This book is really dense. I'm having a hard time getting through all of it simply because every paragraph contains a big statement that has to be further analyzed. With that in mind, I decided I would try to organize my thoughts on the book by major religion. Here goes Judaism...
There are two aspects of Armstrong's writing that really jumped out at me. First, I really appreciated the details associated with the creation of a Jewish state in Biblical times. The lessons that were learned there seem to have been forgotten in the modern age. This was especially clear to me on page 26 when she says, "the process of establishing themselves as a nation in their own land was painful to others and morally perplexing." Statements like this force us to look at the modern situation in an attempt to understand why there is strife. This also really put the length of the conflict into context for me. It's not necessarily about Israeli's fighting Palestinians as it is often portrayed, but rather, a group of people who feels that it is their right to establish their own sovereign nation on this land. When we look at it in this context, I think it makes the battle less personal, less about us versus them, and more about a human quality of life.
The second aspect of the first seven chapters that popped out at me, was the success of rulers who were accommodating of other faiths. The best example is of Herod, a Jewish King who was able to transform his city into a prosperous one that was accepting of many different faiths and peoples. This appears to be a lesson that the leaders of Jerusalem are not necessarily able to accept at the current time. People respected him. Not just Jews and not just Gentiles, but everybody, according to Armstrong, seemed to think that he was very capable of leading the city. Maybe the right leader hasn't been found yet. Maybe peace is something that you can work really hard at, but in the end what you really need is someone who forces people to relax. Maybe that's a gross oversimplification, but I really don't think so. Herod is an example of a person who was able to make his religion and his politics work together for the greater good of his city.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
2 comments:
I think there is something to say for an intelligent, compassionate and visionary leader. In light of the 40th anniversary of Martin Luther King Jr's death, I know that was two weeks ago, I've reflected and am still currently in reflection about the towering legend and legacy he's left behind. As you've said peace is rarely achieved without a comprehensive or guiding vision...maybe what we hope for in the future needs to be reassessed...what do we hope and pray for exactly? Just peace? Or justice and love and compassion?
yeah good points about leadership. also about the long history of conflict this city has seen, it definitely makes some things seem really insignificant. part of your comments make me wonder though. what do you think are the lessons that were lost from the establishment of the ancient kingdoms of israel? and this whole notion of the leaders of jerusalem not being able to accept different people? how do you see this manifest and do you see any similar rejectionism coming from the other side?
Post a Comment