OrthodoxChristianity.net
April 20, 2014, 08:09:21 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: The Rules page has been updated.  Please familiarize yourself with its contents!
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Copts Demand Equality!  (Read 6446 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Stavro
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox
Posts: 985


« Reply #45 on: February 18, 2005, 02:44:43 PM »

Dear Ibrahim,
Quote
I have not said that they are. As I am meeting more Copts (there are a few at my school) this is becoming more and more clear. Do you have information about your (Coptic) language? Are you allowed to speak it in Egypt?
-The Coptic language is used in liturgical worship and in hymns, chiefly for religious ceremonies. There has been a strong attmepts of reviving it among the Coptic people in churches, by initiative of the Church, with little success. Some very distant and isolated villages in Upper Egypt speaks Coptic till this day, but this is a very rare exception.
-It is not criminal anymore to learn Coptic or speak it as it was in the 10th century, when the Khalif decided to cut the tongues of those who spoke Coptic. The brutal verdict was administered publicly and it brought fruits. Arabic replaced Coptic by force, even in church. It was one of the sad period in which a nation's identity was eradicated completely, and which seems to be the mark of Islam whenver it goes. Look at Asia Minor, for a parallel example.
-The first six centuries a.d. of Egypt's history are dropped as if they never happened, from all history books in schools, in the media, from the memory of the people. I understand why such a position is adopted by arabs and muslims. How would the persecution of Copts by Arians, for example, and the staunch defense by Copts led by St.Athanaisus against the denial of Christ's divinity fair with their alleged acception of Islam (total denial of Christ's divinity) only a couple of centuries later ?
- Nothing about martyrdom under Roman Emperors, for it will raise questions about how can a faith so persecuted propagate so fast in the East and in Egypt without the power of the sword, whereas another religion did not move one inch beyond the where the sword carried it.
- Nothing about Coptic culture, COptic art, Coptic literature or anything remotely related to the COptic heritage is ever taught in schools or even mentioned. I understand that, because our country lost its identity that made it great at one point of history and replaed it by another identity that is not hers.
- When the muslims and arab nationlists figured out that Copts are the natural extension of Pharaohs, they cancelled the greater part of the Pharaoh's history in schools. All universities in the World have an Egyptology section, but we do not. Egypt was the only country that declined a recent invitation to the most prominant Paris conference of Egyptology.
Because it is a very hard mission to take a shot at the greatness of the Pharaohs (which is indeed a great civilization that was so advanced that most of its mysteries are still not solved, scientific or otherwise), the attack became religious. I apologize for presenting this ridiculus piece of crap to such a respected forum, but it will give an idea about the islamic / arabic nationalism mind. It goes as follows : " Pharaohs are pagans, not muslims, and as such, they are cursed and there monuments (among them the pyramids, temples,...) should be demolished as pagan statues". This is Karadawy's fatwas, El-Awa, Muhamed Gebriel and other prominant sheikhs fatwas. In fact, previous attempts to demolish the pyramids were made under Sultan Salah El-Din, under Sultan Kalawon, and most recently by the Ottman princes were made.
For similarity, check what TALIBAN did with ancient Budda statues.

Peace.
Logged

In that day there will be an altar to the LORD in the heart of Egypt, and a monument to the LORD at its border. (Isaiah 19:19)

" God forbid I should see the face of Judah or listen to his blasphemy" (Gerontius, Archmanidrite of the monastery of St. Melania)
Stavro
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox
Posts: 985


« Reply #46 on: February 18, 2005, 03:50:41 PM »

Dear Ibrahim,
Quote
Ba'th is failure because it was run by a bunch of foolios and it was basically "Islam continued". It might as well be it's own religion. It says that Christianity is good, Islam is better (because it is more "ARab") and the Ba'th is best because it supposedly unites both (ie all the ARabs).
I agree, and there is a pattern of failure for regimes that adopts this nationalism agenda that was started by Nasser. You cannot replace the country's own identity with another one, this is recipe for complete destruction of a nation. The EU has many members, and they are most successful in taking unity steps, yet Germans have not abondoned their heritage nor are they less proud of its glorious moments, nor did the French or the British.
Before Nasser, we were doing fine. Under occupation, but by far better than the rule of Nasser, Saddat,.... . There was a sense of loving the country, that you do not find now.
Compare to UAE for example, that has totally abondoned the arabic nationalism crap (and they are the original arab) and they opened to the West. Compare to Syria, Egypt, Jordon (before th shift of the 90's), Iraq, .... .
Quote
It (Ba'th) is very racist and I can tell you from growing up around Ba'thists that they are racist in most definitions.
This is rooted in Islam and in the arabic mentality since childhood, like you brilliantly showed. It is not only Ba'th, it was the scheme of Nasser's regime (before he learnt to fear St.Pope Kyrollos). There is no explanation for the hatred of Jews in uncompromising terms, if it was not a religious duty to hate them. I understand the issues they might have with israel, but not the Jews. When a religious book mentions that the Jews are the grandchildren of Pigs and Monkeys, it cannot get more racist.
Remember the famous "3eloug" expression used by the former Iraqi media minister (Sa7af) ? This is an expression used by Arab muslims and Ottmans alike, referring to the occupied places original population. For an arab muslim, upon their invasion of Egypt, Syria, Iraq, lebanon, working in the field or working in a handcraft is an insult to his manhood, for they lived in the desert on invading neighboring tribes. "3elog" was invented by them, and it means a smelly pig, to describe the original inhabitants of these countries.
Granted, every nation went through a period of racism when it was in its ultimate grasp of power. Romans called others Barabrians, and maybe did Greeks, and so did any nation, but not anymore. This racism culture is fought in these countries, ironically to the benefit of arabs and muslims. Yet it still lives in the minds of the muslims and many arabs. Ever heard how the Saudi, Kwaities, Qataris, Baheranian refer to Africans ? A very denegrative word that cannot go unchecked. Ever heard the word " Masechut" ( disfigured by divine command) in reference of the far asians ?These words are popular in the Penninsula. 
Quote
I agree that many Arab nationalists equate Islam and Arab and I am fully aware of this and I have seen it many times in reading and experience (espeically in Algeria) but my friends who are also Arab (and Christian and Muslim at that) when I came to the US first asked me if I was Arab and I said yes and they did not mean Muslim.
This is a very special case, I must note. I have been under the impression that Syria is not big on religion, but on nationalism. Lebanon (the old Lebanon that was a paradise) was very loose of religion until the Palestinians and Hezballah sabotaged the South.
Quote
In Syria I was always treated as anybody else would have been (though that is hard to say because I have never been anybody else) and I am proud to be Syrian and to be Arab a
And one should be always proud of what he thinks is his heritage. That is clear and in fact encouraged. Yet all the different ethnic groups (including Copts) need to examine their history and to present it in truth, and study the present to know where they went wrong. Definitely, the arabic region cannot claim these times as its best, and the reason is the continuous state of denial of mistakes, history unpleasant facts, ..... .
Quote
Islam usually doesn't let people make progress. But I still do not believe that because a lot of people think Islam and Arab are not separable that this makes me not Arab. It is against everything I have experienced and lived.
Let me clarify so that no misunderstanding would arise. Arabs, as a race, are as any other race, with the same distribution of good and evil, intelligence and lack of it, and so on. Any other statement is racist.
I also totally appreciate the syrain civilization of old times and the great heritage in this place.
However, it is also a fact, that all arabs (minus you and your family and a number of converts that are on the rise) are muslims. As you mentioned, Islam is an ideological system that stops progress because it stops thinking and questioning. If you cannot question what you believer in, and you go in vicious circles to prove the obviously wrong in islamic doctrines, how would you expect any progress in any field ? When the islamic domination was somewhat supressed, or neglected, between 1880 and 1952, many arabic countries made very large steps. I will refer to Egypt again. We had democracy since 1922, for the most part, a Parliment, great economy, and moreover, active and responsible youth who were absorbed in the political process. We had also relative religious freedom, relative to the ages of martyrdom at least.
When the same arabic nations revivedd Islamic fundamenstalism, and arabic nationalism which in my opinion (and I respectfully disagree with you) is an islamic idea in nature to revive the Khalifates and bring back the glory of Islam, they went into the pathetic state they are in today.
So we are discussing the effect of Islam on arabic culture, which would be the same effect on other non-arab nations with time. We are not discussing the short comings of arabs becuase of their race.
Quote
This is sad and I think you are correct as 'Arab unity" is not possible and serves only the interests of fat cats (look at Syria ruining LEbanon right now) now

The presence of Syria in Lebanon reminds me of the presence of Egypt in Yemen 1962-68. An invitation for disaster. I cannot understand the logic behind it nor can I understand the mob and gang mentality that still dominates the arabic government attitude. I must question the intelligence of such regimes to invite trouble when it is already sinking. This is nothing short of Lybia in the 70's and 80's ( although I find Khadafi amusing and comic) and Nasser in the 60's. This complete detachment from reality.
Quote
It is idealistic and unrealistic
What is idealistic in ruining the Lebanon we all loved ? It is pure evil. i do not like Hariri, for he was nothing but a traitor and a dog on a leash for Saudis and he tried to islamize Lebanon, but there is nothing ideal about the Syrian presence in Lebanon. Please note that I would find the same faults at Egyptian policies as well, so it is not an attack on your nation.
Quote
It hurts Syria too, we spend too much money on keeping troops there.
Since 1948, we had to spend for the sake of others, and sometimes for no reason, without any benefit, only destruction. While many Israel's policies are opposed by me and by many, I still think there was no need to enter into a war we were not a part of in 1948. Egypt and Syria are the only countries that ever fought for the palestinian cause, and it did not even grant us a "thank you" note from arabs. Evenr heard the famous phrase :
'' Arabs fight till the last egyptian or syrian soldier". This is the direct fruit of arab nationalism, entering in wars we could have stayed away from.
Quote
I think that it is obvious that Arab nationalism went off coarse in most countries and made trouble.
- I believe it was always big words empty of any content. What real steps were taken for arabic nationalism dream except some songs, festivals, changing history books,.... ? Even the attempt of unity between Egyot and Syria in 1958 fell in three years, for both countries proved to have different natures. In a pathetic move, the name "Masr - Egypt" was dropped :'( and we were named thereafter "ARABIC UNITED REPUBLIC".
- When was there ever any unity between the arabic or islamic nations , a unity based on will of nations and not based on swords and wars ? The islamic/arabic empires of old were not confederate states like the US , for example, they were submitted into the EMpire by the sword. Whenever these nations could escape under a powerful Ameer (prince) or Sultan they did, like the Fatimites, Tolonites, Ekshedis, Mamloks, Ayoobyess (Family of Salah El-Din), Saljoki, Barahemas", .....
- Unity need compromise, and I doubt muslims compromise. Take the example of the civil war in Afghanistan after the expuslion of the Soviets. The TAKE ALL mentality prevailed, tribes killed each other because they would have all the 100 % of the pie and give nothing away.

Peace.
Logged

In that day there will be an altar to the LORD in the heart of Egypt, and a monument to the LORD at its border. (Isaiah 19:19)

" God forbid I should see the face of Judah or listen to his blasphemy" (Gerontius, Archmanidrite of the monastery of St. Melania)
Ibrahim
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 64


« Reply #47 on: February 20, 2005, 09:53:34 PM »

Quote
The presence of Syria in Lebanon reminds me of the presence of Egypt in Yemen 1962-68. An invitation for disaster. I cannot understand the logic behind it nor can I understand the mob and gang mentality that still dominates the arabic government attitude. I must question the intelligence of such regimes to invite trouble when it is already sinking. This is nothing short of Lybia in the 70's and 80's ( although I find Khadafi amusing and comic) and Nasser in the 60's. This complete detachment from reality.

Well the original intention was mostly good in my opinion. It was to restore order in Lebanon, not to hurt them or anything. It was very harsh (it was for the Maronites), go in, put in the old order so that the Ba'thi order sticks up in Syria without problems. Eventually we did our job and now we should be leaving (a long time ago, like 1992/3 maybe just to be safe). We're just making the Lebanese brothers hate us now. I like Qaddafi, he is funny and he is doing positive things in Africa now which is better than handing out guns to anyone who doesn't like capitalism.

Quote
What is idealistic in ruining the Lebanon we all loved ? It is pure evil. i do not like Hariri, for he was nothing but a traitor and a dog on a leash for Saudis and he tried to islamize Lebanon, but there is nothing ideal about the Syrian presence in Lebanon. Please note that I would find the same faults at Egyptian policies as well, so it is not an attack on your nation.

I agree, now the Lebanese don't need us anymore. The Lebanse problems are mostly fixed and they should be running themselves and its not like they don't want to (it is sad when you are supporting one Intifada and then your so-called "ally" (ie country you occupy) is calling for an intifada against you! We are like Israel in Lebanon now. We have no place and it is time to leave.

Quote
Since 1948, we had to spend for the sake of others, and sometimes for no reason, without any benefit, only destruction. While many Israel's policies are opposed by me and by many, I still think there was no need to enter into a war we were not a part of in 1948. Egypt and Syria are the only countries that ever fought for the palestinian cause, and it did not even grant us a "thank you" note from arabs. Evenr heard the famous phrase :
'' Arabs fight till the last egyptian or syrian soldier". This is the direct fruit of arab nationalism, entering in wars we could have stayed away from.

Yes, I remember that from military education class (we have this in Syria I think they used to in Jordan and Egypt probably not anymore though).


Quote
Compare to UAE for example, that has totally abondoned the arabic nationalism crap (and they are the original arab) and they opened to the West. Compare to Syria, Egypt, Jordon (before th shift of the 90's), Iraq, .... .

I have been to UAE, it is a nice place but its the same government we have in Syria, Jordan, Morocco etc. It's a hereditary despot. I like how itis more relaxed but this is because there are so many foreigners. Most there are  not even Arab. They have some of the prettiest cities in all the Arab world though because they spend more time on development and education than on stupid military and posters. I mean Hafez al Asad wasn't an ugly man, but he was not that good looking.

Quote
I believe it was always big words empty of any content. What real steps were taken for arabic nationalism dream except some songs, festivals, changing history books,.... ? Even the attempt of unity between Egyot and Syria in 1958 fell in three years, for both countries proved to have different natures. In a pathetic move, the name "Masr - Egypt" was dropped   and we were named thereafter "ARABIC UNITED REPUBLIC".

- Arab nationalism made many good cultural advances. The plays, poetry etc were some of the best in years. It did however make many people ethnocentric and easy to manipulate (for example, the leader can torture because it is for the good the nation; hate the Jews for the good of the nation). It was/is good if it is not in power. It makes for national self confidence but it does not work because Arabs are not uniform and it is in the character of the Arabs mostly to be very proud and to think this tribe, this or that is better. So you get people like Nasser "Egypt will lead revolution" and then Qaddafi "Libya will lead" and Asad "Syria will lead the Arabs!" and so on. But while they are talking, what is getting done at home? Very little except lots of portraits.
- The UAR was horrible for Syria as well. Do not think that because we asked for it that we wanted it the way it was. It was Nasser (who I can see as a good character but very tragic) who wanted to dominate us. We just wanted Egyptian help to squash the communists and he took it as a wayto make Egypt special. What is to be expected from a larger than life personality? There were (I dont I wasnt there this old people saying) Egyptian peasants coming to Syria and adding to poverty, Egypt was dominating the union (they had omethign like 300 more people in the token parliament) and the capital was in Cairo, not fair to Syria at all. So we broke it.

Quote
- Unity need compromise, and I doubt muslims compromise. Take the example of the civil war in Afghanistan after the expuslion of the Soviets. The TAKE ALL mentality prevailed, tribes killed each other because they would have all the 100 % of the pie and give nothing away.

This is the trouble in Lebanon. nobody wanted to compromise. People said "Lebanon is Christian" then someone says "Lebanon is Arab" then someone says "Lebanon is Muslims!" and nobody would compromise anymore or would let it change with the population (allowing the SHia/Muslims more say in government when Maronites were no longer the majority). In Syria nobody will comprmise it seems. I wish they would though. I hope the US does not get rid of the Ba'th because if they do, you can say good by to the Christians and Alaowites (off with our heads!) because the Sunnis will be mad at us. IT is good for minorities and some Sunni (the Asads basically made themselves Sunni the new wife of Dr Bashir is a Sunni in fact and they keep trying to make the Sunnis like them). But the government has not made the Sunni accept the minorities. They just made themselves sunni essentially.

Starvo, have you read the Dream Palace of the Arabs by Fouad Ajami? It is good, it talks about the nationalists and their problems through the intellectuals (poets, writers etc) and is very good. Another is by Adeed Dawisha, Arab Nationalism in the Twentieth Century: From Trimph to Despair. It is very good and has good chapters about the UAR and the many problems in the Arab world.
Logged

At any rate, I do not believe that there is a man in the USA who accepts to live in illusion who says that peace will be recognized between the Arabs and Israel even if the occupation of the occupied Arab territories does not come to an end.
The late
Ibrahim
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 64


« Reply #48 on: February 20, 2005, 10:19:35 PM »

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=1&categ_id=1&article_id=12826

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=1&categ_id=2&article_id=12818


Soon Syria will ahve to leave Lebanon wether the old people like it or not. Syrians don't want it, Lebanese don't want it, nobody wants it.
Logged

At any rate, I do not believe that there is a man in the USA who accepts to live in illusion who says that peace will be recognized between the Arabs and Israel even if the occupation of the occupied Arab territories does not come to an end.
The late
Stavro
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox
Posts: 985


« Reply #49 on: February 25, 2005, 06:20:38 PM »

Quote
Starvo, have you read the Dream Palace of the Arabs by Fouad Ajami? It is good, it talks about the nationalists and their problems through the intellectuals (poets, writers etc) and is very good. Another is by Adeed Dawisha, Arab Nationalism in the Twentieth Century: From Trimph to Despair. It is very good and has good chapters about the UAR and the many problems in the Arab world.
Thanks for the references, I will read them. I have read many books by Heikal (who I despise) and other writers that try to sell the idea, and have read for Khaled Muntasser, Adel Gendi, Shaker Tarabulsi and others who are totally against it, like myself. I look at a span of history in Egypt, from 1952 till now, and compare to 1870-1952, and I get my answer.

The cultural advances were mostly advances in support of the regime and the idea, but not in any other field. Brilliance and advancement need freedom, which is missing in all arab nationalist regimes. You cannot tie down a bird and ask the same bird to fly. Only shy attempts by Nageeb Mahfouz, Tawfik El-Hakeem were made to symbolically allude to the fact that we are going to have a disaster. Read " 3awdat el-wa3ey" for Nageeb Mahfouz or the masterpiece " A talk on the nile" by Nageeb Mahfouz.
Cultural advances must be accompanied by scientific ones, for both have the same roots and lead to the same, with a difference in the field of application. Scientific thinking was assassinated in the muslim/arab nationalist movement, and that is why our countries are so miserable in this field. No significant writers came from Egypt during this period who believed in Nationalism. Tawfik Hakim rejected the idea, Taha Hussein , Nageeb Mahfouz (Nobel Laureaute 1988), Saad El-Din Hamamsi, Zaki Naguib Mahmoud, .... . Only the dogs of the regime were given the stage to perform pitiful acts.
I do not regard these as advancement at all. They have killed the arabic mind and we see its fruits now in embracing Bin Laden and terrorist agenda.
How can such be labeled advancement if the result is the sweeping domination of terrorist ideas ?

You are right that it might have been different if these nationalists were not in power. Basically, there would have been no such idea at all. Do not underestimate the power of media. The islamic brotherhood, being out of favour at times with the regime, have managed to islamize the nation by media, backed up by Saudi money.

Islam and Arab nationalism are one and the same.
Logged

In that day there will be an altar to the LORD in the heart of Egypt, and a monument to the LORD at its border. (Isaiah 19:19)

" God forbid I should see the face of Judah or listen to his blasphemy" (Gerontius, Archmanidrite of the monastery of St. Melania)
Ibrahim
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 64


« Reply #50 on: February 25, 2005, 07:10:54 PM »

Quote
Islam and Arab nationalism are one and the same.

This is also said by Michel Aflaq. However I think there is a difference between militant, hardline Arab nationalism (Ba'th, Nasserism, etc) and liberal Arab/individualist nationalism (like in Lebanon now or in Algeria) where itis by consent of individual and not established as the whole country is the same thing with no exception. If you make a country to be one thing it stays that way and it goes no where. Islam is only thing for Saudi Arabia and they are regressive and reactionary. For Syria we are only Arab and religion is basically not important except for religion classes (which are a joke because they don't even count for a grade and are fill with nonsense about how Jesus was half Arab  (Huh Huh) and other falacious things) and then there is the great class, military education that is more ridiculous than the religious classes (we learned how to march every year as if this was important for something???) and the science classes are based off of Soviet science books which we all know are sooo savvy. There are positive aspects to it (over all social interaction climate) but intellectually it is overall stiffiling especially the government aspect. They said it was a revolution but it was the same thing as we had before if not worse. Right now there is a revolution about to happen however.

Quote
The cultural advances were mostly advances in support of the regime and the idea, but not in any other field. Brilliance and advancement need freedom, which is missing in all arab nationalist regimes. You cannot tie down a bird and ask the same bird to fly. Only shy attempts by Nageeb Mahfouz, Tawfik El-Hakeem were made to symbolically allude to the fact that we are going to have a disaster. Read " 3awdat el-wa3ey" for Nageeb Mahfouz or the masterpiece " A talk on the nile" by Nageeb Mahfouz.

I agree, the cultural center of the Arab world moved from Egypt in the 50s to Lebanon (mainly Beirut) and this is where many of the best poets and writers came from. What I find ironic however is that many of them (the best writers) were initially either fascist or semifasicst (like in the Orthodox Christian dominated Syrian Peoples Party/Syrian Social Nationalist Party) and then became either Arab nationalist or Arab fascist (Ba'th) but the best ones, like Khalil Hawi or Ali Ahemd Said (Adonis) went through these phases and ended up at a more moderate stance. Lebanon was able to create many great writers becasue it was not dominated by any of the totalitarian ideologies that took hold elsewhere (but they did try!). Even the writers from Algeria and Morocco that were nationalist had to go abroad to be able to write any thing of significance (as they were banned in their countries). The best poetry was written in anticipation of the regime but not during it. All of the good ones were during the struggle or right before it but they did not stay on afterwards. "Be careful what you wish for" you might say.
Logged

At any rate, I do not believe that there is a man in the USA who accepts to live in illusion who says that peace will be recognized between the Arabs and Israel even if the occupation of the occupied Arab territories does not come to an end.
The late
ethiopicartist
Ethiopian Tewahedo Orthodox
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 29

God bless you..may God have mercy on us sinners


« Reply #51 on: January 19, 2006, 10:34:27 PM »

 

    I believe the persecution only goes on becuase God allows it,with out His permisson not one coptic in eygpt would suffer from the holy cross.Just as Satan asked GOD in heaven to bring anusih and suffering to Job before he laid a hand on Job so it is so with the brave coptics in Egpyt.Coptics suffer because your a God's chosen people as are all christians.Never the less the Lord is merciful and one day I believe the moslems will turn back on their faith and all of Egypt will be memeber of the orthodox faith.I also think the Lord allows it to happen because it is the thorn that humbles Coptics because Egypt is quoted in the Holy bible and the coptic church was founded by st Mark the apostle.St. Paul had a thorn after he went to the third heaven so i guess that could be why it goes on.Saint Anthony the Great,the real father of monastics and so the list goes on. 
Logged

Lord Jesus Christ,Son of God,by the Mother of God have mercy on us sinners:34  I give you a new commandment, that you  love  one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should  love  one anot
Tags: Coptic Orthodox Church arab Syrian Middle East Middle Eastern Syria persecution Islam 
Pages: « 1 2  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.069 seconds with 33 queries.