Does Religion Cause Violence or Is It Used to Justify Pre-Existing Conflicts?

,

Conflicts and Violence

1. Introduction

The relationship between religion and violence is complex and highly debated. While some argue religion inherently causes violence due to its absolutist truth claims, others suggest religion is primarily used to legitimise and mobilise pre-existing political, economic, and social conflicts. This analysis examines both perspectives, supported by historical examples, sociological theories, and theological reflections.

2. Religion as a Cause of Violence

2.1 Sacred Absolutism and Moral Certainty

2.1.1 Divine Commands

Religious systems often claim absolute truths and divine mandates, potentially fostering:

  • Non-negotiable positions in conflicts.
  • Perception of opponents as enemies of God rather than human rivals (Juergensmeyer, 2003).

2.1.2 Scriptural Justifications

Certain religious texts contain violent passages:

  • Hebrew Bible: conquest of Canaan (Joshua).
  • Qur’an: verses allowing defensive jihad (Qur’an 2:190).
  • Christian history: calls for crusades (Riley-Smith, 2005).

Interpretations that literalise or universalise such texts can promote violence.

2.2 Religious Identity and Group Solidarity

2.2.1 In-group/Out-group Dynamics

Religions create strong group identities, which:

  • Strengthen solidarity within communities.
  • Demonise outsiders, increasing potential for conflict (Girard, 1977).

2.2.2 Martyrdom and Sacrifice

Beliefs in afterlife rewards or martyrdom can motivate extreme violence (Juergensmeyer, 2003).

3. Religion as Justification for Pre-Existing Conflicts

3.1 Instrumentalisation Theory

3.1.1 Political and Economic Drivers

Most violent conflicts framed as religious have underlying political, territorial, or economic causes, with religion providing:

  • Legitimacy and moral justification.
  • Mobilisation of popular support (Cavanaugh, 2009).
Examples:
  • Crusades: While framed as holy wars, they also pursued political power and economic gain (Tyerman, 2006).
  • Thirty Years’ War: Ostensibly Protestant-Catholic conflict, driven by dynastic and territorial ambitions (Parker, 1997).
  • Partition of India (1947): Hindu-Muslim violence rooted in colonial policies and nationalist politics (Pandey, 1990).

3.2 Religion as a Cultural Marker

3.2.1 Ethno-Religious Conflicts

Where religion aligns with ethnicity (e.g. Bosnia, Northern Ireland), it acts as:

  • Identity marker for mobilisation.
  • Symbolic justification rather than causal factor (Fox, 2004).

4. Theoretical Perspectives

4.1 Mark Juergensmeyer – Cosmic War Theory

Conflicts become religiously violent when framed as cosmic wars between good and evil, giving ultimate meaning and moral imperative to violence (Juergensmeyer, 2003).

4.2 William Cavanaugh – Myth of Religious Violence

Cavanaugh (2009) argues:

  • The idea that religion is uniquely prone to violence is a secular myth.
  • Modern nation-states use the “religious violence” narrative to justify their own wars and marginalise religious institutions.

4.3 René Girard – Mimetic Desire and Sacrificial Violence

Girard (1977) suggests:

  • Religion historically channelled human violence into sacrificial rituals to prevent social chaos.
  • However, religious myths can also legitimise scapegoating and collective violence.

5. Contemporary Examples

5.1 Islamist Extremism

Case: ISIS

  • Uses Islamic narratives to justify violence.
  • Root causes include political instability, economic deprivation, Western intervention, and identity crises (Gerges, 2016).

5.2 Hindu Nationalism

Case: Hindutva

  • Uses religious rhetoric to justify violence against minorities.
  • Motivated by political mobilisation, caste dynamics, and nationalism (Jaffrelot, 2007).

5.3 Christian Extremism

Examples

  • White supremacist Christian Identity movements in the US.
  • Northern Ireland Troubles: Protestant-Catholic framing overlaying nationalist conflict (Mitchell, 2006).

6. Peace Traditions Within Religions

All major religions include teachings promoting peace and nonviolence:

  • Christianity: Love your enemies (Matthew 5:44).
  • Islam: “If they incline to peace, incline to it also” (Qur’an 8:61).
  • Buddhism: Ahimsa (nonviolence) and metta (loving-kindness).
  • Hinduism: Ahimsa as highest dharma.

7. Conclusion

Does religion cause violence?

  • Religion contains elements that can motivate, frame, and justify violence, especially when interpreted absolutistically.

Or is it used to justify pre-existing conflicts?

  • In most cases, political, economic, and social conflicts precede, with religion providing powerful symbolic justification and mobilisation.

Overall, religion does not cause violence independently; rather, it:

  • Amplifies pre-existing conflicts when used as a legitimising framework.
  • Shapes conflict narratives, intensifying group solidarity and moral justifications.
  • Simultaneously provides resources for peace, reconciliation, and justice.

8. References

  • Cavanaugh, W. T. (2009). The Myth of Religious Violence. Oxford University Press.
  • Fox, J. (2004). Religion, Civilization, and Civil War. Lexington Books.
  • Gerges, F. A. (2016). ISIS: A History. Princeton University Press.
  • Girard, R. (1977). Violence and the Sacred. Johns Hopkins University Press.
  • Jaffrelot, C. (2007). Hindu Nationalism: A Reader. Princeton University Press.
  • Juergensmeyer, M. (2003). Terror in the Mind of God: The Global Rise of Religious Violence. University of California Press.
  • Mitchell, C. (2006). Religion, Identity and Politics in Northern Ireland. Ashgate.
  • Pandey, G. (1990). The Construction of Communalism in Colonial North India. Oxford University Press.
  • Parker, G. (1997). The Thirty Years’ War. Routledge.
  • Riley-Smith, J. (2005). The Crusades: A History. Yale University Press.
  • Tyerman, C. (2006). God’s War: A New History of the Crusades. Belknap Press.
Home