mon, 04 May 2009 10:13:02 +0000

The findings of article is true.If we connect and read the history about diampher synod, “Kuunen Cruz oath in Mattancherry” and the history related to Menesis Methran(Bishop).

By: Jesudas Athyal

Jesudas Athyal — Sun, 03 May 2009 23:47:52 +0000

Barry, you are right in saying that the St. Thomas Christians were well integrated in the Kerala society – culturally and socially. It, however, needs to be noted that this is their strength as well as weakness. The historically entrenched harmonious relationship between the Hindus, Muslims and Christians in Kerala is undisputed. What is overlooked in such an assessment, however, is the caste factor – the organizing principle of the Indian society. The St. Thomas Christians (without any historical evidence) have assumed to be the descendants of converts from the Brahminical sections and as such, have enjoyed cultural and social communion with the upper caste Hindus of the area. The credit for working among the lower castes and outcasts go to the Western missionaries who came on the scene only in recent centuries. To this day, there is little social or cultural communion between the “upper caste” Christians and these new Christians. Your statement that “the presence of native Christians is not in anyway a threat to the heritage of hinduism”, therefore, is a loaded one. Both the upper caste Hindus and those Christians who claim to be of Brahminical descend, are averse to the idea of reaching out to the socially and economically outcast sections. This factor might also account for the “religious conflicts” in North India where the Hindu elite is still distinctly upper caste whereas most of the Christians are from the outcast sections.