Burning Scripture

[JustGeorge]

In most cases, I consider it immature and over the top to go around burning books. If its your own, and you're doing it for some personal reason, as @Rival suggests, in the privacy of your own space, go for it. But burning a book that some other person or group of people hold dear is threatening, hurtful, and wasteful.

 

[Soandso]

In most cases, I consider it immature and over the top to go around burning books. If its your own, and you're doing it for some personal reason, as @Rival suggests, in the privacy of your own space, go for it. But burning a book that some other person or group of people hold dear is threatening, hurtful, and wasteful.

I would definitely agree. Book burnings leave a bad taste in my mouth, as any other form kind of information control does

 

[JustGeorge]

I would definitely agree. Book burnings leave a bad taste in my mouth, as any other form kind of information control does

View attachment 81591

The parent in me can't help but wonder how well anyone is observing fire safety at these things as well...

 

[Rival]

The parent in me can't help but wonder how well anyone is observing fire safety at these things as well...

You think anti-intellectuals who burn books care about health and safety?

 

[Windwalker]

So many people take exception to burning religious texts, and I can understand this if it was the only remaining copy of the text and the knowledge would be forever lost if the book was burned.

But at the end of the day, these are books that were printed, often for money, by publishing companies and are simply copies. Unless you're an environmentalist protesting the waste of wood pulp and the cutting down of trees, is it really worth all the hullabaloo?

All of my scripture is on Kindle, so if you were to burn my iPad, I could just get on another device to read it.

Are you talking the simple disposal of sacred texts or objects because they are worn or broken? Or are you talking about making a public statement, either about your own past religious texts, i.e. the Ex-Christian atheist either burning his old bibles, or throwing them into the toilet, or stamping on them with their feet, and such, or those of others?

If you are talking about the former, simple disposal of old sacred objects, then that depends on the person and what role or depth of faith those objects were imbued with. If someone used say a mala for many years and it fell apart, generally they might choose to do some form of ritualized disposal of them, because they carry a sacred significance to the practionneer. Same thing if they revered a book of sacred scripture. To simple toss it aside with disregard would be somewhat tantamount to taking a "oh well" attitude towards their own faith.

In the latter case, say the Ex-Christian, Ex-fundamentalist atheist who had been spiritually and emotionally abused by religion, where God was made the villain at the door who threatened them and psychological tormented them, i.e, the God of Fear, then taking religious objects and burning them is also a ritual in itself. But the purpose of that ritual would be to attempt to reclaim power that was taken away by them through association with the objects of symbols of his previous tormentors. It too is a symbolic act.

This is the nature of iconoclasm. This also applies to urinating on or burning the texts of other religions than their own, who are seen as threats to themselves or others. But the motivation still comes from the same place, to make a public statement through a ritual action that carries meaning to both the doer and the witness of such acts, like flag burning, and so forth. Are those helpful ultimately? That's a different question.

 

[Soandso]

The parent in me can't help but wonder how well anyone is observing fire safety at these things as well...

I'm not so sure fire safety is at the height of concern for people at a mass book burning while aggressively Nazi saluting with rabid fervor, heh

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

In most cases, I consider it immature and over the top to go around burning books. If its your own, and you're doing it for some personal reason, as @Rival suggests, in the privacy of your own space, go for it. But burning a book that some other person or group of people hold dear is threatening, hurtful, and wasteful.

So ...

... it's immature, over the top, threatening, hurtful, and wasteful, but,​

if you do it in your own space for some personal reason, go for it.​

Really?

 

[Soandso]

So ...

... it's immature, over the top, threatening, hurtful, and wasteful, but,​

if you do it in your own space for some personal reason, go for it.​

Really?

I can certainly see situations where I'd find it acceptable. When I was young, I was gifted a Bible from the pastor of my church. If that pastor had molested me, burning the bible he gave me could be cathartic

 

[JustGeorge]

So ...

... it's immature, over the top, threatening, hurtful, and wasteful, but,​

if you do it in your own space for some personal reason, go for it.​

Really?

If I want to burn my personal copy of the Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster to help me reconcile the years of food poisoning I suffered in its midst in my backyard, free of any crowds or observers(yes, this is a hypothetical example), I don't see the problem. Its not a threat to anyone, and its not hurting anyone because I am doing it privately. Perhaps a bit wasteful still(I could have put it in a book box somewhere), but us humans are often more emotional creatures than logical ones.

(This is negated if I film the ordeal and put it on social media, of course.)

 

[Estro Felino]

I am a Christian, and I consider the Bible a holy text. God's word.

But a person sets their own Bible on fire, because they believe that book is a bunch of nonsense, it's absolutely normal they do that.

Why should I care?
Good. I would approve of their act and their point. You should always fight for your own right to criticize religions.

 

[syo]

I have destroyed sacred things. So what?

 

[Windwalker]

I have destroyed sacred things. So what?

Oh oh.... you're screwed now.

 

[SalixIncendium]

I have destroyed sacred things. So what?

So now you owe me another pair of paisley Speedos and argyle socks.

 

[Estro Felino]

I have destroyed sacred things. So what?

I hope not in Denmark...LoL...

 

[Polymath257]

I notice that we have shifted a bit from discussing the burning of sacred texts to the burning of books in general.

I think one of the points in both cases is not the actual burning of the book, but the implied threat to others. The books are being burned because people want to make a statement that they reject the ideas (real or imagined) that are in those books. In the case of sacred books, there is often an implied threat to those who follow those religious teachings. In the case of other book burning, the issue isn't so much the loss of those specific books as it is the fact that book turnings are often associated with censorship.

In both cases, the issue is the message of hate and the implied threats that are the *real* issue, not the burning itself. So the central issue seems to me to be how we deal with loud messages of hatred in our public discourse.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I think one of the points in both cases is not the actual burning of the book, but the implied threat to others.

And it's somewhat disheartening to watch some propose the most absurd scenarios to obscure this point.

 

[SalixIncendium]

I notice that we have shifted a bit from discussing the burning of sacred texts to the burning of books in general.

I think one of the points in both cases is not the actual burning of the book, but the implied threat to others. The books are being burned because people want to make a statement that they reject the ideas (real or imagined) that are in those books. In the case of sacred books, there is often an implied threat to those who follow those religious teachings. In the case of other book burning, the issue isn't so much the loss of those specific books as it is the fact that book turnings are often associated with censorship.

In both cases, the issue is the message of hate and the implied threats that are the *real* issue, not the burning itself. So the central issue seems to me to be how we deal with loud messages of hatred in our public discourse.

Aren't such book burnings protests designed to incite a reaction more than they are a "threat to others?"

If there is no reaction, what would come next? More book burnings? Or violence?

 

[Rival]

If you see burning a book as a threat I think that's more of a you problem.

It's different when it's people, but objects can be replaced. I would hardly call book-burning an act of terrorism, more just stupidity.

I wouldn't feel threatened by it.

I think some people are positing a slippery-slope where book burning leads to human burning.

Well, I've burned a Quran before and I haven't burned any Muslims

 

[SalixIncendium]

And it's somewhat disheartening to watch some propose the most absurd scenarios to obscure this point.

I understand the book burnings in Germany in 1933 led to act that were horrible beyond words, and I see your point if we use this as a precedent, but I'm not sure that book burnings in general lead to such heinousness. Or do they? I don't have a great deal of knowledge about the aftermath of book burnings. I suppose I could do some research, but if you have knowledge on this, perhaps sharing this knowledge would be more productive and educational than passive-aggressive comments in this thread.

 

[Viker]

My scripture is transcribed onto my heart. Even if you burn me into cinders, my scripture has before this already leaked into the world.... it's too late.

Anyway. I am not opposed to someone burning scripture that they have lawfully purchased for the intent of expression. I don't see the point in worrying. Books are all idols, words and letters are their occultic symbology.