Jerusalem: Sacred because they said so

In continuation to last week’s discussion, Armstrong provided contextualization for how Jerusalem is cherished as a sacred space. However, when discussing the apparent infatuation people have with Jerusalem she was able to not necessarily place this characteristic on believers. She argues that viewing something as sacred is not exclusive to only people who believe the space possesses divine connections. Instead, Armstrong states that “such sites are ‘sacred’ to us because they are inextricably bound up with our conception of ourselves” (Armstrong, 8). This lens in viewing Jerusalem is interesting because it allows for this “holy city” to be viewed through a non-religious manner. Some might argue that this lens could not deliver an accurate portrayal of Jerusalem due to the undoubting religious influence. However, I would be interested to try to at times view Jerusalem through a non-religious lens and ask myself the question of “why does this piece of land matter so much”? It seems that the “profound experiences that transform our lives” will carry a weight that gives them sacred like qualities (Armstrong, 8). Qualities that become rooted in an identity to a point that allows future generations to view upon such spaces with the same fondness of past. Perhaps Jerusalem as a place is not solely influential due to the divine connections but also because of the historical significance. When Armstrong claimed that we are “meaning seeking creatures”, this could be an entry point to explain the creation and adherence to sacred spaces. Just how Eliade argued how humans are seeking for “orientation”, I would argue that humans find this orientation by creating meaning. Further justification for the significance of how a sacred space is assigned meaning is through the way people reflect upon it. The accounts attesting to the story of Israel and its people is one that shows “how the people of their own period saw the past” and carried more legend-like qualities than historical facts (Armstrong, 25). This isn’t to say that the accounts are of no value but it’s worth recognizing the intent of them. These accounts succeed in attaching themselves to the idea of a sacred space and “shape a distinct identity for themselves” (Armstrong, 25).