How did Islam destroy the classical world?

[mralstoner]

This is all racist nonsense, of course. Everybody knows that Islam was welcomed with open arms everywhere it went, simply because everyone instantly recognised the truth of Allah. Ahem...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7AhLlYNGxFE

[WinterHold]

IDK. I find this hard to believe, especially when I realize that Attila the Hun and his raids, the Mongol invasions, the Crusades, WW1, WW2, the atomic attacks against Japan, the Vietnam war & finally the Iraq war, were all non-Muslim acts that killed Millions & Million of people.

So..what's your point again ?

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Yeah, gonna pick two nits, here:

1) Traditionally speaking, Islam arose in the Early Middle Ages, not the 'Classical World', as the video claims.

2) Of the forces mentioned by Atlas, only Attila was active during the Classical World (Late Rome).

Boru

[abaris]

Idiot as usual, using idiotic sources. This darling of yours, dr Bill Warner, is in no way qualified to be an expert in the field. He's only a rightwinger running his mouth on the select few outlets having him.

Islam didn't destroy the Classical World. The Classical World had been already destroyed when Islam arose. By the decline of the Roman empire, by the migration of the peoples, by raving christians destroying everything that wasn't christian. Especially in Egypt and the Middle East in general.

Islam on the other hand preserved many achievements of the Classical age. Without it we wouldn't have many of the writing of the classical authors and philosophers. And lets not forget basic hygiene. They kept the aqueducts running, whereas Rome declined spectecularly in the early Middle Ages.

In fact it was Byzanz and the Islamic realms being the last preservers of classical culture. But I'm sure, that goes way beyond your understanding and education.

[Aractus]

One thing they did do is destroy Egyptian's cultural heritage. There were many centuries where not one Egyptian knew their ancient history or could read Egyptian hieroglyphs!

[abaris]

One thing they did do is destroy Egyptian's cultural heritage. There were many centuries where not one Egyptian knew they ancient history or could read Egyptian hieroglyphs!

Simply wrong, unless you are speaking of the 16th century and later. Egypt already was Greek after Alexander taking over. Egypt was one of the first christian regions also. And in Egypt the first christian fundamentalists cropped up. Ultimately they were responsible for the loss of the Egyptian heritage, since they destroyed everything not being christian. The writings, the monuments, everything. Not to mention the destruction of the library of Alexandria in Caesar's time, which accounts for a huge cultural loss too.

[Aractus]

Simply wrong, unless you are speaking of the 16th century and later. Egypt already was Greek after Alexander taking over. Egypt was one of the first christian regions also. And in Egypt the first christian fundamentalists cropped up. Ultimately they were responsible for the loss of the Egyptian heritage, since they destroyed everything not being christian. The writings, the monuments, everything. Not to mention the destruction of the library of Alexandria in Caesar's time, which accounts for a huge cultural loss too.

That's interesting. This seems to be how everyone behaved back in the day before we as a species knew better. I guess what I see today is that some cultures and religions are more intolerant of other's heritage and for me Islam ranks very high on this, which makes me project that backwards. But you're right, in the middle ages and earlier there was probably no difference between Christians and Muslims in terms of their hatred for other people's culture.

[God of Mr. Hanky]

Idiot as usual, using idiotic sources. This darling of yours, dr Bill Warner, is in no way qualified to be an expert in the field. He's only a rightwinger running his mouth on the select few outlets having him.

Islam didn't destroy the Classical World. The Classical World had been already destroyed when Islam arose. By the decline of the Roman empire, by the migration of the peoples, by raving christians destroying everything that wasn't christian. Especially in Egypt and the Middle East in general.

Islam on the other hand preserved many achievements of the Classical age. Without it we wouldn't have many of the writing of the classical authors and philosophers. And lets not forget basic hygiene. They kept the aqueducts running, whereas Rome declined spectecularly in the early Middle Ages.

In fact it was Byzanz and the Islamic realms being the last preservers of classical culture. But I'm sure, that goes way beyond your understanding and education.

True, but what of all that Muslim military activity in Europe, and the undisputed enslavement of a million Europeans? There may not have been much of a civilization for Muslims to destroy when they invaded Spain, France, and much of Italy, and they did preserve the wisdom of Europe's past, but I can only think this would mean nothing to the average European who's land was being invaded, and whose children were being enslaved by those hordes of camel-kissers. What this may shed insight on is there may have been some legitimate motivation for joining the Crusades. Yes, I know, the Muslims were already, or mostly driven out before the first pope called up his own anti-Muslim war, but if I were Spanish, French, or Italian in the 10th Century, I'm pretty sure I would want to see the murderous brutes (culture-preserving or not, they did like to fight and kill) driven as far away from my land as possible after what they did in my home.

By the accounts which I have read, the pre-European Rennaisance culture of the Muslims was in no way an ignorant one among ruling class. So would this have made Europe a better place earlier on, and far better today? Perhaps, but then perhaps not. To hear the accounts on Muslim settlers in Spain, they were not only wise but benevolent to most Europeans, who drove them out for the stupidest of reasons, in the name of papal power. Then again, maybe one too many of them had a son who was forced to beg on the streets while holding out his remaining hand, just for steeling an apple which had already fallen off the truck!

On scientific progress, who knows what could have happened - perhaps we may have already been colonizing the stars today! On the other hand, I truly shudder to think of Europe, America, and Oceania still reeling under the influence of anti-math and anti-philosophy al-Ghazali, who may have come to power there as well.

In light of the fact that a smart culture could fall so hard to al-Ghazali's evil yammering, it doesn't really look so much like they could have really been all that smart. Maybe they too had an inbreeding problem, or they should have taken the advice of their slaves more seriously.

[CapnAwesome]

IDK. I find this hard to believe, especially when I realize that  Attila the Hun and his raids, the Mongol invasions, the Crusades, WW1, WW2, the atomic attacks against Japan, the Vietnam war & finally the Iraq war, were all non-Muslim acts that killed Millions & Million of people.

So..what's your point again ?

The Nazis and Ghenghis Khan were a little better then Islam because at least they didn't lie to their vicitim's face and say they were peaceful. Ghenghis Khan told people straight up he was there to kill them and take their stuff. Islam does the same but lies about being a religion of peace. Also Islam is heavily involved in lots of those things you mentioned.

[WinterHold]

IDK. I find this hard to believe, especially when I realize that  Attila the Hun and his raids, the Mongol invasions, the Crusades, WW1, WW2, the atomic attacks against Japan, the Vietnam war & finally the Iraq war, were all non-Muslim acts that killed Millions & Million of people.

So..what's your point again ?

The Nazis and Ghenghis Khan were a little better then Islam because at least they didn't lie to their vicitim's face and say they were peaceful. Ghenghis Khan told people straight up he was there to kill them and take their stuff. Islam does the same but lies about being a religion of peace. Also Islam is heavily involved in lots of those things you mentioned.

Lie? Our holy book says so explicitly and directly:

(Sura 8 Verse 61 )   And if they incline to peace, then incline to it [also] and rely upon Allah. Indeed, it is He who is the Hearing, the Knowing.

Another verse:

( Sura 2 Verse 256 )   There shall be no compulsion in [acceptance of] the religion. The right course has become clear from the wrong. So whoever disbelieves in Taghut and believes in Allah has grasped the most trustworthy handhold with no break in it. And Allah is Hearing and Knowing.

A third:

(Sura 2 Verse 190 )   Fight in the way of Allah those who fight you but do not transgress. Indeed. Allah does not like transgressors.

I don't know why you're delusional, but as you can see our own holy book is ordering us to fight only as self defense. 
But what I find hilarious -in a bad way-, is people who demand Muslims to be peaceful even when they are being invaded and butchered. 

So, now you know those EXPLICIT verses from the Quran. 
And it's so boring to debate people, who claim they are blind and cannot read.

The verses are obvious. This is what Islam said. Claiming to be blind, or crying because of the actions of "HUMANS" is truly non of my business..