Religion vs Violence

2364 Words10 Pages
Religion and Violence According to the Harvard Divinity School, “Religion is a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices that serves the purpose of establishing rules and principles in a society”. When studying various religions, it becomes credible that the principles instilled are those that are morally “just”. Every major religion specifically addresses the issue of violence, and the vast majority condemns such actions. Individuals following a particular religion are expected to follow the rules and principles established which should create a world that is morally righteous and free from violence. For this instance, this is not the case, society must constantly correct immoral actions performed by certain individuals. These individuals originate from diverse backgrounds and religions, and where as there is no specific religion that can be solely liable. Therefore, it becomes necessary to determine how violence and religion can simultaneously exist because the nature of these two elements seems to be contradictory. To begin with, there are two particular explanations in which introduce some historical examples of religion and violence intertwining, and illustrate how those two entities (religion and violence) can coexist. One explanation states that certain individuals feel that violence is relatively harmless, and therefore feel no remorse in performing violent acts. This explanation incorporates classical historical texts, which imply that violence is an essential element of life. Another explanation states that certain individuals feel that violent acts are justified as a means of propagating faith. This explanation points out that survival and expansion of religion through violent acts is acceptable. These two rationalizations help explain how such violence can exist between religious dictation and the actual be practiced by individuals in
Open Document