A bot has generated this blog entry based on the linked YouTube video. There are no intentions to steal the information or research from the original owner. This blog post is exclusively for "Educational Purposes Only," and I have no intention of earning, selling, or monetizing it. The main objective of this site is to share knowledge to as many people as possible. I strongly advise people to watch the original video for a better understanding.
This may seem self-serving, but in any case hearing from you will probably highlight the case about the lack of understanding of the general populace about my community, the Syrian Christians of Kerala. I know you've said there is no historical proof of saint Thomas having traveled to India. You have to understand also that there is no, not any there's no proof regarding the existence of Jesus Christ either, but you'll have to agree to the fact that the existence of Christians in Kerala long before the Europeans embraced the religion. I would also like to point out that my community has been persecuted by the Portuguese simply because we did not adhere to their culture and traditions. The current cross oath is the best example of that. The schisms in the church in Kerala at this time is testament to all the politics, the Portuguese and later the British played, although in Kerala our existence is understood.
It is my community's existence that the other people of my beloved country fail to understand. We are, after all, by faith Christian and by culture. Hindu. Your point of view will shed some light and many can then not conveniently paint everyone with the same brush. I agree with you: uh Jio, Alex um. This is a complex topic, see the Syrian or Syriac Christians of Kerala are a community that seems to date back about 1900 years so clearly before any foreign occupation or invasion or occupation of India.
Definitely more than a thousand years before the European invasions and occupation of India, especially in southern India, it was the Portuguese, so this um, so the Syria Syrian Christian community in India, believes that they were converted by Thomas the apostle saint Thomas, who came to India preached Christianity and converted a number of people in the Malabar region in the Kerala region to uh Christianity, that is Syriac or Syrian Christianity. They practice their liturgical rights in an ancient Syriac language, a dialect of the old Aramaic language, I believe, and when the Portuguese occupied this part of India, they tried to force these Christians, Indian Christians into adopting Portuguese uh a Portuguese version of Christianity, in which Latin was The predominant language, not the Aramaic dialect, so they tried to impose this upon the local Christians upon the Syrian Christians. They tried to impose Latin and other forms of other Portuguese forms of worship. So at some point in time, after about 50 years, the Syriac Syrian Christians rebelled against the Portuguese. They made this wow of affirmation, which is called the Conan cross oath, in which they rejected the Portuguese flavor of Christianity and reverted to their older uh rituals and uh Aramaic, language, etc. so they reverted to their older uh version or rights of Christianity.
So this was a repudiation of the European culture that had been brought into this part of India. So definitely it is true that the Syrian Christians are a much older community. It is believed to be about 1900 or so years. Old. The belief is that it is saint Thomas who converted them to Christianity. So listen.
The thing is this: you are right, there is no evidence of saint Thomas. There is no evidence of the lord Jesus himself. They have archaeologists, have been searching for evidence of Jesus Christ for decades or centuries and thus far there is no hard evidence, it doesn't mean he may not have existed, he may have existed uh Thomas, the apostle also most likely existed. The only question is: did he ever come to India? I have no question. I have no issue with, even if he actually did come to India. The issue is the portrayal of Indians in the story.
They portray Indians as primitive barbarians who killed Thomas the apostle because he was converting Indians. There is no evidence that this gentleman ever came to India, firstly and secondly, there is no evidence whatsoever that he was murdered by Indians, but this is now the canonical story to show India in a bad light, to show the people of India in a bad light. So that is what I have a problem with. That is what all Indians would have a problem with this fake depiction, this false fabricated, depiction of Indians as murderous barbarians right. But apart from that, yes, you are right. You, the Syrian Christians, are, of course, by culture and by DNA Hindu. The funny thing is that uh.
The curious thing is that Syrian Christians, some of them call each other call themselves Manila. The word Manila is an honorific term. That is a which means descendant of foreigners. I believe even the Muslims of Kerala call themselves Manila so Manila or mop la it means a descendant of foreigners, especially from the Middle East. So even the Syrian Christians consider themselves to be at least some of them consider themselves to be descendants of people from the Middle East, from the uh region of Judea and the Arabic regions, etc. so this is i this is a bit curious, I mean so.
Does it mean that the Syrian Christians are originally the descendants of some people who migrated to India from that region, and is it is that how the religion was brought into India? So the origins of this community are a little obscure. The official version is that saint Thomas came and converted them, but it looks like because they call each other etc. that they may actually be the descendants of a small group of migrants who came to this part of India for whatever reason it's like the afghan Pashtuns, The afghan Pashtuns, they say that we are the descendants of one of the lost tribes of Israel, but DNL analysis shows that there is no. This is not the case.
They are an extension of the overall Indian population, but the claim they make to to perhaps justify their conversion to the other religion to Islam is that we are the descendants of middle easterners and all that and the Pakistanis similarly claim descent from Turks. So I am not really sure what is the origin of this community. Of course you are very much Indian. You are Indian by DNA. You practice a much older form of Christianity than these Europeans who try to impose a different form of Christianity on you so by culture. Hindu.
I am not sure how culturally Hindu Christianity is um yeah. It is true that many uh Christians in India n have Hindu names. I think the majority of Christians in India have Hindu names, but they practice Christianity. So by that sense you could say that, yes, Indian Christians are to some extent by culture Hindu, but on the other hand there is definitely a very strong movement towards explicitly rejecting Hindu culture among Indian Christians, especially in the past one or two generations. As a Christian convergence pick up speed right now, which we are witnessing everywhere, so this is a very uh complicated topic. It is the Syrian.
Christians are definitely one of the oldest Christian communities in the world. If you go by the official version that it is 1900 years old, I would like to see some sort of DNA analysis as to see exactly what sort of DNA components this community has uh. Is there any middle, eastern or Syrian uh trace of DNA among these people or not? So that's an interesting topic but uh so yeah, that's that's what I would have to say about this is a matter of debate. It'S a matter that it needs more historical research. Dna research and much more the uh story of Thomas the apostle traveling to India is very much a myth.
Some people said there is a church up on some hill, and that proves that the saint Thomas was in India. How does the presence of a building on a hill prove anything? I mean it proves nothing just because there is a church on some hill or whatever doesn't prove anything, it's just a building on a hill. It doesn't prove that some individual was in India 1900 years ago. The only way to prove that he was in India was if his remains are found in India, or there is undeniable literary evidence from multiple sources that attests to the fact that he was in India. But there is a marked absence of such evidence.