User talk:The Truth Now

Bosnian Church
Please understand that I have no interest in defaming the Krstjani or anything - I am simply explaining the widely held scientific view. I can't find anyone except you who thinks that they were 1) Bogomils 2) Bosniaks only.

The Catholic Church has old documents talking of some heretics in Bosnia at the time, but it's not at all clear that this is Bogomilism or even the same sect - read the article contents.

There is also no point in appropriating those old Bosnian Slavs as Bosniaks, because Bosniaks (Bošnjaci) does not mean the same thing today as Bosnians (Bošnjani, I think) meant back then.

If you can provide references (e.g. quotes from a scholarly book) for your point of view, it would be most appreciated.

I changed the introduction of the article to say "sect" now, that seems to be a more accurate description. The contents of the article was already pretty clear as to how little of a "Church" it was. We can also rename the article if there is a better English name.

--Joy &#91;shallot&#93;   19:55, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

NO "joy" I don't want to understand anything you are saying since it all sounds so damn WRONG, the catholic curch is not a true source, since we all know that the catholic curch used to write falsehood about other religions in order to decline the other religion's identity. The bosnian church dissapeared as the turks came, IT DISAPPEARED SIMPLY because the bosniaks converted to Islam from their previous religion at that time BOGOMIL, but you do maybe believe that bosniaks where christians before converting !! BUT They never were and you know this, the bosniaks don't have anything christian in their history...


 * It's none other than the Catholic Church who implied that these monks were Bogomils. There is apparently no other source saying so!


 * You are using the term "Bosniaks" for all Bosnians in the Middle Ages. This is simply incorrect and confusing. The Bosniak people editing the Bosniaks article told you so, too.


 * Wikipedia requires editors to cite reliable sources. You have not even attempted to do so thus far. If you continue not to do so, your edits will continue to be reverted. --Joy &#91;shallot&#93;   21:13, 8 October 2005 (UTC)