Israel / Palestine

That LRB piece is excellent IMHO.

No, and excellent piece there.

As a secular person whose only fiddling with religion comes from the occasional participation in the Catholic rituals of Christmas and Easter (appeals to family and whatnot), this particular topic eludes my understanding almost entirely. Without knowledge of the Abrahamic religions, in terms of their histories and stories, I find it essentially impossible to truly grasp why this region is so hotly contested. The simple truth is that I am ignorant.

For anyone else reading this thread that can relate to the sentiment I've expressed, I suggest Jerusalem: The Biography as a reference for the region. It is really helping my understanding of its multi-millennia history, including those that have vied for its control. It's a fascinating read.

Without knowledge of the Abrahamic religions, in terms of their histories and stories, I find it essentially impossible to truly grasp why this region is so hotly contested.

One can view Islam as the successor to Christianity, in that they share many of the core stories, histories and characters. Jesus is present in both, but in Islam I understand that he is a prophet. Mohammed is a later prophet, essentially adding to the message, clarifying, reinforcing.

With this overlap in place, of course the same sites, and region are valued across Judaism, all branches of Christianity, and Islam... on a Venn diagram a lot of this overlaps. Each religion then has additional sites for what is specific to their beliefs, hence Mecca and lots of parts of Saudi Arabia as that is where Mohammed lived.

But it does not require a lot of understanding to get why the same sites are viewed as holy by all religions. And at different points in time different religions have sought to make those sites exclusively theirs, but always there has been diversity of religion there... I'm not sure it's ever been "one thing", unless we're going beyond when man was there or at least prior to a second religion emerging (although even then, it's more likely that a religion was not held by the majority).

.

Not the right person to be picking with a fight with

No no no, pls, carry on....

.

True but arguing over which religion could beat up your religion isn't exactly going to come to a nice conclusion

.

Great, so with all that knowledge why not answer the original question that bossman was replying to rather than just calling him ignorant.

I'm not sure it's ever been "one thing"

From what I'm reading (and there is a lot to read) there are some brief moments where the Holy of Holies (now where the Dome of Rock sits, depending on who you ask) was the home of God to the Hebrew people under King David. Under his direction, the Hebrew army took the site from the Phillistines, who were polytheists, and made it so. But that only lasted so long. After David passed the site was controlled by many hands (sometimes by polytheists even) until it was absolutely obliterated by the Romans many centuries later.

The early days of Jerusalem are hard to verify though because the Bible is effectively the only history at that point with scant archaeological evidence to support it. Later in history it becomes more clear, but not until after the 10th century BC.

To be clear, I'm not trying to justify any one group's ownership. If anything, my point is that the region was in a "dark age" for many centuries even before the Hebrew people declared it the home of God, so "true ownership" is impossible to establish.

IMO the discussion of ownership is moot. But that is a very secular mindset: as an example, the destruction and eradication of Hebrews from Jerusalem by the Romans is one of the prophecies that supposedly invalidates Moses' revelations and justifies the existence Christianity and Islam and their claims to the various holy sites of Jerusalem. The concept of supersession in this context really complicates the matter.

Anyways, A superficial understanding is good enough to know that the current situation is truly awful, but I think reading about the history is helping me personally come to terms with the Gordian Knot that is this particular problem.

.

1 Attachment

This level of ignorance and reductionism is astonishing.

True, but it's a cycling forum and there are limits to the time I'll invest in the reply and also literally a limit to the textarea... every answer is reductionist. And on the ignorance front, sure... but if we hold that "you need all the context and to know everything to have an opinion" then we can never make this (or many other topics and issues) something that people can have any investment or personal ownership over, and it's how nothing will improve and people throw their hands up in resignation because it's too complex.

However, I have

also, that's an hilarious reply, thank you

.

.

.

They won't be resolved by a white, western secular overlord of a cycling forum.

Perhaps if we established a God of our own that supersedes all other Gods? (Joking of course...)

Yeah we just need one more all powerful god that'll fix it

1 Attachment

Sorry After disrupting the memes thread I'm just posting some here for balance

There's written historical evidence of Spanish Catholic naval captains referring to Protestant churches in Cornish coastal villages as 'mosques' so it is not as if Velocio's comment on the relationship between Christianity and Islam is entirely without precedent. I'm not convinced that the religious angle is anything other than a dead end though. Then as now, religious justification has been sought for the establishment of temporal power, and religious rules will bend or break in the service of that power and control.

.

I'm not suggesting that religion can be ignored, I'm suggesting that we have to recognise that while they are genuinely believed and deeply held, they are basically confected (and often very recently) so resolution will be hampered as a result. That which we cannot speak of we must pass over in silence - thus "invisible space dad said it was mine" cannot constitute a solid claim to political or geographic hegemony on either side because it's untestable and thus will always be whatever the claimant wants it to be.

I'm being a bit facetious because this is a cycling forum, but while dealing with people appropriately sensitively, I think this has to be borne in mind. The word of a prophet or a deity however long ago, cannot be weighed against the real actual life of people, particularly when even the supposedly faithful are extremely sketchy about the bits they adhere to or recognise. Argument from faith is always going to be a hiding to nowhere.

Right, we have had enough of experts, haven't we?

idk what to do with that kind of reply.

the news is awful, what's happening is horrible, but the situation isn't something that only experts can have an opinion on and I don't know why you'd conclude that what I implied excludes experts either nor why that would trigger you such that you'd want to start with personal attacks, but whatevs 🤷