• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

What is wrong with smashing the idols?

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
They destroyed many, is the point. If I burn down half the mosques in Jordan, that is still very intolerant, even though I left half alone.
Pretty much so.

Offensive as the very thought is, I can only assume that @FearGod wants to argue that if "true Muslims" were behind the destruction of statues they would have gone through with it to the end. Perhaps because good Muslims do not have a reason to hesitate or to be only halfway through?

As arguments go, it is beyond the pale. If it is an argument at all. It compares closely to "the West has not been a bad influence on Middle East, for after all the native people survive to this day."
 

Kirran

Premium Member
Pretty much so.

Offensive as the very thought is, I can only assume that @FearGod wants to argue that if "true Muslims" were behind the destruction of statues they would have gone through with it to the end. Perhaps because good Muslims do not have a reason to hesitate or to be only halfway through?

As arguments go, it is beyond the pale. If it is an argument at all. It compares closely to "the West has not been a bad influence on Middle East, for after all the native people survive to this day."

That's a good analogy!
 

FearGod

Freedom Of Mind
Pretty much so.

Offensive as the very thought is, I can only assume that @FearGod wants to argue that if "true Muslims" were behind the destruction of statues they would have gone through with it to the end. Perhaps because good Muslims do not have a reason to hesitate or to be only halfway through?

As arguments go, it is beyond the pale. If it is an argument at all. It compares closely to "the West has not been a bad influence on Middle East, for after all the native people survive to this day."

You are insisting in saying "true Muslims" while I am speaking about evidences that Islam
didn't target the places of worshiping, Islam is in the region for 1500 years, so if Islam
demands that the places of worshiping and idols should be destroyed then why they
didn't finish with them, was it a hard task to achieve, I'm not talking about false Muslims
and true Muslims, I'm talking about evidences.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
You are insisting in saying "true Muslims" while I am speaking about evidences that Islam
didn't target the places of worshiping, Islam is in the region for 1500 years, so if Islam
demands that the places of worshiping and idols should be destroyed then why they
didn't finish with them, was it a hard task to achieve, I'm not talking about false Muslims
and true Muslims, I'm talking about evidences.
You did not understand my point at all, did you?

Because if you did, you would realize that you sound desperate and utterly unconvincing. At this point I am not sure whether you even believe what you are saying.
 

Kirran

Premium Member
You are insisting in saying "true Muslims" while I am speaking about evidences that Islam
didn't target the places of worshiping, Islam is in the region for 1500 years, so if Islam
demands that the places of worshiping and idols should be destroyed then why they
didn't finish with them, was it a hard task to achieve, I'm not talking about false Muslims
and true Muslims, I'm talking about evidences.

It hasn't been said that it demands they be destroyed, but that its historical orthodoxies have encouraged such activities.
 

Kirran

Premium Member
Because you liked it since it doesn't defend Islam while evidences are stronger than both of you.

Do Western governments cause harm in the Middle East? Obviously not, because there are still people living there.
 

FearGod

Freedom Of Mind
They destroyed many, is the point. If I burn down half the mosques in Jordan, that is still very intolerant, even though I left half alone.


I'm not talking if it is good or bad, but if you have a task to destroy or mosques then you can,
that's my point.

Evidences point to that Islam didn't target the places of worshiping.
 

Kirran

Premium Member
I'm not talking if it is good or bad, but if you have a task to destroy or mosques then you can,
that's my point.

Evidences point to that Islam didn't target the places of worshiping.

No, but they point to a strong intolerance of minority faiths, in particular those judged to be participating in idolatry.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
Do Western governments cause harm in the Middle East? Obviously not, because there are still people living there.
Well, that sure is a relief. For a couple of years there I thought there was a quagmire in Syria and other places of the Middle East that "the West" had considerable responsibility for. I guess I am entitled to disregard the whole matter as harmless now.

Not.
 

FearGod

Freedom Of Mind
It hasn't been said that it demands they be destroyed, but that its historical orthodoxies have encouraged such activities.

Muslims can easily destroy all places of worshiping if Islam promoting for doing so,
evidences show that Islam doesn't demand destroying any place of worshiping,
for example the church of Nativity is very holy for the Christians and Muslims
did never disturb the Christians or their places of worshiping even though
that they can during the Islamic empire.
Church of the Nativity - Wikipedia
 

Kirran

Premium Member
Muslims can easily destroy all places of worshiping if Islam promoting for doing so,
evidences show that Islam doesn't demand destroying any place of worshiping,
for example the church of Nativity is very holy for the Christians and Muslims
did never disturb the Christians or their places of worshiping even though
that they can during the Islamic empire.
Church of the Nativity - Wikipedia

Right, yeah, but you're thinking in absolutes here, which is very rarely a good idea.
 

FearGod

Freedom Of Mind
Do Western governments cause harm in the Middle East? Obviously not, because there are still people living there.

If they stay for 1500 years in the region then yes the native people will disappear,
do you think the native Americans do exist.
 

FearGod

Freedom Of Mind
No, I don't think that the indigenous Americans exist; I know they do. So by your logic the American settlers didn't do any harm, because the indigenous nations are still here.

Compared to the Arabs invading India for hundreds of years and the same for Spain.
 
Top