Reading Response for September 12th

    This weekend we had our first foray into Karen Armstrong's book "Jerusalem: Once City, Three Faiths." After reading the introduction, and chapters 1-4, all I have to say is wow; there is so much more to this situation than I could have ever imagined. She looked at Jerusalem from a Christian perspective, which was much different than the perspectives we had last week. As far as what is at stake for Armstrong, I believe, she has nothing at stake, but to reveal the cities culture and history without misconceptions and equal truths from all sides. She doesn't have to worry about agreeing with the Palestinian or Israeli side, instead, she had only herself to please. I feel that the Jerusalem Project members chose a good book for the project, it looks at all aspects of the conflict from all points of view.
    I really enjoyed the introduction to the book. Usually books don't give much insight into a story or conflict, but this one proved ever so useful. She makes Jerusalem personal by describing as how she knew it before first visiting, which is, something completely unknown; this is how I view it. She discussed the word 'holy' and what exactly it means. It is discussed how often times, religions search for a holy ground in order to have a physical form to identify with; with no "physical" god, one must find attachment in the land where one's god could have existed to. Doing so establishes a strong bond and dependency to one's religious past that, if not in accordance with other's beliefs, could pose problems. People like having physical evidence of their beliefs, and Jerusalem just so happens to be religious evidence to three of the world's largest religions.
    The most interesting paragraph of the reading for Monday comes from the introduction, on pages xvii-xviii, in which the "question of myth" is discussed. She discussed how myth shapes our religious  history and beliefs, and how people use it to speak about the sacred. Today, people usually dismiss things that are solely based on "myth". But much of religious texts are based on myth, which is defined as "a traditional story" (unlike it is widely known as today as an untrue story). She discusses the notion of how the three major religions of the area have, throughout history, discounted each other's histories (myths) in favor of their own. But we must question why they have been dismissed, because it is the root of these dismissals that are the roots of the current conflicts. This conflict has included disregarding the other's stories and beliefs. All the stories and histories of Jerusalem are important, each side has contributed to what it is today. And, therefore, Armstrong reaches her point about these alleged myths about Jerusalem, that they were "never designed to describe historically verifiable events that actually happened. It was an attempt to express their inner significance or to draw attention to realities that were too elusive to be discussed in a logical or coherent way." We cannot disregard any of the stories about Jerusalem even if they are from a group we despise, because they all hold value, truth, and exist for a reason; if they didn't, they would not have survived thousands of years to today