Response to Karen Armstrong

So I've read Karen Armstrong's book The Battle For G-d back in high school. It's about fundamentalism in all three Abrahamic religions and I remember it being a pretty decent book with sound arguments and a good style. I remember loving it and hating it at the same time, and these four chapters from Jerusalem reminded me why. From a scholarly standpoint, I guess it's a decent piece of work. She does a good job accurately explaining the functions, features, and intentions of religion. But as a spiritual/religious/whatever point of view her analysis of religion, and especially of early Jewish history, really pissed me off. Her narrative of blending and transforming the gods based on the military or political situation makes sense to me, I suppose. But her views really conflict with my Jewish beliefs. First of all, your average Jew probably can't tell the difference between Saul, Samuel, and Solomon, much less the years of the two different Israelite commonwealths. Armstrong sticks mostly to history, which is commendable, but the analysis seems cold and almost heartless in my mind. For instance, Armstrong points out at many points that most scripture is written generations after the events they recount. So are we to believe that it's a lie or a misconception? I dunno it's a troubling read but I'm excited to finish it.