• 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?

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Not only Spain, we have the Middle east as a whole, Egypt, Palestine, Syria, Turkey,
Iran...etc, we only hear the bad news coming from India, this is an indication that they lied.
You are the liar. The Arabs often initially promised tolerance and generosity to keep the subjects happy in the initial stages of their conquest (just like the British and all empires have done) but as soon as they have established a secure foothold, all that toleration vanished. Coptics of Egypt suffered same as the Zoroastrians of Iran and Hindus of India.

Just some excerpts
It was when he was succeeded as governor by his son, al-Asbagh, that the full scale of Coptic subjection seriously began to be felt. An insatiable thirst for money, abetted by a Coptic quisling named Benjamin who revealed all places where Copts had concealed their wealth, led to extraordinary taxation, confiscation of treasure and the extension of the jizyah to monks. A levy of 2,000 dinars was imposed onto the existing land tax (kharaj) for all bishops. This heavy imposition led to the first serious wave of conversions by Coptic notables anxious to escape such burdens. Yet finance was not al-Asbagh’s only motivation as it is recorded that he reviled Christ and spat at the ikon of Our Lady when it was carried in procession at Helwan.

When the Copts complained to the Umayyad Caliph ‘Abd al-Malik (685-705) he arrested their spokesmen, confiscated their wealth and sent an even more disastrous governor. On going to greet him, Pope Alexander II (705-730) was abruptly arrested and a ransom of 3,000 dinars set for his release. Churches and monasteries were pillaged, sacred vessels despoiled and monks carried away as slaves to either serve in the Caliph’s navy or to erect palaces for his governors. Those who did not convert fled their homes to avoid the crippling taxes but were brutally treated when apprehended, being flogged and branded, returned in chains, their limbs amputated and property subject to confiscation. The heirs of those who died were disinherited. Even short periods of respite under moderate caliphs were cut short by the rapacity of local governors anxious both to enrich themselves and gratify the caliph during their brief tenure of office. Outbreaks of plague and ruinous taxes to finance the war with Byzantium brought Egypt to the verge of ruin. The Copts had profound grievances but a number of Muslims were also among the rebels.

Insurrection was inevitable and between 725 and 832 Copts rose against their oppressors on several occasions but were speedily crushed. Only in al-Bashmur, in the marshlands of the northern Delta, were they able to resist pacification and engage in periodic attacks on the Muslim army. In 749 the last Umayyad Caliph Marwan II (744-750) brought an army to support the forces already engaged under his governor and carried away in irons Pope Kha’il I (744-767) to Rashid (Rosetta) as a hostage. Undaunted the Copts defeated his forces and destroyed Rashid. In the resulting chaos of the Abbasid overthrow of the Umayyads the caliph fled and the Pope and other imprisoned clergy gained their freedom. In 767 an expedition against the rebels was defeated and the government retreated. It was not until 830 that the Caliph al-Ma’mun (813-833) despatched an army under al-Afshin to subdued them and sought the assurance of Pope Yusab I (830-849) that he would act as a mediator for peace. His efforts were to no avail and a further army under the caliph himself finally prevailed amidst great slaughter, wholesale deportations and wasting of entire villages. Describing the Copts, the Muslim historian al-Makrizi wrote:

From that time they were in subjection throughout the Egyptian territory, and their power was definitely crushed. None of them had the power to revolt or even resist the government; the Muslims were in the majority in the villages.”

The Coptic Orthodox Church under Islam | The British Orthodox Church

Extensive History. Since the Copts still survive,let's hear it from them
History of the Coptic Orthodox People and the Church of Egypt
 
Last edited:

Kirran

Premium Member
You are the liar. The Arabs often initially promised tolerance and generosity to keep the subjects happy in the initial stages of their conquest (just like the British and all empires have done) but as soon as they have established a secure foothold, all that toleration vanished.

Woah! Don't go attacking the British!

It is very obvious the British never harmed anybody and were always tolerant. Look at all those non-British people living in India and West Africa! Checkmate.
 

FearGod

Freedom Of Mind
In Latin America many countries have up to 80% of the population of Amerindian descent.

Similar to the 80% Hindus in India.

Which means that oppression occurred to them in the US today and not
in the Latin America.
 

FearGod

Freedom Of Mind
You are the liar. The Arabs often initially promised tolerance and generosity to keep the subjects happy in the initial stages of their conquest (just like the British and all empires have done) but as soon as they have established a secure foothold, all that toleration vanished. Coptics of Egypt suffered same as the Zoroastrians of Iran and Hindus of India.

Just some excerpts


The Coptic Orthodox Church under Islam | The British Orthodox Church

Extensive History. Since the Copts still survive,let's hear it from them
History of the Coptic Orthodox People and the Church of Egypt

The conflict happening today in Egypt and in other places isn't the case
before a hundred years ago, Islam is 1500 years old.
 

FearGod

Freedom Of Mind
Woah! Don't go attacking the British!

It is very obvious the British never harmed anybody and were always tolerant. Look at all those non-British people living in India and West Africa! Checkmate.

Your turn, you bad :D
 

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
The conflict happening today in Egypt and in other places isn't the case
before a hundred years ago, Islam is 1500 years old.
My entire post was talking about oppression of the Coptics in history under Islamic Caliphates (800 CE - 1600 CE) .
You do not read. is that it?
 

Kirran

Premium Member
Which means that oppression occurred to them in the US today and not
in the Latin America.

But that's wrong, there was massive oppression of Amerindians in Latin America. The casta system, in particular. My family's from Latin America.

Your turn, you bad :D

Good thing I'm not a blind hypocrite, huh? I am more than willing to say that the British Empire committed many atrocities.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
But that's wrong, there was massive oppression of Amerindians in Latin America. The casta system, in particular. My family's from Latin America.
Very true. Brazil, at least, historically has no moral high ground to speak of regarding treatment of Amerindians.
 

FearGod

Freedom Of Mind
But that's wrong, there was massive oppression of Amerindians in Latin America. The casta system, in particular. My family's from Latin America.

And how you explain that US has the fewest if not being Genocide.

Good thing I'm not a blind hypocrite, huh? I am more than willing to say that the British Empire committed many atrocities.

And which religion to blame for their ugly deeds?
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
And how you explain that US has the fewest if not being Genocide.

Wait a minute. Are you operating under the belief that there is less of a native american population in the USA than Brazil does? That they massacred their own natives more throughly than we did?

I am not sure what metrics would be proper to compare the two situations, but I have a hard time believing that.



And which religion to blame for their ugly deeds?

Why would it have to be a religion? The most blame-worthy belief that guides those deeds would probably be White Man's Burden, if we have to choose one. But as in so much else, the reality is very much nuanced.
 

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
The US government also signed multiple documents assuring the "Indians" that they will be respected and their rights will be protected. And then they violated them willy-nilly whenever it suited them. A document (even if not a forgery) is not worth the paper it is written on when the rulers feel free to violate it whenever they feel like it.

You asked if the Muslim rulers of the conquered territories oppressed religious minorities, destroyed and desecrated their places of worship and used all sorts of heavy handed tactics to force them to convert. I have provided plenty of such evidence now that this happened by official sanction of the Caliphs and Governors throughout the centuries quite regularly on

1) Hindus and Sikhs of India
2) Zoroastrians of Persia
3) Coptics of Egypt

I do not care if this somehow violates some principles laid down by Mohammed, as I do not care whether the Crusades or the Spanish Conquistadors, devout and zealous Christians all, did atrocities that somehow violates the words of Jesus. Muslim conquerors, fired with religious zeal, severely oppressed followers of other religions in the territories they conquered until they were either nearly decimated (Zoroastrians, Coptics) or were forced to convert in large numbers to escape the oppression. This is a fact of history and is continuing right to the present. Your pious fiction that the people of these regions lived blissfully under a tolerant Muslim order and converted with gay abandon to Islamic after realizing its truth is a lie. Your fiction that those who wanted to keep their religions were able to do this with freedom and honor is an even greater lie. What you make of these facts of history is upto you.
 

Kirran

Premium Member
Its not complex. Imposition of civilizational and racial superiority theory spearheaded by missionary Christians in collusion with the State.
Canadian Indian residential school system - Wikipedia

I am referring to the set of circumstances leading humans to behave in this manner. I am well aware of the great many atrocities committed by the British state and its organs, and how their impacts continue to cause great suffering to this day as well.
 

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
I am referring to the set of circumstances leading humans to behave in this manner. I am well aware of the great many atrocities committed by the British state and its organs, and how their impacts continue to cause great suffering to this day as well.
True. Neither am I saying that somehow the British or the Europeans were especially worse and other in their place would do better. But the macroscopic factors and the psychological factors that lead from simple lack of empathy all the way upto the gas chamber are not too complex to untangle and hence attempt to understand and redress. I laud the Canadian government for doing this through its current efforts. I continue to hope (in vain) that India-Bagladesh-Pakistan will set up one such truth and reconciliation effort to address the wounds of those killed and displaced during the atrocities of the Partition. The way forward is not denial, and that is the typical attitude of most individuals, nations and communities in the world. :(

For a man dwelling on the objects of the senses,
An attachment to them is born;
From attachment, desire is born;
From desire anger is born (from the frustration of the desires);
From anger rises delusion;
From delusion loss of memory;
From loss of memory, destruction of discrimination;
From destruction of discrimination one is lost.
- Gita ( 2:62)

See? Simple! :)
 

FearGod

Freedom Of Mind
The US government also signed multiple documents assuring the "Indians" that they will be respected and their rights will be protected. And then they violated them willy-nilly whenever it suited them. A document (even if not a forgery) is not worth the paper it is written on when the rulers feel free to violate it whenever they feel like it.

You asked if the Muslim rulers of the conquered territories oppressed religious minorities, destroyed and desecrated their places of worship and used all sorts of heavy handed tactics to force them to convert. I have provided plenty of such evidence now that this happened by official sanction of the Caliphs and Governors throughout the centuries quite regularly on

1) Hindus and Sikhs of India
2) Zoroastrians of Persia
3) Coptics of Egypt

I do not care if this somehow violates some principles laid down by Mohammed, as I do not care whether the Crusades or the Spanish Conquistadors, devout and zealous Christians all, did atrocities that somehow violates the words of Jesus. Muslim conquerors, fired with religious zeal, severely oppressed followers of other religions in the territories they conquered until they were either nearly decimated (Zoroastrians, Coptics) or were forced to convert in large numbers to escape the oppression. This is a fact of history and is continuing right to the present. Your pious fiction that the people of these regions lived blissfully under a tolerant Muslim order and converted with gay abandon to Islamic after realizing its truth is a lie. Your fiction that those who wanted to keep their religions were able to do this with freedom and honor is an even greater lie. What you make of these facts of history is upto you.

Are you more knowledgeable than Gandhi whom believed that Islam can never be
succeeded if by the sword.

a3dqnnqcyaeiama.jpg
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
Gandhi broke bread with Badshah Khan, blessed be his memory.

He may easily have extrapolated a bit too much from Khan into his conceptions of Islaam and of Muhammad.
 

Kirran

Premium Member
Are you more knowledgeable than Gandhi whom believed that Islam can never be
succeeded if by the sword.

a3dqnnqcyaeiama.jpg

'Those days' Gandhiji talks about seem to be those in which Muhammad was alive. Not the 1400 years since.
 
Top