Here’s what our own gov’t says about religion in Korea:

Relations among religious groups generally are amicable and free of incident, and religious tolerance is widespread. In 2000 there were press reports of so-called “Protestant fanatics” damaging Buddhist temples and artifacts through vandalism and arson. In mid-2000, a Christian was arrested for vandalism of Dong Kuk University, a Buddhist institution, and of some small temples. Such reports generated calls for religious tolerance and mutual respect in the media and among the general public. However, such incidents are rare, and religious leaders regularly meet both privately and under government auspices to promote mutual understanding and tolerance. These meetings are given wide and favorable coverage by the media.

http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2003/23834.htm

So, I’ll defer to that summary of the situation.

Well, this is kind of what I was getting at: it seems people are filling in the details with assumptions. If a perp is caught and claims to be “Christian” and his or her background supports that, I’d say that definitely is a part of the problem you’re talking about here.

But on the other hand, when the perp is not caught, I think the assumption is still often (?) being made that the perp is also a professed fundamentalist.

Given the “enthusiasm” of Korean Christians I’ve met/seen to badger everybody around them to convert,

There’s a huuuuuuuge difference in the motivation between trying to — from the point of view of the proselytizer — bringing the “Good News” and destroying property. I’m not saying some horribly misguided — or perhaps mentally ill — “believers” don’t make that jump (some certainly do), but the New Testament is pointing to numerous reasons to do the former and numerous reasons NOT to do the latter.

even so far as going to Iraq in the middle of a war,

How very interesting that you would consider someone risking their own life for their beliefs to be along the same lines as destroying other people’s property for the same beliefs.

Proselytizing may seem a form of intolerance, but in terms of what is in the person’s heart, I don’t think it is. A fundamentalist believes that he/she is following the one true path to Heaven and feels a burden — a painful one, in fact — to “rescue” as many people as possible.

Sure, that interpretation of Christ’s teachings leaves little room for alternate paths to Heaven, but that’s not the point regarding the person’s motivation. Right or wrong, he or she believes that this is the one way and feels a need to “save” as many people as possible. It is not intolerance and hatred to try to save people, but an act of love and sacrifice.

That is the motivation of the zealous converter.

By way of analogy, imagine someone thinking you are going to be hit by a train if you keep walking along a set of tracks. You believe the trains don’t run along here anymore (or never did), but this person has seen trains along these tracks, or heard there were trains, and is urgently trying to get you off of them before you start walking through what you think is an abandoned tunnel. Is the person “intolerant” for yelling warnings at you? Should the person just leave you to find your own way?

Kim Sun-il went to Iraq because he believed he had an important message and needed to save people in that country. Ditto for those who venture into China or even North Korea to rescue people’s physical bodies, and hopefully their souls, too. This is a far, far, far cry from destroying others’ property (and the New Testament deals with that in verses about Caesar and about dealing with the Jews and the Gentiles).

Indeed, however, there are people who cross a line and do things that, as I mentioned in a previous post, Christ would kick their asses for (Christ was an ass-kicker when it came to people subverting or distorting His own religion).

These include the people who bomb abortion clinics, hold up signs that say “God Hates Fags,” or burn down temples. They are out there, but they are not true Christians (in the sense of being “Christ-like”) and they are a very different animal from the people you described above.

and the lack of motivation for anyone else to burn down dozens of Buddhist buildings over the last 15 years or so,

Didn’t we have two competing Buddhist orders violently engaged in a battle for control of Chogyesa a few years back (if I’m mischaracterizing that, please correct me)? Do Buddhists not have anything like “disgruntled parishioners” (one guy came into a church I was attending and shot two people, killing one, before he himself was shot by an off-duty deputy)? Isn’t it possible that an accidental fire occurred?

Or how about the case of the world-famous Kinkaku-ji in Kyoto, a beautiful temple burned down by a mentally disturbed monk?

it seems likely there’s an informal campaign of intolerance going on.

Well, I think we need to more clearly define what is intolerance and what is not.

Of course that’s just my opinion, and like you said there’s a number of other explanations for headless statues and burning temples.

Loads of reasons. And fringe fundamentalist zealotry does, despite what I said above, remain one of the possibilities.

Let me put it this way, I certainly hope I’m wrong to think there’s that much religious intolerance in Korea, and I’d be glad to be proved wrong.

Well, that was what I’m trying to get to the bottom of with my questions.

The Buddhist riots in Seoul a few years ago when the largest sect was changing leadership were pretty interesting.

Like with Christian churches and sects in the US, there is a good bit of money and power involved — far beyond religious thought conflict….

Of course that’s just my opinion, and like you said there’s a number of other explanations for headless statues and burning temples. Let me put it this way, I certainly hope I’m wrong to think there’s that much religious intolerance in Korea, and I’d be glad to be proved wrong.

But the true DPRKists, the t’ongiljaengis don’t seem to find any problem with the Dangun project in the north (ok, “leftist” is not a proper term for them). The “Dangun Tomb” (???) is part of the DPRK visit routine, and from a quick search in Voice of Leader gives some nice info on their attitudes towards the Dangun grandfather. It was after Kim Il-sung who told that Dangun was a real person and not a myth and encouraged scholars to excavate the tomb (from ?? ??).

I’m a bit skeptical, and I’m asking these questions not in a rhetorical way, but out of genuine curiosity. I know that there are professed “Christians” who have been caught red-handed engaging in anti-Buddhist arson or other forms of destruction. But in what percent of the cases involving arson or vandalism of Buddhist temples has this been the case?

There’s internecine fighting among competing Buddhist groups (the infamous take-over of Chogye-sa being an example). There are accidental fires. There are street thugs who engage in vandalism (Bart cut off the head of Jebediah Springfield and he’s not a religious zealot). There are alternate causes, but based on some prominent past incidents it’s possible that an assumption derived from at least a significant minority is being used to explain a vast majority. (I’m not saying that IS the case, just that it’s possible and I want to see some hard data on it.)

I’m just not so sure that approach is prudent. In the States, for example, it turned out that the rash of Black church burnings were not all racially motivated. Some, apparently, were by fellow parishioners (no time to find a link, so it’s possible I’m remembering this wrong).

If there is some data demonstrating fundamentalist Christian involvement in, say, 50% or more of the cases, I’d concede this point (rather, I’d be satisfied that the finger should quickly be pointing to fundamentalists). But if it’s something like, for example, 10 or 20%, then I’m not so sure I would. Are there any stats available?

I’m always cautious when people not of a certain group describe in detail the apparent motivations and workings of that group (in this case, the legendary “intolerance for others’ beliefs” — to your credit, you at least described this as “apparent intolerance” — or the vandalism caused by supposed followers).

I’m no fan of fundamentalists, except as far as their volunteer work (including helping get North Korean refugees out of China) is concerned. Too many seem to get into a cycle of intolerance that is profoundly anti-Christ-like.

What would Jesus do? He’d kick the money-changers out of his own temple and not even think about burning down a Buddhist structure or chopping off the head of a statue.