Neither in the Old Testament nor in the New Testament is there anything to suggest the validity of the dogma of the Trinity. The idea of the trinity is a forced argument. The authority of the Church has overruled the authority of the gospels. The Trinity has become the sine qua non of Christianity. Had the dogma of Trinity been so important, shouldn’t it be explained over and over again by God’s messengers and prophets in the Old Testament, or at least in the gospels of the New Testament? Christians confirm the Old Testament as an authority. How is it that the Holy Spirit (Gabriel), indicated to be one of the three, is not mentioned as such in the Old Testament? Why is there no mention in the Old Testament of the advent of the Son of God or the transfiguration of God? If this were so important why do we not encounter it anywhere in the Old Testament, which is the revelation of God? The problem of God the Father and God the Son was the consequence of an interpretation made by the Church. God in the contemporary Gospels is referred to as the “Father” of all men and his believers, his sons. The words “Father” and “Son” are but similes, as an impartial reader may readily see: So that you may be the sons of your Father who is in the heaven. Matthew 5, 45.
She is talking about what the historians should do. They have to write about the Partition of India, Bengal Famine of 1943, Indo-Pak war and refugees. These are ignored by the Gandhi-Nehru historians of India.
This is an excellent example of how not to not to moderate! Minimize the egotistical "I" and remember that moderator takes less time than the principal panelists or invitees. R.Nanduri
well said. She kept providing us her resume and showing off her network and her pedigree. Intelluctual elitism. The name dropping was so cringy and embarrassing. Felt like I am listening to some brown madams and sahibs at a marie antionette kitty party. Felt like screaming STFU! and let the guests talk.
Indian didn't write history as much as what foreigner did ever since Chinese travelers did. To start with Jadunath Sorcar or Bhandarkar or Altekar or what ever other did isn't even a drop in the ocean of vastness Indian history. So what are you rewriting and what business you got to do?
They are Marxist-Jihadists who want to further manufacture and mainstream myths against hindus. Spivak is a far left jihadist. Same with Butalia. Her Partition book is Pakistani Propaganda
I listened to the discourse... initially I thought it was unbiased. In Q and A session, the moderator and the panelists turned the tables... I wonder whether these middling intellectuals wish good for India
There are more books on Indian history conceived and written in any ONE of French, German, Japanese, Russian, OR Korean than in all Indian vernaculars put together. And Indian historians don't seem to be ashamed of the fact in the slightest. Mental enslavement of English speaking Indians is abysmal!
amazing...learning still...
Excellent
Great historian 😍
You mean jihadi
Neither in the Old Testament nor in the New Testament is there anything to suggest the validity of the dogma of the Trinity. The idea of the trinity is a forced argument. The authority of the Church has overruled the authority of the gospels. The Trinity has become the sine qua non of Christianity. Had the dogma of Trinity been so important, shouldn’t it be explained over and over again by God’s messengers and prophets in the Old Testament, or at least in the gospels of the New Testament? Christians confirm the Old Testament as an authority. How is it that the Holy Spirit (Gabriel), indicated to be one of the three, is not mentioned as such in the Old Testament? Why is there no mention in the Old Testament of the advent of the Son of God or the transfiguration of God? If this were so important why do we not encounter it anywhere in the Old Testament, which is the revelation of God?
The problem of God the Father and God the Son was the consequence of an interpretation made by the Church. God in the contemporary Gospels is referred to as the “Father” of all men and his believers, his sons. The words “Father” and “Son” are but similes, as an impartial reader may readily see: So that you may be the sons of your Father who is in the heaven. Matthew 5, 45.
The exceedingly long introduction of Ms Spivak is simply embarassing: doesn't she realize that?
Spivak speaks a bit too much for a moderator. She should have spoken less about the "I" that she seems to obsess about.
She is talking about what the historians should do. They have to write about the Partition of India, Bengal Famine of 1943, Indo-Pak war and refugees. These are ignored by the Gandhi-Nehru historians of India.
I thought she was modest for a celebrated intellectual and her tone was so sweet when talking to them who are not as well known or recognised as her.
This is an excellent example of how not to not to moderate! Minimize the egotistical "I" and remember that moderator takes less time than the principal panelists or invitees.
R.Nanduri
well said. She kept providing us her resume and showing off her network and her pedigree. Intelluctual elitism. The name dropping was so cringy and embarrassing. Felt like I am listening to some brown madams and sahibs at a marie antionette kitty party. Felt like screaming STFU! and let the guests talk.
Indian didn't write history as much as what foreigner did ever since Chinese travelers did. To start with Jadunath Sorcar or Bhandarkar or Altekar or what ever other did isn't even a drop in the ocean of vastness Indian history. So what are you rewriting and what business you got to do?
They are Marxist-Jihadists who want to further manufacture and mainstream myths against hindus. Spivak is a far left jihadist. Same with Butalia. Her Partition book is Pakistani Propaganda
I listened to the discourse... initially I thought it was unbiased. In Q and A session, the moderator and the panelists turned the tables...
I wonder whether these middling intellectuals wish good for India
they are academic fat cats groomed by the west to keep indian narratives on leash.
There are more books on Indian history conceived and written in any ONE of French, German, Japanese, Russian, OR Korean than in all Indian vernaculars put together. And Indian historians don't seem to be ashamed of the fact in the slightest. Mental enslavement of English speaking Indians is abysmal!