|
|
Post by Orange Team Admin on Jan 31, 2014 17:58:00 GMT
What are the religious ideologies held by the Arabs and Israelites which resulted in the conflict?
|
|
|
|
Post by wenqing on Feb 2, 2014 10:20:48 GMT
The Israelites are Jewish, whereas the Arabs are Muslims. I guess the conflicting ideologies has caused them to believe and want different things, thus leading to the conflict? And this may be why the two sides may never get to see eye to eye on the issue.. :/ But the two threads under this category got me thinking, is it a religious argument or a political strife?
|
|
|
|
Post by rutianrutian on Feb 25, 2014 15:25:33 GMT
The Israelites are Jewish, whereas the Arabs are Muslims. I guess the conflicting ideologies has caused them to believe and want different things, thus leading to the conflict? And this may be why the two sides may never get to see eye to eye on the issue.. :/ But the two threads under this category got me thinking, is it a religious argument or a political strife? Hmm.. I am of the opinion that the conflict isn't simply an either/or issue but a hybrid since religion and politics are not two entirely discrete entities separated by an impenetrable barrier. Separation of Islam and state is a foreign concept absolutely unimaginable to those who subscribe to Islamic teachings where religion and government essentially come together and become one. To them, theocracy controls all public and private domains! Individuals (and similarly those in power) bring their beliefs to bear on every aspect of their lives and as a result, faith and politics meld seamlessly into one. It is precisely this intimate intertwining of religion and politics that has rendered any attempts to draw clear lines of distinction between the two futile, if not impossible. Therefore, I think there is a need for us to go beyond rigid, untenable conceptualizations that often lacks nuance. |
|
|
|
Post by Foopee on Mar 10, 2014 17:35:26 GMT
Hi,
I am in the opinion that if you rigidly subscribe to religious ideology in this context, then the Arabs are under ideology of Pan-Islamism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan-Islamic) while the Israelis subscribe to the religious ideology of Zionism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionism).
However, with regards to the idea of religious ideology being a driving cause in this conflict, we have to look beyond religion as a factor.
We have to consider history, geopolitics and regional power plays.
The use of religion is a simple, effective political tool in uniting people under a common cause or banner for war.
Beyond that, the cause of the conflict can be down to more than religion.
Thanks
|
|
|
|
Post by leesze on Mar 14, 2014 15:05:38 GMT
I agree with the two posters above. There are a plethora of reasons as to why there are conflicts between the Israelites and the Arabs. I just went to research and one website says
'Despite the long going peace process and the general reconciliation of Israel with Egypt and Jordan, Israelis and Palestinians have failed to reach a final peace agreement. The remaining key issues are: mutual recognition, borders, security, water rights, control of Jerusalem, Israeli settlements, Palestinian freedom of movement and finding a resolution to the refugee question.'
So yeah.. We can't really argue that the conflict is due to religious ideology alone, because its all just really a super convoluted web of issues that is causing the problem.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dean on Mar 30, 2014 13:09:12 GMT
Yes we can't solely see it from a religious point of view. However, I do feel that there is SOME relation to religion. Take a look at this:
If I'm not wrong, the Jews believe that the Land of Canaan or Eretz Yisrael (Land of Israel) was, according to the Hebrew Bible, promised by God to the Children of Israel. Many things happened after that which led to the Zionist movement - to reclaim back the land that was promised to them. However, this contradicted with the muslims. Contrary to the Jewish claim that this land was promised only to the descendants of Abraham's younger son Isaac, they argue that the Land of Canaan was promised to what they consider the elder son, Ishmael, from whom Arabs claim descent. So I guess there are differences in the fundamental beliefs, which actually is a pertinent issue because ideologies are extremely difficult to change.
|
|
|
|
Post by skippinghippo on Mar 31, 2014 8:37:45 GMT
Yes we can't solely see it from a religious point of view. However, I do feel that there is SOME relation to religion. Take a look at this: If I'm not wrong, the Jews believe that the Land of Canaan or Eretz Yisrael (Land of Israel) was, according to the Hebrew Bible, promised by God to the Children of Israel. Many things happened after that which led to the Zionist movement - to reclaim back the land that was promised to them. However, this contradicted with the muslims. Contrary to the Jewish claim that this land was promised only to the descendants of Abraham's younger son Isaac, they argue that the Land of Canaan was promised to what they consider the elder son, Ishmael, from whom Arabs claim descent. So I guess there are differences in the fundamental beliefs, which actually is a pertinent issue because ideologies are extremely difficult to change. Yep, I actually agree with what has been discussed so far. Fundamental beliefs are difficult to eradicate and change and therein lies the problem. Of course, like what Dean (and everyone else) has discussed so far, we can't attribute the conflict to it being a religious one. There are so many other different forces and factors at play. That being said, I feel that religion does play a role! Take a look at this: "Jewish and Arab groups invoke religious arguments for their uncompromising positions. The contemporary history of the Arab–Israeli conflict is very much affected by the religious beliefs of the various sides and their views of the idea of the chosen people in their policies with regard to the "Promised Land" and the "Chosen City" of Jerusalem. The Land of Canaan or Eretz Yisrael (Land of Israel) was, according to the Hebrew Bible, promised by God to the Children of Israel. In his 1896 manifesto, The Jewish State, Theodor Herzl repeatedly refers to the Biblical Promised land concept.[10] Likud is currently the most prominent Israeli political party to include the Biblical claim to the Land of Israel in its platform. Muslims also claim rights to that land in accordance with the Quran. Contrary to the Jewish claim that this land was promised only to the descendants of Abraham's younger son Isaac, they argue that the Land of Canaan was promised to what they consider the elder son, Ishmael, from whom Arabs claim descent.[12] Additionally, Muslims also revere many sites holy for Biblical Israelites, such as The Cave of the Patriarchs and the Temple Mount. In the past 1,400 years, Muslims have constructed Islamic landmarks on these ancient Israelite sites, such as the Dome of the Rock and the Al-Aqsa Mosque on the Temple Mount, the holiest site in Judaism. This has brought the two groups into conflict over the rightful possession of Jerusalem. Muslim teaching is that Muhammad passed through Jerusalem on his first journey to heaven. Hamas, which governs the Gaza Strip, claims that all of the land of Palestine (the current Israeli and Palestinian territories) is an Islamic waqf that must be governed by Muslims. Christian Zionists often support the State of Israel because of the ancestral right of the Jews to the Holy Land, as suggested, for instance, by Paul in Romans 11. Christian Zionism teaches that the return of Jews in Israel is a prerequisite for the Second Coming of Christ." Now, my question is this: Is Zionism merely a religious movement? Or can it be considered a political movement? Or perhaps even both? Would love to hear your thoughts on this!  |
|
|
|
Post by Dean on Mar 31, 2014 8:42:43 GMT
Yes we can't solely see it from a religious point of view. However, I do feel that there is SOME relation to religion. Take a look at this: If I'm not wrong, the Jews believe that the Land of Canaan or Eretz Yisrael (Land of Israel) was, according to the Hebrew Bible, promised by God to the Children of Israel. Many things happened after that which led to the Zionist movement - to reclaim back the land that was promised to them. However, this contradicted with the muslims. Contrary to the Jewish claim that this land was promised only to the descendants of Abraham's younger son Isaac, they argue that the Land of Canaan was promised to what they consider the elder son, Ishmael, from whom Arabs claim descent. So I guess there are differences in the fundamental beliefs, which actually is a pertinent issue because ideologies are extremely difficult to change. Yep, I actually agree with what has been discussed so far. Fundamental beliefs are difficult to eradicate and change and therein lies the problem. Of course, like what Dean (and everyone else) has discussed so far, we can't attribute the conflict to it being a religious one. There are so many other different forces and factors at play. That being said, I feel that religion does play a role! Take a look at this: "Jewish and Arab groups invoke religious arguments for their uncompromising positions. The contemporary history of the Arab–Israeli conflict is very much affected by the religious beliefs of the various sides and their views of the idea of the chosen people in their policies with regard to the "Promised Land" and the "Chosen City" of Jerusalem. The Land of Canaan or Eretz Yisrael (Land of Israel) was, according to the Hebrew Bible, promised by God to the Children of Israel. In his 1896 manifesto, The Jewish State, Theodor Herzl repeatedly refers to the Biblical Promised land concept.[10] Likud is currently the most prominent Israeli political party to include the Biblical claim to the Land of Israel in its platform. Muslims also claim rights to that land in accordance with the Quran. Contrary to the Jewish claim that this land was promised only to the descendants of Abraham's younger son Isaac, they argue that the Land of Canaan was promised to what they consider the elder son, Ishmael, from whom Arabs claim descent.[12] Additionally, Muslims also revere many sites holy for Biblical Israelites, such as The Cave of the Patriarchs and the Temple Mount. In the past 1,400 years, Muslims have constructed Islamic landmarks on these ancient Israelite sites, such as the Dome of the Rock and the Al-Aqsa Mosque on the Temple Mount, the holiest site in Judaism. This has brought the two groups into conflict over the rightful possession of Jerusalem. Muslim teaching is that Muhammad passed through Jerusalem on his first journey to heaven. Hamas, which governs the Gaza Strip, claims that all of the land of Palestine (the current Israeli and Palestinian territories) is an Islamic waqf that must be governed by Muslims. Christian Zionists often support the State of Israel because of the ancestral right of the Jews to the Holy Land, as suggested, for instance, by Paul in Romans 11. Christian Zionism teaches that the return of Jews in Israel is a prerequisite for the Second Coming of Christ." Now, my question is this: Is Zionism merely a religious movement? Or can it be considered a political movement? Or perhaps even both? Would love to hear your thoughts on this! Hey skippinghippo, Interesting point brought up! I think we need not classify zionism into a political or religious movement. Rather, an understanding of what zionism entails is more important. Here's what I found: "A Zionist is a person who desires or supports the establishment of a Jewish state in the Land of Israel, which in the future will become the state of the Jewish people." Take a look at this article. I think it summarises the idea of Zionism pretty well. Hope it helps! www.haaretz.com/opinion/defining-zionism-the-belief-that-israel-belongs-to-the-entire-jewish-people.premium-1.525064 |
|
