Talk:Christians in Iran

Major "revisions" like that by K1 should really be accompanied by some discussion + explanations why this is considered the right move.

I have reverted to the last intact page before k1's changes.

An excellent source for information on the early history of Christianity in Iran is "A History of Christianity in Asia: Beginnings to 1500" by Samuel Hugh Moffett

refdoc 10/5/04

Actually it is you who commits major changes to the article. I simply removed some misinformation. Unlike you, I am not evnagelizing anything here, I just care about the correctness, and if possible, accuracy of the articles. You may have read one book (possibly recommended by your church) about "the oh wow so glorious history of Christianity in Iran" ... but fact are facts. Fact is, that in pre-Islamic Iran, there was little (if any) tolerance for christianity. Also, you removed all of my changes. Before reverting should you not have first discussed it here, as you have suggested this should be done in antoher discussioin area? Unlike you, I do not revert and will give you a chance to discuss your case. But I do intend to correct the article. --K1 04:09, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

if you review the history of the page you will see that you had introduced no new text apart from Shapur's remark - which I think is well worth re-introducing. I am sorry for deleting it when reverting. I will try and rectify this now. Apart from this you shortened the article to less then half its previous size without comment or explanation. I would suggest that you add text to balance rather than deleting text in bulk.

WRT your remarks regarding my range of reading or my "evangelizing" on these pages I think these remarks are not called for. Refdoc 12:09, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I have now re-introduced Shapur's remark. I guess tolerance is a matter of degrees. In comparison to the Roman Empire, pre-Islamic Iran was indeed largely tolerant - even if its leading classes were contemptous.

With regard to the "glorious history of Christianity in Iran" - Iran has a multi-facetted history, its religious history is extremely rich and diverse. It should be therefore of little surprise that Christianity has its own stake in Iranian history, even if this is a matter of little importance to non-Christians - e.g. Shapur II or yourself. Refdoc 12:37, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

BTW. Can I also refer you to "A Brief History of Christianity in Iran" by Massoume Price[[1] (http://www.iranchamber.com/religions/history_of_christianity_iran1.php)] Refdoc 16:52, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Why are you puting misinformation in Wikipedia articles? You claim the Christians in pre-Islamic Iran where so many that at one point 100,000 of them were slaughtered (in the 6th century). Where do you get this "fact" from? How come it is not recorded in any of the Iranian books or the books of the neighbouring cultures? I don't know what you are up to, but I know whatever it is smells fishy. --- oh, and you said Massoume who ?!! --K1 22:39, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I think you are getting increasingly out of order. Wipipedia NPOV is achieved by adding balance to articles instead of blindly culling. I have no reason to doubt your expertise in Iranian matters in general, but I do think that that you might not have that much of a qualification to repeatedly delete other people's contributions. Refdoc 22:49, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

If you look carefully you will see that all additions made by you are readily incorporated. I am not blindly reverting as you claim.

It is you who is getting out of whack. You are here to promote an ideal not to contribute to the improvement of Wikipedia. I am asking you nicely to either be a civilized contributor and don't bring your political or ideoligical agenda to Wikipedia, or we are going to have a conflict here. How do you like when you are using Wikipedia to learn about things, and jump from subject to subject, one or two of those articles along the way contained misinformation or misleading information, due to a single person taking advantage of the open nature of Wikipedia to promote his or her own little agenda? Then don't do the same to others. --K1 22:59, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

"Where is it recorded ?" - Moffett jumps to my mind. I repeat myself probably, but your "contribution" were so fare largely wholesale culls of an perfectly acceptable article full of factual, if largely irrelevant (for people like you) information. Instead of continueing to revert adn rubbishing my sources ("Massoume who ?!!" etc) why don't you bring some sources on the matter ? It is quite obvious that a minority issue will not find significant pages in non minority history books, but this does not make the presentation of these pages ahistorical. Refdoc 23:16, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

No, I disagree with your "minority" logic. In the same century as you claim, the Mazdakis (another religious minority) were massively killed by Khosrow I (Khosrow Anushirvan) and it was extensively recored. That historical fact is all over the place. So you say in the same time 100,000 Christians were slaughtered in Persia and there is no recording of it anywhere outside of some obscure christian evengelical "literature" ? Why is it not mentioned, for example, in the Shahnameh which is a fairly thorough depiction of the Sassanid events? The Shahname clearly talks about the Mazdakis. And that is just one of many examples. --K1 23:21, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

right, by all means leave the "100.000" out until further notice. I do think that Moffett is not "obscure evangelical literature" but I am sure we will find other supportive material and can re-insert this number than, but please do not repeatedly destroy what took long time on a slow modem connection. Refdoc 23:34, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

No, this is rather significant. If you were willing to revert the article with this major piece of misinformation several times, what credibility does the rest of you contributions and claims in the article get ? --K1 23:37, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I have removed the 100.000 not because I believe it is a wrong estimate, but simply because you repeatedly attacked the number and kept culling the whole article to half its size. I believe this number is a matter worth exploring further and I am happy to learn if you find differnt numbers. But I loath your repeated attacks on my integrity and on my motives. I am just as you committed to the ideals of wikipedia and wish it to grow more and more as a reliable source of information. My contributions are in the areas of my personal knowledge, surely influenced by my interests etc, but I am quite capable of keeping fact and fiction apart from each other.

WRT to your "allegedly murdered by the Iranian government" I am referring here to a remark Roozbeh made in Haik Hovsepian's stub. I did initially on Hovsepian's article write he was allegedly murdered by teh Iranian government, but Roozbeh corrected me insofar as he said his murder had been part of the government sponsored serial killings. Correct him if he is wrong. Refdoc 23:49, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Well, first of all, I am not an apoligist or supporter of the Iranian regime, but I am not an activist against them either. As for what Roozbeh did to that article, well, maybe Roozbeh knows something that the rest of the world doesn't. How would Roozbeh know who has killed who where? So the term "allegedly" is used in situations like this, you see it or hear it in the same usage all the time. I don't know why you have interpreted my "allegedly" to be "excusing" in nature? It is standard English for situations where one cannot report with certainty. --K1 00:13, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

what are you so paranoid about - I have never accused you of being an apologist, nor a supporter of the Iranian government or anyone else. As far as I understand Roozbeh - the murder has been cleared up as part of the investigations into the serial killings. Refdoc 00:38, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

May I please also ask you to read the following from the NPOV article

"Lack of neutrality as an excuse to delete

The neutrality policy is used sometimes as an excuse to delete texts that are perceived as biased. Isn't this a problem?

In many cases, yes. Most of us believe that the mere fact that some text is biased is not enough, by itself, to delete the text outright. If it contains perfectly valid information, the text should simply be edited accordingly, and certainly not deleted.

There's sometimes trouble determining whether some claim is true or useful, particularly when there are few people on board who know about the topic. In such a case, it's a good idea to raise objections on a talk page; if one has some reason to believe that the author of the biased material will not be induced to change it, we have sometimes taken to removing the text to the talk page itself (but certainly not deleting it entirely). But the latter should be done more or less as a last resort, never merely as a way of punishing people who have written something biased." Refdoc 23:56, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

What is troubling is that someone like you, "contributes" to the article and writes that 100,000 christians where slaughterd in iran, and when someone like me asks for evidence, the best you can do is "i am sure it is true, but i will find the evidence". you see, it clearly shows that that is exactly what you want to believe. i am not even disputing the number, i am saying the whole thing is flat out false. i gave you a good example, the case of the Mazdakis. imagine if i had not reverted your article, how many people would have read this article and left the page with the misinformation (and possibly hatred) that iranians slaughtered christians? --K1 00:19, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I am sorry, but you are wrong here - I have given evidence (Moffett), but you were not willing to accept this evidence. Hence I put this particular aspect up for further debate ans said I am willing to put it here fore further talk. WRT "hatred towards Iranians" - how low can you aim ? The whole blasted thing happened about 1400 years ago. If people wish to hate for things so long ago, then leave them to it, they have only themselves to blame. I simply do not think this fear should influence our debate and this article. Mate, get some confidence - Iran is a great nation and no one reasonable is going to blame you for things people have done (or not done) 1400 years ago Refdoc 00:30, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the protection. Maybe we can now move towards actual debate.

K1 - you are asserting two contradictory views - pre-Islamic Iran was acc to you so intolerant that no Christian church could take hold and grow there, at the same time you are claiming there was no persecution. These two things do not mix - at least in my mind. I think you are a bit confused here. Please read the Price article before you claim there was no significant (from a Christian point of view) presence in Iran in pre Islamic times. Refdoc 17:51, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

The facts in question appear to be 1) Was there a significant presence of Christians in pre-Islamic Iran? 2) What was the attitude of the Iranian Shahs towards Christians? 3) Where there any major persecutions with mass killings at any stage and in particular in the 6th century? 4) How many where killed in these persecutions?

My answers to 1) - This obviously depends to some degree on what is perceived to be "significant". But from the view point of (today) a small minority in Iran the presence is very old and had at times been much more significant than now.

There is plenty early Christian literature - Syriac and otherwise - showing the extent of a Christian presence in the Parthian and the Sassanide Empires, including the region of today's Iran. Massume Price asserts "Christianity spread in both Villages and cities and by the end of the Parthian period (AD 225), Christian communities were settled all the way from Edessa, an important missionary center, to Afghanistan. The Chronicles of Arbela report that by this time there were already more than twenty bishops in Persia and Christians had already penetrated Arabia and Central Asia." [[2] (http://www.iranchamber.com/religions/history_of_christianity_iran1.php)]

to 2) mostly ignoring or tolerant under the Parthians, while widely changing between toleration, supporty and persecution under the Sassanides. Shapour II whom K1 quotes was responsible for particularly strong persecutions.

enough for tonight... Refdoc 23:14, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

The numbers of adherents of each church/denomination are from Patrick Johnsons "Prayer for the World", a collection of - among other things - statistical information on the state of the Christian church worldwide. I have not checked the numbers by other sources, but adding them up gives a ball park figure which appears appropriate. Refdoc 09:38, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

---

Why is this page still protected? This bible-thumber has had plenty of opportunity to back up his fabricated history of christianity in iran with solid evidence, but he has not done so in well over a week. I want the page immediately unprotected so that we can remove the lies and christian promotional agenda from the article once and for all. --K1 02:07, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)

You appear quite unwilling to deal with what is presented to you Refdoc 05:44, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)

No editing has happened for months I will now remove the NPOV notice. Refdoc 22:59, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Contents

1 Removal of NPOV notice 1 Rewrite of mangled article 2 Disputed? 3 The "Insignificance" of Christian history in Iran 4 Pics from Iran 5 Removal of dispute tags 6 giving short shrift to roman catholism

Removal of NPOV notice

Dear anonymous, before you add blindly the NPOV notice it would be good if you could point out where you do not agree. Refdoc 17:59, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)

The history of the page and the discussion page speak abundantly on this subject. It was you who removed the TotallyDisputed notice without any explantions whatsoever. Reading the article, I disagree with many parts of it. For starters, the statistics does not even match the figures given in the article, and the figures are exaggerated. The history section is even more questionable. I put back the TotallyDisputed message in the article, because it was put in there as a result of long disputes which were never settled, and it seems that at some point you have decided that ok it is now the time to remove the notice without any further explanations.

Rewrite of mangled article

I have rewritten the article, mostly using what was there before. I've included some more historical background, corrected spelling mistakes and used the accepted Wikipedia style throughout. I've deleted material that is either unsubstantiated, unnecessary or POV. I believe that the article is now in a sufficient state not to be bludgeoned by reverts and 'disputed' tags. I see that some reverts have been made by anonymous users, while this is allowed, it makes it look far too much like vandalism or sock-puppetry. Let discussion be had here, and relevant edits be made. Gareth Hughes 01:18, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Your rewrite in my opinion is not an improvement at all in terms of the long disputed contents of this article, although you have made some syntactical and spelling improvements. I also noticed from your user page that you are a professed Anglican priest. Perhaps it would be wiser if you let some non-religious folks also get involved as the other guy who has long been "defending" this article is also a professed religious christian. The article starts off by saying that christianity in Iran has a "significant" history. I believe any reasonble person with familiarity with Iranian history and culture will tell you that christianity has never been significant in Iran. There are many other problems with this article, but I suffice it to say that in general, it has a promotional tone and tries to exaggerate the presence and role of christianity in Iran. Speaking of significance, I also think it is significant that in Iran less than 0.5% of the population is christian and before the Islamic revolution, that statistic was barely over 1% (if at all over 1%). The article also has historical misinformation. For example, it says due to pressue christians formed ghettos, mostly Armenian. This is just plain wrong. The Armenians of Iran were initially brought in Iran by Shah Abbas I and he built "a second Jolfa" for them in Isfahan. That was not a "ghetto" and it was not formed out of pressure. They were treated with respect and they were brought in because of their talent and craftsmanship and they had religious freedom. This article is just plain wrong and correcting one sentence here and there will not make it an honest article. It has to be rewritten without any agenda or ideological/religious promotionalism in mind.

I had no agenda in mind when rewriting the article other than trying to prevent an edit war. You obviously found my user page and know a little about me: I choose to make that information public in the interest of openness and honesty. I've noticed that a few of the edits to this article have been made by anonymous users like yourself. If you are serious about contributing here, you might think about getting an account. I feel that I have contributed in an unbiased manner to this article, and have at least declared my personal interests, so that all users can see who I am. Christians in Iran, though numerically insignificant today, have been significant in the history of Christian mission to China and India, and the church within the Sassanid Empire is of significant historical interest. I have in no way suggested that Christianity has been a major part of Iranian history. I kept the section mentioning ghettos (I did think of editing it out), because the word can be used in a loose, figurative way. I shall have another look at it and see if I can reword. Gareth Hughes 18:09, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Again, an anonymous user has decided to add a disputed tag without adding anything to the talk page. 'Dispute' requires talk. I believe that the anonymous user(s) is/are making personal referrences to various openly disclosed facts about who I am to dispute the article. Such ad hominem remarks are against the policy of Wikipedia. I came to this article to help make a good, neutral article and stop these tags appearing without justification. I am not pursuing any other line here, whatever anyone may surmise about me. If anyone has objections to this article they should be listed here in a well-presented case, so that we can deal with them. If there are users who wish to hide anonymously, stick tags on the page and fail to engage in any kind of discussion, then I shall have to report that the Wikipedia is being misused. Gareth Hughes 23:10, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC)

You could simply do the same thing that I did. When I first read this article, to me it was clear that it was biased and with hidden agenda. What did I do? Two things: 1) I spent a little time reading the "other" versions and compared. and 2) I came to this very page, and read the old discussions from top to bottom. How difficult is that? Piece of cake.

Disputed?

I know very little about the history of Christianity in Iran; I have no idea whether a dispute is merited here (apart from the word "significant" in the first paragraph, now removed, which I agree is clearly POV.) Can those who consider the article problematic please state their objections here, so they can be discussed and if necessary corrected - preferably bearing in mind the policy Wikipedia:Assume good faith? - Mustafaa 21:51, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

The "Insignificance" of Christian history in Iran

I notice a reversion of "significant history", (17:44, 10 Jan 2005) by User:Mustafaa who asserts that ""significant" is POV." Under such attack, this entry will never achieve authenticity by suppressing the significant Persian traditions of Nestorius. Through its modest successes in Persia Nestorian Christianity reached Central Asia and eventually China. Islamist bullying does not change history. --Wetman 22:38, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

The significance, or not, of something is subjective. There are some things that are generally agreed to be significant, because they are to so many. Christianity in Iran is probably not generally significant: there is enough to say that it is worth saying, worth the article. I agree with the last edit: the removal of 'significant'. The purpose of a disputed tag is to dispute. Let us work out what we can agree on, then remove the tag. There is no purpose in striving to keep the tag there. It is good to talk to people willing to introduce themselves. Gareth Hughes 23:08, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Contrary to the suspicions above am I very grateful for the attention this article has found. It is not meant as promotion, though the subject is clearly personally very important to me. In this personal importance it is though not different to the contributions of many others - why else do we contribute to Wikipedia if not to share what we know on subjects we are interested in? For those referring to the above "debate" between user K1 and myself - this has unfortunately a history which ultimately led to the banning of k1 from wikipedia last summer. K1 indulged in a unfettered vendetta across multiple pages and entries, using gross abuse. This article was but a minor "theatre of war".

WRT "significance" - I agree with the removal to a degree. The Iranian church is clearly of great significance to the history of Christianity and Christian mission (Nestorian), while maybe largely irrelevant to the Iranian society at large. So I suggest change rather than deletion Refdoc 00:37, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Refdoc/Navid's change looks good to me. I think I'll just ignore Wetman's insinuations (again) that I'm promoting some sort of eeevil Islamist agenda... - Mustafaa 02:03, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I think you should. Refdoc 10:17, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Pics from Iran

Just thought I'd add some PD pics from the oldest churches of Iran, to add flavor to the page. As to the neutrality of the article, I'll leave that up to the experts.

However I must add that personally, when I visited the Christian minority groups in Qazvin, I learned that only 40 people remain from what used to be 20000-30000 a few decades ago (according to the keeper of the St Hripsime Church in Qazvin). Another church I visited there (where a Russian pilot is buried) had totally been abandoned.

My point? That Christians do not live the free life in Iran that many people say they do. There are policies by both the Iranian govt AND western govts including the US that encourage minorities to leave Iran. I can name a few.

Very sad. --Zereshk 00:42, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for the pictures, it is always good to add images to a page.

I would like to reiterate that the purpose of the 'disputed' tag is to encourage us to work on an article until it is acceptably neutral. I would like to see those who would dispute this article to present their objections, so that we can edit the article and remove the tag. Gareth Hughes 11:44, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I have edited the sentence re membership of the newer churches - Jamiat-e Rabbani says 80% of its members and adherents are converts from non Christian background. And the others are obviously not simply by virture of being Armenian/Assyrian "former mebers of other churches", though their parents or grandparents might well have been. Refdoc 11:29, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I seriously doubt there are even 1000 Iranians who have converted to Christianity inside Iran. I have never personally known or even heard of one case. In fact, I seriously doubt that even in USA and Europe put together, there are Iranian converts into Christianity whose numbers are in "thousands" -- if there was, we would have heard of (and seen) their congregations, activities, publications, etc. They are at best, in "hundreds" not "thousands". To me it seems the claim that there are between 7000 and 15000 converts to Christianity in Iran is highly exaggerated (Armenian and Assyrian Iranians are categorized separately in the article). What are the sources for such a claim? How many Churches do they have and where are their churches or congregational facilities? The only "acceptance" of Iranians of Christianity is that many Iranians sort of like the spirit of the Christmas as a holiday and a festival, although nowhere near the love we have for the Norouz. I myself am one such Iranian who likes Christmas, as a festival. I guess I am a "convert" then!! --Amir 20:53, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Jamiat-e Rabboni has churches across the country. If you live in Teheran, the place to go is Takht-e Jamjid / Taleghani, just right next to the University. The "7000 - 15000" - you got this wrong - this is not the number of the converts but of the overall membership of protestant churches - including Armenian and Assyiran protestant churches - which there are a fair number again. Outside of Iran there are far more churches than one can count easily - a directory [3] (http://www.farsinet.com/icc/) might help you - mind you not all its contact information is accurate and up to date. Large-ish websites are meaintained by the church in San Jose [4] (http://www.iranchurch.org/index.htm) in San Francisco [5] (http://www.iranchurch.com/), in Glasgow/UK [6] (http://www.gichurch.org/fm/gic/) and the Valley Church in Chatsworth California [7] (http://www.valleyiranianchurch.org/), but also many more. Information on numbers - obviously intenal count - publishe dnumbers you can find in Patrcik Johnston's book which was mentioned above. Refdoc 23:43, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

First of all, you had no right to delete my contributions to this article, since they did not contain any wrong information. Secondly, I asked you for a source for your data and satatistics, and you are using GMI ?!!! that is a CHRISTIAN organization ... DUH !!! .... I am restoring my changes, and you must provide credible source for the bogus figures and statistics. Also I want to definitely include in the article that the total number of christians in Iran, using the maximum estimates and even rounding them up, is still less than 0.2% of the population. This is significant, because the article gives unfamiliar readers the wrong impression.

And yes, there are a handful of "Iranian Christian" congregations in USA and Europe, I didn't say there isn't any. But the total number of their membership is in hundreds, not thousands. If I am not misinformed, the largest one is in San José, California, and they don´t even have one hundred people in their sunday congregation. There is a very good explanation why it is particularly hard to get Iranians to convert to Christianity (or any other religion, for that matter), even among Iranians who don't give a damn about Islam; but since you are a Christian evangelist, I will not equip you with this knowledge. --Amir 06:15, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Removal of dispute tags

The dispute has long died down. It circled lastly about sources for headcounts and estimates - sources are given and diverging counts/estimates are listed. i assume that any dispute is therefore currently resolved. Refdoc 01:54, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

giving short shrift to roman catholism

there is no mention of roman catholism in this article except oen brief mention.

Short shrift implies deliberateness. I would suggest (being the main author) lack of specific knowledge might be a more appropriate accusation. Please add what you know. Refdoc 09:23, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I wonder what is meant by the first comment. As this is a wiki, you should add what improvements you can. Off the top of my head, I don't think there are many Latin-rite Catholics in Iran, most Catholics are Chaldeans. --Gareth Hughes 16:26, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)