Posted on 01/10/2013 9:38:12 AM PST by marshmallow
DEMRE, Turkey In the fourth century A.D., a bishop named Nicholas transformed the city of Myra, on the Mediterranean coast of what is now Turkey, into a Christian capital.
One wall of the chapel has a cross-shaped window that, when sunlit, beams its shape onto an altar table.
A vibrant fresco that is unusual for Turkey was perfectly preserved.
Nicholas was later canonized, becoming the St. Nicholas of Christmas fame. Myra had a much unhappier fate.
After some 800 years as an important pilgrimage site in the Byzantine Empire it vanished buried under 18 feet of mud from the rampaging Myros River. All that remained was the Church of St. Nicholas, parts of a Roman amphitheater and tombs cut into the rocky hills.
But now, 700 years later, Myra is reappearing.
Archaeologists first detected the ancient city in 2009 using ground-penetrating radar that revealed anomalies whose shape and size suggested walls and buildings. Over the next two years they excavated a small, stunning 13th-century chapel sealed in an uncanny state of preservation. Carved out of one wall is a cross that, when sunlit, beams its shape onto the altar. Inside is a vibrant fresco that is highly unusual for Turkey.
The chapels structural integrity suggests that Myra may be largely intact underground. This means we can find the original city, like Pompeii, said Nevzat Cevik, an archaeologist at Akdeniz University who is director of the excavations at Myra, beneath the modern town of Demre.
Mark Jackson, a Byzantine archaeologist at Newcastle University in England, who was not involved in the research, called the site fantastic, and added,This level of preservation under such deep layers of mud suggests an extremely well-preserved archive of information.
Occupied since at least the fourth century B.C., Myra was one of the most powerful.....
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
And under the current Turkish government, it will be promptly destroyed.
Thank you for posting this; it’s just amazing.
Christian churches, Hindu temples, Bamayan Buddhas, Egyptian antiquities.......
The Muslim death cult destroys them all. What a pack of moral savages!
St. Nicholas, Bishop of Myra. And some say he never existed. Count on the Turks to eliminate this evidence that he lived.
So the only new churches allowed in Turkey are those you can dig up?
The Saudis Wahhabi faith decrees that revering structures with ties to the Prophet can lead to idolatrous practices. So, only days after soldiers of King Abdul-Aziz al-Saud conquered Mecca in 1924, the destruction of buildings associated with the Prophet began, including his presumed birthplace and the house of his wife Khadijah.
The problem is that the Saudis are and were illiterate bedouins from the Nejd (the interior desert) and the Mecca-Medina area is in the Hejaz -- Hejazis had celebrations for the Moslem "Saints" honouring Muhammad, his family and companions, reverence of deceased saints, visitation of shrines, tombs and holy sites
The Saudis destroye the tombs of Hussein, Ali etc. (the first two imams of the Shia) -- and cemented Sunni-Shia hatred
They also demolished the tombs of other Moslem holy men, cementing the hatred felt by Ismailies, Bohris and even some sufis against the Wahabbis
Would you also compare the Saudi Wahhabis to the Catholics on steriods or compare another branch of Islam to the Catholic faith on steriods?
No and yes -- just as Wahabbis are utterly strict to sola scriptura and reject all idea of holy men, pilgrimages etc. can be compared (only the highest sense) to Presbyterians in steriods, the Syedni Bohris or Ismailies with the belief in a Leadership who would hold a particular interpretation can be compared (only in the highest sense) to orthodoxy
To clarify to all those reading this, I put the "on steroids" bit to indicate that these two superficially have similar activities and beliefs, but are not the same
Presbyterians have a strict holding to the Bible alone, don't hold with veneration of holy peoples. They were also instrumental in the destruction or defacement (mostly the latter) of Churches with their belief that this was wrong
not commenting on what they did, but if you read further into my post, I went on to explain why the Wahabbis went on to destroy the mosques etc. in Mecca
to a Christian person in the US it would not make sense why Moslems destroyed Moslem mosques and tombs, so the best way is to make a comparison to terms they would understand -- just as Presbyterians saw the images of Churches as anathema and destroyed them or defaced them, so too the Wahabbis destroyed the mosques in MEcca
only the Wahabbis went much further, hence the 'on steroids' bit and note that I said Would you also compare the Saudi Wahhabis to the Catholics on steriods or compare another branch of Islam to the Catholic faith on steriods?
isn't that the best way to describe the various sects in islam -- most of which are mutually antagonistic, by giving people parallel examples to what they already know?
Otherwise how to explain Sunnis (Hanafis, Salafis/Wahabbis, Sufis), Ibadis, 12er Shias, 5er Shias, Ismailies, Syedni Bohris, Bohris or even further: Druze, Alawis, Alevis, Bahais, Ahmadiyyas etc?
Can you give a better way to explain the Destruction of Islamic heritage sites without giving parallel examples for folks who don't know the intricacies to understand?
If you want, ok, I can explain this without parallels by talking of how the followers of al-Wahhab especially the Sauds rejected the Ash'ari schol focussing on the Salaf only which justified their destruction of the tombs as being haram.
More likely then a comparison would then be given that it is Shia Islam that could be said to be like the Catholic faith on steriods then?
The Muʿtazilah basically holds that the scriptures (the surahs) were created at a finite point and were not co-eternal with the eternal. This is a logical point of view separating the creator from the created. To do the opposite seems to almost set the Logos as being fixed in stone in the surahs and that everything in it is utterly, literally true
This held to free-will as supposed the Sahabah had held to, not the Qadar that permeates utterly current islamic thought that every action and every deed, thought etc. is proceeded entirely from allah.
Of course, Syedna Bohris ARE Shias, but normally when one refers to Shias one just means the Irani (12er) Shias.
Of course, Syedna Bohris ARE Shias, but normally when one refers to Shias one just means the Irani (12er) Shias.
The twelvers don't have a detailed line of succession.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.