What do you think?
Rate this book
Ben-Gurion looks at the Bible;
The addresses presented in this volume were delivered by the first Prime Minister of the State of Israel to a select group of students who comprised the "Prime Minister's Bible Study Circle." The issues with which Mr. Ben-Gurion wrestles, and the resolutions he proposes, will be of interest to all those interested in the sacred text, regardless of religion. Originally published in Hebrew in 1969.
317 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1972
4 people are currently reading
22 people want to read
About the author
David Ben-Gurion
56 books17 followersDavid ben Gurion, originally David Grün, active Polish-born Israeli political leader, in the Zionist movement founded the Mapai party in 1930, after World War II organized the resistance against the British, and upon independence from 1948 served as prime minister to 1953 and from 1955 to 1963.
David ben Gurion came first.
Passion of ben Gurion began early in life to a major and executive head in 1946. He headed the Jewish agency later as president of its executive de facto of the community in Palestine and largely its struggle. On 14 May 1948, he formally proclaimed the establishment of the state, helped to write the declaration, and first signed it. Ben-Gurion during the Arabs of 1948 united the various Jewish militias into the defense forces. People subsequently knew him as "father."
Ben-Gurion followed and first served. He helped to build the state institutions, presided, and aimed various national projects at the development of the country. He also oversaw the absorption of vast numbers of all Jews. A centerpiece of his foreign improved relationships with the West Germans. The Nazis persecuted Jews during the Holocaust; he worked very well with government of Konrad Adenauer in Bonn, and West Germany provided large sums in the reparations agreement in compensation.
He in 1954 resigned, served at defense, and afterward returned in 1955 to office. Arab guerrillas attacked; he responded aggressively and after Egypt nationalized the Suez Canal invaded in 1956 alongside French forces.
From office, he stepped away in 1963 and from life retired in 1970. He then at Sde Boker, a kibbutz in the Negev, lived until his death.
Posthumously, Ben-Gurion was named one of Time magazine's 100 Most Important People of the 20th century.
Yeshayahu Leibowitz considered Ben-Gurion "to have hated Judaism more than any other man he had met." On his religious views, Ben-Gurion was an atheist.
More: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/t...
http://www.biography.com/people/david...
David ben Gurion came first.
Passion of ben Gurion began early in life to a major and executive head in 1946. He headed the Jewish agency later as president of its executive de facto of the community in Palestine and largely its struggle. On 14 May 1948, he formally proclaimed the establishment of the state, helped to write the declaration, and first signed it. Ben-Gurion during the Arabs of 1948 united the various Jewish militias into the defense forces. People subsequently knew him as "father."
Ben-Gurion followed and first served. He helped to build the state institutions, presided, and aimed various national projects at the development of the country. He also oversaw the absorption of vast numbers of all Jews. A centerpiece of his foreign improved relationships with the West Germans. The Nazis persecuted Jews during the Holocaust; he worked very well with government of Konrad Adenauer in Bonn, and West Germany provided large sums in the reparations agreement in compensation.
He in 1954 resigned, served at defense, and afterward returned in 1955 to office. Arab guerrillas attacked; he responded aggressively and after Egypt nationalized the Suez Canal invaded in 1956 alongside French forces.
From office, he stepped away in 1963 and from life retired in 1970. He then at Sde Boker, a kibbutz in the Negev, lived until his death.
Posthumously, Ben-Gurion was named one of Time magazine's 100 Most Important People of the 20th century.
Yeshayahu Leibowitz considered Ben-Gurion "to have hated Judaism more than any other man he had met." On his religious views, Ben-Gurion was an atheist.
More: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/t...
http://www.biography.com/people/david...
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
October 7, 2024
Hard to read but highly rewarding. Learnt a lot about the insights behind the historiosophy inside the establishment of the State. I find his point of view eccentric, but noneless, worthy of consideration.
He acknowledges the spiritual-moral and monotheistic consciousness in the existence of Hebrews, fast forward Israelites, but without losing the practical conception of state-nation and the political need for independence in it.
At the middle of the book I thought I was going to give it a lower rating, but at the end of it I was confronted within my own ideas on the ontology of oneself and the history tied to it, well described throughout Israel’s journey.
I feel like this is not a book for everyone, it was made for a very narrow and a specific public. But I’m grateful for the work put into the translation from Hebrew to English, and the fidelity to the interpretations of the Torah made by the leader behind the modern conception of the State of Israel.
Sometimes the book may seem a little bit insistent in his hypothesis about the antiquity of Hebrews, the definition of identity, and the relationship between spirituality and nationalism. But, in every part of the storytelling there’s also an invitation for debate, therefore it’s worth the reading if you are a person inclined towards criticism, analysis and reflection. I particularly enjoyed the facilities he provided to integrate the context behind the conflict, from a historical but theological point of view.
He acknowledges the spiritual-moral and monotheistic consciousness in the existence of Hebrews, fast forward Israelites, but without losing the practical conception of state-nation and the political need for independence in it.
At the middle of the book I thought I was going to give it a lower rating, but at the end of it I was confronted within my own ideas on the ontology of oneself and the history tied to it, well described throughout Israel’s journey.
I feel like this is not a book for everyone, it was made for a very narrow and a specific public. But I’m grateful for the work put into the translation from Hebrew to English, and the fidelity to the interpretations of the Torah made by the leader behind the modern conception of the State of Israel.
Sometimes the book may seem a little bit insistent in his hypothesis about the antiquity of Hebrews, the definition of identity, and the relationship between spirituality and nationalism. But, in every part of the storytelling there’s also an invitation for debate, therefore it’s worth the reading if you are a person inclined towards criticism, analysis and reflection. I particularly enjoyed the facilities he provided to integrate the context behind the conflict, from a historical but theological point of view.
July 2, 2023
This book is a mix of platitude-filled speeches about the greatness of Israel, and often-eccentric commentary about the Torah and a few other parts of the Hebrew Bible (especially Joshua). I especially liked Ch. 7, in which Ben-Gurion argues respectfully with various academics.
Much of his commentary focuses on the idea that there were two groups of ancient Israelites: the group that came with Moses from Egypt, and a (possibly larger) group that did not go with Jacob to Egypt several hundred years earlier, and thus never experienced Egyptian slavery. His arguments for this idea range from sane to off-the-wall.
An example of the former is his discussion of Joshua 23 and 24; he gives two very different end-of-life speeches, and it seems reasonable that they might involve different audiences. An example of the latter is his claim that if the Hebrews were really one people who had spent generations together, they would not have divided into tribes that often did not get along with each other. This claim makes no sense to me, because in a society with mass media to unify the nation, villages that are more than a few miles apart could easily become very different places over the course of centuries. If anything, it is surprising that these tribes were able to reunify into a kingdom a few centuries after Moses.
Much of his commentary focuses on the idea that there were two groups of ancient Israelites: the group that came with Moses from Egypt, and a (possibly larger) group that did not go with Jacob to Egypt several hundred years earlier, and thus never experienced Egyptian slavery. His arguments for this idea range from sane to off-the-wall.
An example of the former is his discussion of Joshua 23 and 24; he gives two very different end-of-life speeches, and it seems reasonable that they might involve different audiences. An example of the latter is his claim that if the Hebrews were really one people who had spent generations together, they would not have divided into tribes that often did not get along with each other. This claim makes no sense to me, because in a society with mass media to unify the nation, villages that are more than a few miles apart could easily become very different places over the course of centuries. If anything, it is surprising that these tribes were able to reunify into a kingdom a few centuries after Moses.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews