Talk:Religion in Libya/Archive 1

No Libyan is Christian
This descussion took place between me and Troy 07 about the use of the statement 'Christians in Libya are almost exculsively foreigners' I took issue that the use of almost before exclusively suggests that there are very few Christian Libyans, which is not the case. Here is the descussion, please have your say:

Thanks for adding info about Copts in Libya. The lines you added say that the Coptic community in Libya is composed almost exclusively of foreigners. Are you sure that almost exclusively is the right choice of words here as I am not aware that there are non-Muslim Libyan nationals, which would mislead the reader to thinking that there is indeed a small (very small) indigenous minority of Libyan Copts - which is not the case. P.S. Consider adding the info to Christianity in Libya article as well. cheers. ;) --  hɑkeem  ¡ʇ u ɐ ɹ  ɯǝǝʞɐɥ  06:20, 2 May 2008 (UTC)


 * You mean I wrote that specifically in the article "Religion in Libya"? If so, than I only added to what had already been written.


 * This is the original sentence (as I remember it):


 * "The Anglican bishop of Libya has his seat in Cairo, as most Christians in Libya come from Egypt"


 * This is half-true, as Copts, who slightly outnumber the other denominations, are originally from Egypt — in fact, they are probably the closest to being pure descendants of the ancient Egyptians. However, you do have a point as to how this implies that the, quote, majority of Christians are almost exclusively foreigners.


 * I only added:


 * "The Anglican bishop of Libya has his seat in Cairo, as most Christians in Libya come from Egypt... including the Copts"


 * Either way, both are inaccurate, as it should probably only say that most Christians, the Coptic Orthodox, as well a few other denominations, have historical roots in Egypt.


 * I can tell you one thing for sure, though, I don't even remember writing the exact words: "the Coptic community in Libya is composed almost exclusively of foreigners". I know for a fact that this is not logical, as it is not feasible in most circumstances to have the majority being immigrants for centuries! The Italians have a history as well, as Libya was once a colony, so the same goes for all of the other Christians who have at least a notable prescence (ie: Catholics, Anglicans, Greeks, Russians).


 * Also, it was contradictary when it said that the Catholics have the largest minority, and then said the same for the Copts. According to the source I added, along with the Catholic source, the Copts should have about 10,000-20,000 more than the Catholics, so as this difference is not noticable, I see why the articles said what they used to.


 * Would you mind telling me where you think it needs help? Until then, I will try to add more information to the articles - may be it should clear up this mess with all this articles (the text is almost "exclusively" copy-and-pasted XD)Thanks a bunch. :)


 * ~ Troy 23:52, 2 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Ok, sorry for having bothered you. I have rechecked the article and it appears that another wikipedian wrote that-I removed the word almost anway. Sorry again.
 * By the way, even though I do believe that 60000 does faithfully represent the number of Copts in Libya (most of which are from upper Egypt (which is the lower part;))-I know this as an unresearched first-hand knowledge), I would like to draw your attention to the fact that LookLex is not quite an accurate source. For example their entry about Libya is full of mistakes about obvious things. So if you can support your additions with more reliable source the article Christianity in Libya would be in a much better shape. I am willing to cooperate with you to dig up more info on Libya-related Coptic and Christian matters, as long as we work within the bounds of objectivity and neutrallity. Thanks a bundle.--  hɑkeem  ¡ʇ u ɐ ɹ  ɯǝǝʞɐɥ  11:09, 3 May 2008 (UTC)


 * No problem. I agree entirely about what you say about Looklex Encyclopedia. The only problem is, it's probably the only source that I can find for the Copts in Libya — notice that I only used the 1% figure as an approxamite estimate. However, if I do find a better source (AKA, any other source at all XD ), then I'll replace Looklex with that other source. In any case, I would like to thank-you for helping me out and I look forward to working with you. Later,


 * ~ Troy (talk) 22:32, 3 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Also, I should notify you that whoever wrote "exclusively" to begin with didn't have any of the right sources. Thus, I have changed "exclusively" —> "largely" — not the best word, but I think that you'll find that it's far more suitable ;). Cheers, ~ Troy (talk) 22:48, 3 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the reply. The problem was with using the word almost with exclusively which is suggestive that there are some Native Libyan Christians, which is not the case. I know that claiming that 'No Libyan is Christian' is a paradigm sentence for a Negative proof, but given the fact that historically the last communities of christians in Libya go back to 9th century B.C. (I don't have a reference for that, but it is a word from a scholar who works on the history of christianity in North Africa) AND given the fact that no body, no source has ever mentioned the fact that contemporary Christian Libyan cases have been recorded AND given the fact that the law in Libya prohibits proselytization (so there is no way a Libyan can have a change of heart on matters of faith-at least not outloud), I think the burden of proof lies on the claim that Libyan Christians do exist. As of the present status quo, the best word to describe the situation is 'exclusively foreigners'. I am going to revert it to exclusively. If you think there are better reasons for keeping 'largely' please post me up. Cheers.--  hɑkeem  ¡ʇ u ɐ ɹ  ɯǝǝʞɐɥ  08:54, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
 * P.S. I am taking the descussion to pages Christianity in Libya and Religion in Libya so other people can chip in.

The one of the only Jewish woman living in Libya is just ridiculous. This is an encyclopedia, not the oracle of the Sybilla. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.190.130.3 (talk) 06:55, 4 March 2011 (UTC)