Religion and War

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lost_Sheep
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

Lost_Sheep

Guest
Not sure if this the appropriate forum or not but…

Very often I hear the anti-religion types say that through history religion has been the cause of most wars.

Is this true and/or accurate? If not, are there any references that can validly refute that claim?
 
Not sure if this the appropriate forum or not but…

Very often I hear the anti-religion types say that through history religion has been the cause of most wars.

Is this true and/or accurate? If not, are there any references that can validly refute that claim?
It’s really not true. See William Cavanaugh’s The Myth of Religious Violence. This myth was largely invented by ascendant nation-states seeking to consolidate power and appropriate the sacrality of churches (Catholic or otherwise) for themselves. Ironically, secular nation-states precipitated much of the “wars of religion” or outdid them in violence themselves.
 
Is this true and/or accurate? If not, are there any references that can validly refute that claim?
I’ve always wondered about this myself, since I’ve heard the same thing. It seems Catholic Answers has an article on this, though: Is Religion REALLY the Number One Cause of War? 🙂

In the article, it says:

"According to the Encyclopedia of Wars (Phillips and Axelrod), of the 1,763 major conflicts in recorded history, only 123 of them can be classified as having been fought over religious differences. That’s less than 7 percent."
 
I have also always thought that excessive desire or greed was the real reason for most wars: Greed for power, greed for someone else’s land or goods, greed for more control. We cloak our true intentions, the greed, with the noble mantle of religion, in order to make the endeavor seem like a good thing. Of course, I’m speaking of wars of aggression. Self defense is another issue, but again, I do not think religion is usually the primary motive.
 
I definitely think Religion is a MAIN cause of most Wars and Conflict.

Killing/Fighting IN THE NAME OF GOD is happening now, everywhere and has been happening throughout history.

i.e. I will kill/die for my beliefs, my God says you are wrong/a sinner and I’m going to hurt/kill you. 😦
 
I definitely think Religion is a MAIN cause of most Wars and Conflict.

Killing/Fighting IN THE NAME OF GOD is happening now, everywhere and has been happening throughout history.

i.e. I will kill/die for my beliefs, my God says you are wrong/a sinner and I’m going to hurt/kill you. 😦
It seems you are speaking generally, possibly from a position of bias. Could you at least give some examples of wars fought mainly for religion, as well as statistics about the death toll?

I then ask you to look at the major conflicts of the last 150 years, just involving America. Civil War, Spanish-American War, WWI, WWII, Korean War, Vietnam War, US involvement in Cambodia, Bosnia, Somalia, the War on Terror, etc. Throw in all of the dictators who killed large portions of their populations (Hitler, Stalin and other Communist leaders, the South American dictators) and you have quite a large number, I would imagine.
 
Not sure if this the appropriate forum or not but…

Very often I hear the anti-religion types say that through history religion has been the cause of most wars.

Is this true and/or accurate? If not, are there any references that can validly refute that claim?
More people have been killed in the name of secular humanism than in the name of religion. Man is born good, but can choose evil; many do. Many must then justly resist. Thus wars begin.
 
It seems Catholic Answers has an article on this, though: Is Religion REALLY the Number One Cause of War? 🙂
In the article above, the 2nd commenter says this:

"I’d like to point out that WW2 was a result of religious fascism, on hitlers side. Hitler was a catholic Christian, and actually believed he was doing the lords work by killing non Christian Jews, he clearly stated this on April 12, 1922. Also, Korea is a heavily religious country, in the sense that the leader is a god, still religious. What about the flood? God killed millions, for what reason? Because the he believed the people were corrupt and that that they were destroying his plan for a perfect planet, so he started fresh. Hitler gassed millions because they were screwing up his plan for a perfect Germany, creator or not, it’s still not okay. Hitler and god are just as bad as each other in my eyes."

How would u guys respond to something like this?
 
I definitely think Religion is a MAIN cause of most Wars and Conflict.

Killing/Fighting IN THE NAME OF GOD is happening now, everywhere and has been happening throughout history.

i.e. I will kill/die for my beliefs, my God says you are wrong/a sinner and I’m going to hurt/kill you. 😦
Can you prove this, or is this just what you believe because you’ve heard it stated often enough (without backup)?

The 20th century alone proves otherwise, with its hundreds of millions of deaths attributed to non-religious conflict and oppression (and also more slavery than any other period in history, in absolute numbers, if only merely because of population size). The atheistic movements of Communism, National Socialism, Fascism, and other materialistic and relativistic philosophies wrought the worst wars, greatest death and destruction in world history, dwarfing all other wars up to that point (combined, I think). WWI, WWII, the Korean War, Vietnam War, and the internal death wrought by the Soviet Union, China, Cambodia, fascist Italy and Spain (in echoes of the “enlightenment” French Reign of Terror a century previous) etc.

Of the other great, high-ranking campaigns of death and destruction, one could easily look to the Mongolian conquests and their successors (Huns, Tartars, etc), who saw themselves (starting with Genghis Khan) as the “Scourge of God.” Ancient empires who fought great wars usually did so for (like most wars) reasons of power, politics, wealth, resources (think Persia, Greece, Rome, Carthage).

“Ethnic cleansing” in Africa, Asia, and elsewhere is, like a great many more wars, tribalism/tribal hatred. It sometimes uses religion as an excuse, but religion is rarely the primary motivating factor, just something used occasionally by leaders as a secondary means to motivate the populace.

In our American experience, none of our wars, including our most destructive by far (to ourselves–the Civil War) were started because of or motivated primarily by religion.

And even if we are going to impugn “religion,” or even “philosophy” (as opposed to simple politics, power, wealth, resources, ethnic hatred, nationalism), shouldn’t we ask “what kind” and “why” before linking the two or accusing all with a broad brush?

And what effects were intended versus what were not? (for instance, settlement of the Americas brought European diseases to the continents, which killed millions of natives, but this was not really intended, and certainly not for religious reasons; so that accident of biology and geography would be inadmissable in such an examination).

In the latter instance, you’d have to examine the motivating factors of a religion’s or philosophy’s tenets to see what they produce and why. Here I think you’ll quickly find that, even of those few conflicts that are truly attributable primarily to religion (rather than the usual suspects of causes listed above), you’ll find them linked to specific religious expressions. Some will certainly come out more favorably than others.

So please, feel free to do some actual research and see if you can find more than a small fraction of wars primarily motivated by religion, and of those, more than an even smaller fraction motivated by Christianity in general (or Catholicism in particular).
 
In the article above, the 2nd commenter says this:

"I’d like to point out that WW2 was a result of religious fascism, on hitlers side. Hitler was a catholic Christian, and actually believed he was doing the lords work by killing non Christian Jews, he clearly stated this on April 12, 1922. Also, Korea is a heavily religious country, in the sense that the leader is a god, still religious. What about the flood? God killed millions, for what reason? Because the he believed the people were corrupt and that that they were destroying his plan for a perfect planet, so he started fresh. Hitler gassed millions because they were screwing up his plan for a perfect Germany, creator or not, it’s still not okay. Hitler and god are just as bad as each other in my eyes."

How would u guys respond to something like this?
Hitler opposed the Catholic Church. You can’t accuse a religion for the acts of someone who has left it or doesn’t follow its teachings. You can’t call an avowed atheist who just happened to be raised Catholic a “Catholic” or impute his beliefs to the Catholic Church, or his motives to Catholic ones. You also can’t accuse the Church or its teachings of the wrongdoing of people who are deliberately and openly opposed to it/them, even if they still call themselves Catholic–e.g., you can’t call the Catholic Church “pro-abortion” or accuse it of the millions of deaths and other harms wrought by abortion just because Nancy Pelosi has that blood on her hands while still trying to claim that she’s Catholic. The Church is clearly and vehemently opposed to abortion and her agenda in that regard.

Also, the Nazi movement was highly atheistic and anti-religion. It’s pretty easy to turn up that evidence.

The Flood is a different matter entirely and different context, and should be addressed separately.
 
I definitely think Religion is a MAIN cause of most Wars and Conflict.

Killing/Fighting IN THE NAME OF GOD is happening now, everywhere and has been happening throughout history.

i.e. I will kill/die for my beliefs, my God says you are wrong/a sinner and I’m going to hurt/kill you. 😦
Well, I’m sorry to say, the historical record is largely against you on this. Again, see William Cavanaugh’s The Myth of Religious Violence.
In the article above, the 2nd commenter says this:

"I’d like to point out that WW2 was a result of religious fascism, on hitlers side. Hitler was a catholic Christian, and actually believed he was doing the lords work by killing non Christian Jews, he clearly stated this on April 12, 1922. Also, Korea is a heavily religious country, in the sense that the leader is a god, still religious. What about the flood? God killed millions, for what reason? Because the he believed the people were corrupt and that that they were destroying his plan for a perfect planet, so he started fresh. Hitler gassed millions because they were screwing up his plan for a perfect Germany, creator or not, it’s still not okay. Hitler and god are just as bad as each other in my eyes."

How would u guys respond to something like this?
The bit about Hitler being “a catholic Christian” is a half-truth. He was baptized Catholic, as were most Austrians at the time, but had repudiated it by adulthood. He was “Christian” only to the extent he invented and peddled a fascist-friendly “positive Christianity” that reenvisioned Jesus as a crusader against the Jews, which he hoped to use to ween Germans off their faith. Nearly all the men who conspired to kill Hitler and seize power were Catholic aristocrats. Etc.

As for the rest, do you really feel the need to respond to every anonymous Internet heckler’s half-formed opinions?
 
"The men who flew planes into buildings on 9/11, the Pakistanis who went on a murderous rampage in Mumbai and the Bali bombers, all killed as many people as they could in the name of their religion. Breivik did it in the name of his race. Timothy McVeigh, who killed 168 people and wounded 800, hated the government. All saw their mass murder as a political act of protest and all felt justified.

Atheists like Mao or Pol Pot have murdered millions in the name of political totalitarianism. Hitler used a quasi-mystical racist philosophy to exploit the ancient hatred of the Jews by Christians. I heard somewhere (I’ve never been able to discover where) that terrorism occurs when you combine a sense of military and economic inferiority with a sense of moral superiority. Religion is very good at conferring a sense of moral superiority on its followers.

Indeed, while the religious have murdered throughout history in the name of their god, I’ve been unable to find any evidence of atheists killing anyone in the name of atheism. Atheists are no more or less capable of evil than anyone else, but it seems that murder, particularly mass murder and war, is a sin of commission. In other words, human beings are generally only prepared to fight and kill in the name of something. It can be a god, but it can also be a political philosophy – like nazism or communism. Many fight for patriotism: for country, tribe or race. Some kill because they’re psychologically disturbed, but none – so far – in the name of atheism.

So, while I don’t agree that only religion causes conflict, I’d argue that all mass murder and war are fought in the name of a bigger-than-self philosophy or idea. Atheism, simply lack of belief in a god, has not yet proved compelling enough to motivate murder. So far no one has gone into a crowded public space and blown themselves up while shouting, “No god is great!”.
 
I like a statement I heard from a priest regarding faith and reason.
“Faith without reason leads to violence. Reason without faith leads to violence.”
As examples, he used the extremism of radical Islamists who willing sacrifice their lives from religious zeal. At the opposite end of the spectrum, he used the example of the French Revolution.
Yes, there have been religious wars. These wars, especially between Christian brothers and sisters serve to scandalize the world with our divisions. Catholics have fought against Protestants, and vice versa. The most recent conflict being that in Ireland. Christians have crusaded against Muslims. Muslims have declared jihad against infidels.
As others have posted, men will find different reasons for conflict. Religion may used as an excuse underlying a deeper motive of material greed or power by ruthless rulers.
All the more reason for individuals to know and understand what their Faith and religion truly teaches.
 
Religion is not named in any theory of “the cause of war” that I have read in a foreign policy / political science publication.

The argument comes from atheist propaganda.

The atheist genocides of the 20th Century refute any claim that religion causes war.

The argument that the atheists who killed millions did not kill for atheism has no merit.

If God exists, you would expect people who turn away from God to do bad things when they obtain power.

In the 20th Century, that is exactly what happened.
 
"The men who flew planes into buildings on 9/11, the Pakistanis who went on a murderous rampage in Mumbai and the Bali bombers, all killed as many people as they could in the name of their religion. Breivik did it in the name of his race. Timothy McVeigh, who killed 168 people and wounded 800, hated the government. All saw their mass murder as a political act of protest and all felt justified.

Atheists like Mao or Pol Pot have murdered millions in the name of political totalitarianism. Hitler used a quasi-mystical racist philosophy to exploit the ancient hatred of the Jews by Christians. I heard somewhere (I’ve never been able to discover where) that terrorism occurs when you combine a sense of military and economic inferiority with a sense of moral superiority. Religion is very good at conferring a sense of moral superiority on its followers.

Indeed, while the religious have murdered throughout history in the name of their god, I’ve been unable to find any evidence of atheists killing anyone in the name of atheism. Atheists are no more or less capable of evil than anyone else, but it seems that murder, particularly mass murder and war, is a sin of commission. In other words, human beings are generally only prepared to fight and kill in the name of something. It can be a god, but it can also be a political philosophy – like nazism or communism. Many fight for patriotism: for country, tribe or race. Some kill because they’re psychologically disturbed, but none – so far – in the name of atheism.

So, while I don’t agree that only religion causes conflict, I’d argue that all mass murder and war are fought in the name of a bigger-than-self philosophy or idea. Atheism, simply lack of belief in a god, has not yet proved compelling enough to motivate murder. So far no one has gone into a crowded public space and blown themselves up while shouting, “No god is great!”.
Atheism was an integral aspect of most Communist dictators, who killed millions because of their overarching ideology. If one counts the atheist Communist regimes of the 20th century, it would seem that atheism has resulted in much more killing than has religion.
 
Religion is very good at conferring a sense of moral superiority on its followers.
So is tribalism, nationalism, ethnocentrism, and various forms of statism. More effective, I wager.
I’ve been unable to find any evidence of atheists killing anyone in the name of atheism.
Oh? You must be pretty selective about your “research.” Many secular, atheistic governments have persecuted and murdered various religious adherents precisely because the faithful were perceived either as threats or as distasteful. See, recently, the Holocaust; the Reign of Terror; the Mexican Cristada, etc.
Atheists are no more or less capable of evil than anyone else, but it seems that murder, particularly mass murder and war, is a sin of commission. In other words, human beings are generally only prepared to fight and kill in the name of something. It can be a god, but it can also be a political philosophy – like nazism or communism. Many fight for patriotism: for country, tribe or race. Some kill because they’re psychologically disturbed, but none – so far – in the name of atheism.
Many statist philosophies are very deliberately, intrinsically, committed to atheism, the power of man (and the state) rather than the power of God. And thus they deliberately persecute and commit mass murder and genocide of those who oppose them. As Nietzsche advocates, in the absence of God, might makes right, and the only thing left is to impose your will upon others by any and all means necessary. Nothing else makes sense.
I’d argue that all mass murder and war are fought in the name of a bigger-than-self philosophy or idea. Atheism, simply lack of belief in a god, has not yet proved compelling enough to motivate murder. So far no one has gone into a crowded public space and blown themselves up while shouting, “No god is great!”.
It just takes on a different form. Guillotines in the name of Enlightenment. Firing squads in the name of freeing people from “clericalism.” Death camps and executions to “free” people from the “dangerous” influence of religion.

The vast majority of wars are fought for obvious political reasons–power, money, resources, ethnic hatred. Religion is occasionally a convenient excuse the powerful try to use to get more people to fight. It’s not the primary driver.

Rather, many religions, Christianity foremost among them, act as a great restrainer on violence.

Without a religion or philosophy even advocating a moral good, or a possible judgment, what could possibly restrict anyone or any power from seeking its own interests and domination over the rest? Nothing else would make sense.

I find it the height of conceit that Western atheists believe that their sense of morality is somehow detached from Christianity, when so many of their sensibilities (when they incline towards peace and justice) derive explicitly and almost exclusively from it; without Western Christianity, the world would still be mired in so many of the barbarous and tribal injustices and violence Christianity rose above, and which we still see evident in so much of the non-Western world.

Western civilization is the first to truly advance “human rights,” international justice and peace. And specifically, it was the Catholic Church that built Western civilization.
 
There is nothing wrong with war initiated by religion in itself.

Or should the crusaders dropped down their swords and let the sultans and islamics conquered europe, slave christians and deny entry to the Holy Land?

Should John III Sobieski surrendered to the Ottomans?

The saying “Religion is the cause of war(or some wars)” is void of meaning and full of sound.
 
"The men who flew planes into buildings on 9/11, the Pakistanis who went on a murderous rampage in Mumbai and the Bali bombers, all killed as many people as they could in the name of their religion. Breivik did it in the name of his race. Timothy McVeigh, who killed 168 people and wounded 800, hated the government. All saw their mass murder as a political act of protest and all felt justified.

Atheists like Mao or Pol Pot have murdered millions in the name of political totalitarianism. Hitler used a quasi-mystical racist philosophy to exploit the ancient hatred of the Jews by Christians. I heard somewhere (I’ve never been able to discover where) that terrorism occurs when you combine a sense of military and economic inferiority with a sense of moral superiority. Religion is very good at conferring a sense of moral superiority on its followers.

Indeed, while the religious have murdered throughout history in the name of their god, I’ve been unable to find any evidence of atheists killing anyone in the name of atheism. …
So, the millions of people killed in war and genocide committed by Atheists don’t count, because the Atheists were just trying to squash their enemies, not promote their god.

How convenient for the Atheist apologist. 🤷
 
I have heard the argument that religion is the main cause of war and I don’t agree with
Every time someone says that to me my reply is let’s go war by war and let’s see what is the actual cause of the conflict. If you look with detail to each and every war on the planet the cause is always: uncontrollable desire for power over land and to achivee the world old goal of dominating the world. World domination …that is the cause for each and every war. Some may use the name of God but truth is they do it to justify themselves but the reasonbehind the war is always to dominate over other countries and to conquer land. Even the war between iIsraelites and Palestine’s, that war is notbober religion Thatvwar is over land. Both want the land. Both want to dominate over the land and kick the other one out. Religion is just an added feature but the real reason is the land. Same goes for WWII. The reason of the war was because Hitler wanted to dominate over the world and control the entire world. He had a sick desire for power and that was what caused the war. The religion is only an added future but each and every war in history is cause by the sick uncontrollable desire of power that human have.
 
In answer to the OP: the burden is not on you to refute a claim made with no evidence. The burden of proof is on the person making the claim.

The problem, as Cavanaugh has pointed out, is that “religion” can mean so many different things. For instance, Dawkins or one of those guys responded to the “atheist regimes killed people” argument by saying “because those regimes demanded absolute loyalty, didn’t care about evidence, etc., they were really more like religions.” So what it boils down to is that totalitarian systems that submerge critical thinking and expect people to put loyalty to an ideology above basic feelings of humanity are likely to commit horrific acts of violence. What is not reasonable is to turn this into a specific criticism of supernaturalist, theistic ways of looking at the world.

Edwin
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top