Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Maybe you may not have noticed, but along with a rather massive history of invasion and forcible conversion, Islam has a history of smashing cultural treasures.
Supposedly, these statues are destroyed because they are symbols of idolatry. But there is another reason. Islam has for a long time attempted to erase the history of the areas they inhabit, including their own. Why? We Islam has a few skeletons in the closet.
You see, as Islam tries to act like Ancient Egypt didn't exist, that Buddhist cultures didn't predate it and have a way better culture, and smash competing cultural history (or build over it, in the case of the Temple in Israel) they forget where they can from.
Allah is from Allat, a Babylonian pagan moon god of violence and destruction. It is not, as Muslims claim "The same God as Judeo-Christians worship" and it is not the God that created the universe. It's an idol. The reason Muslims destroy idols, is because they are insecure about their own past, so they are actively trying to erase any other cultures that came before.
Maybe you may not have noticed, but along with a rather massive history of invasion and forcible conversion, Islam has a history of smashing cultural treasures.
Supposedly, these statues are destroyed because they are symbols of idolatry. But there is another reason. Islam has for a long time attempted to erase the history of the areas they inhabit, including their own. Why? We Islam has a few skeletons in the closet.
You see, as Islam tries to act like Ancient Egypt didn't exist, that Buddhist cultures didn't predate it and have a way better culture, and smash competing cultural history (or build over it, in the case of the Temple in Israel) they forget where they can from.
To this point I agree with you. Modern day fundamentalist Islam is especially bad about this. Historically, there was much less of this attitude. The fact that various holy sites, monuments, and the like have existed to this day, in order to be destroyed by ISIL is evidence that, historically, Islam has not always had as great of an iconoclastic strain as some sects do today.
But this is a human issue, not a specifically Muslim one. One only has to visit the cathedral in Ely and view the paint smeared walls, and headless saints resulting from the Puritans to see this. Desecrating or destroying the gods of your rivals is a pretty old tradition that even the Bible describes the ancient Israelites as practicing. It is a shame, and especially those of us outside of the sectarian conflicts can deplore the loss of history, culture, and art, but it is an entirely human response to conflict.
Allah is from Allat, a Babylonian pagan moon god of violence and destruction. It is not, as Muslims claim "The same God as Judeo-Christians worship" and it is not the God that created the universe. It's an idol. The reason Muslims destroy idols, is because they are insecure about their own past, so they are actively trying to erase any other cultures that came before.
As far as this claim, I would take it with several grains of salt, considering the source, an anti-Islamic Christian apologist... Take a look at the wiki page for Al-lat, it appears that none of this is a conspiracy or unknown. Al-lat was one of the deities revered in the Arabian peninsula before Islam began, and according to the Quran, was one of the deities whose temples and idols Mohammed destroyed (to come back to the original topic...) and replaced with the worship of Allah.
Now is it impossible that the worship of al-Lat morphed into Islam, and the Quran records a theological tale and not the actual history of the religion? Absolutely, just as it is not only possible, but likely that the Old Testament and Tanakh whitewashed the origins of the Hebrew god as being part of the Canaanite pantheon (El) witha wife (Asherah). And of course these are some of the "idols" whose temples and sacred groves were destroyed by the Israelite purges. But it is a bit silly to argue that Muslims about their belief. Even if there were good evidence that worship of Allah originated in this pre-Islamic deity, they could no more accept it than Christians can accept that their God was borrowed from the Canaanite pantheon. Theology is what it is now, and in a very Orwellian fashion, has always been what it is now, regardless of actual history...
To this point I agree with you. Modern day fundamentalist Islam is especially bad about this. Historically, there was much less of this attitude. The fact that various holy sites, monuments, and the like have existed to this day, in order to be destroyed by ISIL is evidence that, historically, Islam has not always had as great of an iconoclastic strain as some sects do today.
But this is a human issue, not a specifically Muslim one. One only has to visit the cathedral in Ely and view the paint smeared walls, and headless saints resulting from the Puritans to see this. Desecrating or destroying the gods of your rivals is a pretty old tradition that even the Bible describes the ancient Israelites as practicing. It is a shame, and especially those of us outside of the sectarian conflicts can deplore the loss of history, culture, and art, but it is an entirely human response to conflict.
-NoCapo
It is true destroying the culture and history of enemies and the conquered is a human issue.
The point is such barbaric practices has been got rid off by most as humanity advances into the modern era.
The exception is with SOME Muslims and Islam [in part] that in 2015, Muslims are still destroying history and it antiquities on such a large scale.
The root cause is purely due to the doctrines of Islam that condemned idolatry in the worse terms without any humane restraints in the Quran and exaggerated in the Hadiths.
Since the Quran is supposed to be immutable we can expect such destructions of history and culture will continue forever as long as the Quran is believed by SOME trigger happy Muslims.
The root cause is purely due to the doctrines of Islam that condemned idolatry in the worse terms without any humane restraints in the Quran and exaggerated in the Hadiths.
Since the Quran is supposed to be immutable we can expect such destructions of history and culture will continue forever as long as the Quran is believed by SOME trigger happy Muslims.
Here I disagree. History shows us that while the Christian nations of Europe were busy pulling civilization down around their ears, the Islamic world was preserving history and culture.Men like Ibn Rushd and Abu Bakr were preserving and providing their own contributions toward our modern views of philosophy and Western culture. There is nothing inherent in Islam that dictates hostility towards history, culture, and art, any more than there is in Christianity or Judaism.All these religions have had periods where the ascendent sects tried to force morality, destroyed the history and culture of others, and devalued the personhood of others. But at the same time, all these religious traditions have had their thinkers, their skeptics, their preservers of history and culture, their humanitarians, and their believers in the inherent dignity of all men.
Rather than castigate an entire religion and argue that, due to those who use it to justify atrocities, the entire thing must go, those of us who stand outside such religious frameworks ought to encourage the view of faith that produces men like Ibn Rushd, Martin Luther King Jr, Ghandi, Thomas Aquinas, and the like rather than the bloody, repressive, and inhumane examples that every faith community has had. But to do this, be must make a clear distinction between a faith, and the way in which it is put into practice. Otherwise, we are giving others a false choice, abandon your faith or side with the bloody minded, which in practice ends up pushing the entire religion to an extreme. Rather we want to encourage people who take their faith seriously to find ways of fitting that faith into an open, tolerant, secular framework. That is never going to be accomplished by trying to undermine a religion at its deepest level.
To put it in a different perspective, if I blame Christianity as a whole for the behavior of the Westboro Baptist Church, I end up alienating the ECLA congregation across my street, who are the kind of Christians I would prefer to be around. Rather than tar with a broad brush, being specific and clear in my criticism of behavior and doctrine is more likely to result in the kind of society I desire.
I think ISIS has a more simple and more materialistic reason.
Quote:
Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, "No prayer is harder for the hypocrites than the Fajr and the 'Isha' prayers and if they knew the reward for these prayers at their respective times, they would certainly present themselves (in the mosques) even if they had to c awl." The Prophet added, "Certainly I decided to order the Mu'adh-dhin (call-maker) to pronounce Iqama and order a man to lead the prayer and then take a fire flame to burn all those who had not left their houses so far for the prayer along with their houses." Isis profits from destruction of antiquities by selling relics to dealers
Islamic State isn’t just destroying ancient artifacts — it’s selling them
BAGHDAD — Islamic State militants have provoked a global outcry by attacking ancient monuments with jackhammers and bulldozers. But they also have been quietly selling off smaller antiquities from Iraq and Syria, earning millions of dollars in an increasingly organized pillaging of national treasures, according to officials and experts.
The Islamic State has defended its destruction of cultural artifacts by saying they are idolatrous and represent pre-Islamic cultures. Behind the scenes, though, the group’s looting has become so systematic that the Islamic State has incorporated the practice into the structure of its self-declared caliphate, granting *licenses for digging at historic sites through a department of “precious resources.” https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...4ae_story.html
Their widespread destruction of antiquities has created a huge world demand for Iraqi Artifacts along with driving up the value and selling prices.
This has nothing to do with Islam. It is a business strategy and is providings millions of dollars for ISIS.
Here I disagree. History shows us that while the Christian nations of Europe were busy pulling civilization down around their ears, the Islamic world was preserving history and culture.Men like Ibn Rushd and Abu Bakr were preserving and providing their own contributions toward our modern views of philosophy and Western culture. There is nothing inherent in Islam that dictates hostility towards history, culture, and art, any more than there is in Christianity or Judaism.All these religions have had periods where the ascendent sects tried to force morality, destroyed the history and culture of others, and devalued the personhood of others. But at the same time, all these religious traditions have had their thinkers, their skeptics, their preservers of history and culture, their humanitarians, and their believers in the inherent dignity of all men.
Rather than castigate an entire religion and argue that, due to those who use it to justify atrocities, the entire thing must go, those of us who stand outside such religious frameworks ought to encourage the view of faith that produces men like Ibn Rushd, Martin Luther King Jr, Ghandi, Thomas Aquinas, and the like rather than the bloody, repressive, and inhumane examples that every faith community has had. But to do this, be must make a clear distinction between a faith, and the way in which it is put into practice. Otherwise, we are giving others a false choice, abandon your faith or side with the bloody minded, which in practice ends up pushing the entire religion to an extreme. Rather we want to encourage people who take their faith seriously to find ways of fitting that faith into an open, tolerant, secular framework. That is never going to be accomplished by trying to undermine a religion at its deepest level.
To put it in a different perspective, if I blame Christianity as a whole for the behavior of the Westboro Baptist Church, I end up alienating the ECLA congregation across my street, who are the kind of Christians I would prefer to be around. Rather than tar with a broad brush, being specific and clear in my criticism of behavior and doctrine is more likely to result in the kind of society I desire.
-NoCapo
I disagree with your views.
Both Christianity and Islam has verses in their main texts that condemn idolatry.
It is a reality Christians and Muslims has relied on these verses in practicing iconoclasm since their religion started till the present.
In such a case, we have to blame the religion because of the present of verses that influence SOME believers to practice iconoclasm.
In contrast [as a control], the pure principles of Buddhism do not agree with idolatry but there are no verses in their main texts that condemn idolatry in as a serious sin. Rather Buddhism is flexible enough to allow the lesser Buddhists to pray to idols and statues with the hope when they progress further they will naturally give up idolatry.
In such a case we cannot blame Buddhism at all because there are no verses in the main sutra that insinuate Buddhists to practice iconoclasm.
It is for certain 100% of Christians and Muslims are against idolatry as defined by their doctrines. However 80% of their believers are not likely to practice iconoclasm, except for say 10%. However 10% is a very significant quantum of 400 million Christians and Muslims.
I did not intend to castigate the whole religion and all believers, but it is a fact Christianity and Islam in part are directly responsible for iconoclastic practices by SOME of their believers. In the modern era the threat of iconoclasm and cultural genocide is very serious from SOME believers of Islam but not that bad from Christians.
Last edited by Continuum; 10-10-2015 at 12:07 AM..
It's always been about Business (including controlling the PR) with the Abrahamic religious denominations of desperation.
But it's not that hard to keep a well-guarded record and build authentic reconstructions featuring the history of why the macho crazies fought and killed a defenseless and offenseless statue or building used as a historical site and kept in disrepair.
Blue. You can quote me by copypasting rather than being lazy and just hitting quote.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoCapo
To this point I agree with you. Modern day fundamentalist Islam is especially bad about this. Historically, there was much less of this attitude. The fact that various holy sites, monuments, and the like have existed to this day, in order to be destroyed by ISIL is evidence that, historically, Islam has not always had as great of an iconoclastic strain as some sects do today.
But this is a human issue, not a specifically Muslim one. One only has to visit the cathedral in Ely and view the paint smeared walls, and headless saints resulting from the Puritans to see this. Desecrating or destroying the gods of your rivals is a pretty old tradition that even the Bible describes the ancient Israelites as practicing. It is a shame, and especially those of us outside of the sectarian conflicts can deplore the loss of history, culture, and art, but it is an entirely human response to conflict.
I think you mean ISIS.
This is true that there are iconoclastic fundie groups around, however, Islam seems to be hellbent on this. By the way, I have a person beef with this. I was eating in a Chinese restaurant, when Taliban/Al Qaeda went and smashed up a big statue of Buddha. The waitress was crying. Look, it's one thing to be in your own country, and have your own followers worship idols, or seeing (apparent) heresy within your own faith, to try to get rid of it in your own country. It takes a different kind of jerk-off to go to another country and deface their faith. Or to deface centuries old buildings. This is theft and vandalism.
As far as this claim, I would take it with several grains of salt, considering the source, an anti-Islamic Christian apologist... Take a look at the wiki page for Al-lat, it appears that none of this is a conspiracy or unknown. Al-lat was one of the deities revered in the Arabian peninsula before Islam began, and according to the Quran, was one of the deities whose temples and idols Mohammed destroyed (to come back to the original topic...) and replaced with the worship of Allah.
Then that means it's consistent with the truth, doesn't it? Whether this guy is an anti-Muslim type or not, we have a (hmmmm) temple destroyed when establishing that only one of these deities was the real one.
Now is it impossible that the worship of al-Lat morphed into Islam, and the Quran records a theological tale and not the actual history of the religion? Absolutely, just as it is not only possible, but likely that the Old Testament and Tanakh whitewashed the origins of the Hebrew god as being part of the Canaanite pantheon (El) witha wife (Asherah). And of course these are some of the "idols" whose temples and sacred groves were destroyed by the Israelite purges. But it is a bit silly to argue that Muslims about their belief. Even if there were good evidence that worship of Allah originated in this pre-Islamic deity, they could no more accept it than Christians can accept that their God was borrowed from the Canaanite pantheon. Theology is what it is now, and in a very Orwellian fashion, has always been what it is now, regardless of actual history...
Uhhhhh, you did some weird Big Brother "We've always been at war with Eastasia" doublethink. By your very words, you admitted that yes, indeed they have been destroying their "idols". And yet, in the same paragraph you suddenly tell me I've got not proof. You kinda just gave me some.
Sorry, no. Israel's religion was an offshoot of Egyptian Aten monotheism, and there are definitely Canaanite roots. Just as there is a strong link with Mithraism to Christianity. And don't get me started on the Hamsa being used by not only Jews and Muslims, but even Buddhists (it's actually Mesopotamian marriage symbol). The difference however, is that after establishing their religion, they largely stopped. Muslims have yet to stop acting like thugs.
Another thing, these are not the "idols" we are talking about. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teraphim
The idols they meant were actively worshiped not sitting around hurting nobody. To the Muslim, even fine art is an affront to their culture, because it talks about civilizations that rival theirs.
In fact...
“The time before Islam is a time of blackness: that is part of Muslim theology. History has to serve theology.”
This is not even condemning idolatry, this is crazy xenophobic suppression of anything that predated Islam. These cultures created the Buddha, and great thinkers that brought people to higher consciousness. But nah, "time ofblackness".
-NoCapo
Last edited by bulmabriefs144; 10-15-2015 at 05:35 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
