Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!genrad!decvax!microsof!fluke!ssc-vax!uw-beaver!cornell!vax135!ariel!houti!hogpc!houxm!houxf!govern
From: govern@houxf.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Re: Holy Land
Message-ID: <361@houxf.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 1-Jul-83 14:27:05 EDT
Article-I.D.: houxf.361
Posted: Fri Jul  1 14:27:05 1983
Date-Received: Sun, 3-Jul-83 12:14:25 EDT
References: <1694@floyd.UUCP>
Lines: 27

One of the reasons that "fundamentalists" and others refer to Israel
and the surrouding area as "The Holy Land" is a matter of tradition
in language.  I'm not a "Fundy" in the cultural sense, although much
of my theology is similar, but I have noticed that there is a
tendency, especially among preachers, and among rural people, to
talk the way their fathers and grandfathers did.  Some of this may be just
reactionary; some of it is from continual exposure to written tradition
and to oral tradition, especially in preaching style.  Some of it
just comes from only being exposed to people like themselves.

	In any case, Palestine has been commonly called
"The Holy Land" for quite a while, before the founding of the modern
state of Israel*.  Some people's language hasn't caught up with it --
even though many people who use that phrase look at Israel's
existence as fulfilled prophecy, and evidence for their own theology
(Let's not get into that one.. it's a *long* discussion.)

	Also, the phrase "Holy Land" includes areas of Palestine
that (until the 6-day War) were not part of the state of Israel; in
particular parts of Jerusalem, and the Sinai area which has changed
ownership several times even after that war.  It also causes fewer
problems around people who think the the Arabs have some claim to
Palestine.

			Bill Stewart

(I myself tend to call Israel "Israel".)