Religion, Peace and Conflict: War and Violence

These four concepts are the foundation of religious responses to conflict. Students need to define and distinguish them clearly.

Peace — the absence of conflict; a state of harmony between individuals or nations. In many religious traditions, peace is more than the absence of war — it is an active state of justice and well-being. In Christianity, the Hebrew concept of shalom means wholeness and flourishing, not just ceasing conflict.

Justice — fair treatment; giving people what they deserve or what they are owed. Religious traditions emphasise justice as a divine requirement. Amos 5:24 (Bible): "Let justice roll on like a river, righteousness like a never-failing stream." In Islam, 'adl (justice) is one of God's attributes — Muslims are required to act justly even against themselves.

Forgiveness — letting go of resentment towards someone who has caused harm; not requiring punishment or payback. Christianity: Jesus taught "Forgive us our sins as we forgive those who sin against us" (Lord's Prayer). Islam: forgiveness is a virtue, though justice is also permitted.

Reconciliation — restoring broken relationships — between individuals, communities, or nations — after conflict. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission in post-apartheid South Africa (influenced by Archbishop Desmond Tutu's Christian faith) is a modern example of religiously motivated reconciliation.

These concepts are in tension: justice may demand punishment while forgiveness requires letting go; reconciliation requires both parties to be willing. Exam questions may ask how these relate to each other.

Violence is the use of physical force to hurt, injure, or kill. Religions have varied and nuanced views on whether violence is ever justified.

When religions permit violence:

• Self-defence — protecting oneself or others from attack
• Defence of the innocent — preventing harm to the vulnerable
• Just war — meeting the criteria established by tradition (see next slide)

When religions reject violence:

• Pacifist traditions (Quakers, some Buddhists, Jains) reject all violence as incompatible with the sanctity of life
• Jesus' teaching in the Sermon on the Mount: "Blessed are the peacemakers" (Matthew 5:9); "Love your enemies" (Matthew 5:44)
• Non-violence (ahimsa) is central to Buddhist, Jain, and Hindu ethics

Violent protest raises specific questions: is violence against property (e.g. smashing windows) morally different from violence against people? Many religious people supported the civil rights movement in the USA, which was explicitly non-violent. Martin Luther King Jr. drew on Christian teaching about non-violence and the worth of every human being.

Religious tradition	View on violence	Key teaching
Christianity	Generally rejected; self-defence and just war may be permitted	"Put your sword back in its place" (Matthew 26:52); just war tradition from Augustine/Aquinas
Islam	Permitted in self-defence and just war (jihad); terrorism rejected	"Fight in the way of God against those who fight you, but do not transgress limits" (Qur'an 2:190)
Buddhism	Generally rejected; ahimsa is central	The Five Precepts include "do not take life"
Quakers (Christianity)	Absolute rejection of all violence	The Peace Testimony (1660): war is inconsistent with love of God and neighbour

Terrorism is the use of violence or the threat of violence — particularly against civilians — to create fear and advance a political, religious, or ideological goal.

Religious views on terrorism:

No mainstream religious tradition endorses terrorism. All major religions teach the sanctity of human life and the prohibition of killing innocents.

• Christianity: The just war tradition requires that non-combatants (civilians) may not be deliberately targeted. Terrorism, which deliberately targets civilians, cannot be justified under just war criteria.
• Islam: The Qur'an (5:32) states: "Whoever kills a soul... it is as if he had slain all mankind." Islamic scholars near-universally condemn terrorism. The killing of civilians is forbidden in Islamic law, even in war.
• Buddhism: The principle of ahimsa (non-harming) prohibits any intentional killing.

Can religion cause terrorism? This is a 12-mark question area. Those who commit terrorist acts in the name of religion claim religious justification, but mainstream religious authorities reject this. The question is whether extremist interpretations — which selectively use religious texts — represent the tradition genuinely, or are a distortion of it.

The three issues requiring contrasting beliefs (Christianity + one other religion) in this theme are: violence, weapons of mass destruction, and pacifism. For violence: Christians differ between pacifists (Quakers) who reject all violence, and those who accept just war. Islam permits defensive jihad but prohibits attacking civilians.

Reasons given for going to war:

Reason	Example	Religious response
Greed — desire for resources, territory, power	Colonial wars; resource wars	Most religions condemn wars motivated purely by greed as unjust
Self-defence — responding to attack or imminent threat	UK in World War II	Christianity and Islam permit defensive war; pacifists reject all war
Retaliation — punishing an aggressor after an attack	Many 20th-century conflicts	Permitted by some traditions; risky as it can escalate violence

Just War Theory — developed by Augustine (4th century) and systematised by Thomas Aquinas (13th century) — sets out the conditions under which war can be morally justified:

Criterion	Meaning
Just cause	The reason for war must be just — e.g. self-defence, protecting the innocent, correcting injustice
Right intention	The aim must be to achieve good (e.g. peace, justice), not revenge or gain
Proportionality	The harm caused must not exceed the good achieved; the level of force must be proportionate
Last resort	All peaceful alternatives (diplomacy, sanctions) must have been exhausted first
Declared by proper authority	War must be declared by a legitimate government, not individuals or militias
Reasonable chance of success	War should not be fought if there is no realistic prospect of achieving the just aim

Just war theory is not a Christian monopoly — Islamic tradition has comparable criteria for jihad (the greater jihad is internal spiritual struggle; the lesser jihad is physical fighting, governed by strict rules about protecting civilians and the environment).

Holy war is war fought for religious reasons — on behalf of God, in defence of faith, or to spread religious beliefs.

• In Christian history, the Crusades (11th–13th centuries) were declared holy wars to recapture Jerusalem from Muslim rule. The Church granted spiritual rewards for participation.
• In Islam, jihad (literally "struggle") includes the concept of fighting in the defence of Islam. The lesser jihad — physical fighting — must follow strict rules: protect civilians, do not destroy crops or property unnecessarily.

Differences between just war and holy war:

	Just War	Holy War
Authority	Secular government	Religious authority (e.g. a Caliph, the Pope)
Justification	Political/moral — protecting the innocent, correcting injustice	Religious — obeying God, defending faith
Reward	Political outcomes — peace, justice	Spiritual reward — salvation, paradise

Pacifism is the belief that war and violence are never morally justified, and that conflicts should be resolved through non-violent means.

• Quakers (Religious Society of Friends) are the most prominent Christian pacifist denomination. Their Peace Testimony (1660) states that war is incompatible with Christianity.
• Buddhist ethics emphasise ahimsa and compassion — taking any life is harmful karma.
• Martin Luther King Jr. advocated active non-violence rooted in Christian love (agape) — not passive acceptance of injustice, but peaceful resistance.

Pacifism is contrasted with just war theory: pacifists argue no criteria can make killing right; just war theorists argue that refusing to fight can allow greater evil to prevail.

Theme D requires contrasting beliefs from Christianity and one other religion on violence, weapons of mass destruction, and pacifism. Islam is the most commonly paired tradition.

Issue	Christian views	Islamic views
Violence	Pacifist strand (Quakers): reject all violence; mainstream: permit self-defence and just war	Jihad in defence of Islam permitted; terrorism and attacking civilians forbidden
Weapons of mass destruction	Most churches oppose WMDs — indiscriminate killing violates just war's proportionality and non-combatant immunity	Islamic law forbids killing civilians; WMDs, which cannot discriminate, are widely condemned by Islamic scholars
Pacifism	Quakers hold absolute pacifism; most mainstream denominations accept just war	Islam does not endorse absolute pacifism — defensive fighting is permitted — but the greater jihad is non-violent spiritual struggle

The greater jihad vs. lesser jihad distinction is important: the Prophet Muhammad reportedly said that returning from battle, fighters returned from the lesser jihad to the greater jihad — the struggle against one's own lower nature. This places internal moral effort above physical warfare in Islamic teaching.

Exam tip: For a 12-mark question on violence or pacifism, include: a specific Christian teaching and example, a specific Islamic teaching and example, a developed contrast between them, and a reasoned conclusion about which religious view is more persuasive and why.

1. Confusing holy war and just war

Just war is a philosophical framework about when war is morally permissible. Holy war claims divine command or religious reward as justification. They can overlap but are distinct concepts. Name both correctly.

2. Treating all Muslims as having the same view on jihad

Jihad has multiple meanings. The greater jihad (internal spiritual struggle) is considered more important than the lesser jihad (physical fighting). Many Muslims emphasise non-violent interpretations, and terrorist acts are condemned by mainstream Islamic scholars.

3. Saying all Christians are pacifists — or none are

Christianity contains both pacifist traditions (Quakers, some Mennonites) and the mainstream acceptance of just war. Show you know both exist and why they differ.

4. Forgetting all six just war criteria

AQA questions may ask you to "describe just war theory" for 4 marks. Know all six criteria and be able to name them with brief explanations. Listing only two or three limits your marks.

5. Omitting the civilian protection principle

The requirement to protect non-combatants (civilians) is central to both just war theory and Islamic rules of warfare. This principle is what makes terrorism — which deliberately targets civilians — unjustifiable under both frameworks.