Some leaders approve of this development, but others fear that the unifying spirit of Islam is betrayed by political nationalism. Although it has had no centralized authority for centuries, Islam has retained a remarkable spirit of unity. With the emerging variety of political structures in the Muslim world, however, some believers -- probably a minority -- would prefer a more centralized leadership for religious unity. Others believe that God alone should rule without any earthly mediating authority. Sources http://www.philosophy-religion.org/world/index.htm Fundamentalism: http://religiousmovements.lib.virginia.edu/nrms/fund.html Center for the Study of Islam and Christian-Muslim Relations: http://macdonald.hartsem.edu/
These are the issues which need to be looked at in order to end the conflict as it has had adverse effects even on other nations around the world. The dispute as to which nation should claim ownership of the city of Jerusalem has been one of the major issues causing the conflict. The Israelis view Jerusalem as part of their historic homeland. It is somewhat a religious city to them owing to the Abraham religions- Judaism, Christianity and Islam (Sela 2002). However Palestinians already claim parts of the city which were not under Israeli jurisdiction.
Though he chooses to avoid the issue, Huntington’s theory provides a groundwork for analyzing the conflict in Israel in terms of a clash of civilizations between Judaism and Islam. This is a dangerous and provocative idea. But if we dare examine its implications and explore its insights, we risk a more complete understanding of the conflict which has plagued relations between Palestinians and Israelis in particular, Muslim countries and Israel in general, for over fifty years. Let us begin with a discussion about Judaism’s status as a civilization. This is a highly contentious claim which Huntington himself questions: With the creation of Israel, Jews have all the objective accoutrements of a civilization: religion, language, customs, literature, institutions, and a territorial and political home.
Whereas in the Israeli case, religious nationalism grew out of political inaction on the part of the Labor party to address the settler movement. It is the purpose of this paper to compare the political contexts that gave rise to these distinct forms of religious nationalism in Palestine and Israel, and to evaluate how religious nationalism has shaped the political identities of the two communities. I hope to show that in both the Palestinian and Israeli case, the rise of religious nationalism can be attributed to a form of political paralysis. In Identity and Religion of Palestine, Lybarger attributes the rise of religious nationalism to massive destabilizing events such as war, occupation, uprisings and the failure of the peace process. Amidst this era of occupation and political frustration emerged a new generation that would have a profound impact on the rise of religious nationalism.
The Bible itself provides a binding of old teachings and principles that can be used even to this day. It is true that the Bible holds and teaches fundamental basis and principles in some of the most practiced religions, but incorporating a whole religious faith with politics and government is not of good intention. With the Bible, one can read of stories and traditions that can be used for reference, for knowledge, humor, and even fun. However, a religion is full of traditions, respective cultures and is different to each being that it takes part in it. Each person in some form or fashion incorporates what they value into decision-making, but the uproar is caused when one enforces it upon one another.
The path to peace has yet to be clearly identified, announced or plotted into action, but the possibility (although hard to imagine) of peace is quite fathomable in our modern world. The major roadblock in the long traveled journey towards a peaceful union between the Middle East and the rest of the world lies in the form of the fanatic Islamic movement (its most notorious leader being the infamous, terror-motivated militant, Osama Bin Laden). According to Nader, a Muslim researcher set on clarifying the lines between fanatic and not, "these radical Muslims changed the teachings of Islam using the man-made Hadiths and sunna (sayings and traditions falsely attributed to the prophet Muhammad) that contradict the Quran and allow them all kinds of oppression, aggression, and terrorism" (2011). Misconstrued religious motivation has been at the heart of unrest in the Middle East for far longer then most can even imagine. Religious wars have raging between radical Islam, Christianity, Judaism, and all other opposing religions for longer then our world history has been recorded.
They demanded an independent Palestinian state. They attacked British troops and posts, as well as Jewish settlements. The settlers counterattacked and retaliated while at the same time, the British escalated its oppressive measures against the Palestinians by destroying their homes and sentencin... ... middle of paper ... ...e so-called leaders in Palestine and Israel and some here at the US don’t want peace in that land at all. They have their own agenda and interest to protect at all cost. The Palestinians’ hatred of Jews would extend even beyond Israel.
Cultural conformity, specifically in religious customs is a influential facilitator within social perception. Israeli-Palestinian conflict are deep-rooted with social perceptions of their rival, and only through reconciliation and reducing the opposing views between the two groups will reconciliation ever occur. The divergent principles create a bias religion supporting and maintaining traditionally held typecasts of each other. Religion is the central theme within the conflict, while that same conflict could serve as a basis of bridge building between the differences. Creating peace often alters perceptions promoting social interactions with emphasis on common ground (Byrne, 1961).
I believe that the Palestinians must be given their rights. I fully understand that Israel is extremely concerned about it’s safety as it is mostly surround by enemy’s however I do not believe that the oppression and ultimate control of the Palestinians will bring this safety they long for, but do the very opposite instead. Works Cited (1986). Holy bible. (NIV ed.).
In fact, a large literature and media publications have developed over the last century on this heated discourse of democracy versus Islam. While many argue that Islam has all the ingredients of modern state and democratic society, many other reject the phenomena “modernism” and “democracy” as a whole because of their “foreign nature”—alien to “Islamic values”. For Islamists and modernists, the motivation for such effort to either embrace or reject democracy often is to remove suspicion about the nature and goals of Islamic movements and Islamic revivalism or resurgence. But before diving into this discourse, one needs to understand the definition and origins of “democracy.” Although purely a Western ideology in its origin, there is no consensus on the definition of “democracy” as a political system. The Oxford English Dictionary describes democracy as: “A system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives” (“democracy, n.”).