ISIS on the offensive in Iraq

[Hax]

our answer would not be to go on an iconoclastic rampage and destroy thousands of years or heritage.

Hahaha, like, of course Christians wouldn't do that.

EDIT: Also the Saudis have been destroying early Islamic heritage sites since the 19th century, so it's not really all that new. Sadly.

[Fragony]

Hahaha, like, of course Christians wouldn't do that.

EDIT: Also the Saudis have been destroying early Islamic heritage sites since the 19th century, so it's not really all that new. Sadly.

Surily enough, the 'beeldenstorm' happened. There is a difference though, the catholic church was a political power. It's easy to shoot holes in that reasoning when only taking the fact that stuff was destroyed, but you wouldn't be considering why that happened.

[Husar]

http://www.jasoncolavito.com/blog/th...hing-the-idols

The Bible itself is full of condemnations of idols and idolatry. Exodus 20:3-4 commands the Israelites to forgo any idols, and the Golden Calf hardly comes in for praise. In Exodus 32:20, Moses smashes the Golden Calf, grinds it to dust, mixes it with water, and forces the Israelites to drink their false god. The Bible praises those who smash the idols, like Hezekiah in 2 Kings 18:3-4, where he “did right in the sight of the Lord” by smashing a serpent idol. God himself even destroys the idol of Dagon in 1 Samuel 5:1-5.

In the fourth part of the sixth-century Book of the Cave of Treasures, a Christian text, the author asserts that Satan lives in idols and pretends to be pagan gods. God, the author said, destroyed these idols:

The fact is, since the rise of monotheism nearly everyone smashes idols. (Polytheists were a mixed lot, just as likely to capture an idol and take it home as to destroy it.) The Byzantine iconoclasts and Protestant reformers both attacked Christian imagery, destroying statues and icons for violating God’s commandment. Charlemagne legislated the destruction of Germanic pagan sanctuaries. The Spanish obliterated the idols of the Mexicans and Peruvians during the Conquest of the New World. Francisco Burgoa tells in his Geographica descripcion de la America setentrional, Chapter 28, how a missionary destroyed a Mixtec idol made of nearly priceless translucent green stone by following the example of Moses, grinding it to dust, mixing it with water, pouring it onto the earth, and stomping on it to show that the Mixtec gods were powerless. Two centuries after that, the Revolutionary French smashed the stained glass images of Jesus and the saints to demonstrate the triumph of reason over religion. Two centuries later, the peoples of Eastern Europe tore down the statues of Lenin and Stalin and broke them into pieces to symbolize the destruction of Communist ideology. Early in this century, the Taliban infamously destroyed medieval statues of the Buddha in Afghanistan.

The last paragraph says that this reason is illogical since these old statues hardly qualify as idols anymore now that noone believes in their religious symbolism anymore, but one also has to take into account that one just has to be fundie enough to think that they may still be "possessed" or something and therefore deserving of destruction. The idea that human belief alone gives an idol power is an atheist idea that does not fly for religious people who believe in an invisible world beyond the one we live in.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Hahaha, like, of course Christians wouldn't do that.

EDIT: Also the Saudis have been destroying early Islamic heritage sites since the 19th century, so it's not really all that new. Sadly.

My understanding is that Christian iconoclasm tends to involve icons that are actually being used in worship. There may be exceptions but that would seem to be the pattern in the Beeldenstorm. There were similar instances in Scotland and England where Protestants whitewashed over artwork in Christian churches - I would support such a measure if the church was still to be used as a place of worship (provided the congregation wanted to, of course).

I'm maybe setting myself up to be proved wrong, but I don't think you will find Christians (maybe a handful of individual loons aside) arguing for the destruction of icons at historic sites, museums etc.

[Fragony]

My understanding is that Christian iconoclasm tends to involve icons that are actually being used in worship. There may be exceptions but that would seem to be the pattern in the Beeldenstorm. There were similar instances in Scotland and England where Protestants whitewashed over artwork in Christian churches - I would support such a measure if the church was still to be used as a place of worship (provided the congregation wanted to, of course).

I'm maybe setting myself up to be proved wrong, but I don't think you will find Christians (maybe a handful of individual loons aside) arguing for the destruction of icons at historic sites, museums etc.

Iconalism comes from the good old Roman days. The period Hax refers to is more than a thousand years later, and it was politics rather than faith.

edit: not a thousand years we will have to wait for a while

[Hax]

And it's called iconoclasm. It's like literally ​in the post you quoted.

EDIT: I was going to point out the historical destruction of Graeco-Roman sites, but whatever. It's happening in South Korea right now.

[Crandar]

Don't know about Beeldenstorm, but the Byzantine version of iconoclasm concerned only the depiction of religious figures, like the Holy Triad and the various saints or martyrs.
It originated from the provinces of Asia Minor, which were greatly influenced by their muslim neighbors, while the opposition was stronger in Greece and Italy.

However, the reason behind it was that the public and the monks had adopted a hysterical attitude towards images.
The monks have become financially powerful, creating and selling numerous images to the christian Romans and encouraged them to use them for every problem they faced.
It has been reported that the most popular medicine was a mix between water and wood or colour from a wooden image...

[Rhyfelwyr]

Hax,

I'm not trying to turn this into a Christianity v Islam point-scoring exercise. I don't think I should have to point out that when I give my opinion on what the Christian position is on an issue, I am not speaking for all of Christendom. I am also aware that the vast overwhelming majority of Muslims (today and throughout history) oppose the cultural destruction of Islamic State - otherwise, these artefacts would not be around for IS to destroy today, considering the area has been Muslim almost since Islam existed (afaik).

My point was simply, that as a Christian fundamentalist, I do not believe it is necessary or right to destroy artefacts from ancient cultures.

[Husar]

My point was simply, that as a Christian fundamentalist, I do not believe it is necessary or right to destroy artefacts from ancient cultures.

Would you display them in a cupboard in your living room or advocate sending school children to museums to look at them and learn about them?
Please note that this is just a question, I'm just curious.

[Hax]

Hax,

I'm not trying to turn this into a Christianity v Islam point-scoring exercise. I don't think I should have to point out that when I give my opinion on what the Christian position is on an issue, I am not speaking for all of Christendom. I am also aware that the vast overwhelming majority of Muslims (today and throughout history) oppose the cultural destruction of Islamic State - otherwise, these artefacts would not be around for IS to destroy today, considering the area has been Muslim almost since Islam existed (afaik).

My point was simply, that as a Christian fundamentalist, I do not believe it is necessary or right to destroy artefacts from ancient cultures.

But those are the best arguments!

Nah man, I hear you, and personally, I think you're actually probably right. I also really appreciate your contributions to any discussion.

It is just a showing the hypocrisy of IS that they are demolishing the larger statues and constructions at the site, which they cant move, while they have little problems selling everything they can move to black market.

Yes, you'd almost start to think that they're actually humans. :D

[Fragony]

And it's called iconoclasm. It's like literally ​in the post you quoted.

EDIT: I was going to point out the historical destruction of Graeco-Roman sites, but whatever. It's happening in South Korea right now.

I didn't do gymnasium so I can make language mistakes in Latin, it was never tought to me so bear with me. Why should it have been anyway because I don't understand some things anyway.

The day I do understand these IS manuacs you are free to shoot me because I wouldn't want to be alive anyway.

[Fragony]

And it's called iconoclasm. It's like literally ​in the post you quoted.

EDIT: I was going to point out the historical destruction of Graeco-Roman sites, but whatever. It's happening in South Korea right now.

So what, I got the word wrong. I am not being payed for this.

[Kagemusha]

Things are getting rather hard for Is forces at Tikrit. Apparently the Shia militant/Iraq army/ Iranian force is pushing towards city center from all directions.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-31849794

[Husar]

I am not being payed for this.

Correction: I am not getting paid for this.

http://public.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/payed.html

Are you always a bad friend unless someone pays for your friendship?

[Brenus]

So, IS used chemical weapons.
Hmm, I though only Assad had the technical capacity to use them. Well, it was what I was told...