The St. Bartholomew’s Day massacre of 1572 saw a series of assassinations and waves of violence against the Huguenots (French Calvinist Protestants), during the French Wars of Religion.
A common complaint by secular humanists, usually directed at Christianity, has been that religion has been the primary cause of war and oppression throughout history. Sam Harris, in his book The End of Faith, says that faith and religion are the most prolific source of violence in our history. Religion, however, isn’t going anywhere; the World Religion Database expects there to be a net gain of over a billion Christians, and a net loss of almost 2 million Agnostics and more than 4 million Atheists from 2010 to 2050. Has religion, in fact, been the cause of much of the oppression and war throughout history? This is a basic assumption of many who incorporate it into their justification for disbelief; so does it, on its own, disprove religion? I invite you to join me in examining this question: How much has Religion contributed to wars throughout history, and in discussing what can we and what can we not logically conclude from that?
In any case, let’s assume for a couple paragraphs that Sam Harris and others like him are correct and religion is the cause of most oppression and war of mankind’s history. There’s no question in my mind that war is a sad reality of our world, but what conclusion can we come to if most wars have been religious? If this is in fact true, and the tragedies of war and oppression can all be shown to be caused by religion, at least half or even three fourths of the time, what then? Therefore what? What effect does that have on whether a view is consistent or inconsistent with reality? A view is regarded incorrect based on the reasons, or lack thereof, for the view, not by how kind or cruel the behavior is of the person who holds to the view. Perhaps if I was kind, people would be more apt to listen to the reasons for my view, but whether I am Buddhist and kind to those around me or if I am Muslim and cruel to those around me, what does that have to do with whether my beliefs are correct or incorrect? It appears that those who are raising this issue have a problem with the believer, not the actual belief. It does not logically follow to claim a religious view is correct or not based on a believer’s moral or immoral acts.
Maybe one could claim a religion is wrong in virtue that it promotes violence and oppression, but by doing so they are claiming something about oppression is objectively inconsistent with the way things should be, to which I would ask Why? It seems some intuitive sense would be telling them it is wrong, therefore whatever view they hold to must not make oppression acceptable. They have, then, made some claim to an objective moral standard which requires a worldview capable of explaining it, and I discussed in my last blog post how naturalism fails to provide such a thing.
Additionally, I would bargain that many religious conflicts were not actually fueled by theological disagreements, although I’m not at all claiming this was always the case, but instead were implicitly fueled by politics where political and religious lines matched. The Seventh War of Religion of 1580, for instance, also known as the Lovers’ War, had little to do with aggression between Catholics and Protestants. Instead, the hostilities were set off by the promiscuous wife of Henry IV of Navarre. Greg Koukl offered it this way, that
Many conflicts that appear at first glance to be religious in nature are actually political or cultural wars that divide along religious lines. The strife in Northern Ireland is not a theological dispute about Catholicism vs. Protestantism per se, but rather a cultural power struggle between two groups of people. In like manner, much of the conflict in Eastern Europe and the Middle East is the result of ethnic hostilities, not genuine religious differences. The Crusades, the Inquisition, some of the religious wars of the Reformation, and the Salem witch trials, on the other hand, were more theological.
Furthermore, why should we hold Christianity accountable for the actions of so-called followers whom disobey the explicit instructions? Is oppression or bloodshed either a religious duty of Christianity or a logical application of its teachings? If the answer is no, then the violence done in His name cannot be blamed on Christ. The blame would not be with Christ, but with the people who disobey Him. Clearly, He says If you love Me, you will keep My Commandments (John14v15), including his command to show love even to one’s enemy (Luke10v29-37). The Apostle John communicates the same view: By this the children of God and the children of the devil are obvious: Anyone who does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor the one who does not love his brother (1John3v10). In truth, any acts of cruelty or oppression would not have been due to an individual’s Christian worldview, but a lack thereof. When Martin Luther King Jr. confronted injustice in the white church in the South, for example, he called on those churches not to become more secular, but more Christian. He knew that the answer to oppression and violence was not less Christianity, but a deeper and truer Christianity. A Christianity that transcended their cultural and political associations. Greg Koukl points out that
Nothing in Christian teaching itself mandates forcible conversion to the faith or coerced adherence to Biblical doctrines. The teachings of Christ do not lead logically to wanton bloodshed. Jesus Himself warned of interlopers, wolves in sheep’s clothing. His assessment of them is unmistakable: “I never knew you. Depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness” (Matthew7v23) The actual track record for genuine disciples of Jesus Christ, those who follow the written instructions, is much different…Christian morality is informed by the notion that… God reigns over a moral universe He created. He requires virtuous behavior from His subjects and will one day judge each person’s conduct with perfect justice…. [and] human beings are made in the image of God and therefore have transcendent value. This has been the foundation for Christian ethics for 2,000 years.
In regards to the claim that religion has been the biggest source of oppression and war in human history, the facts may surprise you. The three volume Encyclopedia of Wars, which records some 1,763 wars that have been waged over the course of human history categorize only 123 as being religious in nature. This is only 6.98% of all wars. The percentage is less than half that, at 3.23%, if you subtract those waged in the name of Islam (66). The relationship between religion and war, which skeptics have depicted, is in stark contrast to the facts. Despite this reality, people like Richard Dawkins, who in his book The God Delusion, claim that without religion there would be no labels by which to decide whom to oppress and whom to avenge. Critics of religion continue to make such claims which allude to religion as the ultimate factor responsible for world oppression and violence, and in doing so seem to insinuate that it in some way has anything to do with the coherence of the religious view. Still, it is clear that religion has not played a significant role in most of the world’s wars, though even if it had, that fact would be irrelevant in trying to prove a religious viewpoint false.
Religion then, exonerated from the charge, is not a major contributor to humanity’s wars in proportion to all wars fought. This, however, begs the question of what the cause actually is. I don’t see any way to get around the obvious fact that secular reasoning and naturalistic philosophies have actually been involved in the most bloodshed. The number of people who perished in religious conflicts pales in comparison to the slaughter and butchery which has taken place under non-religious leaders. Ideas have consequences, and in the 20th century they contributed to the democide of an unprecedented number of people. Russia’s communist USSR gave rise to both Joseph Stalin and Vladimir Illich Lenin whom murdered 42,672,000 and 4,017,000, China’s communist Mao Tse-tung and militarist/fascist Chiang Kai-sheck whom murdered 37,828,000 and 10,214,000, communist Cambodia’s Pol Pot whom murdered 2,397,000, Germany’s fascist Adolf Hitler whom murdered 20,946,000, and Imperial Japan’s militarist/fascist Tojo Hideki whom murdered 3,990,000. From 1917 to 1987, in a span of under 70 years, roughly 121,332,000 human beings were murdered by these government regimes. In R. J. Rummel’s work Lethal Politics and Death by Government, he writes
Almost 170 million men, women and children have been shot, beaten, tortured, knifed, burned, starved, frozen, crushed or worked to death; buried alive, drowned, hung, bombed or killed in any other of a myriad of ways governments have inflicted death on unarmed, helpless citizens and foreigners. The dead could conceivably be nearly 360 million people. It is though our species has been devastated by a modern Black Plague. And indeed it has, but a plague of Power, not germs.
The cause, of course, goes deeper than political dogma or philosophical ideology. No single worldview can bear full responsibility, it has occurred under such a wide spectrum of philosophical positions. The common denominator of all this conflict, suffering and oppression, as understood in the Christian worldview, is humankind and the sin problem that plagues it. Very clearly Paul the Apostle and Jesus write that it is due to their hardness of heart, that in the futility of their minds… They are darkened in their understanding (Ephesians4v17,18). That it is because of the ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth (Romans1v18), from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, coveting, wickedness, deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride, foolishness (Mark7v21-23). This, we see, is why their feet are swift to shed blood; in their paths are ruin and misery, and the way of peace they have not known (Romans3v15-17). James asks (and answers his own question) what causes quarrels and what causes fights among you? Is it not this, that your passions are at war within you? You desire and do not have, so you murder. You covet and cannot obtain, so you fight and quarrel (James4v1,2). It is the great tragedy of the human condition, but a reality we must accept if we are to accurately understand and identify why there has been so much war, oppression and suffering.
Many have, claiming religion has been the primary cause of so much war and oppression, seen this as a devastating argument against Christianity or religion in general. It turns out to be a misinformed view of history, though even if it were true, doesn’t address the reasons for the religious view in question and is therefore irrelevant in determining if it is false. It also tells us nothing about the validity or coherency of the claims a religious view makes if so-called followers are disobeying its instructions. Still, less than 7% of all wars have been over theological differences, less than 4% if you do not include Islamic wars, and religious wars account for only 2% of all people killed by warfare. Religion is not to blame; indeed secular ideologies and philosophies have contributed far more to human bloodshed. Despite this, they are not the problem per se, the problem is deeper, diagnosed by many, though cured only by one.
Claim
Only 6.7% of wars are religious.
Rationale
Philip & Axelrod’s index lists 1763 wars, but only lists 120 wars under the heading “Religious wars”.
Note – the index actually lists 121 wars under the “Religious Wars” heading in the index but it lists “ Religion, Sixth and Seventh Wars of (1576–1577, 1580)” as one entry.
Issues & Assumptions
A fundamental observation here is that this is the reference cited by theists as the basis of the claim. Theists have CHOSEN to accept this work as being an acceptable source to analyse the claim of the number of religious wars.
If a formal analysis shows that the claim is unfounded, theists CANNOT then claim that the source cant be relied upon.
The claim is further predicated on the false (sic) assumption that the index lists ALL the wars that the body of the text has identified as religious.
Nowhere is this reasoning provided, and nowhere is there an attempt to demonstrate that this is a reasonable assumption.
Even just a glance at the (alphabetical) titles of the wars (pages iv to xv) or chronological list of wars (pages 1406 to 1425) should make a casual reader suspicious that 120 is an underestimation.
Methodology
If we make a list of the names of the wars from the body of the document, and search for obvious key words (like Allah, Amir, Arab-Israeli, Bishop, Caliphate, Catholic, Charlemagne, Christian, Church, Crusade, Covenanter, Druse, Hindu, Holy, Imam, Janissaries, Jew, Monk, Mormon, Muslim, Papal, Pope, Protestant, Religion, Sacred, Saint, Saladin, Shi’ite, Sikh, Sultan, Sunni, Taliban, Temple) we have already identified 127 Wars – already more than claimed.
If we expand the list to include lesser known religions and religious groups (like Almohad, Almoravid, Fatimid, Hamdanids, Ikshidids, Janissar, Kharijite, Khurramite, Maratha, Moro , Mogul, Muhammad, Saffarid) that gives us 163 Religious wars – more than 40 more than claimed.
A comparison with the claimed 120 yields a surprising list of 43 religious wars NOT included under the “Religious Wars” rubric , including :
• Arab Israeli Wars
• Sultanate Wars
• Holy Roman Empire Wars
• Jewish Revolts
• Muslim Wars
• Sikh Wars
At this point we are immediately struck by the inescapable conclusion that the index is a selection of religious wars and not comprehensive (and nor does it claim to be). The index says nothing more than “These Wars Are Religious”.
Let’s expand the search methodology looking solely at “Combatants” (as specified in the classification for each war), and use our keyword search technique on the combatants.
The combatants section permits much more detail than a “Name”, and it is no surprise that it yields an even greater list – in fact there are 228 wars listed where the combatants are religious groups (from the list above) – and 147 of those wars are NOT listed in the index as “Religious Wars”.
This list (of Wars with Religious combatants but not indexed as Religious Wars) includes :
• Druse Rebellions
• Fatimid Conquests
• Janissaries Revolts
• Mogul Wars
• Shi’ite Rebellions
• Venetian Turkish Wars
And to reiterate – 147 of these wars with religious protagonists are NOT indexed as “Religious Wars”.
At this point it is clear, and beyond debate, that the index reflects, “A Classification” of some wars that are religious but NOT in any sense a comprehensive classification.
Now let’s expand our search even further – and read the descriptions and details of each war. This is an incredibly slow, laborious activity, but in the spirit of completeness – it has been done – All 1762 wars have been reviewed, and religious factors as documented in the encyclopedia itself (without external reference), have been recorded.
Note : depending on whether one uses the alphabetical list, the chronological list, or the body of the encyclopedia, there are minor variations in numbers of wars (e.g. WWII is described as one war in the indexes, and multiple wars with different geographical fronts, in the body of the encyclopedia).
What does this yield ? This provides the grand total of 459 religious wars, of which only 120 are mentioned in the index, and now we know that there are 459 wars – this possibly explains why they aren’t all included under the one index heading. Possibly the authors could have created a completely new separate section “Religious Wars” – but they didn’t.
Clearly the unjustified and untested methodology of using the index to determine the number of religious wars, is fundamentally flawed, and dramatically understates the causes as identified by the authors in the body.
Findings
The encyclopedia (that is cited by theists as an acceptable source for Religious War analysis) lists 459 religious wars out of 1762 in total – 26%.
The inescapable arithmetical conclusion is that ONE WAR IN FOUR IS RELIGIOUS, and the claim of one war in fifteen (6.8%) is not only supported by the reference material as cited by theists but explicitly refuted.
Conclusion
The demonstrably flawed theist methodology understates the percentage of religious wars by a factor of around FOUR.
L + Ratio + no bitches + youngboy better
Down bad
This comment is, sadly, a series of rather simplistic, poorly made accusations against respectable, methodical historians. If one’s way of making a point is to write it in CAPITAL LETTERS, this only betrays a lack of substance to the arguments.
Here, here!
literally just saying “your dumb and wrong because your dumb and wrong, unlike me” like critique his points and where he went wrong instead of insulting him like a child.
The war between Satan and Gods true religion is on going.
1. Satan’s side is to FORCE anyone to worship Man’s rules and any and all mans made up fairy tale laws abut how to worship God. Any church or Religion that claims to worship on ANY DAY OF THE WEEK other then the bibles 7th day of the week Saturday, is at fault here. Like The Catholic church only worships the Pope not Jesus and the Pope’s make up rewritten commandments. Thousands of years of wars by the Catholic Religion against true believers of the Bible and Jesus Christ. Bible Prophecy Revelation 13. The Catholic church has got is world wide power back and is going to resume it’s horrible war again soon. This will be when Jesus comes to end it all. The second res-erection.
2. All those who Believe the True King James Bible and Worship only Jesus Christ are always attacked by Satan’s Churches for thousands of years. most of all religions now claim a false day of Worship on Sunday and or Friday. Wake up every one an leave those fake churches.
It doesn’t matter what the rationale is, nations and people go to war often enough and it’s usually b/c someone with exceptional public marketing skills can rally a bunch of sensitized people over whatever is convenient at the time. IOW, war too is a social construct. Even when the masses revolt, somewhere, someone has to fund it who has an interest. Such is reality. Anyone who is angered about something or someone is potentially a warmonger, given their power to rally the masses. Have a nice day.
Sounds like the basis of Trump’s entire campaign
Really ? Your gonna quote this :
The blame would not be with Christ, but with the people who disobey Him. Clearly, He says If you love Me, you will keep My Commandments (John14v15), including his command to show love even to one’s enemy (Luke10v29-37). The Apostle John communicates the same view: By this the children of God and the children of the devil are obvious: Anyone who does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor the one who does not love his brother (1John3v10
But leave out the many times the Bible condoned or approves of war
Psalm 18:47
The God who gave me vengeance and subdued peoples under me
Deuteronomy 7:2
And when the LORD thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, [and] utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor show mercy unto them
Deuteronomy 13:15
Thou shalt surely smite the inhabitants of that city with the edge of the sword, destroying it utterly, and all that [is] therein, and the cattle thereof, with the edge of the sword.
Joshua 10:19
And stay ye not, [but] pursue after your enemies, and smite the hindmost of them; suffer them not to enter into their cities: for the LORD your God hath delivered them into your hand.
Judges 21:10
And the congregation sent thither twelve thousand men of the valiantest, and commanded them, saying, Go and smite the inhabitants of Jabeshgilead with the edge of the sword, with the women and the children.
Yes, the Bible does give us the Ten Commandments one of which is Thou shalt not kill. But it also gives us many many references where God told his followers to go out and smite their enemies* , usually with the promise that they would have his support in this endeavor
* enemies is a term quite often used in the biblical to mean people guilty of nothing more than disagreeing with that religion
You’re quoting the old Testement. We observe these laws but as Christians do not hold them in practice.
Take take that up with Judaism.
Except for those quotes from the Old Testament and especially the stories of Joshua’s army the Jewish world has waged little war. Of course, after Constantine Christianity came to dominate the western world and Jews were rarely in a position to go to war against them.
The main thing I want to say is that Jesus’ variations on Jewish moral teachings were not outside the limits of Judaism and, yes, if people followed them we’d all get along with a lot less, if any, war. However, Jesus was not a Christian and it is unsupportable to believe that Jesus would ever have taught himself as the way to salvation. Such an idea, far from being a fulfillment of Judaism, flies in the face of it. Those who accept the Gospel of Christ don’t understand how much Paul changed the meaning of messiah and salvation. And, although not all Christians embrace the idea, it says maybe 15 times in the New Testament that those who do not accept Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior are condemned. There lies the makings of the dehumanization of other (since they have an inferior relationship with God) and the platform for persecuting them, abusing them, and murdering them. The commandment by the way does not say Don’t Kill; it says Don’t Murder.
Most Jews recognize that there is no story in Genesis 2-3 of the Fall of Man. And Jews, generally, don’t believe in Satan. We each have a tendency to do good and a tendency to do bad. Those who do not live righteously are that way because they’ve given in to their darker side. It’s not because of Satan or not believing in Christ.
Why are these comments just people throwing hissy fits
The first comment is literally a data-driven breakdown.
That, my friend is what hissies do.
This is a well-thought out and eloquently written paper. If anyone has qualms with this, it’s because they’re quick to take the word of God and spin it out of context. Only the Holy Spirit can remove that “stumbling block” from their minds, and I pray that He does. For those not in Christ, these are harsh words that show we, as people are to blame for this fallen world-not God. It’s as simple as that. Our fallen nature and darkened hearts, and the god of this world, satan, are the cause for all war, death and destruction. Look no further than the Book of Romans. God bless you brother!
Bravo!!!
Denis and Brandon, if we go with the first comment’s conclusion, atheism, aka secularism, is by far the leading cause of wars.
Additionally, atheism is an ideology that shares many of the same problems with religion when you consider the contribution of atheist philosophies to wars of history.
And if you lump Islam and Christianity into the same category, you do so because you do not think deeply. What people of a given ideology believe is an important factor that is dropped by those who would blame religion for all conflicts.
Jesus taught that you must love your enemies.
Muhammad taught that you must hate those who disbelieve in the prophet and Allah and practice Islam as he practices it.
There is a difference.
Mao Tse Tung, Stalin and Lenin’s philosophy is much more similar to Muhammad’s philosophy than to that of Jesus. And Adolph Hitler greatly admired Muhammad. And all of these wonderful atheists were Socialists. But of course, they weren’t practicing Marx’s theory correctly, were they?
By the way who started the war and why they did so is significant. If Marxists begin “terminating” Christian’s in the street and a war ensues, is it a religious war?
You cannot escape the inevitable conclusion: religion as a philosophy that incorporates a belief in a creator God is not the main reason for wars. Only the God of Spinoza can claim that distinction, based on the data.
Well said; and… match.
Jolly good, let’s get some coffee and talk about Truth vs. the Religion of Humanism!
You can’t talk about a “creator” as if it were a true fact!! Creators exist only in the minds of religious people! They do NOT exist in the real world!!! So please, check your facts before you start feeding all that nonsense to human kind!!
I habe very little to add…
Except, I enjoy the Anti-Spam word combo’s so much:
ware ham, bacon mad, take mien, off holly, and… I gotta stop, but my favorite = “ lob chirp “
The amount of BS contained in this article exceeds the number of words within the article itself!! This article was obviously written by a devout theist, and obviously lacks the basic notion of objectivity! It is like somebody referring to an armed bank heist as a minor burglary, possibly justified by the needs of the robber. No! This is all wrong!! If we continue to turn a blind eye to the disgraceful religious wars as minor misunderstandings… and we don’t face the true danger that religion has been posing on humanity for thousands of years and sweep it all under the rug – like religious bigots want you to believe…. Then we are certainly headed for eventual self annihilation of the human race by the hands of a bunch of stupid religious FANATICS!!!
Well said!
Definitely worth revisiting. I have bookmarked here, thanks for that useful content!
Buy MDMA online with XTC pills
Hello everyone!
You can Buy Resarch chemicals from PROFFESSORNL.COM with worldwide stealth shipping!
Great web site you have here. It’s hard to find high-quality writing like yours these days. Thank you for your articles. I find them very helpful. I really appreciate people like you! Take care and have a great day ahead!!
Karya Bintang Abadi
Great website you have here. You have such a beautiful way of writing. Thank you for sharing this, it’s very helpful for some people like me.
Karya Bintang Abadi