In the section about simulacra in religion (p. 4-5), Baudrillard writes about how Iconoclasts, who "predicted the omnipotence of simulacra," feared images based on the knowledge "that deep down God never existed, that only the simulacrum ever existed, even that God himself was never anything but his own simulacrum." (4)
My questions are oriented around asking whether this is a legitimate statement for Baudrillard to make. Perhaps this is not the easiest matter to tackle, but is Baudrillard's reasoning behind why Iconoclasts feared the image/simulacrum of God feasible? I feel his claim that Iconoclasts knew that "it is dangerous to unmask images, since they dissimulate the fact that there is nothing behind them" seems rather off course . . . did they really?? How does Baudrillard know this?? And who exactly is he talking about? (I know he mentioned Jesuits, but are these the only individuals to take this approach?)
I suppose I am just curious to read what you guys have to say about the whole Iconoclast/simulacra debate, and the role of the representation in religion.