Talk:Arab Christians/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Recent Edits

There is no dispute under international law that the West Bank is under Israeli military occupation and not merely "presence" (see Wikipedia article West Bank). This is an encyclopedia article, not an Israeli government press release. Slackerlawstudent 02:16, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Also, regarding the "execution" of poor people who can't afford the jizya, do you have a source for this provision of Islamic law, or evidence that such an execution took place under Islamic law? The wikipedia article on jizya, which lists its sources, lists a number of exemptions, including for the poor.Slackerlawstudent 02:20, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

There are very few "Arab" Christians

Middle Eastern Christians are not ethnic Arabs for the most part.סרגון יוחנא 19:57, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

The only 100%-ethnic Arabs live in parts of the Arabian peninsula and Sinai, so even most muslim Arabs refer their identity to their mother tongue rather than to their ethnicity. The nowadays called Arabs in Syria e.g. have been for thousands of years an ethnical mixture of Arabs and Aramaeans. M0s6p 09/25/2006 17:29 CET

Wrong/Wrong; The ethnic Arabs are the majority of the Christian Arabs, atleast thats the case in Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Israel/Palestine.--Skatewalk 03:47, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Tariq Aziz

First of all I think the most broadest definition of an Arab is any person (be it african or white or whatever) that speaks Arabic as a first language (native language). Tariq's native language is Syriac, not Arabic. Being part of a certian political party does not change your ethnicity; this is silly. He belongs to the Chaldean Catholic Church; a non-arab church. Unless you have a direct quote from him claiming to be an arab, then you should not generalize him as arab. Chaldean 14:18, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Identity

The Identity section of the article begins with the following statement:

• Historically, a number of minority Christian sects that were persecuted as heretical under Byzantine rule (such as Monophysites) actually began to enjoy more religious freedom under initial Muslim rule than they had under Byzantine (Orthodox Christian) rule. This tolerance however waxed and waned, not lasting for very long.

This statement is far from being true. Even the monophysites usffered under initial Arab Muslim invasions. For instance, the Copts, being called Monophysites (the term itself is erroneous and should be changed to Myaphysites), were persecuted, burned and killed by the troops of Amr Ibn El Ass (the Arab leader who invaded Egypt). Historical sources written by both Muslims (example: Al Makrizi) and Christians (example: John of Nikius) agree on this fact. I will remove the above statement within the span of two weeks if no one disagrees with this view. Thanks.--Lanternix 18:24, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

The great thing would be that both of you cite sources to substantiate your claims ;) --Despanan 02:00, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Palestinian Christians

The following sentence is incomplete considering the source given:

In Syria, Christians formed just under 15% of the population: about 2.7 million people, in the 1960 census, but no newer census has been taken. Latest estimates put them at about 10% of the population, due to enduring Islamization and subsequent Christian emigration. About 1.6% or 100,000 of all Palestinians are Christian [12],

One just needs to look at the article to see that not only the Christian emigration is due to Islamisation, but to the Israeli occupation as well. I don't know if the author of this sentence was biased or if it was merely an omission, but I'm correcting it. --Despanan 01:52, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

What is an Christian arab?

Lets hear both sides of the arguement. Chaldean 06:58, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Copts vs Arabs

As a Copt, I know for a fact that Copts do not consider themselve Arabs. I cannot find any sources online that state this per say. But the opinion is evident from any online Coptic discussion about this particular issue. It's also evident from the fact that all history books written by Copts refer to the Copts as Egyptians, while they refer to the Arabs as the invaders of Egypt, making a clear distinction between both ethnic groups. Can anyone with knowledge about Egypt/Copts back me on this please? Thanks. --Lanternix 18:40, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Your pretty much right. The most clear cut definition of an ethnic group is a group of people that share a common language; which the Copts and also to a certain extent the Maronites do. Chaldean 19:00, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

A few comments:

(1) As I understand it, it's not uncommon for Chaldean Iraqis to speak Arabic as their first language rather than Syriac, so I'm not so sure Tariq Aziz would not fit the definition (especially since he considers himself Arab).
(2) The idea that the immigration of Palestinian Christians is only due to "Islamization" and has nothing to do with Israel is just ludicrous
(3) Can we see some evidence to support the statement that the Nabateans were "Arameans"?
(4) It hardly sounds accurate that the Copts lost their original language as a part of "suffering" under Muslim rule rather than through natural process that happens to many languages in many different countries. There are other groups that have suffered more and still maintained their language, so I think the wording should be changed.
(5) Can we add some prominent Arab or Arabic-speaking Christians from previous historical eras to the list at the bottom? The list seems exclusively made up of names from the past century or so.Slackerlawstudent 17:59, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

As I understand it, its not uncommon for Chaldean Iraqis to speak Arabic as their first language rather than Syriac, 0 where did you get this from? Syriac is spoken by the vast majority of Chaldeans. Chaldean 03:11, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

I've met Iraqi Chaldean Catholics who speak to each other in Arabic. I assumed they were people from places like Baghdad and Basra rather than the north, but I will certainly yield to your knowledge on this subject. Slacker 04:24, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes Chaldeans often do this, but that doesn't mean they dont know Syriac. The reason they do this is speaking in Arabic is alot easier (ie easier to communicate) then in Syriac, since Syriac has alot of variability from origins of one village/area to another. This is a very common practice, but that doesn't change their ethnicity. Chaldean 13:58, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Merge Arab Christians today

Arab Christians today can not be an article Arab Christians is better definition. Arab Christians today can be part of this article but not the main article since Christianity is related to ancient Arabs such as Ghassanid, Lakhmids,and people of Najran and Yemen.--Aziz1005 15:04, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Execution?

The article currently states that if anyone could not pay jizya, then he were to face execution. It then cites 4 sources, anf they are all highly biased, anti-islamic websites. Such a statement should refer to a historical source, or at least, an unbiased website. If one cannot site reliable sources at wikipedia, then he should know that his statements will be deleted. So i have deleted it. Please, cite reliable sources from now on. Hamid-Masri 12:54, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Maronites are NOT Arabs

Some people asked for my references, most Maronites do not identify as Arabs:

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenicia#Origins
• http://amalid.com/prominent_lebs/Gubran_Khalil_Gubran/AMU_to_Powell.htm
• http://www.aina.org/guesteds/20060210113623.htm
• http://lebanesewbass.blogspot.com
• http://www.petitiononline.com/NotArab/petition.html

I'll stop here, short of many other references. Enjoy the reading. --Lanternix 00:33, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry but Blogs and other Wikipedia Articles are not a reliable sources Also Assyrians are not Maronites so don't give Assyrian websites to talk about Maronites--Aziz1005 13:26, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Lanternix, I was not asking for sources on Maronites in general; I was asking for sources that prove that these specific individuals (Nancy Ajram, Amin Rihani, Najwa Karam) are not considered Christian Arab. Also, please note that this article is meant to describe this term as it is actually used, not as it *should* be used, because that would be "original research". -- Slacker 14:09, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

• Blogs are reliable sources because they express the masses' viewpoints on certain issues. All the references I cited clearly state that Maronites do NOT consider themselves Arabs, Assyrians were there sometimes as well, but not one single link talked about Assyrians alone. Wikipedia articles cite references, so I'm not gonna cite references of references. Slacker, if you get me links that specifically mention that these individuals consider themselves Arabs, I will be more than happy to include them. Until then, the general mass opinion and self-definition of the Maronites, that is they are NOT Arabs, applies to them. --Lanternix 15:24, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Well then. I have removed all the Prominent Arab Christians. --SkyWalker 16:10, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Aina is Assyrian website; one blog does not mean the majority, Also other wikipedia articles are not a reliable sources. Lets just ask a question who is an Arab? Every one who speaks Arabic as a mother tongue; can't you guys understand that ,I am not talking about a race, Since ALL Middle eastern people are of mixed races and ethnics I know that some Copts do not like to be considered Arabs but this does not really apply to Maronites since Maronite is a church consists of people of mixed race therefore we take the mother tongue of those people into consideration. Being an Arab in modern days does not mean that you are not Lebanese or Egyptian or Iraqi whatsoever. Also this does not mean you are not connected to ancient Pharos, Arameans or Babylonians..etc (Although it is almost impossible to trace you roots back to those ancient times or say that I'm a descendant of king Tutankhamen ;).This issue has been ridiculously misunderstood due to counterparty political issues. This then gets reflected in these sorts of websites and blogs. However unfortunately this does not make it true!--Aziz1005 00:25, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

• Aziz, there is a discussion about who is an Arab on the talk page of Arabs. Please add there and let's reach a consensus together about how to define an Arab. I totally object to the linguistic definition because 1. it's rejected by almost all ME monorities (ethnic+religious), and 2. because it does not apply to any other group in the world. I will leave your changes until we reach an agreement about the definition of an Arab, but will reserve the right to revise your changes depending on the circumstances and the outcome of the discussion. Thank you. --Lanternix 03:03, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Dear Lanternix lets reach an agreement first then we can edit the article I'll try to find some sources (such as Books) during this month. So please let's leave it until we reach a consensus. You should bare in mind that Arabic nationalism did not came from Saudi Arabia It came from Syria, Egypt and Iraq and Most of those Arab nationalists according to your way of defining Arabs would be classified as Non-Arabs such as Michel Aflak and Sate' Al-Husari. I lived in Syria most of my life and to be honest with you I know that many high ranked Ba'this (Which is well-known by its Arab nationalism ideology) are Christians from Different churches. Where as some Arab Muslims in Egypt,Lebanon and Iraq for instance refused to be classified as Arab due to political issues. It's really complicated to define who is an Arab therefore the easiest way is the linguistic definition.--Aziz1005 19:24, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Sure, I'll revert your edits to my version then we can change things once we reach an agreement. I have many objections to what you wrote but I'll refrain from replying until we provide sources to backup our claims. Thank you. --Lanternix 21:06, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Syria

in syria the government claims that they are 10 % of the population are chritians and in syria they are 18000000 so how it is one million , it is more

I'll do the changes according to (page 33 of كتاب الطوائف المسيحية في سوريا,نشأتها تطورها تعدادها,سمير عبده) Christians of Syria are 1526997 (estimation of 2000) this means they are around 1.5 million; more than 40% of them are followers of the Greek Orthodox Church and then around 18% are Armenians (Orthodox and Catholic) the rest are followers of other churches such as (Greek Catholic,Syriac Orthodox,Evangelical,Latin and Other churches)--Aziz1005 22:39, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry my bad :) I counted Armenians and Assyrians as Arab --Aziz1005 22:43, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Israeli Arab Christians

The section on Arab Christians in Israel is clearly biased; it points out that they are more successful and educated than Israeli Muslims - this is true, but of course it is equally true for Christians in nearly all Arab countries, especially Israel's majority Muslim Arab neigbors such as Syria, Jordan, and the Palestinian territories. The fact that this fact is stated for Israel alone gives the clear but false impression that this tolerance is an Israeli exception and that neigboring Arab countries persecute their Christians. Either delete this fact from the paragraph on Israel or mention it in reference to the other countrys as well.Arab Christians Greek1979 07:04, 21 August 2007 (UTC)Greek1979

Hi Greek, That statement is not true, Syria and Jordans Christian population didnt decline. (In Lebanon this applies mainly to the Maronites who don't identify as Arabs).--Skatewalk 04:00, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Egyptian Christians not Arab

Please stop shoving them into the CHristian Arab article, we all know that they are:

• Ethnic Africans, who never had a Semitic or Arab past.
• They stop using Arabic once they are outside the Arab world.

Maronites

• Some politicaly motivated Maronites will claim an Aramean, Syriac or even Phoenician identity. However, those are few and not living among us! The Arabs have their history and presence in the Maronite church. Maronite is religious sect not an ethnicity!.--Skatewalk 04:05, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Copts

Skatewalk, the purpose of this article is to describe this term as it is used in the real world. It's not supposed to delve into people's genetic make-up or other kinds of personal opinions, otherwise it would be original research. I don't consider Copts to be Arabs either, but it's a fact that the term has frequently been used to cover all Arab-speaking Christians, including Egyptian ones. Slacker 08:35, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

I beg to differ. Wikipedia is about presenting the correct information, not about repeating and reiterating the misconceptions of the ignorant few. I agree with Skatwalk that all mentions of Copts and Egyptians (except for the bedouin minority of Sinai) must be removed from Arab articles --Lanternix 12:43, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

• • Lanternix we disagree on who is Arab in Egypt.(Ashraaf and Bedouins) and you insist on discounting the Ashraaf! Why are you denying those who claim an Arab identity and ethnic origin from their rights? It doesnt matter how true the claim is. Just like you claim to be related to the native Egyptians. Its not a matter of who you like or who you dont like you have to state facts. I am not a supporter of the Copts AntiArab movement, but these are facts and they have to be stated (although the official statements go against what I say).
• Egyptian Christians complain day and night from the Arab invaders, oppression! (who are the Arab nvaders?, are you claiming that the Sinai bedouins are responsible for the Arab "oppression" in Egypt!)--Skatewalk 23:21, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

You claimed before that the Ashraaf are 30% of the population and I asked you for your references. You failed to provide any. Then I showed you how little credibility does someone's claim of being a descendent of the Ashraaf have. And I gave you examples of Saddam Hussein and Gadhafi and Bakri all claiming this, and it was later discovered that they paid money to obtain fake certificate linking them to the Arab invaders of Egypt (we'll get to that in a sec). I also explained to you that the only poeple who have lived in isolation from the Egyptians are the Bedouins (of course any article on Egypt should also take the Nubians into account, since they are not ethnic Egyptians, but this has little relevence for an article on Arabs). Until today, the Bedouin Arab culture expresses a condescending attitude towards Egyptian farmers (probably their most famous adage is: armiha lel temsah wala adiha lel fallah aka. I'd rather throw [my daughter] to the crocodile than give her to a farmer [to marry]). So such people living in isolation have really nothing to do with Egyptians. They are only citizens of the modern Republic of Egypt rather than ethnic Egyptians. This clearly does not apply to the so-called Asharf. When some Arabs invaded Egypt hundreds of years ago, Egypt's native population were already numbering millions (refer to Gamal Hamdan's book about Arab immigration to Egypt for more references, or to books by Iris Habib el-Masri and other historians). And not all Arabs who invaded the country, either with Amr ibn el-Ass or later immigrations from Arabia, remained, since they went on to invade North Africa, Sudan and Spain. So the relatively few Arabs who came were assimilated into the Egyptian culture and gene pool. No one can prove that these Arabs remained in isolation, did not intermarry with Egyptians, and produced those who, today, call themselves Asharf. This simply did not happen. So the same way Egyptains in Ancient Egypt intermarried with non-Egyptians, Egyptians in Hellenistic Egypt intermarried with Greeks, and modern Egyptians intermarried with Europeans and Levantines, those in the early Middle Ages intermarried with Arabs and assimilated them into their gene pool. Simple math can prove that today's Egyptian population, although with some outside influence, has retained its authentic Egyptian identity. Refer to the identity section of the Egypt article and see for yourself how Egyptians, until 60 years ago, viewed themselves: Egyptians not Arabs! Only when Nasser's propaganda came to power did Egypt's name changed to Arab Republic of Egypt. He even completely banned people from calling Egypt as Egypt, and rather called the country the Southern region of the United Arab republic!!! This is NOT something that by any means reflect the Egyptians' notion of themselves, but rather an imposed doctrine. And no one said that the Ashraf or the Bedouins are ruling Egypt. Only some brain-washed remenants of Nasser's time. But this will change very soon as more and more people become disillusioned and realize how catastrophic Nasser and his pan-Arabist ideology were and still are for Egypt. I hope this helps --Lanternix 00:26, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

• I actually doubt that even 5% of the Ashraaf are actually from the tribe of Kinana. (I saw a website and on heard on TV these claims in Millions). The point is that they are claiming an Arab identity. After all most the Arabs are simply self identified and if someone claims to be an Arab (from Sudan or Syria) he is an Arab. The Bedouins on the other hand could be Semitic or of Qahtani/Adnani lineage, but the term Arab is not restricted to them, sense many of us Arabs live a sedanatary life and identify with modern Arab identity (language, culture, Arabsat TV...etc). --Skatewalk 09:39, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Slacker on Copts

Skatewalk, the purpose of this article is to describe this term as it is used in the real world. It's not supposed to delve into people's genetic make-up or other kinds of personal opinions, otherwise it would be original research. I don't consider Copts to be Arabs either, but it's a fact that the term has frequently been used to cover all Arab-speaking Christians, including Egyptian ones. Slacker 08:35, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

The problem is that the copts dont speak Arabic once they leave Egypt, just like the Bengalis dont speak Arabic once they leave Saudi Arabia. The ethnic Arab christians are proud of their language and culture and its unfair to equate them with the Egyptian Copts who have ill feelings towards the Arabs and start denouncing everything related to the Arabs once they are outside the Arab world. I am not going to edit this article again, so its up to you and the rest of the users to decide. I would rather hear the an Egyptian (christian) disagreeing with me.--Skatewalk 23:21, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

You make it sound like the Copts are bad people because they denounce Arab identity! Do they have to love and worship people who invaded their country and attempted to destroy their identity, erasing their language and treating them as slaves in the country of their forefathers???!!! What sort of logic is that? Of course they have every right to denounce an identity and a language that were forced upon them but (and again I repeat, and go look for that in your history books) naked un-educated Bedouin Arabs! And I stand firm by my words. When Iraqis being "proud" of American English and American culture, or when Palestinians start being "proud" of Hebrew language and Zionist Israeli culture, the Copts may start thinking about having similar feelings for Arabs and their language. --Lanternix 00:30, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

All this is irrelevant. The purpose of this page is to discuss how to improve or expand the article. If you feel the need to vent your frustrations, you can publish your own blog. Slacker 10:56, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

I really dont blame the Christian Egyptians, they hold on to their religion and their culture. However, I dont to be associated with them, because when you generalize Arab christians as Copts it becomes confusing. As of Iraqis becoming American loool! or Palestinains Hebrew?. I really prefer having few self identified Arabs in these days than the weaklings who will jump off the wagon whne things get bad. Its a similar situation to the Copts who held on to their religion when things got sour. I don't believe in imposed identities that why I want you to look into the Ashraaf issue? because you are Egyptian and it should concern you more than anyone else? Do you expect those Ashraaf to change their claims of nobility? (although very weak, but they created a Niqaba!).

• Lol the Bedouins who invaded Egypt were not naked lol! Maybe the Hyksos were like that? but Muslims regulations required them to cover up...I think. And for the record they didn't face a fight because the Byzantines didnt show up and the natives were peaceful, so it wasnt violent or extreme. --Skatewalk 09:48, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Of course all this is irrelevent, yet must be addressed in face of the tone of blame directed towards Copts on this page. You don't have to be part of the conversation if you don't like. As for the natives being peaceful, have you not heard about the resistance the Egyptians put against the Arabs, in spite of the embargo set by the Byzantines about providing the natives with weapons? While the coward Byzantines ran away, Egyptians like Yoannis of Samanoud and later Mina Ben Bokira and the Beshmurites gave the Arabs a hell of a time and defended their land, until the latters resorted to treachery and then performed an organized an ethnic cleansing against the Egyptians, many in the Delta. The problem I see with you is that you just repeat what people say all the time with no scrutiny or consideration of the other side of the story. --Lanternix 05:32, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

• Lanternix, I am sorry I am not very educated in the Islamic period. (I admit I don't care about how they entered EGypt), but the history witten by the Muslims says they entered with no war. (opposed to the well known battles in Syria and Iran) their was no major battle vs the muslims in Egypt.
• You use the term Arab widely in a way that you make it seem that all the Arabs (Muslim and Christian) invaded Egypt. I never heard of a Ghassanid invasion of Egypt? (be specific the Muslims not the Arabs, the 90% that dominate your country are your problem, dont blame it on the Arabs).
• Anyways the trolling Elias, decided to revert the Copts again as Arabs! although me and you know that he doesn't know what he is doing! and he just made it his duty in life to revert anything I post because I disagreed with many of his Assyrianist views.
• Egyegy reverts (an Egyptian muslim) can be easily understood, because she wants to distract you for your biggest fear. Do you think by denouncing your Arab co-religionist your muslim "egyptians" 90% will allow you to live in peace? Muslims are Arabized subjects of the Arabs(wil always be), They are 90% of Egypt most them dream to be Arab (claiming fake prophet lineage). You think of that next time you see Egyegy reverting this article!--Skatewalk 02:55, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Of course the history written by the Arabs says they invaded the country without war. This is the only way they can legitimize the invasion, that is, to pretend they came to help the Egyptians and that the Egyptians accepted them with open arms and threw flowers on them. This is vey mich far from being the truth. If you'd like to know more, you can read about this period from non-Arab sources, be it Egyptian Christian (Coptic) or Western. I don't like to say Muslim vs Christian (although you're correct in saying that all the Arabs who invaded Egypt were Muslims) because religion is a matter of conviction, and later on many Egyptians converted to Islam, for one reason or the other. These are equally Egyptian to today's Copts. But the remnants of the Arab invaders MUST respect Egypt's peculiar identity, history and civilization because this is the land where they live. If they don't like it and if they prefer some Arabian identity over it, then they can go enjoy it somewhere else. These are the facts. You need not to delve into "living in peace" talk, this is not what this article is about. Oh, and by the way, most of your information is blatantly wrong, as Egyegy mentioned to you on my page. I sriously suggest you get your information from less-biased sources, and that you talk with them Egyptians of all religious backgrounds to get some of your facts straight. --Lanternix 04:40, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

lol ya Lanternix, it looks like I've been outed with my longstanding mission to distract you from the big Arabist plot to wipe Egypt off the map of the earth. Maybe you should join your Arab co-religionist in her gezirt elme'iz to really get a taste of "living in peace". Oh wait I forgot, they behead Christians there last time I checked, unless you're American, in which case you're worshiped like a god. Egyegy 01:48, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

"Arabs"/"plot" thats an oxymoron. Arabs are simple natured. You can call them whatever you want, just don't use the world plot with Arabs! Anyways real life is diff than Wikipedia. I know I can go Egypt anytime I want....I am Christian Arab so I clearly see the tensions between Egyptian Muslims and Egyptian christians(I saw it on Memri TV, youtube), but I never heard of Egyptians anti-Arabs! If it exists I never saw it!?. And its hard for me to Sympathize with fellow Christians who blindly hate all the Arabs. Maybe you can gain Israel as an ally, but Israel will not be their for you, just look what happenned to their allies in Lebanon? And their Lebanese allies were martial people. The Coptic christians should be bold and brave in pointing the finger of blame on the right people, instead of accusing Arab Christians for their misery!(assuming you are really a christian).

Be honest whats going on in Egypt today? Who is doing this to the Coptic christians? The Arabs (you already said we dont exist in Egypt), so who is oppressing you! I am pretty sure you saw all the tears and cries on youtube, are these people lying? or is their someone causing them that horror?--Skatewalk 16:57, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Copts and Maronites, are not Arabs

Do we all agree on this? If not, what is the Arabists' objection. — EliasAlucard|Talk 17:55 25 Aug, 2007 (UTC)

Most Maronites are Arabs>>>

• 70% of the Patriachs in the last 500years are ethnic Arabs (Ghassanid, Mashrouki, Ghaythi) tribes. The rest are of varied origins, they speak Arabic in the disapora and home.
• Maronite is a religious sect, So you can't generalize Maronites, just because a certain Maronite will claim being a certain ethnicity (Maronites can't speak as a group. Many ethnic Arabs among the Maronites tried to impose the Arab identity on them (they will tell you we are ethnic Arabs, we speak Arabic anywhere we go! and try to generalize it on all Maronites), Go to Phoenicia.org you will hear claims that Maronites are not Aramean, Syriac or Arab and plain simple Phoenicians (which the website claims are not Semites!)! Go to the Arameans they will tell you they speak Aramiac in church they are. The Maronites fought as unified group in the first half of the Lebanese war (faranjea and Douia factors showed the ethnic Arab vs Euro diffrences in the religious sector in certain periods of the war), They switched alliances from Israel to Syria to Saudi today!
• Copts are an ethnic group (African-Egyptian), I personally dont think they have to do anything with the Arabs or Semites at all (especially the Christian Copts)
• Maronites and Copts is used by antiArabs in a wrong way. Some Americans actually think the Maronites = all christians in Lebanon! (catholic practice thanks to France promotion of their allies in colonial Lebanon, in return the Orthodox _closely related to the Copts of Egypt are never mentioned, because they don't follow the Western agenda)--Skatewalk 19:02, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Maronites are not "Aramaeans". They follow Syriac Christianity. That is not the same thing as Aramaean. Aramaeans haven't existed since biblical times. And Copts (they are all Christians, last I checked), are not Arabs. They are Egyptians. We should respect this, by not listing either Maronites, or Copts, in this article. — EliasAlucard|Talk 22:19 25 Aug, 2007 (UTC)

• Elias, you are obviously in this article to vandalize!
• I am the one who removed Copts because they are not Arabs (why did you restore it?), Lanternix agrees with me and you are reverting it just because you love vandalizing.
• Maronites are Aramean, Syriacs, Arab, Phoenician and even some are European. Go the Maronites websites and forums yo will hear some Maronites tracing themselves to various origins which is normal beause Maronites are a religious sector not a race.
• Dont even ry to equate the Non Arab Copts, with the Maronite religion (just because the Pakistanis read Arabic in the Mosque that don't make them Arabs!). Maronites are diverse do a simple google heck if you really didnt know that!
• I know you have an Anti-Aramean fetish, but please forgive me! I am not Maronite and you are not Maronite. Why would you deny a Maronite from claiming he is Aramean! seriously whats wrong with that? Nobody knows who is really who, so why offend people by denying their right to identify!? Why you are like that? I don'yt care if an Arab wants to identify as Phoenician why do you want to impose Assyrianism on people? (you even claimed the Banu Tai/Shammar Arab Qahtani tribes that came all the way from Yemen as Assyrian!! Now how can I take you seriously??--Skatewalk 02:35, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
  • I restored it, not because I agree with the content, but because you deleted lots of content that might be valuable to the article. As for Maronites, they are not Aramaeans. They used to speak Aramaic about 1100 years ago. The entire Middle East spoke Aramaic at the time. Now they claim to be Phoenicians. No Maronite claims that he's an Aramaean. I have never claimed anything about Arabic tribes being Assyrians. I just copied the content from this article. It was already written like that. Muslim Assyrians needs a clean up, and possible, AfD. And no, I'm not here to vandalise. But you shouldn't delete half the content in the article, without discussion. — EliasAlucard|Talk 15:13 26 Aug, 2007 (UTC)
  • OK Elias, I discussed most of this stuff with Elias. I am starting to iunderstand what this whole Aramean thing (is a political movement more than anything else?) supported by some Europeans and Syria? Turkey? The guy who writes the articles is a Muslim Greek/Turkish guy. I read some of his articles with interesting claims about the whole Ancient Near East, but he always opposes the accepted fact. I have to admit I confused Aramiac with Aramean for a while, and with the Aramnahrin website poping up whenever you want to read about Arameans it makes you confused. I only know about the ancient Arameans what happenned after the 7th century BC...I am not sure. At that simply most the mideast started speaking their language. Phoenician disappeared around that time from main land Phoenicia (only to survive in the Colonies).
  • As of the Maronites claims, they vary on the guy you are talking to! Beliee within the same family you will have 3 diffirent ethnic claims! Go google their websites, some Maronite families have claer Ghassanid last names and you will find one brother proudly claiming to be a Ghassanid Arab and the other one claiming to be Frankish and a third one swearing he is Phoenician and only Phoenician!. However, the Copts Its clear what they identify as and what they want to be. --Skatewalk 18:01, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
• You mean what they clearly are --Lanternix 21:24, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
• OK Lanternix I believe in science. I think Arabs, Copts, berbers...are not truly pure and its just what they want to identify. I am sorry if that doesn't suit you! I still think the Copts are the closest thing to the ancient Egyptians...and oppose Afrocentric bogus.--Skatewalk 22:35, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Nobody is pure and no one believes in science more than I do. But Copts are NOT Egyptians because they think so, and Copts aren't unrelated to Arabs because they want to believe it. Do the math and you'll realize they are Egyptians not Arabs. Of course they may have Arab or Greek or whatever blood in them, but in proportions that by no way alienates them from their Egyptian ancestors. --Lanternix 01:44, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Thats what I meant wanting to be, whats wrong with that?--Skatewalk 16:33, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Recent Edits

There is no dispute under international law that the West Bank is under Israeli military occupation and not merely "presence" (see Wikipedia article West Bank). This is an encyclopedia article, not an Israeli government press release. Slackerlawstudent 02:16, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Also, regarding the "execution" of poor people who can't afford the jizya, do you have a source for this provision of Islamic law, or evidence that such an execution took place under Islamic law? The wikipedia article on jizya, which lists its sources, lists a number of exemptions, including for the poor.Slackerlawstudent 02:20, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

There are very few "Arab" Christians

Middle Eastern Christians are not ethnic Arabs for the most part.סרגון יוחנא 19:57, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

The only 100%-ethnic Arabs live in parts of the Arabian peninsula and Sinai, so even most muslim Arabs refer their identity to their mother tongue rather than to their ethnicity. The nowadays called Arabs in Syria e.g. have been for thousands of years an ethnical mixture of Arabs and Aramaeans. M0s6p 09/25/2006 17:29 CET

Tariq Aziz

First of all I think the most broadest definition of an Arab is any person (be it african or white or whatever) that speaks Arabic as a first language (native language). Tariq's native language is Syriac, not Arabic. Being part of a certian political party does not change your ethnicity; this is silly. He belongs to the Chaldean Catholic Church; a non-arab church. Unless you have a direct quote from him claiming to be an arab, then you should not generalize him as arab. Chaldean 14:18, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Identity

The Identity section of the article begins with the following statement:

• Historically, a number of minority Christian sects that were persecuted as heretical under Byzantine rule (such as Monophysites) actually began to enjoy more religious freedom under initial Muslim rule than they had under Byzantine (Orthodox Christian) rule. This tolerance however waxed and waned, not lasting for very long.

This statement is far from being true. Even the monophysites usffered under initial Arab Muslim invasions. For instance, the Copts, being called Monophysites (the term itself is erroneous and should be changed to Myaphysites), were persecuted, burned and killed by the troops of Amr Ibn El Ass (the Arab leader who invaded Egypt). Historical sources written by both Muslims (example: Al Makrizi) and Christians (example: John of Nikius) agree on this fact. I will remove the above statement within the span of two weeks if no one disagrees with this view. Thanks.--Lanternix 18:24, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

The great thing would be that both of you cite sources to substantiate your claims ;) --Despanan 02:00, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Palestinian Christians

The following sentence is incomplete considering the source given:

In Syria, Christians formed just under 15% of the population: about 2.7 million people, in the 1960 census, but no newer census has been taken. Latest estimates put them at about 10% of the population, due to enduring Islamization and subsequent Christian emigration. About 1.6% or 100,000 of all Palestinians are Christian [12],

One just needs to look at the article to see that not only the Christian emigration is due to Islamisation, but to the Israeli occupation as well. I don't know if the author of this sentence was biased or if it was merely an omission, but I'm correcting it. --Despanan 01:52, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

What is an Christian arab?

Lets hear both sides of the arguement. Chaldean 06:58, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Copts vs Arabs

As a Copt, I know for a fact that Copts do not consider themselve Arabs. I cannot find any sources online that state this per say. But the opinion is evident from any online Coptic discussion about this particular issue. It's also evident from the fact that all history books written by Copts refer to the Copts as Egyptians, while they refer to the Arabs as the invaders of Egypt, making a clear distinction between both ethnic groups. Can anyone with knowledge about Egypt/Copts back me on this please? Thanks. --Lanternix 18:40, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Your pretty much right. The most clear cut definition of an ethnic group is a group of people that share a common language; which the Copts and also to a certain extent the Maronites do. Chaldean 19:00, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

A few comments:

(1) As I understand it, it's not uncommon for Chaldean Iraqis to speak Arabic as their first language rather than Syriac, so I'm not so sure Tariq Aziz would not fit the definition (especially since he considers himself Arab).
(2) The idea that the immigration of Palestinian Christians is only due to "Islamization" and has nothing to do with Israel is just ludicrous
(3) Can we see some evidence to support the statement that the Nabateans were "Arameans"?
(4) It hardly sounds accurate that the Copts lost their original language as a part of "suffering" under Muslim rule rather than through natural process that happens to many languages in many different countries. There are other groups that have suffered more and still maintained their language, so I think the wording should be changed.
(5) Can we add some prominent Arab or Arabic-speaking Christians from previous historical eras to the list at the bottom? The list seems exclusively made up of names from the past century or so.Slackerlawstudent 17:59, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

As I understand it, its not uncommon for Chaldean Iraqis to speak Arabic as their first language rather than Syriac, 0 where did you get this from? Syriac is spoken by the vast majority of Chaldeans. Chaldean 03:11, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

I've met Iraqi Chaldean Catholics who speak to each other in Arabic. I assumed they were people from places like Baghdad and Basra rather than the north, but I will certainly yield to your knowledge on this subject. Slacker 04:24, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes Chaldeans often do this, but that doesn't mean they dont know Syriac. The reason they do this is speaking in Arabic is alot easier (ie easier to communicate) then in Syriac, since Syriac has alot of variability from origins of one village/area to another. This is a very common practice, but that doesn't change their ethnicity. Chaldean 13:58, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Merge Arab Christians today

Arab Christians today can not be an article Arab Christians is better definition. Arab Christians today can be part of this article but not the main article since Christianity is related to ancient Arabs such as Ghassanid, Lakhmids,and people of Najran and Yemen.--Aziz1005 15:04, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Execution?

The article currently states that if anyone could not pay jizya, then he were to face execution. It then cites 4 sources, anf they are all highly biased, anti-islamic websites. Such a statement should refer to a historical source, or at least, an unbiased website. If one cannot site reliable sources at wikipedia, then he should know that his statements will be deleted. So i have deleted it. Please, cite reliable sources from now on. Hamid-Masri 12:54, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Maronites are NOT Arabs

Some people asked for my references, most Maronites do not identify as Arabs:

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenicia#Origins
• http://amalid.com/prominent_lebs/Gubran_Khalil_Gubran/AMU_to_Powell.htm
• http://www.aina.org/guesteds/20060210113623.htm
• http://lebanesewbass.blogspot.com
• http://www.petitiononline.com/NotArab/petition.html

I'll stop here, short of many other references. Enjoy the reading. --Lanternix 00:33, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry but Blogs and other Wikipedia Articles are not a reliable sources Also Assyrians are not Maronites so don't give Assyrian websites to talk about Maronites--Aziz1005 13:26, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Lanternix, I was not asking for sources on Maronites in general; I was asking for sources that prove that these specific individuals (Nancy Ajram, Amin Rihani, Najwa Karam) are not considered Christian Arab. Also, please note that this article is meant to describe this term as it is actually used, not as it *should* be used, because that would be "original research". -- Slacker 14:09, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

• Blogs are reliable sources because they express the masses' viewpoints on certain issues. All the references I cited clearly state that Maronites do NOT consider themselves Arabs, Assyrians were there sometimes as well, but not one single link talked about Assyrians alone. Wikipedia articles cite references, so I'm not gonna cite references of references. Slacker, if you get me links that specifically mention that these individuals consider themselves Arabs, I will be more than happy to include them. Until then, the general mass opinion and self-definition of the Maronites, that is they are NOT Arabs, applies to them. --Lanternix 15:24, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Well then. I have removed all the Prominent Arab Christians. --SkyWalker 16:10, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Aina is Assyrian website; one blog does not mean the majority, Also other wikipedia articles are not a reliable sources. Lets just ask a question who is an Arab? Every one who speaks Arabic as a mother tongue; can't you guys understand that ,I am not talking about a race, Since ALL Middle eastern people are of mixed races and ethnics I know that some Copts do not like to be considered Arabs but this does not really apply to Maronites since Maronite is a church consists of people of mixed race therefore we take the mother tongue of those people into consideration. Being an Arab in modern days does not mean that you are not Lebanese or Egyptian or Iraqi whatsoever. Also this does not mean you are not connected to ancient Pharos, Arameans or Babylonians..etc (Although it is almost impossible to trace you roots back to those ancient times or say that I'm a descendant of king Tutankhamen ;).This issue has been ridiculously misunderstood due to counterparty political issues. This then gets reflected in these sorts of websites and blogs. However unfortunately this does not make it true!--Aziz1005 00:25, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

• Aziz, there is a discussion about who is an Arab on the talk page of Arabs. Please add there and let's reach a consensus together about how to define an Arab. I totally object to the linguistic definition because 1. it's rejected by almost all ME monorities (ethnic+religious), and 2. because it does not apply to any other group in the world. I will leave your changes until we reach an agreement about the definition of an Arab, but will reserve the right to revise your changes depending on the circumstances and the outcome of the discussion. Thank you. --Lanternix 03:03, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Dear Lanternix lets reach an agreement first then we can edit the article I'll try to find some sources (such as Books) during this month. So please let's leave it until we reach a consensus. You should bare in mind that Arabic nationalism did not came from Saudi Arabia It came from Syria, Egypt and Iraq and Most of those Arab nationalists according to your way of defining Arabs would be classified as Non-Arabs such as Michel Aflak and Sate' Al-Husari. I lived in Syria most of my life and to be honest with you I know that many high ranked Ba'this (Which is well-known by its Arab nationalism ideology) are Christians from Different churches. Where as some Arab Muslims in Egypt,Lebanon and Iraq for instance refused to be classified as Arab due to political issues. It's really complicated to define who is an Arab therefore the easiest way is the linguistic definition.--Aziz1005 19:24, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Sure, I'll revert your edits to my version then we can change things once we reach an agreement. I have many objections to what you wrote but I'll refrain from replying until we provide sources to backup our claims. Thank you. --Lanternix 21:06, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Syria

in syria the government claims that they are 10 % of the population are chritians and in syria they are 18000000 so how it is one million , it is more

I'll do the changes according to (page 33 of كتاب الطوائف المسيحية في سوريا,نشأتها تطورها تعدادها,سمير عبده) Christians of Syria are 1526997 (estimation of 2000) this means they are around 1.5 million; more than 40% of them are followers of the Greek Orthodox Church and then around 18% are Armenians (Orthodox and Catholic) the rest are followers of other churches such as (Greek Catholic,Syriac Orthodox,Evangelical,Latin and Other churches)--Aziz1005 22:39, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry my bad :) I counted Armenians and Assyrians as Arab --Aziz1005 22:43, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Israeli Arab Christians

The section on Arab Christians in Israel is clearly biased; it points out that they are more successful and educated than Israeli Muslims - this is true, but of course it is equally true for Christians in nearly all Arab countries, especially Israel's majority Muslim Arab neigbors such as Syria, Jordan, and the Palestinian territories. The fact that this fact is stated for Israel alone gives the clear but false impression that this tolerance is an Israeli exception and that neigboring Arab countries persecute their Christians. Either delete this fact from the paragraph on Israel or mention it in reference to the other countrys as well.Arab Christians Greek1979 07:04, 21 August 2007 (UTC)Greek1979

Hi Greek, That statement is not true, Syria and Jordans Christian population didnt decline. (In Lebanon this applies mainly to the Maronites who don't identify as Arabs).--Skatewalk 04:00, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Egyptian Christians not Arab

Please stop shoving them into the CHristian Arab article, we all know that they are:

• Ethnic Africans, who never had a Semitic or Arab past.
• They stop using Arabic once they are outside the Arab world.

Maronites

• Some politicaly motivated Maronites will claim an Aramean, Syriac or even Phoenician identity. However, those are few and not living among us! The Arabs have their history and presence in the Maronite church. Maronite is religious sect not an ethnicity!.--Skatewalk 04:05, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Copts

Skatewalk, the purpose of this article is to describe this term as it is used in the real world. It's not supposed to delve into people's genetic make-up or other kinds of personal opinions, otherwise it would be original research. I don't consider Copts to be Arabs either, but it's a fact that the term has frequently been used to cover all Arab-speaking Christians, including Egyptian ones. Slacker 08:35, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

I beg to differ. Wikipedia is about presenting the correct information, not about repeating and reiterating the misconceptions of the ignorant few. I agree with Skatwalk that all mentions of Copts and Egyptians (except for the bedouin minority of Sinai) must be removed from Arab articles --Lanternix 12:43, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

• • Lanternix we disagree on who is Arab in Egypt.(Ashraaf and Bedouins) and you insist on discounting the Ashraaf! Why are you denying those who claim an Arab identity and ethnic origin from their rights? It doesnt matter how true the claim is. Just like you claim to be related to the native Egyptians. Its not a matter of who you like or who you dont like you have to state facts. I am not a supporter of the Copts AntiArab movement, but these are facts and they have to be stated (although the official statements go against what I say).
• Egyptian Christians complain day and night from the Arab invaders, oppression! (who are the Arab nvaders?, are you claiming that the Sinai bedouins are responsible for the Arab "oppression" in Egypt!)--Skatewalk 23:21, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

You claimed before that the Ashraaf are 30% of the population and I asked you for your references. You failed to provide any. Then I showed you how little credibility does someone's claim of being a descendent of the Ashraaf have. And I gave you examples of Saddam Hussein and Gadhafi and Bakri all claiming this, and it was later discovered that they paid money to obtain fake certificate linking them to the Arab invaders of Egypt (we'll get to that in a sec). I also explained to you that the only poeple who have lived in isolation from the Egyptians are the Bedouins (of course any article on Egypt should also take the Nubians into account, since they are not ethnic Egyptians, but this has little relevence for an article on Arabs). Until today, the Bedouin Arab culture expresses a condescending attitude towards Egyptian farmers (probably their most famous adage is: armiha lel temsah wala adiha lel fallah aka. I'd rather throw [my daughter] to the crocodile than give her to a farmer [to marry]). So such people living in isolation have really nothing to do with Egyptians. They are only citizens of the modern Republic of Egypt rather than ethnic Egyptians. This clearly does not apply to the so-called Asharf. When some Arabs invaded Egypt hundreds of years ago, Egypt's native population were already numbering millions (refer to Gamal Hamdan's book about Arab immigration to Egypt for more references, or to books by Iris Habib el-Masri and other historians). And not all Arabs who invaded the country, either with Amr ibn el-Ass or later immigrations from Arabia, remained, since they went on to invade North Africa, Sudan and Spain. So the relatively few Arabs who came were assimilated into the Egyptian culture and gene pool. No one can prove that these Arabs remained in isolation, did not intermarry with Egyptians, and produced those who, today, call themselves Asharf. This simply did not happen. So the same way Egyptains in Ancient Egypt intermarried with non-Egyptians, Egyptians in Hellenistic Egypt intermarried with Greeks, and modern Egyptians intermarried with Europeans and Levantines, those in the early Middle Ages intermarried with Arabs and assimilated them into their gene pool. Simple math can prove that today's Egyptian population, although with some outside influence, has retained its authentic Egyptian identity. Refer to the identity section of the Egypt article and see for yourself how Egyptians, until 60 years ago, viewed themselves: Egyptians not Arabs! Only when Nasser's propaganda came to power did Egypt's name changed to Arab Republic of Egypt. He even completely banned people from calling Egypt as Egypt, and rather called the country the Southern region of the United Arab republic!!! This is NOT something that by any means reflect the Egyptians' notion of themselves, but rather an imposed doctrine. And no one said that the Ashraf or the Bedouins are ruling Egypt. Only some brain-washed remenants of Nasser's time. But this will change very soon as more and more people become disillusioned and realize how catastrophic Nasser and his pan-Arabist ideology were and still are for Egypt. I hope this helps --Lanternix 00:26, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

• I actually doubt that even 5% of the Ashraaf are actually from the tribe of Kinana. (I saw a website and on heard on TV these claims in Millions). The point is that they are claiming an Arab identity. After all most the Arabs are simply self identified and if someone claims to be an Arab (from Sudan or Syria) he is an Arab. The Bedouins on the other hand could be Semitic or of Qahtani/Adnani lineage, but the term Arab is not restricted to them, sense many of us Arabs live a sedanatary life and identify with modern Arab identity (language, culture, Arabsat TV...etc). --Skatewalk 09:39, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Slacker on Copts

Skatewalk, the purpose of this article is to describe this term as it is used in the real world. It's not supposed to delve into people's genetic make-up or other kinds of personal opinions, otherwise it would be original research. I don't consider Copts to be Arabs either, but it's a fact that the term has frequently been used to cover all Arab-speaking Christians, including Egyptian ones. Slacker 08:35, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

The problem is that the copts dont speak Arabic once they leave Egypt, just like the Bengalis dont speak Arabic once they leave Saudi Arabia. The ethnic Arab christians are proud of their language and culture and its unfair to equate them with the Egyptian Copts who have ill feelings towards the Arabs and start denouncing everything related to the Arabs once they are outside the Arab world. I am not going to edit this article again, so its up to you and the rest of the users to decide. I would rather hear the an Egyptian (christian) disagreeing with me.--Skatewalk 23:21, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

You make it sound like the Copts are bad people because they denounce Arab identity! Do they have to love and worship people who invaded their country and attempted to destroy their identity, erasing their language and treating them as slaves in the country of their forefathers???!!! What sort of logic is that? Of course they have every right to denounce an identity and a language that were forced upon them but (and again I repeat, and go look for that in your history books) naked un-educated Bedouin Arabs! And I stand firm by my words. When Iraqis being "proud" of American English and American culture, or when Palestinians start being "proud" of Hebrew language and Zionist Israeli culture, the Copts may start thinking about having similar feelings for Arabs and their language. --Lanternix 00:30, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

All this is irrelevant. The purpose of this page is to discuss how to improve or expand the article. If you feel the need to vent your frustrations, you can publish your own blog. Slacker 10:56, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

I really dont blame the Christian Egyptians, they hold on to their religion and their culture. However, I dont to be associated with them, because when you generalize Arab christians as Copts it becomes confusing. As of Iraqis becoming American loool! or Palestinains Hebrew?. I really prefer having few self identified Arabs in these days than the weaklings who will jump off the wagon whne things get bad. Its a similar situation to the Copts who held on to their religion when things got sour. I don't believe in imposed identities that why I want you to look into the Ashraaf issue? because you are Egyptian and it should concern you more than anyone else? Do you expect those Ashraaf to change their claims of nobility? (although very weak, but they created a Niqaba!).

• Lol the Bedouins who invaded Egypt were not naked lol! Maybe the Hyksos were like that? but Muslims regulations required them to cover up...I think. And for the record they didn't face a fight because the Byzantines didnt show up and the natives were peaceful, so it wasnt violent or extreme. --Skatewalk 09:48, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Of course all this is irrelevent, yet must be addressed in face of the tone of blame directed towards Copts on this page. You don't have to be part of the conversation if you don't like. As for the natives being peaceful, have you not heard about the resistance the Egyptians put against the Arabs, in spite of the embargo set by the Byzantines about providing the natives with weapons? While the coward Byzantines ran away, Egyptians like Yoannis of Samanoud and later Mina Ben Bokira and the Beshmurites gave the Arabs a hell of a time and defended their land, until the latters resorted to treachery and then performed an organized an ethnic cleansing against the Egyptians, many in the Delta. The problem I see with you is that you just repeat what people say all the time with no scrutiny or consideration of the other side of the story. --Lanternix 05:32, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

• Lanternix, I am sorry I am not very educated in the Islamic period. (I admit I don't care about how they entered EGypt), but the history witten by the Muslims says they entered with no war. (opposed to the well known battles in Syria and Iran) their was no major battle vs the muslims in Egypt.
• You use the term Arab widely in a way that you make it seem that all the Arabs (Muslim and Christian) invaded Egypt. I never heard of a Ghassanid invasion of Egypt? (be specific the Muslims not the Arabs, the 90% that dominate your country are your problem, dont blame it on the Arabs).
• Anyways the trolling Elias, decided to revert the Copts again as Arabs! although me and you know that he doesn't know what he is doing! and he just made it his duty in life to revert anything I post because I disagreed with many of his Assyrianist views.
• Egyegy reverts (an Egyptian muslim) can be easily understood, because she wants to distract you for your biggest fear. Do you think by denouncing your Arab co-religionist your muslim "egyptians" 90% will allow you to live in peace? Muslims are Arabized subjects of the Arabs(wil always be), They are 90% of Egypt most them dream to be Arab (claiming fake prophet lineage). You think of that next time you see Egyegy reverting this article!--Skatewalk 02:55, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Of course the history written by the Arabs says they invaded the country without war. This is the only way they can legitimize the invasion, that is, to pretend they came to help the Egyptians and that the Egyptians accepted them with open arms and threw flowers on them. This is vey mich far from being the truth. If you'd like to know more, you can read about this period from non-Arab sources, be it Egyptian Christian (Coptic) or Western. I don't like to say Muslim vs Christian (although you're correct in saying that all the Arabs who invaded Egypt were Muslims) because religion is a matter of conviction, and later on many Egyptians converted to Islam, for one reason or the other. These are equally Egyptian to today's Copts. But the remnants of the Arab invaders MUST respect Egypt's peculiar identity, history and civilization because this is the land where they live. If they don't like it and if they prefer some Arabian identity over it, then they can go enjoy it somewhere else. These are the facts. You need not to delve into "living in peace" talk, this is not what this article is about. Oh, and by the way, most of your information is blatantly wrong, as Egyegy mentioned to you on my page. I sriously suggest you get your information from less-biased sources, and that you talk with them Egyptians of all religious backgrounds to get some of your facts straight. --Lanternix 04:40, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

lol ya Lanternix, it looks like I've been outed with my longstanding mission to distract you from the big Arabist plot to wipe Egypt off the map of the earth. Maybe you should join your Arab co-religionist in her gezirt elme'iz to really get a taste of "living in peace". Oh wait I forgot, they behead Christians there last time I checked, unless you're American, in which case you're worshiped like a god. Egyegy 01:48, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

"Arabs"/"plot" thats an oxymoron. Arabs are simple natured. You can call them whatever you want, just don't use the world plot with Arabs! Anyways real life is diff than Wikipedia. I know I can go Egypt anytime I want....I am Christian Arab so I clearly see the tensions between Egyptian Muslims and Egyptian christians(I saw it on Memri TV, youtube), but I never heard of Egyptians anti-Arabs! If it exists I never saw it!?. And its hard for me to Sympathize with fellow Christians who blindly hate all the Arabs. Maybe you can gain Israel as an ally, but Israel will not be their for you, just look what happenned to their allies in Lebanon? And their Lebanese allies were martial people. The Coptic christians should be bold and brave in pointing the finger of blame on the right people, instead of accusing Arab Christians for their misery!(assuming you are really a christian).

Be honest whats going on in Egypt today? Who is doing this to the Coptic christians? The Arabs (you already said we dont exist in Egypt), so who is oppressing you! I am pretty sure you saw all the tears and cries on youtube, are these people lying? or is their someone causing them that horror?--Skatewalk 16:57, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Copts and Maronites, are not Arabs

Do we all agree on this? If not, what is the Arabists' objection. — EliasAlucard|Talk 17:55 25 Aug, 2007 (UTC)

Maronites are >>>

• 70% of the Patriachs in the last 500years are ethnic Arabs (Ghassanid, Mashrouki, Ghaythi) tribes. The rest are of varied origins, they speak Arabic in the disapora and home.
• Maronite is a religious sect, So you can't generalize Maronites, just because a certain Maronite will claim being a certain ethnicity (Maronites can't speak as a group. Many ethnic Arabs among the Maronites tried to impose the Arab identity on them (they will tell you we are ethnic Arabs, we speak Arabic anywhere we go! and try to generalize it on all Maronites), Go to Phoenicia.org you will hear claims that Maronites are not Aramean, Syriac or Arab and plain simple Phoenicians (which the website claims are not Semites!)! Go to the Arameans they will tell you they speak Aramiac in church they are. The Maronites fought as unified group in the first half of the Lebanese war (faranjea and Douia factors showed the ethnic Arab vs Euro diffrences in the religious sector in certain periods of the war), They switched alliances from Israel to Syria to Saudi today!
• Copts are an ethnic group (African-Egyptian), I personally dont think they have to do anything with the Arabs or Semites at all (especially the Christian Copts)
• Maronites and Copts is used by antiArabs in a wrong way. Some Americans actually think the Maronites = all christians in Lebanon! (catholic practice thanks to France promotion of their allies in colonial Lebanon, in return the Orthodox _closely related to the Copts of Egypt are never mentioned, because they don't follow the Western agenda)--Skatewalk 19:02, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Maronites are not "Aramaeans". They follow Syriac Christianity. That is not the same thing as Aramaean. Aramaeans haven't existed since biblical times. And Copts (they are all Christians, last I checked), are not Arabs. They are Egyptians. We should respect this, by not listing either Maronites, or Copts, in this article. — EliasAlucard|Talk 22:19 25 Aug, 2007 (UTC)

• Elias, you are obviously in this article to vandalize!
• I am the one who removed Copts because they are not Arabs (why did you restore it?), Lanternix agrees with me and you are reverting it just because you love vandalizing.
• Maronites are Aramean, Syriacs, Arab, Phoenician and even some are European. Go the Maronites websites and forums yo will hear some Maronites tracing themselves to various origins which is normal beause Maronites are a religious sector not a race.
• Dont even ry to equate the Non Arab Copts, with the Maronite religion (just because the Pakistanis read Arabic in the Mosque that don't make them Arabs!). Maronites are diverse do a simple google heck if you really didnt know that!
• I know you have an Anti-Aramean fetish, but please forgive me! I am not Maronite and you are not Maronite. Why would you deny a Maronite from claiming he is Aramean! seriously whats wrong with that? Nobody knows who is really who, so why offend people by denying their right to identify!? Why you are like that? I don'yt care if an Arab wants to identify as Phoenician why do you want to impose Assyrianism on people? (you even claimed the Banu Tai/Shammar Arab Qahtani tribes that came all the way from Yemen as Assyrian!! Now how can I take you seriously??--Skatewalk 02:35, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
  • I restored it, not because I agree with the content, but because you deleted lots of content that might be valuable to the article. As for Maronites, they are not Aramaeans. They used to speak Aramaic about 1100 years ago. The entire Middle East spoke Aramaic at the time. Now they claim to be Phoenicians. No Maronite claims that he's an Aramaean. I have never claimed anything about Arabic tribes being Assyrians. I just copied the content from this article. It was already written like that. Muslim Assyrians needs a clean up, and possible, AfD. And no, I'm not here to vandalise. But you shouldn't delete half the content in the article, without discussion. — EliasAlucard|Talk 15:13 26 Aug, 2007 (UTC)
  • OK Elias, I discussed most of this stuff with Elias. I am starting to iunderstand what this whole Aramean thing (is a political movement more than anything else?) supported by some Europeans and Syria? Turkey? The guy who writes the articles is a Muslim Greek/Turkish guy. I read some of his articles with interesting claims about the whole Ancient Near East, but he always opposes the accepted fact. I have to admit I confused Aramiac with Aramean for a while, and with the Aramnahrin website poping up whenever you want to read about Arameans it makes you confused. I only know about the ancient Arameans what happenned after the 7th century BC...I am not sure. At that simply most the mideast started speaking their language. Phoenician disappeared around that time from main land Phoenicia (only to survive in the Colonies).
  • As of the Maronites claims, they vary on the guy you are talking to! Beliee within the same family you will have 3 diffirent ethnic claims! Go google their websites, some Maronite families have claer Ghassanid last names and you will find one brother proudly claiming to be a Ghassanid Arab and the other one claiming to be Frankish and a third one swearing he is Phoenician and only Phoenician!. However, the Copts Its clear what they identify as and what they want to be. --Skatewalk 18:01, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
• You mean what they clearly are --Lanternix 21:24, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
• OK Lanternix I believe in science. I think Arabs, Copts, berbers...are not truly pure and its just what they want to identify. I am sorry if that doesn't suit you! I still think the Copts are the closest thing to the ancient Egyptians...and oppose Afrocentric bogus.--Skatewalk 22:35, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Nobody is pure and no one believes in science more than I do. But Copts are NOT Egyptians because they think so, and Copts aren't unrelated to Arabs because they want to believe it. Do the math and you'll realize they are Egyptians not Arabs. Of course they may have Arab or Greek or whatever blood in them, but in proportions that by no way alienates them from their Egyptian ancestors. --Lanternix 01:44, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Thats what I meant wanting to be, whats wrong with that?--Skatewalk 16:33, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

UNACCEPTABLE OMISSION OF COPTS

How can a serious article about Arab Christians completely omit mentioning Copts and Egypt ???!!! The words "Copts" and "Egypt" are totally ABSENT from the article !! Someone has obviously been continually editing the article so as to remove any reference to Copts. Although it is clear that some Copts may not feel Arab, many of them do. All of this depends on the meaning one gives to the word "Arab" :

- 1) If one adopts an ETHNIC/RACIAL definition of the word, then it is obvious that Copts are not Arabs. Such a genetic definition actually restricts "Arabness" to very few individuals, as only people in the Gulf region who descend genetically from the Tribes of Arabia can be considered Arab in such a case. This means that not only Copts but also Muslim Egyptians should not be considered Arabs, since the overwhelming majority of them are genetically speaking much closer to Berbers and Nilotic people than to ethnic Arabs. If Wikipedia is to remain a coherent encyclopedia, then one needs to edit the Wikipedia article on Arabs and exclude from it all those who are not pure descendants of Arabian tribes, which would greatly reduce the overall number of Arabs from 340 million (the figure currently given in the infobox) to a few dozen million. If one opts for a genetic definition of Arabness, then not only Copts but also Maronites should not be mentioned in this article on Arab Christians, since the Wikipedia article on Maronites itself clearly states that "Maronites are overall very genetically similar to other Levantine populations, such as Syrians and Jordanians, with minor foreign genetic influence". Therefore, including Maronites in an article on Arab Christians while excluding Copts from the same article is simply INCOHERENT.

- 2) On the other hand, if one adopts a LINGUISTIC definition of "Arabness", then it is clear that Copts are undoubtedly Arabs. The Coptic language is a completely extinct language, unlike for instance Aramaic which is still spoken by some Assyrians. Egyptian Copts IN THEIR ENTIRETY use Arabic as their mother tongue : they speak Egyptian Arabic in daily conversation and use Modern Standard Arabic in formal writing. As for Skatewalk's assertion that "the copts dont speak Arabic once they leave Egypt, just like the Bengalis dont speak Arabic once they leave Saudi Arabia", it's simply ridiculous (I apologize for my rudeness) as it gives the impression that Copts are an oppressed linguistic minority who are forced to speak Arabic while in Egypt and abandon it as soon as they have the chance to flee it. The comparison with Bengalis is completely misleading : Bengalis do not live in Saudi Arabia on a permanent basis, they are simply guest workers who may speak Arabic as a matter of convenience as long as they reside in their host country, and naturally switch back to their original mother tongue once they return to their home country. Copts, on the other hand, simply do not have a living language of their own (until the seventeenth century they had the Coptic language, but it has completely disappeared since then). The ONLY living language for the overwhelming majority of present-day Copts is Arabic. What Skatewalk probably means by saying that Copts no longer speak Arabic once they leave Egypt is that Coptic immigrants and their childern who live in Western countries stop using Arabic a few years after they emigrate from Egypt. This is probably true, yet it is absolutely normal and is not specific to Copts : anyone who immigrates and settles in a new country on a permanent basis tends to gradually abandon his mother tongue and adopt that of his host country. This a widespread and almost universal phenomenon that is as common to Swedish Americans and Chinese Australians as it is to expatriate Copts. When Copts living abroad stop using Arabic, they NEVER replace it with the Coptic language (this is what they would be expected to do if they really were a linguistically oppressed minority like Turkish Kurds, who are eager to speak their mother tongue once they flee the oppression of the Kemalist Turkish State and settle abroad), but always with the modern language of their host country. Coptic only remains as a liturgical language, and even the Coptic Church itself nowadays conducts a large part of its religious services in Arabic.

- 3) Besides the linguistic aspect, there is also the CULTURAL dimension associated with "Arabness". Some Copts may want to dissociate themselves from the rest of the Arab world, especially the Coptic activists living abroad who want to promote the idea of a distinct Coptic cultural identity by creating for instance a Coptic flag, a 2-year-old invention that is not recognized by the Coptic Orthodox Church in Alexandria and that very few Christians in Egypt are even aware of. Nevertheless, whether these individuals like it or not, Copts living in Egypt are culturally Arab. When ordinary Copts in Egypt listen to music, they listen to the same Arabic pop music and Arabic classical music that people in Bahrain or Libya listen to. When Coptic authors in Egypt (e.g. Salama Musa) write, they use Literary Arabic ; their writings are intended to be sold on the Arab book market, and it is to Arabic literature that they are contributing. When ordinary Copts in Egypt watch TV, they watch and enjoy the same Arabic-speaking Egyptian films and miniseries that people in Yemen or Morocco watch and enjoy. And these are just but a few illustrative examples taken from daily life. If collective memory (which is an important part of any culture) is taken into account, then one can also consider Copts to be culturally Arab. All the events that have shaped the collective memory of the modern Arab world have been shared by Copts. Copts have faced the same European colonialism and same independence struggles as have other people in the Arab world. Copts have fought in every Arab war against Israel since 1948, and have been equally devastated (morally speaking) by the 1967 Naksa as any other Arab. In fact, the current Coptic Pope himself, Shenouda III, served as an army officer in the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, and continues to anathematize any Copt who visits Israeli-occupied Jerusalem. I am not saying that such a political stance is good or bad, I am simply pointing to it to highlight how genuinely attached to Arab patriotism the Coptic Pope is (and there is no reason to believe that his ban on travel to Jerusalem is due to political pressure from the Egyptian government, since to my knowledge the Grand Sheikh of Al-Azhar, the highest Muslim authority in the country, has not issued a fatwa banning travel to Jerusalem).

THEREFORE, simply because some Copts do not feel part of the Arab world or wish to distance themselves from it does not justify the complete omission of Copts from an article on Arab Christians. For better or for worse, Egyptian Copts are linguistically and culturally as part of the Arab world as their Muslim Egyptian counterparts. Even if the majority of Wikipedia users finds it better not to group Copts with Arab Christians, the article should still at least mention Copts and explain why they have been excluded, since the majority of people would expect to find something about Copts when they type "Arab Christians". Omitting all references to Copts and to Egypt in an article on Arab Christians is clearly an ideologically motivated action that is the work of a handful of users and that is completely at odds with Wikipedia's NPOV policy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by BomBom (talk • contribs) 02:39, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Is it not enough that Lanternix (who IS a Copt) and others constantly have to explain that we Copts are NOT Arabs???

I am a Copt also, so since Copts DID NOT intermarry with Arab invaders (unless they converted), than we aren't Arabs. I know this for a fact.

...as for the mentioning of Copts, we can simply explain that Copts are often wrongfully labelled as Arabs. I don't even speak Arabic very well as I wasn't born in Egypt. So, enough is ENOUGH. Please consider the fact that the Copts own view of themselves should not be so downgraded.

Also, remember to sign your comments with four tildes (~) when you're done. ~ Troy 02:28, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Dear Troy, I do not see how your comments contradict what I said. If you had read my post carefully, you would have noticed that I agree with you in saying that Copts are not Arabs from a genetic point of view since they did not intermarry with them. However, the problem is that people like you and Lanternix choose ONLY this ethnic definition as a basis for your argumentation, and I have clearly explained in my post why an exclusively ethnic/racial definition of "Arabness" is misleading : if one were to focus solely on ethnicity, then the vast of majority of Egyptians (Copts and Muslims alike) should not be considered as Arabs (and if you had lived in Egypt long enough, you would have noticed that all Egyptians are aware of this, since they refer to tourists from the Gulf as Arabs, thereby implying that Egyptians form a different ethnic group), and so Egypt, which is viewed as the center of the Arab world, would end up being not an Arab country at all. What you and others completely ignore is that "Arabness" is not only a racial concept, but has other (and in my opinion, far more important) dimensions, such as the linguistic and cultural ones. From this linguistic and cultural perspective, it is clear that Copts - whether you like it or not and whether you feel comfortable with it or not - are Arabs (i.e. they have been Arabized and completely assimilated into Arab culture). You say that you shouldn't be considered Arab since you don't even speak Arabic well ; but that is because of your own personal story, with your parents having emigrated to a Western country and you having lived all your life abroad. You and other expatriate Copts are clearly NOT REPRESENTATIVE of the more than 7 million Copts living in Egypt, ALL OF WHOM speak ONLY Arabic as their mother tongue, and ALL OF WHOM share a culture that is completely INDISTINGUISHABLE from that of their neighbours (same language, same lifestyle, same cultural references, same cuisine, same sex taboos, same bad habits such as female genital mutilation and vendetta...). You are also somewhat contradicting yourself by saying that you are not Arab since you do not speak Arabic well ; by the same reasoning, you also do not speak the Coptic language, at least certainly not to the point of being able to conduct daily conversations in it, and therefore you might as well not be considered Copt (and you surely master Arabic much better than Coptic !) !!! All of this is to say that your resentment towards Arab culture or your frustration at being considered part of it should not influence the way Wikipedia articles are written. Personal self-identification is precisely PERSONAL, it is not an objective criterium to be used by encyclopedias (a nationalistic man from Brittany in France may resent being called French, but whether he likes it or not people in Brittany ARE culturally French since the overwhelming majority of them speak only French as their mother tongue and since they are completely assimilated into modern French culture and society). As for your assertion that "Copts' own view of themselves should not be so downgraded", let me remind you that although there are many Copts such as yourself who do not like being called Arab, there are equally as many Copts who genuinely feel part of the Arab world, first of whom the Coptic Pope himself. Unless you are able to provide a scientific and reliable survey of Copts' perceptions of themselves (and especially those living in Egypt and not expatriate ones such as those who have invented the Coptic flag, which is unknown to most Copts living here in Egypt), people like you and Lanternix should STOP considering that your own personal resentment and frustrations are representative of all Copts. It is not only an immodest thing to do but also completely unbefitting a scientific encyclopedia such as Wikipedia.BomBom 13:49, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

I speak English. How does that make me ethnically English??? I am simply not even ethnically English.

This is the same deal with Copts (even the ones in Egypt). If you learn how to speak Mandarin, does that make you Chinese???

Speaking Arabic does not automatically make you an Arab.

As I said before, the article can and should mention that Copts are often wrongfully labelled as "Arabs".

You said "...should STOP considering that your own personal resentment and frustrations are representative of all Copts"

Have you heard a Copt saying that he/she is an "Arab"? I don't think so. ~ Troy 15:20, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

You are confusing things. If you learn a language, then obviously that doesn't make you what you learned. But your native tongue is what makes your ethnicity. You can't compare an immigrant nation like the US to an ancient one like Egypt by stating "I speak Enlgish.." Chaldean 15:46, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

English IS in fact my native tongue. ~ Troy 23:17, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

It's very simple. Copts are NOT Arabs and language does NOT define people. Very clearly all Copts agree on that. If others,mostly pan-Arabists who like to include everyone under their banner, don't like these ethnical, racial, social and historical facts, they can bang their heads against the closest walls. --Lanternix 23:19, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Copts are native, indigenous Egyptians, not Arabs. I thinks it's high time that we respect this indisputable fact and knock it off with Arabization. The native Coptic language attests to the irrefutable fact that Copts are the descendants of the ancient Egyptians. — EliasAlucard|Talk 04:55 10 Sept, 2007 (UTC)

The Copts and Arabs in Egypt

Troy, can you tell me whats the difference between an Egyptian who claims to be an Arab from the muslims prophet lineage and a Christian Egyptian living in Europe or the USA?, because the Egyptian identity article claims they are the same! both are Egyptian and I am pretty sure the Ashraaf in Egypt are proud Arabs. Maybe the Egyptian identity article needs to be fixed so the Non Arabs dont get confused with the Arabs. Every edit seems anti-Arab, when some posters clearly insult Arabs and start an artile claiming that Arabs dont exist in Egypt!--Skatewalk 03:56, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Skatewalk, this was precisely the point people had made over and over already. We can say for sure, because of Islamic rules, that Copts (Christian minority) have not mixed with Arabs through inter-marriage. This cannot be said for any one of the Muslim Egyptian population. They could be purely Egyptian, purely Arab, or most likely have ancestry of Egyptian and Arabs together. The fact remains Egyptian and Arab are not necessarily synonymous. I apologize for any perceived rudeness, no insult intended here. It is a matter of scientific (or semi-scientific) discussion. (Mike Morgan 14:11, 10 September 2007 (UTC))

Please see Egyptian Party page. Copts are not the only Egyptians who do not think they are Arabs. (Mike Morgan 13:36, 11 September 2007 (UTC))