Talk:Saint Thomas Christians/Archive 6

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

DP Raja edits

I have again reverted changes made by DP Raja. They introduce a lot of unsourced and poorly sourced material and overall do not improve the article. We can hammer out the issue here on the talk page, but just continuously re-inserting it is not the way to go. Thanks.--Cúchullain ^t/c 15:06, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

edit source is mentioned, this is not a "kudubhacharithram" to write some hoaxes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DP Raja (talk • contribs) 07:36, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Social mobility

I have spent some time attempting to put the sentences in the section "Social mobility" into Standard English. I also added several "citation needed" and "clarification needed" tags, the latter accompanied by notes to editors.

In addition to the lack of references and frequent lack of clarity and precision, I wonder whether the entire section is perhaps too long and detailed. I also noticed that at a certain point, about two-thirds to three-quarters of the way through, the syntax suddenly changed to perfect English, and I wonder whether some of that material were not taken directly from a source. If it was, those lines either need to be changed to paraphrase (and sourced) or put into quotation marks (or block quotes if long).CorinneSD (talk) 23:59, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Pentecostal St Thomas Christians.

It is true that there are Pentecostal St Thomas Christians. This can also be seen as seperate articles are already there for some of the St. Thomas Pentecostal churches. I do not understand what @Sitush: is wanting as citation. Even as perWP:Burden, the editors should allow time to add citations by adding citation needed tags, before deleting a portion. --~ ScitDei^{Wanna talk?} 12:14, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

You had 20 minutes after saying you were going to do something. After my revert, you reinstated and said that we should check out the linked articles. I don't want to: find a source that supports your statement that some STCs are Pentecostalists - they are that many different versions of this group that I'm beginning to wonder whether it is really a coherent group at all. - Sitush (talk) 12:17, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

First of all I didn't say I would do something. All editors are equally responsible to find citations to support the statements in an article before deleting. Also Pentecostals arer not a coherent group in a sense but that does not mean they do not exist. I request give it some time. --~ ScitDei^{Wanna talk?} 12:22, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

No, if you are going to wikilawyer then at least understand the "laws". The burden is on you to comply with our policies and those policies include WP:V. In any event, the phrasing of the addition was poor - for example, do you really think that "attracted quite a few" is encyclopaedic? Sitush (talk) 12:51, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

I agree with you that the phrases may not be "encyclopedic", but I suppose, that does not qualify for the paragraph to be deleted without consensus, especially if it has internal wikilinks. That said do you really believe that there are no Pentecostal St Thomas Christians? If yes, what about the other linked articles? If no, how would you present the fact that there are such groups in this article? by deleting the whole paragraph? I didn't think it was right, so I reverted your edit. I think the paragrapgh should be modified so that only facts may be stated. ~ ScitDei^{Wanna talk?} 04:35, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

I think @Sitush: has agreed with me on this point and the paragrapgh should be reintroduced and given time to provide citations. ~ ScitDei^{Wanna talk?} 08:53, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

I've no idea why you think I'd had some sort of Damascene moment here. If I agreed with you then I would say so. I refer you again to WP:BRD, WP:BURDEN and WP:V. Now, please find some decent sources. - Sitush (talk) 12:01, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

OK. With your attitude I should go ahead and delete all those sentences in the Wiki which have no sources, that too without giving any time to add sources or adding citation needed templates. Isn't it?--~ ScitDei^{Wanna talk?} 12:20, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

You've found a source, which is good. The problem is, it doesn't support your statement. The source says "According to Roger E. Hedlund, Indian Christians of indigenous origins include members of tribal communities, converted Dalits or untouchables, as well as converts from much earlier indigenous Christian churches in India, such as the St. Thomas Christians in Kerala and Tamil Nadu." If they are "converts" then they are no longer STCs and it is STCs who are the focus of the article. We might be able to say that some STCs have converted to Pentecostalism but we can't say this, most of which is still unsourced anyway.

Please do not add this stuff again until the issues have been resolved. Your last reply is irrelevant: we're dealing with this article, not some other article. I'm going to seek a third opinion. - Sitush (talk) 12:35, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for seeking a third opinion . It was very necessary for resolution. Even though I don't agree to half of your claims, I'm not going to say much since the issue is resolved.~ ScitDei^{Wanna talk?} 04:54, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

---

• Sitush and ScitDei, you're both edit warring; instead of handing out blocks, I have decided to fully protect the page for two days. Please solve your dispute through discussion (or using one of Wikipedia's dispute resolution methods. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 13:00, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

• Salvio, I'm amazed that no-one else has jumped in yet because this article is fiddled with almost daily. Past discussions in relation to other aspects of it (especially about sourcing) have already demonstrated that there are huge problems with the thing & a lot of, ahem, missionary zeal. DR procedures such as WP:3O and WP:DRN would be ok if ScitDei's info was sourced ... but it isn't and they're not getting it. This is basic stuff and should not need escalating. - Sitush (talk) 12:06, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

3O Response: The 3O request asked specifically for an opinion on the use of this source to support this edit, so that's what I'm restricting myself to. Whilst the Burgess source can certainly be used to support the claim that "Another new movement called Pentecostalism attracted quite a few of the Syrian Christians, from the already existing denominations in the latter half of the 20th century", it emphatically cannot support the statement that "The pioneers of many Pentecostal and evangelical groups in Kerala, like the Brethren, IPC, Assemblies of God, Church of God, and many other similar churches were Saint Thomas Christians." Nowhere in the source does it say anything of the kind. If the latter claim is to be included, a different reliable source needs to be found which unambiguously states that the Pentecostal pioneers were originally St Thomas Christians. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:00, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Yunshui. I also had a look at it (sorry for not catching the discussion till today), and there are a few other problems with the passage. First, neither the cited page nor the article in general support the claim that Pentecostalism has attracted Syrian Christians. As the article explains, traditional Pentecostalism is a specific denomination within Charismatic Christianity, and in fact it has had less impact than other denominations (94). Page 95 includes a quote about Catholic charismatics which says the movement's leader in India is a Syro-Malabar Catholic (meaning, a St. Thomas Christian), but it does not claim the movement is especially prominent among Syro-Malabar Catholics, let alone other Thomas Christians. Page 95 also talks about the neocharismatic movement, which is distinct from Pentecostalism, though they are related. It does say that St. Thomas Christians are among those attracted to this movement (not Pentecostalism) both within their established churches and in newer ones. As Yunshui says, it does not confirm the claim that "the pioneers of many Pentecostal and evangelical groups in Kerala" were St. Thomas Christians, and p. 96 gives a totally different list of prominent neocharismatic churches. I've tried to rephrase the article to more accurately reflect what the article says.--Cúchullain ^t/c 18:06, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

I'm not a believer but thank God that some sense is prevailing. - Sitush (talk) 19:03, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Sitush. I would have added a bit about historical Pentecostalism and/or charismatic Catholicism among the St. Thomas Christians, but the source doesn't really say either has been particularly prominent in the community (as compared other Christians or converts to Christianity). It's a bit of a stretch, even, to get into the neocharismatic churches, as the text is clear the newer independent churches aren't made up exclusively (or even primarily) by folks from a St. Thomas Christian background. It seems like this source may have been chosen to support a conclusion that had already been drawn.--Cúchullain ^t/c 19:39, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Cuchullain & Yunshui for your opinions and edits and teaching atheistic fanatics how to edit instead of senseless deletions & censorship. ~ ScitDei^{Wanna talk?} 04:54, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

WTF? - Sitush (talk) 05:32, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

ScitDei, your attitude is inappropriate and unhelpful. The other editors have been responding to you respectfully and you ought to treat them respectfully. There is a lot here from which you and other editors can learn. Knowledgeable editors have carefully explained the reasons for any deletions. Material is deleted from WP articles if they are:

• unsourced -- that is, is accompanied by no sources;
• sourced with unreliable references, and WP explains what is is considered a reliable source and what is not; sometimes it takes a while to understand the difference;
• original research (see WP:OR);
• written in a style that is not appropriate for an encyclopedia (unencyclopedic); or, possibly,
• duplicating what is already in the article.

That does not mean that the material cannot be added at some later point with appropriate references or in a modified form. In fact, that is what appears to have been done here. Your opinions are welcome. Just try to express them in a respectful way and you will be taken seriously. Also, be open-minded and open to learning something new. If there is disagreement, editors make an effort to persuade other editors by expressing their opinions respectfully and by providing additional information and sources, all in an effort to reach consensus. If you really feel strongly about an issue, start fresh with a different attitude and enjoy participating in the collaborative process. – CorinneSD (talk) 16:09, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

I'm sorry I got carried away. I thought @Sitush: was trying to undo only my edits. I publicly apologize to him for my behavior. ~ ScitDei^{Wanna talk?} 04:40, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Article Intro and well-accepted Infobox layout

The introduction line and the well-accepted infobox have been in the article since the beginning. I have tried to reinstate them.

I request the Admins to check the following three accounts for sock-puppetry.

1. നസ്രാണി (talk)

2. Achayan (talk),

3. അച്ചായൻ (talk).

It seems that the same person edits the articles using different names.117.217.128.253 (talk) 17:16, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Certainly it isn't inappropriate to ask for changes in a long-standing article before making them, but I am curious exactly what is being requested here. If you believe the accounts are the same person, the best thing to do would be to file a sock puppet investigation report at WP:SPI. I get the impression from what you are saying that the three individuals above have been engaging in edit warrings regarding those matters. Is that about right? If it is, could you provide some sort of clearer information, either in the form of specific diffs or times at which the potentially problematic behavior took place? John Carter (talk) 22:14, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply and the suggestion. These 3 accounts are very much connected to a single article Varghese Payyappilly Palakkappilly. I am from Ernakulam in Kerala. Though the person Varghese Payyappilly Palakkappilly is not well-known even in his Ernakulam district in Kerala, the above 3 accounts are very much interested in that article and make similar edits. So I have checked other edits made by these 3 accounts and they are similar in nature. If necessary, I will request for a sock puppet investigation at [[WP:SPI]. 117.217.128.253 (talk) 01:43, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Arbitrary and illogical edits claiming that Catholics are st. thomas christians

An issue here is that St. Thomas Christians by name and by faith believe themselves to be converted by St. Thomas, Apostle of Christ in India. Catholics in India are only established after the arrival of Portuguese. and the catholics are hellbent on change of history to their favour using all their resources. If Wikipedia doesn't stop this nonsene then there is no use to referering this page for any good use. If you are so desirous of spreading the word of god then do it to the masses and not in the history books, because if you change your history you are not worth any message you spread.117.227.19.58 (talk) 01:21, 16 April 2014 (UTC) George 117.227.19.58 (talk) 01:21, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Members Syro-Malabar Catholic Church and the Syro-Malankara Catholic Church are St. Thomas Christians. That's what they consider themselves, and most importantly for our purposes, it's what various reliable sources for the subject consider them. Personal interpretations of individual Wikipedia editors are original research, which isn't allowed in Wikipedia articles.--Cúchullain ^t/c 01:45, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Does those sources refer to Catholics converted or aligned to Roman Catholic church as indigenous St. Thomas Christians or they used the term to generally refer to christians. Further the Original Saint thomas christians was a name give by europeans to people who were the ones who were already christians before the evangelical movement of catholics. even if some St Thomas christians may have joined them, Catholics have converted more indigenous population to roman catholics and by and large very far away from the traditions of the real st. thomas christians. If you say history of 200-300 hundred years can whitewash the history of almost 2000 years your sources may be right. 117.233.14.192 (talk) 10:07, 16 April 2014 (UTC)George

Further i would like to add if what people believe is to taken as measure i believe they are not st. thomas christians, if you want proof from reliable sources, take any and read them they refer to christians who were not catholics before the arrival portugese. George117.233.14.192 (talk) 10:32, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

What the people themselves believe matter, so long as it appears in reliable sources. What you as an individual believes doesn't matter at all. What really matters is what the reliable sources say, and various ones included here (Britannica, Benedict Vadakkekara, Robert Frykenberg, etc.) do include both the Syro-Malabar Catholic Church and Syro-Malankara Catholic Church part of the Saint Thomas Christian community.

You appear to be seriously confused by what these churches are. Not all Catholics in India are Saint Thomas Christians; in fact most Indian Catholics are not. The Syro-Malabar and Syro-Malankara, however, are made up of people whose ancestors were Saint Thomas Christians who were brought into the Catholic church, and now have their own Eastern Catholic hierarchies and church structures. They are just as much Saint Thomas Christians as any other group.--Cúchullain ^t/c 16:49, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

For the sake of argument would you address white Americans or for that matter any black American by the nationality of their ancestors. They have culturally and habitually so diverged from that of their ancestors from different nations that they have attained a divergent and unique and different distinct american identity. such is the case with malabar catholics and they had joined the catholic faith (even if some people doubt, they sincerely hold their allegiance to the pope) long time back, even converted many indigenous hindus and other religions elements ( through their early evangilical work which is still continuing) into their fold. their rank and file are mostly filled with those people who have very little to do with the real st. thomas christians. Just because someone has published something it doens't become 'an authentic source'. You have corrected me twice, may i ask you how much do you know about st. thomas christians. I am not alleging that you are biased nor do i want to believe the same (to much politics in religion nowadays). Taking time out to monitor this page in itself is very big. I am a jacobite and i live in Kerala, India, and don't really care what anyone says or for that matter even less for what are published on the internet, but to see a page which many see and many more may see in future i would like the page to reflect authentic records. and to see something based on evangilical publicity materials, i don't hold it on high values. rest assured i hope the matter is settled. I have by reason of my origins never ventured into seeking sources for my origin as they were as they are to me since the time i was born. hope somebody finds relevant sources. I have nothing more to say. George117.227.85.127 (talk) 15:28, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

The ways other groups shape their identities are irrelevant to this article. And again, your personal views are also irrelevant to the article. All that matters is that we follow the reliable sources the topic. This isn't just my opinion, it's Wikipedia policy; please see verifiability and identifying reliable sources. As I showed, the sources consider the Syro-Malabar and Syro-Malankara Christians part of the Saint Thomas Christian community, so we follow what they say.--Cúchullain ^t/c 20:05, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

George, I don't understand your argument. Till 1054, there was no divisions in the church, there was just ONE,HOLY, CATHOLIC & APOSTOLIC church. Then how could the Christians in India be separate from them. The so called classifications like Orthodox, catholic, Jacobite etc., came to India when after a long time under the Archdeacon (as the leader of the Indian Christians was called, who were not in contact with the other churches), people tried to contact the larger church in the west/middle east. and its a long story you could read here in wiki itself. In fact the Syro-Malabar catholic church came just so that Christians could still be catholic and not under those Portuguese. Have you not ever heard about coonan kurishu oath?~ ScitDei^{Wanna talk?} 07:28, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Not quite. Historically the St. Thomas Christians were part of the Church of the East, which was separated from other Christian groups long before the schism of 1054.--Cúchullain ^t/c 14:49, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

the schism occurred around 400 AD and since then the churches have remained different, actually four different places 1 at rome,2 at constantinople, 3 alexandria, 4 at antiochia which has been the see of christians in india before the evangilical movement by catholics. ScitDei your sources are very unrealiable because there was only one church before the portugese arrived in India. people didn't have any denominations before the evangilical movement. they only went to one church that church definitely wasn't catholic. constantinople and alexandria later merged with rome but the see of antiochia has not till date. schism of 1054 had in no way altered the church in india atleast upto and until the catholic evangilical movemement in india. my church teaches there are two measning of catholisism one to meant one in christ and one that means in agreement with the pope of rome. so which catholic church are you referring to 117.251.187.24 (talk) 05:07, 28 May 2014 (UTC)George

When did Nestorianism reach India?

Quote An organised Christian presence in India dates to the arrival of East Syrian settlers and missionaries from Persia, members of the Church of the East or Nestorian Church, in around the 3rd century. Unquote

How on earth can that be true when Nestorius didn't live until the 5th century? There are similar wild statements in other articles here about the history of Christianity In India. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.49.221.127 (talk) 21:35, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Removals

reference from well reputed historians are provided but then also removed and false information and hoaxes are everywhere and these stories are project as history!.made up stories of some "family historians" are used as authentic history!. There has been an awful lot of well-sourced content removed over the last month or two, and a lot of poorly-sourced content added - notably, too much reliance on nasrani.net. Unless people come up with decent explanations for the removals, I am going to add the material back. - Sitush (talk) 18:16, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

I agree. The changes are unexplained and unsupported. I say go for it.--Cúchullain ^t/c 18:21, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Sitush, would you like to go ahead with this?--Cúchullain ^t/c 14:17, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

It is my plan. Unfortunately, I'm feeling a bit disillusioned with WP at the moment and have an ArbCom case hanging over me - I'm pretty sure that one of the arbs is going to try to drag me into it as a party. - Sitush (talk) 08:26, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Saint Thomas Christians. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120526104825/http://cds.edu:80/download_files/wp427.pdf to http://cds.edu/download_files/wp427.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:58, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Edit War

117.196.150.216 (talk) is engaging in an edit war. The user repeatedly reverting edits I did- mainly stylistic but also to make the text more in line with the sources.

They have not supported their edits or objections.

The substantive edits is the following: STC origin is clarified to be being believed to be *possibly* some time in the first few centuries A.D. There is no historical certainty.

The stylistic edits was to refer Indian Christianity. STC is clearly a form of Indian Christianity, one could even say it is the most Indian of Indian Christianities being the oldest and the most integrated forms..

Josslined (talk) 14:39, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Edit summaries explain the reason for reverting the changes made by Josslined and 192.76.8.34. It is very evident that 192.76.8.34 is a sock puppet of Josslined.

You cannot say that they all are Indain Christians when many of them are American, German, British, Australian, etc. citizens.

These Christians used only Syriac till a few centuries back. Syriac is not an indigenous Indian language. The article itself talks about migration from West Asia and other parts of the world. So all of these Christians are not indigenous people.

According to Citation 4 given in the first paragraph, ".... Thomas landed in Muziris .... in AD 52 ...." Then, why do you change it to around AD 52? You cannot do that. 117.196.150.216 (talk) 15:17, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

To talk about sock puppetry you've used I believe 3 different IP address to revert the article 5 times. I have reported you for edit warring.

As for A.D.52 some traditional sources say A.D. 52. other say 50- the date is clearly not a fact. My main source is Frykenberg. But you are correct the source currently cited is inadequate and will need changing. There is not 'one standard tradition' but many.

STC is Indian Christianity that is indigenous (dictionary definition : "originating or occurring naturally in a particular place; native") to India, even if some have taken citizenship elsewhere or have migrated. It's defining characteristic is that it is a form of Christianity that formed India before European contact. Josslined (talk) 16:21, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Reasons for edits:

Many of the edits I made today were purely stylistic. Rearranging awkward sentences. Other than that here are the edits I made and the reasons:

1. First paragraph: I changed 'commonly called' to 'referred to'. Reason: the Saint Thomas Christians is no more an official appellation than Syrian Christians or Nasrani. Indeed officially the community is called Syrian Christians, and historically Nasrani. Saint Thomas Christians is more a recent coinage that probably took place during European missionary work and is not used much in official or even scholarly discourse. I wanted to give emphasize that Syrian Christian or Nasrani are not nick-names or colloquialism. I understand in an international setting Syrian Christian can be confusing and so can Nasrani. But in actuality and in official record those are the names used historically.

2. First Paragraph: I clarified that while the community is no doubt old, no one really knows exactly when it began, even if legends (the sources we have don't date more than 4/5 hundred years max) claim the 1st century A.D or even more and very dubiously specify exactly the year as A.D. 52.

3. I added Frykenberg as the source for the first paragraph- he is the most comprehensive source on the topic.

3. First portion of Early History and Tradition. Following edits made:

a. I clarified many sources don't list the names of the gramams that are purportedly converted but do mention the tradition of Brahmin conversions. The sources for the list is Frykenberg and Thoma.

b. I added one sentence to clarify why this legend has some significance- it was the basis or the rationality for a class system in place in the community for hundreds of years. This is clear from Frykenberg.

Josslined (talk) 16:09, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

Edit War

One rogue editor, ManofManyTrophies has been attempting do the following:

1. Add claims of a large number of Jews converting to christianity, and then adding false citations. 2. Remove content written on the basis of Prof Malekandathil's published research. Nasrani.net reproduced a chapter from his book. His claim is that the source is not reliable.

Prof Malekandathil is professor of history at JNU, I believe India's most recognized History department, and his book has been reviewed in international journals. His book can be accessed here: https://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=rN69iFj1PJoC&oi=fnd&pg=PR7&dq=pius+malekandathil+&ots=zC_bWvYX01&sig=fC68k0GDnxQtWn0czgDFNhWH-F0#v=onepage&q=pius%20malekandathil&f=false

Other than engaging in a discussion, he has been vandalizing my talk page with dubious warnings. I would like to ask for a third party review. Cúchullain?

Josslined (talk) 16:13, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Nasrani.net is a glorification site of Syrian Christians. Are you saying that a Syrian Christians historian writing about his own people is a 100% reliable source? I never added citations or false citations to the Jews converting to Christianity and if I did, feel free to remove it. You had also reverted minor parts of the edit such as me replacing Persians with Middle Eastern. Regarding the conversions, tt is pretty obvious though. Also, do you know what vandalizing means in Wikipedia context? ManofManyTrophies (talk) 16:38, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Also, the book you have is written by Pius Maalekandathil if I am not mistaken.ManofManyTrophies (talk) 16:49, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

The authenticity of the entries on Wikipedia is very doubtful. Some scrupulous guys edit and and changes the entire history according to their likes and to gain popularity of their groups or families. St.thomas Indian community history is the most edited version on Wikipedia. Those who edit that page has no clues of the history of Indian st Thomas Christians. If they cannot find their family name on the page, they simply add to it . and try to make it authentic. Orthodox Christian history in India clearly states that Only SEVEN FAMILIES were initially converted to Christianity. When somebody doesn't find their family name in the list , he or she simply add their family name to it and deliberately omit the original families who are on the original list. THE ORIGINAL SEVEN FAMILIES ARE KALLI,KALLIANKAL,KALLARAKAL ,MANKI,MADATHALAN,,MATTAMUK AND MANAVASRI.I don't mind anybody add their family name to it, but don't try to draw the history according to their wishes. JayMaveli (talk) 08:08, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Complete Nonsense

It just sounds absolutely ridiculous as every 2 seconds in reading that article, I see some sort of comparison between Brahmins and Syrian Christians or Nairs and Syrian Christians. The sentence 'on par with Brahmins' or 'at the same level as savarna hindus' is probably the most common sentence in that article. It sounds like those from the community wish they were Brahmins or Nairs. If you say that there isn't any caste promotional things in the article that try to lift the status of the community, I would be more than happy to provide evidence for that. 'Privileged Military Role'...this is complete baloney.ManofManyTrophies (talk) 19:33, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Had you checked the source for your particular complaint you would see it is adequately backed up. The source is L.K. Ananthakrishna Iyer's Anthropology of Syrian Christians, which is available online. The required page is 55 and you can look it up here: https://archive.org/stream/AnthropologyOfTheSyrianChristians/Anthropology%20Of%20The%20Syrian%20Christians#page/n93

Josslined (talk) 21:26, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Will also like to add, it is funny that ManofManyTrophies is accusing me for defending 'caste promotion' in this article, given judging by recent 'contributions' to other articles, caste promotion seems to be his hobby.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/ManofManyTrophies

Josslined (talk) 21:39, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
Many syrian catholics good "kudikidappu avakasham", were forced to do oozhiyam service until the proclamation of Dewan reddy Rao on December 29 1815!!

All cooked up stories, most Nasranis along with ezhavas were involved in Liquor trade which is by far the biggest evidence to support their common origins, The nambudiri origin claims are all fads just to escape casteist opression, No syrian christian became the dewans or army commanders of any kingdom until the british uplifted them by giving education and estates as return for their loyal services-all to dismantle the "nair dominance" in travancore in particular106.51.20.13 (talk) 16:30, 2 October 2015 (UTC) It should also be noted that the ORIGINAL NAMBUDIRIS who came from Ahichatra evangelised many fisherman and localites into BRAHMANISM-(source-elamkulam kunjan pillai) So in reality most nambudiris Syrian Catholics and ezhavas have the same blood106.51.20.13 (talk) 16:32, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

The most frequently edited pages of Wikipedia is St.Thomas Christians pages and it is protected too so that other vandals cannot edit this pages anymore. Only authorized WIKI VANDALS are allowed to edit this page. Some scrupulous editors edit these pages to gain popularity of their family name distorting the real facts.I don't mind adding their family name in to this pages, but my request is that DON'T OMIT the original few families that still in existence. The original SEVEN FAMILIES from MALANKARA (Kerala) that St.Thomas converted are KALLI,KALLARAKAL,KALLIANKAL,MANKI,MADATHALAN,MATTAMUKU and MANAVASRI. If anyone wants to add their family name they can do so BUT don't distort the real HISTORY. Remember history is history and there are records to prove it.ANYHOW WIKIPEDIA IS NOTORIOUS FOR FALSIFYING THE FACTS AND PEOPLE DONT RELIE ON WIKIFACTS. JayMaveli (talk) 11:25, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Marthoma people list

Please don't include it. The Mar Thoma people is a subset of STC who follow anglican faith. It would be confusing to merge a subset with the set, as if all STC as Mar Thoma, which is not true. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Josslined (talk • contribs) 21:42, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Repeated removal of inline citation

Josslined removed an established inline citation, which is accessible online, for the 4th time. The inline citation, The Jews of India: A Story of Three Communities by Orpa Slapak, was removed because it contradicts Josslined's main claim. That citation talks about Hebrew signatures found on a 9th century Christian inscription, that is still available in Kerala for verification. No indigenous person in ancient Kerala would have signed in Hebrew in the 9th century. It is a physical evidence, not any speculation.

In the 2nd century, Pantaenus from Alexandria visited a Christian community in India using the Gospel of Mathew in Hebrew language. We have evidence of travel between Egypt and ancient Kerala (See Silk Road trade routes) in the 2nd century. No indigenous people would have used that Gospel at that time. The 2nd century South Indian epic Manimekkalai talks about a non-Indian Jewish Christian community in ancient Kerala.

The lead section should be inclusive and neutral. So I have reverted some of the edits and restored the citation removed by Josslined. I welcome other Users who have experience in editing this article to decide on the correctness of the recent changes proposed by Josslined and whether they are really needed or not. Anyway, we should not remove the citations verifiable online.

The Caste System that existed in the northern part of India did not exist as such in Kerala in the early centuries. Some obviously unreliable wild guesswork, which was not there in the article before 2015, like different castes, number of people converted, etc. can be removed. Jossyys (talk) 01:23, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Oh is that the citation you wished to keep. I removed it thinking it didn't add very much- we all know the Thomsian tradition is mentioned in many academic sources, and b) I thought the link was broken.

We know there were Jews in kerala before 1000 A.D. We know hebrew was used in the community and we know persian merchants may have integrated with the community. We also know the community's tradition is that the initial converts were local Hindu people, supplemented later by migrants. Saint Thomas Christianity is an Indian version of Christianity. It is a community that had churches that looked like temples and that had a specific function and position in the Hindu caste system. A 1000 years later this possible mixture of migrants and local people can be called indigenous Indian Christians, and the community can be called to be Indian. No indigenous Indian community is is ethnically pure. Further all people in the subcontinent were migrants at one time. Indeed the archaeological evidence you cite is one of the earliest recorded artifacts in Kerala.

"Some obvious unreliable wild guesswork, which was not there in the article before 2015, like different castes, number of people converted, etc. can be removed" I think you referring the Songs of Thomas. Songs of Thomas is one of the oldest record of the community tradition. It is not meant to be factual but a legendary account of the communities traditions.

Further I have trouble claiming All saint thomas christians believe in the Thomsian legend. Further, it should be clarified the exact origins of the communit is not clear.

The other point of the name. Calling Syrian Christain and Nasrani as the popular version is again wrong. Syrian Christian and Nasrani are the older more official names for the community. Saint Thomas Christians is actually the less official name, and has Anglican missionary connotations I will make edits accordingly (busy right now). Josslined (talk) 19:28, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

They were originally called Nasrani. The term Syrian Christian has been used in Kerala since the Dutch period, especially to differentiate between the Nasrani people and the Latin Christians.

The structure of any building constructed in any region conforms to the local geography and climate and the construction work is done mostly by the local people. The ancient Nasrani churches in Kerala are a blend of Kerala architecture and Middle East churches.

Now, the lead section is inclusive as it says that they are from Kerala, India; they trace their origins to the evangelistic activity of Saint Thomas in the 1st century. If we say, they are indigenous, we unnecessarily assert something which is not fully true. Look at the history of ancient Kerala, even the Brahmins in Kerala are not originally native to the region.

Some people are very clear about their origins and some are not. The article takes care of the issue regarding their origins under the section "Early history and tradition." We need not clutter the lead section with more details that are included in the following sections.

I have noticed that you give much importance to the term "Hindu." In fact, the word "Hindu" is NOT originally an Indian word. The word "Hindu" is neither a Sanskrit word, nor is this word found in any of the native dialects and languages of India. It is originally a Persian word (derogatory one) used by the Muslims who conquered and ruled the North and Central parts of India to humiliate the inhabitants there. People in India are slowly coming to realize this fact. Since Kerala was never part of any of those North Indian empires, the word "Hindu" was not used in Kerala until very recently. Jossyys (talk) 08:50, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

See this news: Govt does not have info on definition of 'Hindu', reveals RTI query [1]. Jossyys (talk) 12:50, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Diagrams posted on this article regarding:

Users like Achayan or his sock puppet post many pictures in this article. Please remember to post pictures of relevance to the concerned matter. There are so many ceremonies and rituals among St Thomas Christians. Some of them are not common also. For example baptismal font is used in Malankara Church. I don't understand what is the importance of 21 beads on the thali as stated in the picture. Also would like to keep the pure east Syrian crowning ceremony picture of the Chaldean Syrian Church as this Church is not represented. In my opinion, all St Thomas Churches should be given some representation rather than posting pictures of a particular Church. Also I noticed that user Achayan or his sock puppet with IP address starting 202 is so much interested in projecting his family and his marriage photo on this site. He had inserted his family name Payyapilly along with the early families converted by St Thomas. Later I noticed it and removed it. Mandrake_the_Magician (talk) 16:11, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

On division and defiance it is better to post the picture of MarThoma I as he was the primary person concerned with the Coonan cross oath and the first division in the Church. Mandrake_the_Magician (talk) 16:16, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Church of the East and India

The source you add is a reference work on Roman Catholic history and belief edited by the faculty of the Catholic University of America. It cannot be considered an independent source. It says that Theophilus (surnamed the Indian) — an Arian, sent by Emperor Constantius (about 354) on a mission to Arabia Felix and Abyssinia — is one of the earliest, if not the first, who draws our attention to them. Note the point, "our attention to them". In fact, Christians existed in Kerala before that period; however, they could not notice those Christians. I shall explain it. We have to note that Christianity was illegal in Rome until the 4th century AD, until AD 313 and Christians were persecuted in the Roman Empire until then. In AD 313, the Edict of Milan decriminalizing Christian worship was issued. So, only after that period, they started taking interest in Christianity. The Church of the East is a different Church. A particular Church's version cannot be considered the definition of another independent Church. We have to verify different independent sources.

The term 'Malankara' was used originally, not 'Malabar'. See the picture of the tomb that was removed from the article by Kokkarani the other day; the term 'Malankara Nasrani' is used. Jossyys (talk) 00:32, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Please bring references or citations rather than just explaining your versions. Catholic Encycolpedia edited in USA is unbiased and considered reliable. You point out some minor mistakes to reject it. If you reject it, you have to bring forward reliable references and citations. Until then please DON'T revert it. ThanksMandrake_the_Magician (talk) 01:14, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

The term 'Malankara' was used originally, not 'Malabar'. Please bring reference for your claim rather than pointing out to a 17th century Tomb writing .It even look like written a few years ago.Mandrake_the_Magician (talk) 01:14, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Ecclesiastical province of India? What does it mean? Ecclesiastical province of the Church of the East? Also this claim needs reference or citation. ThanksMandrake_the_Magician (talk) 02:26, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

The PDF is here. See the pages 53 and 54.

The Chronicle of Seert reports that a Bishop David of Basra engaged in missionary activity in India around 295/300, and it seems that Joseph of Edessa was named bishop of India by the catholicos of the Church of the East in 345.

Catholicos Sabrisho (596–604) also expressed interest in the Indians, to whom Ishoyahb II (628–46) eventually sent additional bishops. The jurisdiction of the Church of the East over the Christians of the Indian Malabar coast was clearly established under Catholicos Ishoyahb III († 658) around 650. Between 650 and 850 a separate metropolitanate of India was established, which was mentioned around 1350 by Amr b. Matta in his Book of the Tower.

See the pages 20 and 21.

Concerning relations with the patriarch of Antioch, no claim of Antiochene jurisdiction over the Church of the East during the synods of 410, 420, and 424 can be found. In fact, none of the ancient ecclesiastical sources claims a dependence of the East Syriac church upon Antioch as mother church.

So there is no question of independence in 424. It just says, the intervention of the Western bishops, i.e. the bishops of the eastern provinces of the Roman empire, ceased with the decision of 424. Anyway, that is not the main point under discussion here.

Points to be noted:

1. AD 295/300 means it happened in the 3rd/4th century before the First Council of Nicaea.

2. Between 650 and 850 a separate metropolitanate of India was established.

3. Terms like 'local kings of Kerala', 'indegenous Indians' etc. are used.

4. The lead section should not contradict the content in the article.

Therefore, I shall restore the earlier version later. Jossyys (talk) 03:50, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Your point: The Chronicle of Seert reports that a Bishop David of Basra engaged in missionary activity in India around 295/300, and it seems that Joseph of Edessa was named bishop of India by the catholicos of the Church of the East in 345.

This has been discussed a lot by many learned historians. The India mentioned here is NOT about St.Thomas Christians. Please go through more sources to clarify it. I have gone through a number of books and Encyclopedias and none of them state anything like you claimed. ThanksMandrake_the_Magician (talk) 04:03, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Your point:it seems that Joseph of Edessa was named bishop of India by the catholicos of the Church of the East in 345.

Do you have any reference for your assertion that he was a bishop of St Thomas Christians? India mentioned at that time included a region east of Hindukush mountains.There was grater India and lesser India. Your claim is based on vague things. The reference you provided is NOT sufficient to accept your claim. ThanksMandrake_the_Magician (talk) 04:10, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

The Chronicle of Seert (or Siirt) is an ecclesiastical history written in Arabic by an anonymous Nestorian writer, at an unknown date between the ninth and the eleventh century. How much reliability it has?Mandrake_the_Magician (talk) 04:36, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Your claim is totally wrong. There was no claim of Antiochene jurisdiction over the Church of the East during the synods of 410, 420, and 424. I do not claim anything here. I just quote from the reference. I restore the page with proper citation. You need consensus for making changes. Jossyys (talk) 05:12, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Please stick to the TOPIC. We r not discussing about the dependence of the Church of the East on Antioch. You said St.Thomas Christians started relationship/communion with the Church of the East from 4th century. Please bring forth sufficient credible reference to prove it and convince others. ThanksMandrake_the_Magician (talk) 05:22, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Even though that is NOT our topic, I just quote a part from page 19 of the book-Church of the East A concise history-Wilhelm Baum and Dietmar W. Winkler for your information.

The synod of 424 is widely regarded as the occasion on which the Church of the East stated its claim to autocephaly through the rejection of the “right of appeal” to the West. It has been assumed that in this year the Church of the East declared itself independent of the patriarch of Antioch. One must realize, however, that such a declaration of independence from the patriarch of Antioch need not have taken place, as this presupposes an earlier dependence. The Church of the East can be considered to have been autocephalous since the Synod of Isaac in Seleucia-Ctesiphon (410). ThanksMandrake_the_Magician (talk) 05:29, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

First of all, I do not make any new claim. See the section 'Classical Period'. "From the early 4th century the Patriarch of the Church of the East provided India with clergy, holy texts, and ecclesiastical infrastructure, and around 650 Patriarch Ishoyahb III solidified the Church of the East's jurisdiction over the Saint Thomas Christian community". This content has been there under that section with citation since the beginning. Any changes to the lead section should be based on content in the body. The lead section should NOT contradict the content in the article. So I am going to restore the earlier version with additional citations.

See this reference 1: We also know that bishops were in India at the end of the third and early fourth centuries. The first identified bishop of India is David (Dudi) who left Basra by ship around AD 295....it was likely in southern Inda. The second reference to a bishop is John, bishop of Persia and Great India (325)....Eusebius who was present at the council noted that a Persian bishop was a participant....the Indian Church was well established before the Council of Nicea. It answers all your questions.

See these references: 2, 3, 4.

The Catholic Encyclopedia talks about John the Persian, who was present at the Council of Nicaea (325). In his signature to the degrees of the Council he styles himself; John the Persian [presiding] over the churches in all Persia and Great India. The designation implies that he was the [primate] Metropolitan of Persia and also the Bishop of Great India.

Definition of 'ecclesiastical': of or relating to the Christian Church or its clergy.

It is simply an adjective used by another editor earlier. Jossyys (talk) 02:09, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Additional references: 5, 6. Jossyys (talk) 04:32, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

OK. The history-divisions diagram is changed accordingly. Thanks Mandrake_the_Magician (talk) 19:08, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 November 2016

Please edit

"The community was historically united in leadership and liturgy, but since the 17th century have been split into several different church denominations and traditions"

as follows.

"[[Thomas_the_Apostle|Saint Thomas the Apostle]] reached India in AD 52, who was followed by [[Thomas_of_Cana|Knai Thoma]] in AD 345 along with 72 families and clergymen. The second Syrian migration to Kerala happened in AD 825 along with two bishops [[Mar_Sabor_and_Mar_Proth|Mar Sapor and Mar Aproth]] further strengthen the relationship between Saint Thomas Christians and the Syrian liturgy. The community was historically united in leadership and liturgy, but since the 17th century have been split into several different church denominations and traditions."

--Gibies (talk · contribs) 05:58, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

In this context, church and denomination is a synonymous word. Mandrake_the_Magician (talk) 18:02, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

I've made a slight copyedit to the request. @Kokkarani: are you saying the edit is incorrect? Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 16:37, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

 Done and copy-edited.  Paine Ellsworth  ^u/c 13:48, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Undone: This request has been undone. Another editor has cited the lack of sourcing – so Gibies, can you say where you read this material that you wanted to include in this article? Can you cite a reliable source for this material?  Paine Ellsworth  ^u/c 00:40, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Ezhavas converted to Christianity

yrian Christians are Ezhava converts. This was even acknowledged by Fr Paul Thelekkatu{ priest of syro malabar sabha}. This article seems to have been written by people who can't digest their slave past and want to satisfy their vanity. These guys received Kudikidappu Avakasham from Nair feudal lords and Namboothiri jenmis. Even today they live under false notion that they are upper caste. Fact is that even today these guys are not allowed to enter temples or Purification rituals are performed if they enter... So much for their Nambudiri ancestry. Men can lie but his genes can never lie. Their genes are most similar to other South Indian communities (except nairs). This is an excerpt from Harappa DNA project Syrian Christians surnames like Thampan and Panicker were commonly used by Ezhavas. Both these communities were into liquor brewing Vallyathampran (talk) 14:44, 30 December 2016 (UTC)Vallyathampran

References

Recent vandalism and formatting of DNA data

I'm choosing to revert this page back to a previous version used in an antecedent revert, for the following reasons:

1. The edits by User:Mages Mathew lack justification, respect for the style guidelines and deleted or replace reference-supported text for no visible reason.

2. The section on genetic composition of Saint Thomas Christians, as it stands, is incorrectly formatted and lacks context. See Assyrian_people#Genetics for an example of well-contextualised genetic research, which describes the results in plain English.

This will make the recent change by User:Maproom void, sorry about that.

Maximilian Aigner (talk) 13:53, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Genetics

We routinely disregard genetics studies in Indian articles relating to Indian social groups, for a bunch of reasons best highlighted in the post of Fowler&fowler that can be found here. Such studies might be appropriately mentioned elsewhere in Wikipedia but they are not considered suitable here. That is why I have been removing information from this article and will continue to do so. I'm not even convinced that this is actually a reliable source. - Sitush (talk) 11:54, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

I note that the source was briefly mentioned in this discussion. - Sitush (talk) 14:48, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

The reason given by @Fowler&fowler: for the non-inclusion of genetic evidence is that he doesn't find it be reliable, I don't find this to be a valid reason. We are not assessing the validity of a WP:RS we are simply assessing whether it is verifiable and that its published by a reputable organization. --Eng. M.Bandara-Talk 22:48, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Er, no. If a source is not reliable then we do not use it. Fowler is only one of many people who consider it inappropriate to use such studies. - Sitush (talk) 10:20, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Other two recent discussion where consensus was to remove genetics researches.[2][3] Capitals00 (talk) 11:27, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Saint Thomas Christians. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131016110920/http://www.syrianchurch.org/MalankaraChurch/DEFAULT.HTM to http://www.syrianchurch.org/MalankaraChurch/DEFAULT.HTM

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:30, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

The division of Nasranis or Malankara Nasranis.

The St Thomas Christians church or "Malankara Sabha", was split into two because of Catholic Church authorities tried to tie it under its belt, now the details about the division is also seemed to have influenced by Catholics. Need to edit the details given about the divisions of Nasranis Syriannasrani (talk) 15:13, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

The pattern of writing is not easy to read, can we edit to make it more lucid and simple to read (45.248.92.96 (talk) 13:16, 25 January 2018 (UTC))

Requested move 8 May 2018

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: WP:SNOW not moved. This RM is clearly not going to pass. (closed by page mover) GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 02:50, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

---

Saint Thomas Christians → Mar Thoma Nasrani – per WP:COMMON NAME, Wikipedia:Naming conventions (ethnicities and tribes) - Self identification Achayan (talk) 20:56, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 23:05, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

• @Achayan: Better discuss this move. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 23:05, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose. The present name is the WP:COMMONNAME. No evidence that the proposed title is common or otherwise preferable.Cúchullain ^t/c 01:28, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose: St. Thomas is the WP:COMMONNAME. The redirection from Mar Thoma Nasrani seems sufficient. Crawford88 (talk) 05:35, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose: The most common English terms for this community are 'Syrian Christians of Kerala' and less frequently, Saint Thomas Christians. It is true that 'Nasrani' used to be a popular colloquial term in Malayalam for this community until mid/late 20th century. AFAIK the combinative term 'Mar Thoma Nasrani' was not common and if at all used would have been restricted to formal contexts such as documents, speeches or books or in specific church contexts. Considering the above, I believe that the redirection from Mar Thoma Nasrani to Saint Thomas Christians is proper, contemporary and efficient. Sahrudayan (talk) 12:06, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose: St. Thomas is the WP:COMMONNAME. This isn't the Syriac wikipedia. In ictu oculi (talk) 12:44, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Iyer

Iyer is probably C. P. Ramaswami Iyer — Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.13.95.139 (talk) 10:37, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Essenes/ Rabbinic Judaism

1) Essenes was a community that existed between 2nd century and 1st century AD. Manimekalai may or may not refer to a community existing in South India. However there are no credible sources linking Essenes to the Nasrani community of today. Please provide reference to an academic text or paper. 2) Rabbinic Judaism barely influenced the Cochin Jews by the 16th century. There is no way it influenced in any meaningful way the Nasrani community particularly after the Portuguese Synod. I do grant that Portuguese did proscribe the following of some Jewish customs. 3) Judeo-christian roots. The Thoma Parvam mention some Jews who converted to Judaism, but very little academic sources linking the two communities (though there is some reason to believe the Knanayas have had some links).

I suggest these connections are speculative. At best they are new theories and not established knowledge.

If you disagree please provide references (including page numbers), and we can go through the academic sources together. Josslined (talk) 19:12, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

@Josslined: I agree, Cochin Jews should be removed as a related ethnic group from the page and Saint Thomas Christians should be removed from the Cochin Jews page. YaLindaHadad (talk) 20:03, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Would like to add the debunking of St. Thomas myth

Both the catholic church as well as several archaeological evidences have thoroughly debunked the possibility of Thomas having come to India (if he even existed). https://apostlethomasindia.wordpress.com/category/christian-mythology/

Can we update this wiki to reflect this please? this is largely a folklore created to give legitimacy to the belief. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.44.177.134 (talk) 05:10, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

No, the links you have provided are not neutral and are bias. Please add other sources as well.Manabimasu (talk) 01:52, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 May 2019

Please change the link destination for "Savarna" to "Varna (Hinduism)" (unfortunately, the current link destination is only a disambiguation page which brings up irrelevant information about a spider in 'Page preview'). Thanks. 203.221.188.175 (talk) 05:37, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

 Done However, none of the sources contained “Varna” but “Savarna” was not contextually appropriate.Manabimasu (talk) 06:15, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Chaldean and church of the east

Saint Thomas Christians focuses on the ethnoreligious group in India. However, Chaldean Christians trace also have St. Thomas roots. Would they be considered Saint Thomas Christians as well? Thoughts?Manabimasu (talk) 17:56, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Similarities and connections between Cochin Jews and Kerala Syrian Christians

Kerala Syrian Christian copper plates with inscriptions in Old Malayalam, Kufic and Hebrew (849 and c. 883 AD) (Photograph)

Several scholars of Jewish history have noted similarities and connections between the Cochin Jews and Syrian Christians of Kerala. Here are a few quotations from some of these scholars:

1) "There is at least one genre of Knanaya literature that exists also in the Jewish Malayalam corpus, the pallippattu, 'Synagogue song'." (Quote from - page 92 - Gamliel, Ophira. ‘Jewish Malayalam Women's Songs’, Unpublished PhD thesis, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, 2009.)

Note: The Malayalam term "Palli" is used to refer to the Syrian Christian "church" and also the Cochin Jewish "synagogue". Also note that the term ‘Syrian Christian’ was coined by the British. Historically, before the arrival of the British to India, the Cochin Jews were called ‘Malabar Juda Mappila’ and the so called Syrian Christians were called ‘Malabar Nasrani Mappila’. The term Mappila as used in Malayalam means ‘of West Asian Semitic descent’. It is better to use the term ‘Malabar Nasrani Mappila’ as this could reduce a lot of the confusion that arise from using the term ‘Syrian Christian.’

2) "Jussay and Weil compare some songs with the wedding songs of Knanaya Christians as suggestive of historic cultural relations between the two communities. (759) Johnson, with Daniel as her guidance in the language of the corpus, takes the songs as expressions of the socio-religious identity and ideology of Jewish women in Kerala. (760)” (Quote from – page 389 – Gamliel, Ophira. ‘Jewish Malayalam Women's Songs’, Unpublished PhD thesis, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, 2009.)

(Also refer to - Weil, Shalva J. (1982). "Symmetry between Christians and Jews in India: The Cnanite Christian and the Cochin Jews of Kerela," Contributions to Indian Sociology 16: 175-196. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/006996678201600202 )

3) "There are genres of narrative songs about Biblical characters similar to the formulaic songs in the anthology of Knanaya Christian songs – the women's vattamkali pattu and the men's cintu. (786) • The synagogue motif suggests a linkage with the Knanaya Christians. It seems to be adopted into the Jewish Malayalam corpus from the Knanaya songs, where it stands for a more mature genre." (Quote from – page 402 – Gamliel, Ophira. ‘Jewish Malayalam Women's Songs’, Unpublished PhD thesis, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, 2009.)

4) "Similarities between the rites and customs of the Syrian Christians (of Kerala) and the Jews of Kerala reflect a possible common origin in the ancient Middle East, and serve as heuristic evidence in support of the historical claims of both communities." (Quote from – page 88 – Ritual and Music in South India: Syrian Christian Liturgical Music in Kerala. Author(s): Israel J. Ross. Source: Asian Music, Vol. 11, No. 1 (1979), pp. 80-98. http://www.syriacstudies.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Syrian-music-in-kerala.pdf)

5) In the paper ‘Kerala and Her Jews’, published by Cochin Jewish Synagogue (1984), the Cochin Jewish writers Fiona Hallegua and Shabdai Samuel Koder wrote:

"...the Syrian Christian (copper) plates with the signature of four Jewish witnesses in Judeo - Persian, which incidentally is the second oldest inscription in Judeo- Persian in the world, are a few of the ancient relics that can still be seen to remind one of the glorious past of this forgotten outpost of the Jewish world. " (Page 2 Hallegua F. & Koder S. (1984) ‘Kerala and Her Jews’, published by Cochin Jewish Synagogue).

6) In another quote from their text the authors Fiona Hallegua and Shabdai Samuel Koder wrote:

"There are at least a few instances of direct evidence of a Jewish settlement on the South - West Coast of India during the first century of the Christian era. In a wedding song of the ancient Christians of Malabar, mention is made of one Habban, a Jewish merchant, who was sent by a Royal decree to fetch a man who would build a temple more beautiful than the one King Solomon had built in Palestine. Habban accompanied by St. Thomas arrived in Cranganore in 55 A. D., St. Thomas was welcomed by a Jewish flute girl. He stayed in the Jewish quarter of the town and some Jews are said to have been baptized by him in Cranganore." (Page 3 – Hallegua F. & Koder S. (1984) ‘Kerala and Her Jews’, published by Cochin Jewish Synagogue).

Kerala Syrian Christian copper plates with inscriptions in Old Malayalam, Kufic and Hebrew (849 and c. 883 AD) (Inscriptions)

Additional note: The copper plates of privileges granted to the Cochin Jews and the Syrian Christians of Kerala by an ancient King of Kerala are similar with 72 privileges engraved on these copper plates. It is important to note that the copper plates in possession with the Cochin Jewish synagogue is in old Malayalam script (Vattezhuthu), while the Kollam (Quilon) copper plates in possession with the Syrian Christians is in Old Malayalam, Kufic and Hebrew. Ironically, it is the Hebrew script on the Kollam copper plates in possession with the Syrian Christians of Kerala (Malabar Nasranis) that is often taken as conclusive evidence for the earliest presence of Jews in Kerala and India.

“The Kollam copper-plates inscription (849 ce) in Old Malayalam is the earliest evidence of Jews reaching the region.9” (page 55 - Gamliel, O. (2018) Back from Shingly: revisiting the pre-modern history of Jews ... Indian Economic and Social History Review, 55(1), pp. 53-76.)

• The observations across several scholarly papers on Kerala Jewish history, support an ancient Jewish heritage for both Knanaya and the other Syrian Christians of Kerala. Scholars of Jewish history have acknowledged cultural similarities and strong links between the Cochin Jews and Syrian Christians of Kerala. This needs to be mentioned in the articles of these communities. Gafeg (talk) 00:26, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

Are Knanaya Saint Thomas Christians?

The subgroup of the Saint Thomas Christians known as the Knanaya or Southists trace their lineage to Thomas of Cana

How would Knanaya come under the definition of Saint Thomas Christians while they themselves consider to be descendants of immigrants came from middle east on fourth century? --99v (talk) 20:11, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Erzdiakon Thomas.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:01, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Saint Thomas Christians

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Saint Thomas Christians's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "stthoma":

• From Thomas the Apostle: About Thomas The Apostle at the Wayback Machine (archived 2011-02-08)
• From Cochin Jews: India and St.Thomas > South Indian Mission >Overview at the Wayback Machine (archived 2011-06-07)

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 04:23, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Typo - seperately

seperately -- Should be separately. Will some suitably privileged person correct this. Thank you. 78.144.83.114 (talk) 23:02, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

 Done Manabimasu (talk) 00:52, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Copyrighted Images

Hi @Elizium23:, the user @lislecowls or @ Jennaiowan (I’m not sure if this is the same person using different accounts) is repeatedly breaking copyright rules for the three following images:

https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Knanaya_Ichappadu_Kodukkal.jpg#mw-jump-to-license

https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Knanaya_Chantham_Charthal.jpg#mw-jump-to-license

https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Knanaya_wedding_(1903).jpg#mw-jump-to-license

He or she is claiming that these are from a private family album from 1903 when in reality they are from the “Syrian Christian Marriage in India” (1985) a documentary film made by scholars Dr. Jacob Vellian, Dr. Jacob Kollaparambil, and Mr. Chummar Choondal. The film and its content are not free to use but copyrighted by the Hadusa institute. The film is even seen on YouTube used with permission by the Christian Musicological Society of India:

Aramaic Project-77 Syriac Christian Wedding in India” (I cannot post the link because of the spam filter)

I’ve mentioned this several times but the user is quite clearly deceptively making up claims about these images. I do not know if this is on purpose or they simply don’t know where this content is from and that it is copyrighted. I would like to request the images be deleted. Thomast48 (talk) 19:52, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Knanaya Chantham Charthal.jpg
• Knanaya Ichappadu Kodukkal.jpg
• Knanaya wedding (1903).jpg

You can see the reasons for deletion at the file description pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:53, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 August 2021

Please change below line from

According to legend, the community began with Thomas's conversion of Brahmin families, namely Pakalomattom, Sankarapuri, Kalli, Kaliyankal, Nedumpilly, Palackal, Panakkamattom, Kunnappilly, Vazhappilly, Payyappilly, Maliakkal, Pattamukku and Thaiyil.

to

According to legend, the community began with Thomas's conversion of Brahmin families, namely Pakalomattom, Sankarapuri, Kalli, Kaliyankal, Koikara, Madapoor, Muttodal, Kottakara, Nedumpilly, Palackal, Panakkamattom, Kunnappilly, Vazhappilly, Payyappilly, Maliakkal, Pattamukku and Thaiyil. Of these families, Sankarapuri and Palamattam (Pakalomattom) were ordained and set apart for sacred orders and bishops. The priesthood has been practically hereditary in the two families, Sankarapuri and Palamattam, for several centuries with the inheritance in the female line

Reference Link: https://archive.org/stream/AnthropologyOfTheSyrianChristians/Anthropology%20Of%20The%20Syrian%20Christians_djvu.txt 116.15.38.106 (talk) 00:06, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

 Done. Remember to use an edit request in the future; it makes it easier for editors to see your request. thanks you for improvement.Grayson Indica (talk) 07:10, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

References

Removal of images

@Kokkarani: You had removed three images. Since I didn't find any justifiable reason behind their removal, I have restored two of them namely, the images of Saint Thomas and Abraham of Angamaly. However, I think your edit summary on the removal of the timeline chart require a discussion. So what prompted you to its removal? Br Ibrahim john (talk) 23:46, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Sankaramangalam family Tharavad.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:54, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Kindi Kalasha Vilakku.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:23, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Coonan Kurish Oath.jpg
• Palli Perunnal.jpg

You can see the reasons for deletion at the file description pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:54, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 November 2021

These were Arya Brahmins(Indo-Aryans) who travelled to the Southern part of India and Accepted Christianity. 117.220.249.218 (talk) 10:42, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:44, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Image

This conversation is copied from User talk:Pbritti

thumb|140px|Image being discussed.

Hey Pbritti, I just uploaded this image since it contains the traditional dress of the st thomas syrian christians chatta and mundu which is mentioned in the wikipedia article.I'm a person belonging to this community of St.Thomas Christians.Kindly do consider these images to be kept on the page.Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TRHmTivl (talk • contribs) 17:27, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi, @TRHmTivl: Thanks for reaching out, I'm going to move this conversation to the talk page of the article per standard procedure, but wanted to respond to you here quickly. Three other editors disagree with the inclusion of that image on the grounds that it is excessive, and your insertion of the image has been reverted four times. Additionally, it is peculiarly captioned for a photo of a very specific couple. The clothing is mentioned in the article, but not in your caption. While inclusion of images of traditional dress are nice, the image hardly depicts that clothing (only from the chest up). A preferable image exists on the page for the Chatta and Mundu. You've also been inserting the image in a location somewhat irrelevant to what it depicts; if we weren't already so full-up on illustrations in that article, you'd want to put it directly by the passage that mentions it. Thanks for reaching out, but I recommend you heed the gathered consensus against that image on the page. ~ Pbritti (talk) 18:29, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

As I mentioned at Commons:User talk:TRHmTivl, I have concerns over the copyright status of this image.

I also agree with Pbritti that it is not useful to readers, as I do not think it is relevant enough to Saint Thomas Christians as an encyclopedia topic. Since it doesn't clearly illustrate the clothes, it is decorative, and therefore inappropriate. Grayfell (talk) 18:56, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

@Grayfell: I was also concerned about the copyright status; at least here in the U.S, I have a hard time imagining it's free. Regardless, it's an unideal image for this page. ~ Pbritti (talk) 19:05, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Engagement and Marriage are not performed in the same service

> For example, engagement and marriage are usually performed together in the same service.

This requires citation. Except for some very rare and specific cases, engagement (othukalyanam) and kalyanam (marriage) are performed separately and hosted by the bride's family and groom's family respectively. ParaPsychic (talk) 02:09, 4 October 2023 (UTC)