Chapters 14-15

In these chapters, we begin to see the problems arise between the three faiths of Jerusalem.

Armstrong first discusses the meaning of the title of chapter 14, jihad. This word means not only 'holy war,' but also 'struggle' and is used in this meaning in the Quran.  I think it is interesting that Armstrong titled Chapter 14 this because it seems as though the initial unveiling of the struggle occurs in this chapter. I think it was a wise move of her to incorporate this title in with the book but I can't help but wonder how this would come across to members of the Jewish and Christian faiths in modern-day Jerusalem.  Is something as small as the title of a chapter capable of irritating these believers? Who knows.

The primary leader at this time in Jerusalem was Saladin, who had led the city safely during the Crusades.  Armstrong says "he had always granted a truce when the Crusaders had asked for one; he had, for the most part, treated his prisoners fairly and kindly," (295).  This description reminds me of the Muslim ideals that were previously mentioned; how a Muslim should be kind and at peace with those around him.

One of his first decisions was to purify the Haram, which had been contaminated by the Templars' "latrines & furniture" so that it could be made ready for Friday Prayers.  At this point, the city was becoming readily known as a "Muslim" city, something that must have infuriated those that felt they, too, had a right to the area.  An act that took me by surprise was the remodeling of the Church of St. Anna into a mosque, because it seems like a political disaster that almost certainly led to hostility from the Christians.

However, Armstrong later mentions that the ideas of Saladin did not include pushing the Jews and Christians out from the city.  It is an interesting notion that while he claimed to have wanted all three faiths to peacefully reside in Jerusalem, he was destroying the very essences of their connection to the divine (in this case, the Church).

I also found it interesting that the Christians of Spain were pushing out and exiling the Jews of the area and considered them to be foreigners in their own country.  This entire time period seems like a bunch of hostile people just taking their problems out on whoever is immediately available.

Just by reading these chapters, one can see the way unintentional acts of political bullying led to a hostility towards all religions but your own.  Modern day conflicts in Jerusalem seem to be a direct result of the actions made as early as the Crusades.

Chapters 11-13

Being that my previous knowledge of the Muslim religion is nothing at all, I felt interested to learn more on the topic and enjoyed learning the foundations of the religion.  The majority of my response will be on the teachings of Muhammad, as his work is what was most interesting to me.

In the beginning of the chapters, Armstrong tells how the religion of Islam initially had no direct prophet or revelation of their own, and that because of this, the Jews and Christians of the region pretty much dismissed the faith at first.  Muhammed felt a divine voice inside him that inspired him to write the Quran for a total of twenty-two years, a feat in itself.  I had never really considered the creation of the Quran before and found myself slightly surprised that one man wrote the entire scripture, as many different voices are present in the Bible.  I also noticed that I am constantly comparing both the Jewish and Muslim faiths to my own faith, so sorry if that annoys anyone. 

From what I understand, the most important thing about being Muslim is the relationship one has with God rather than any relationships with earthly locations or persons.  I enjoy that Armstrong discusses the importance of "sharing your wealth" in the religion and to take care of the poor and then explained that this concept was applicable during the time period because Mecca was "in the throes of a capitalistic revolution in which the more vulnerable members of Muhammad's tribe of Qureish had been pushed aside in the stampede for wealth," (218).  I find this to be an excellent concept for a faith and also reminds me of the Christian tradition of giving a offering during church service.

I tried to take a more active approach and looked up some pictures relating to the faith.  I really liked this picture of the Dome, the third holiest place in the religion.  This architecture is beautiful and really appealed to me in this beautiful picture.

picture credit here: http://basilspage.blogspot.com/2010/08/3-holy-places-of-islam.html

Weblog #3

This is supposed to be us discussing the image for the class blog, but I don't see a final draft up yet.  I do like Amber's idea of the panoramic header of images for the class blog.  I think that this would be a good way to incorporate neutral images that would allow for academic discussion without being too hectic or overbearing.

Reading Chapters 8-10

In this section, I was again struck by the magnitude of importance that this Temple reflected for the Jews of Jerusalem. One quote, on page 155, says that because the Temple had been destroyed,

"the whole of nature should mourn: now that the Temple had gone, there was no need for the earth to bring forth a harvest nor the vine to yield grapes; the heavens should withhold their dew and the sun dim its rays: For why should light rise again Where the light of Zion is darkened?"

This is an incredible description of the entire community feeling constantly at mourn to the point where one man believed that nature, too, should participate in the mourning period for the loss of their sacred space. It saddens me to consider the despair and deep sense of loss the Jewish people must have felt during this time of rebuilding.  Armstrong mentions that many Jews lost their faith as a direct result of the  destruction of the Temple.  Without having a sacred space in which to share and profess their beliefs, some members of the religion felt unable to continue to practice Judaism.  This is an interesting take on just how vital a sacred space can be for the human need for practicality.  Without a direct link to the spiritual world, some Jews lost touch altogether and left the faith.

I had always heard of the tradition of Jewish people turning towards Jerusalem to pray, but in page 157, when Armstrong cites the reasoning behind this, I felt an academic knowledge of the subject that I had not felt before.  She says that the rabbis "drew up legislation to discourage emigration from Palestine and demanded that the Eighteen Benedictions be recited three times a day, in place of the Morning and Evening Sacrifice. Jews must recite these prayers wherever they were: if they were traveling, they should dismount and turn their faces in the direction of Jerusalem, or at least direct their hearts toward the ruined Devir," (157).  This is an incredible insight to the Jewish faith and makes sense that the tradition lasted until the modern day; because no matter how far away the Jews got from Jerusalem, their hearts and minds were always in touch with that lost Sacred Temple of Jerusalem.  This is such a powerful gesture.

It is also interesting that in these chapters we begin to see Armstrong's take on the separation of the Jewish and Christian identities. She gave the description of Jesus as "'the new Adam' who had given humanity a fresh start,"(155).  I find this an interesting comparison because in the Christian faith we are taught that no one is of comparison to Jesus, God, or the Holy Spirit, so it becomes interesting to consider a comparison between the Messiah and a man thru an academic lens. 

I enjoy the discussion of Luke, Matthew, and John from the Gospel. Armstrong describes Luke as someone who didn't want Christianity to cut off its links with Jerusalem and the Jewish faith.  However, she says that according to their teachings in the Bible, both Matthew and John were far less positive about their relations with Jewish people and Jerusalem itself. 

I am enjoying this section more than others because she introduces more characters, from the Bible, that I am familiar with.  I like hearing her perspective on the men that I have always unquestionably believed since Sunday school.  It feels like a good test to my faith and a good academic experience to read this book and hear the stories from a different perspective.

Weblog 2

This is my random table that I use for holding things that don't go anywhere else. I love candles and LOVE flowers so I have them all over the place. Additionally, I enjoy reading and keep TIME magazines for when I'm bored.

Some decorations.  I bought the painting of the Dalai Lama from a Bloomington artist off of Kirkwood. I keep pictures of my friends up and also have more flowers.  I am Christian but the picture is neat looking so I snagged it for 10 dollars.

My cupboard is filled with ramen, mac & cheese, ravioli and various other quick fixes.  I work all the time so I try to buy meals that I can prepare on the run.

Some movies I like.  I don't enjoy scary movies but I like action/adventure movies like "The Departed" and "Carriers".  I also like romance movies and comedies.

Reading Response 3

Chapters 5-7

In this section, Armstrong continues to delve deeper into the history of the city of Jerusalem and begins to become more in depth as to the different leaders that represented the Judaeans.  In chapter five, Armstrong includes the quote "the people of God were scattered in alien territory," (79), referring to the land of Jerusalem after the Temple was destroyed.  This sentence made me think of the discussion in class when someone pointed out that the reason humans want something on Earth that relates to divinity is because the divine world seems so far away and it's human nature to want tangible evidence of the divine existence.  The destruction of the Temple must have been Earth shattering to the Jewish people of Jerusalem who spent a majority of their time worshipping and reflecting there.  Also, Armstrong later says that "the history of religion shows that in times of crisis and upheaval, people turn more readily to myth than to more rational forms of faith," (82).  This quote again brought me back to our discussion of the word 'myth' and gave me a better understanding of what Armstrong means when she uses the word.  She doesn't mean something negative, like most Western readers would think, but something that can't be explained through commonplace actions, such as attending a service or reading a religious book.  Instead, she says that the majority of people in history are more apt to turn to prayer, reflection and meditation, all acts which are encompassed in her use of the word 'myth.'  This portion of the reading was vital to my understanding of her reference to the word and gave me more insight to her understanding of the word.
I also found it somewhat of a foreshadow that Haggai's statement, "don't rebuild the walls of Jerusalem so that the city can account for the vast amount of people who would shortly flock to live there," (94).  Reading this in the present day, it seems that no amount of extending the area within the walls of Jerusalem would have been enough to satisfy the needs of the groups of Muslim, Jewish and Christian parties.  I recognize that the modern boundaries of Jerusalem are much larger than those of the earlier times but could any amount of space actually end the turmoil in modern Jerusalem?
It is interesting to read Armstrong's description of the Greek influences on ancient Syria as comparable to the current appeal of Western culture to the modern developing world.  I find it interesting that the heavily cultured Jewish man named Joseph was able to not only collect taxes on behalf of the Greek world, but also to transform that foreign wealth into Jewish prosperity as well.  It is also interesting to read of the divide between the Jewish parties that embraced the Greek influence against those who clung to their "old traditions centered on the temple," (106).  This divide continues to show itself as the Greek visitors to Jerusalem were only allowed to the outer court, usually preserved for the unclean, because the Jews of Jerusalem did not believe that these outsiders were 'clean' and therefore were forbidden from areas of direct contact with 'holiness.'
I also find it interested that once the Greeks decided to create a polis out of Jerusalem, they placed the gymnasium so close to the Temple, knowingly disappointing the conservative Jews who considered the Temple invalid unless completely surrounded by a holy and clean Jerusalem.  However, Armstrong states that most of the people of Jerusalem temporarily began to see Greek culture as something that could mesh with Jewish ideas, rather than as a harmful intrusion upon the city.  Then the Temple was raided by an angry king who forever lost the trust and respect of the Jewish people.  Antiochus then proceeded to outlaw the practice of Jewish faith in Judah, an act that could not be forgiven.  Examples of this king's harm to the religion occur again and again throughout the book and lead me to understand the fear that must have captured the Jewish people and once again allowed them to cling to their faith.

Reading Response 2

I am still waiting on my book in the mail so I am doing the best I can at reading online, which is nearly impossible for me. I have gathered that Armstrong does a great job at explaining the history of Jerusalem in a way that allows for even the most confused student to get a grasp of the intense and interesting history of Jerusalem. I also found it interesting that she included stories from the Bible, as most academic works leave out religion.  This is almost to be expected when discussing Jerusalem because the city is SO deeply rooted in religion.  I very much liked how Armstrong began the book, with the sentence "In Jerusalem... history is a demension of the present." This phrase astounded me and led me to consider the reference of how influenced Jerusalem is by its history.  Day to day life is completely interwoven with the past and that entire thought compels me to believe that Jerusalem is a city that is entirely respectful and knowing of what it has endured.  In the United States, on a day such as September 11th, I can relate to history being a part of the present when I consider how overwhelming the day is.  A random thought, I'll admit, but it was the first thing that popped into my head when considering her statement.  It seems as though the entire city of Jerusalem is deeply connected with the past so much so that it is even referenced as the 'Old City'.  Her book is somewhat slow at times but I appreciate that she discusses the history at a slow pace and allows for people to learn with their reading rather than confusing her readers.

Reading Response #1

I really enjoyed these readings simply because it feels like I now know something about the issues we are discussing.  These basic, fundamental outlines of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict within Jerusalem allowed me to feel like someone who can actually add to the conversation rather than being completely confused.  In the Dumper article, it struck me how much emphasis was put on the fact that Jerusalem was being argued over not because of any natural resource or economic matter, but solely on the fact that Jerusalem is the homeland of multiple religions that all feel as though they deserve a stake in the city.  I also found it interesting that Dumper included some of the reasons for the city's connection with the different religions.  For example, he cited that the Christian devotion to the city was originally founded in the visit to the city by Queen Helena, mother of the first Christian emperor of Rome.  I enjoyed this reasoning because it completely ignores the Biblical references that allowed for members of the Christian religion to feel at home in Jerusalem.  In the Pressman article, I enjoyed the way he outlined the movement of Mid European Jews (Zionists) into the Holy Land and how the British government, in the form of the Balfour Declaration, supported and encouraged this mass movement of Jewish people.  I can now understand how this mass movement of Jews into the Palestinian land must have felt like a severe encroachment to the Arab inhabitants.  Following this movement, the Arab militias revolted against British rule in 1936.  At this point, tensions have been increasing and it is understandable that the Arab people must have felt as though they had no choice but to fight in order to protect what could be taken from them.  I also appreciated how Pressman continued on with the history and showed how UNSCOP tried to split Palestine into two separate states, giving the majority of the land to the Jewish state.  It seems strange to me that they made the separation unequal and allowed for the remaining three percent of the area to be an international zone.  This makes me wonder why the UNSCOP allowed for an unequal devision and if it had something to do with geographical borders or some other form of reasoning.  The next interesting argument is when Egypt came into the picture and encouraged Arab unity and somehow ended up creating yet another dispute between the Palestinians and Israelis. Israeli, British and French militias fought against the Egyptian government which was lead by an Arab leader who encouraged Arab unity against those attacking Egypt. This obviously drove another wedge in between the two major inhabitants of Israel and gave them just one more reason to hate each other.

This whole conflict is just beginning to unfold for me so please let me know if I have misunderstood anything.  I am so much more interested in the topic now that I have some sense of understanding the Arab and Israeli conflict and hope to become a more educated member of the class.