You must be from the US applying that lens and reducing the topic to such a simplistic lens that has been propagated by both the US and Israeli governments only.
Many abrahamic worshippers believe these are the prophesized end times, especially in Israel.
Nope, only US Evangelicalism specifically preaches this ridiculous type of world-ending prophecy.
Zionism was an inherently secular movement, but to align all of the other Jewish organizations under their movement with a stronger argument, they’ve defined their goals to be “jewish” in identity AND religion. Otherwise an African location would have been a more serious option.
It’s not religious belief that is driving conflict in the middle east, it is religious tribalism (and of course imperialism). And there’s a world of difference.
Because someone could be secular and of that religion, but it doesn’t mean that they would escape harm from other tribes or not have some patronage and loyalty to their tribe. Like Al-Assad in Syria, which as a country was religiously secular by law but was heavily biased towards the Aalawites.
Yes, tribalism can exist without belief and can even be described as an ethnicity in itself (like Judaism). Unless you willingly glossed over the fact that someone can be secular but still have cultural/familial ties towards the tribe.
It’s not a very smart thing to oversimplify with thought terminating exercises.
The tribalism is the important part, not the religious. Just because your view is so narrow that you only see issues with one aspect of anything does not mean that it’s the driving cause of every problem you see.
You must be from the US applying that lens and reducing the topic to such a simplistic lens that has been propagated by both the US and Israeli governments only.
Nope, only US Evangelicalism specifically preaches this ridiculous type of world-ending prophecy.
Zionism was an inherently secular movement, but to align all of the other Jewish organizations under their movement with a stronger argument, they’ve defined their goals to be “jewish” in identity AND religion. Otherwise an African location would have been a more serious option.
It’s not religious belief that is driving conflict in the middle east, it is religious tribalism (and of course imperialism). And there’s a world of difference.
Because someone could be secular and of that religion, but it doesn’t mean that they would escape harm from other tribes or not have some patronage and loyalty to their tribe. Like Al-Assad in Syria, which as a country was religiously secular by law but was heavily biased towards the Aalawites.
“It’s not religious belief it’s religious tribalism”
Ahh yes, religious tribalism. Famously able to exist without religious belief.
Yes, tribalism can exist without belief and can even be described as an ethnicity in itself (like Judaism). Unless you willingly glossed over the fact that someone can be secular but still have cultural/familial ties towards the tribe.
It’s not a very smart thing to oversimplify with thought terminating exercises.
You’re oversimplifying commitment.
Religious belief is required for religious tribalism, otherwise it’s not religious tribalism, it’s some other form of tribalism.
You said it was religious tribalism.
The tribalism is the important part, not the religious. Just because your view is so narrow that you only see issues with one aspect of anything does not mean that it’s the driving cause of every problem you see.
No, belief is not required. Again, see example of Jewish secular.