Archive for the ‘Duke University’ Category

Romila Thapar, Duke University, Methodist Church or Romila Thapar, Secularism, Secular history: The Role of Historian and Social Change!

July 16, 2009
Romila Thapar, Duke University, Methodist Church or Romila Thapar, Secularism, Secular history: The Role of Historian and Social Change!
Published on October 23rd, 2007 In Uncategorized, Politics |  Views 410
Romila Thapar, Duke University, Methodist Church orRomila Thapar, Secularism, Secular history: The Role of Historian and Social Change! I am happy to know that, “The Historian in the World: A Conversation with John Hope Franklin and Romila Thapar” will take place at 3 p.m. in the Divinity School’s Goodson Chapel on Duke’s West Campus. It is free and open to the public. Srinivas Aravamudan, director of the John Hope Franklin Humanities Institute, will moderate the discussion”. http://www.dukenews .duke.edu/ 2007/10/conversa tion.htmlI am more anxious what the historians discuss there in the Divinity School’s Goodson Chapel on Duke’s West Campus on October 22, 2007!

“the DivinitySchool’s Goodson Chapel on Duke’s West Campus” made me curious to look into the details. The University claims that, “The Duke University is related the Methodist Church”.

For details see: “Duke University”s Relation to the Methodist Church”:  http://library.duke.edu/uarchives/history/duke-umchh.html

  •      Well, it is all right, bt how the reportedly Communist or Marxist, progressive, secuar Romila Thapar would be speaking there in the, “the Divinity School’s Goodson Chapel on Duke’s West Campus”?
  •      How “Two distinguished scholars will share their views of the role of the historian and social change”?
  •      Would they discuss within the Charter, bylaws, aims, and mission statement” or they go beyond?

The “Charter, bylaws, aims, and mission statement” contains a provision, as follows:

The aims of Duke University are to assert a faith in the eternal union of knowledge and religion set forth in the teachings and character of Jesus Christ, the Son of God; to advance learning in all lines of truth; to defend scholarship against all false notions and ideals; to develop a Christian love of freedom and truth; to promote a sincere spirit of tolerance; to discourage all partisan and sectarian strife; and to render the largest permanent service to the individual, the state, the nation, and the church. Unto these ends shall the affairs of this University always be administered”.http://library.duke.edu/uarchives/history/charterlink.html

How Ropmila Thapar hailing from “Secular India” is going to be accommodative, conducive and recptive to such Christians principles in the name of Jesus Christ? This makes me remember as to how the Christian Crusades, marriages and other functions are held at the “Periyar Tidal” (auditourium with big hall) at Chennai, India. The podium / stage there bear the Cross-believing Christians and the atheists, who speak against the God, scriptures and believers! Like that, would the “the Divinity School’s Goodson Chapel on Duke’s West Campus” bear the secular, progressive and sectarian Romila Thapar there in the name of Jesus Christ, the Son of God?

Just remember, what she wrote about Jesus Christ, when she was accusing Rama, the Hindu God as a myth:

This does not happen with the biographies of those who were known to be historical figures and who founded belief systems: the Buddha, Jesus Christ, Mohammad. Their biographies adhere largely to a single story-line and this helps to endorse the ‘official’ narrative of their life. Their existence is recorded in other sources as well that are not just narratives of their lives but have diverse associations…..”.

At that time, I had responded as follows:

Their biographies adhere largely to a single story-line and this helps to endorse the ‘official’ narrative of their life.Why they should largely adhere to a single line? How this helps “official” narrative? How “official” it could be of “their life”? Why can’t you write as a historian instead of believer here? That the “biographers” were compelled or forced to accept or adhere to a single line proves that many lines were left out. And still small number of biographers who did not adhere to a single line is also exposed. Then, what you are talking about? Majority view and minority view? Condemn the “lesser” and accept or approve the Larger”! Adhere to one-line and forget many lines! What sort of historian you are? That man Karu has become a senile man and talks differently. Do you also do the same think as a senile lady?How you endorse such one-liners? Is there any historical methodology to that effect? Which University teaches such approving of one-line biography by eminent historians like you?Do not fool Indians. Ernest Renan, J. M. Robertson and so many reputed authorities are there on the subject matter of Jesus Christ and Christianity. Any way, it is your cowardice gets exposed, as you never whispered anything, when there was much Christian opposition to screening of “Da Vinci Code”. However, when the so-called “Hindutva judgment” came out, you vociferously jumped and asserted that “We would go to Court”. Everything appeared in “the Hindu” itself with your face. Madam, what happened? But now you come siding with atheists, anti-Hindus, anti-nationals as a historian suppressing the recent past and forgetting your own past!

Their existence is recorded in other sources as well that are not just narratives of their lives but have diverse associations. So also Rama. Why then your argument goes differently.In fact, their associations differ. But, Ramayana core story, as H. D. Sankalia in his “Ramayana Myth or Reality”  that it had been there nearly for 3000 years.How “That their existences is recorded in other sources” help you to decide?

It may be noted that historians and scholars have pointed out that Christ story was copied from
Krishna! Rama was repeatedly mentioned in different literature not because of variance, but influence and impact created on the people well before 2500-3000 YBP. Was the Sangam poet a fool to record in his poem about his discussion with his army about the mode of crossing over the ocean to Lanka”. How that poet was imaging that that Lanka should have been the Lanka of Ramayana in his times i.e, 2500 – 3000 YBP?”

Definitely, the Americans and American Christian believers might be knowing about the background and the implications revoving around the discussion. So, we Indians are eagerly waiting to see as to how tshe is going to discuss within the conditions of the University and Christian belief system or she would have courage to vent our her genuine feeling as sjhe has been doing here in India against Hindus. As she has recently started supporting the atheist political party DK-DMK-PMK combine of the ruling combine (supported by the Communist-Marxist political parties from outside), we look forward the discussion to fulfil the following conditions:

The aims of Duke University are to assert a faith in the eternal union of knowledge and religion set forth in the teachings and character of Jesus Christ, the Son of God; V     to advance learning in all lines of truth; to defend scholarship against all false notions and ideals; to develop a Christian love of freedom and truth; V     to promote a sincere spirit of tolerance; to discourage all partisan and sectarian strife; and V     to render the largest permanent service to the individual, the state, the nation, and the church.

Unto these ends shall the affairs of this University always be administered

The activities of Duke foundation have been obviously Christian:

For details: click and see http://www.dukeendowment.org/ruralchurch

VEDAPRAKASH

22-10-2007.

Advertisements