Talk:Babai the Great

message: It is a modern innovation to call the millet of the ancient Church of the East the Assyrians; it is an even more recent usage to call one of the fragments in its current schism the Assyrian Church of the East; it has no more claim to Babai than the other fragments. 
This indiscriminate collection of search engine results cannot change that; that each sect claims the ancient saints is neither novel nor informative. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 21:28, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Im not really sure what you're getting at. Babai is early church father who built the foundational pillars of the Assyrian Church of the East as it is clearly stated by the sources I have provided. The ancient church of the east you are referring to above came into exisitence in 1968 due to reformations. The Chaldean Catholic Church came into official existence in 1553 when the Assyrian Church of the East split with former, causing the the name to be changed to Chaldean to differentiate the cannonical connection with the papacy of Rome. The Assyrian Church of the East along with the Syriac Churches have been in continuous existence sense the the time of the Apostle Thomas. How in any way is that modern? You label my sources as indiscriminate is that because they do not match you views? I have many more if you are interested. I do not doubt that both churches claim him, if you feel it neccessary add chaldean catholic church as well, however that would be redundant as it separated from the Assyrian Church of the East. As far as this case goes, I will cease for the time being as I am needed elsewhere.Ninevite (talk) 21:50, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: That's exactly like claiming St. Augustine was a German Lutheran; I'm sure there are plenty of websites where that connexion is made too; some of  those who would say so would claim that the modern Catholic came into existence some time in the Middle Ages as a heresy. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 23:29, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, as an open minded person, I understand your concerns. In regards to the religious bodies, I have discussed above; I have a question for you. You say, “those who would say so would claim that the modern Catholic came into existence sometime in the Middle Ages as a heresy." No one is stating that the bodies of the Ancient Church of the East as well as the Chaldean Catholic Church are heretical. I am just referring to their historical schism (split) from the ACOE in 15th, 16th, and 20th centuries. These two bodies once belonged to a monolithic religious bevy that dominated Asia. I went ahead and I added Chaldean Catholic Church to show that this other congregation venerates this religious historical figure as well. By adding the Chaldean Catholic Church to the articles first sentence, this has clarified his historical importance for the both congregations. What are your suggestions for improving this article? Best Regards Ninevite (talk) 00:32, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

text: That name was used well before the Ottoman era. This has nothing to do with "claim" as you consistently state. This is a matter of facts, as this historical figure created the Christological pillars of the Assyrian Church of the East as well as beocming one of it's early patriarchs.  Ninevite (talk) 23:58, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Evidence? Septentrionalis PMAnderson 18:21, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

text: Evidence for what? The name of the church or Babai? Ninevite (talk) 21:25, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: For the use of Assyrian for the Church of the East or its communicants before 1800. I will be moderately, but less, impressed, by usage before the triumph of the principle of nationality around 1859. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 02:53, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

text:  Well as far as English sources go here are just a few attesting to the churchs name dating back to it's christological foundation. I have dozens of sources in Assyrian Aramaic as well but unless you can read that language it's pointless to post those here since this is an english encylopedia. Just for a side note the church has been incorectly named the nestorian church by ignorant westerners in some cases. Despite that usage Nestorian has also been used interchangeably with Assyrian, with the former vaguely signifing the churchs relations with Nestorius and the latter attesting to the ethnical makeup of the congregation. I hope some of these sources shed some light on your concerns, I have many more if need be a good portion of which are in my native langauge as well. :        Ninevite (talk) 06:10, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Few, even of these, discuss Christians; the only substance would appear to be the claims that Tatian and Qardagh are of Assyrian descent; that's not the same as claiming it for the whole body of believers. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 17:07, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Assyrian

message: I copywrote much of the page, but still believe it is very in-perspective. Who is a Catholicos? What exactly is the background story surrounding Mesopotamia and its Nestorian population?
--Screwball23 talk 19:51, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Very in-perspective work here 

message: He was neither. The Turks were riding ponies on the steppes of Mongolia at the time. The Assyrian empire was long dead. Stick to the things that he was. Don't try to put him in modern clothes that would have been alien to him. Laurel Lodged (talk) 21:41, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Assyrian-Turkish writers 

message: I would like to suggest a name change for this article. Babai the Monk is more neutral. Any other suggestions? F.Tromble (talk) 17:01, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: See WP:COMMONNAME.  The only hit on Google for "Babai the Monk" was this article after you altered it. There were many hits for "Babai the Great".  We do not invent new names for people on Wikipedia.--Toddy1 (talk) 19:34, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name Change