Truth, Honesty and Justice
The Alternative to Wars, Terrorism and Politics

Home Page - Issues - The World Court of Justice - BOOKS - Contacts - Donate - Search

Resolving Conflict Between Religion and Politics
Publication date: 2003-07-27

What are the Possibilities for Resolving Conflict between Religion and Politics?

We were asked: “What are the possibilities for resolving conflict between religion and politics?”

To answer that question one needs to understand what is “religion” and what is “politics”.

The world “religion” is used in a number of senses, of which the relevant for answering the above question are:

  1. The Man's attempts to understand the reasons for his existence, the purpose of his life, and his relationship to the world in which he lives.

  2. The Man's attempts to discover ways of controlling the world in accordance with his own wishes.

  3. A system of ideas of men who sought to answer the questions in items (1) and (2).

  4. Organized activity of a group of people for the purpose of learning the ideas in item (3) and governing their lives in accordance with these ideas, as well as various institutions set up for the purpose of this activity. In practice, however, such activities often degenerate into meaningless rituals and superstitious beliefs far removed from the teachings of the men whose ideas the religions claim to follow. When most people use the word “religion” they usually mean such “organised religion”.

Although the above four items are closely interconnected, they are not the same, and the differences between them are important for answering our original question.

Thus the primitive religions of people who worshiped stones (or other objects) reveal attempts to assert a fact that their life is controlled by a stone. And that this stone has powers to satisfy their wishes.

And even in those primitive religions there were people who were believed to know the “correct ways” of worshiping stones, and were passing their “science” of stone‐worship from generation to generation.

As the collective human knowledge of the world grew, their view of the world changed with their increased knowledge. And at the present time there emerged three types of human theories about Man's place in the Universe:

  1. Religions based on a concept of one or more human‐shaped gods, who are believed to exercise some control over human life and can be influenced by prayers and rituals. Although the philosophies of such religions are contradicted by human knowledge and experience, their social and political institutions still continue to survive.

  2. Atheistic theories denying existence of any gods (as understood by the religions in the previous category). Atheists seek to explain the origin of Man and the Universe by various “materialistic” theories. The main use of such theories is to refute religions based on the concept of human‐shaped gods. But the fact that religions based on the concept of human‐shaped gods can be proved to be false, does not prove that the materialistic philosophies are correct. In spite of their sophistication, they cannot be proved to be true and remain just pretentious “science fiction” disproved by the continuous advances in human knowledge. Such materialistic theories provide little value to Mankind in understanding Man's place in the Universe. This shortcoming of “materialistic” philosophies is supplemented by ideologies — pseudo‐scientific theories aimed to justify political power of some groups of people over others. But these ideologies are not truly “godless”. They replace the idolatry of worshiping images of imaginary gods, with idolatry of worshiping politicians, ideologues and their statues and images.

  3. The view that asserts that God is whatever created the Universe and makes it what it is, while rejects any attempts to describe that God by ascribing to it any image or comparing it to anything known to Man. According to that view, the existence of such God can be only known through the results of its actions: which are the existence of Man and of the Universe. Such view of God fails to satisfy those who would like to be able to describe and imagine their God (and control it as well). And it is rejected by the Atheists, because they believe that there is no God, but only “matter” or “Nature”. It does provide, however, the answer to Man's questions “What is the place of Man in the Universe?” and “How Man should live his life correctly?”. And the answers are: “Man is creation of God, like the rest of the Universe” and “Man should live his life in accordance with God's will — that is in harmony with Nature (his own and the one around him) as intended by its Creator”.

Although in the modern “western” culture “science” and “religion” are seen as incompatible with each other, in fact “religion” in sense (1) is science, in the sense of activity aimed at learning about Nature. While it is common to believe that “scientific” knowledge or methods are always objective and correct, in practice this is not the case. In their early days, geography or medicine were full of false assumptions and superstitious beliefs, and some “sciences” like alchemy1, phrenology2, or Marxism‐Leninism3, once very fashionable and popular pursuits, proved to be totally false. Now these “sciences” are just historical curiosities and monuments to human tendency to self‐deception.

And in the same way as it took millennia of collective human experience and inspirations of geniuses to come to the experimental sciences of our times, it took millennia of collective human experience and generations of prophetic personalities to arrive at a truly scientific religion and a logically provable definition of God.

Since religion in a very general sense of that word is the science of Man's role in the Universe and of correct human behaviour, it was always closely related to human government. At times the religious leaders and the administrative leaders happened to be the same people, at other times they were separate and complimentary, and sometimes rivals vying for power. But at all times the administrators (or governments) had to justify their powers and their actions, and they often justified it by religion.

While the purpose of government powers is to perform the duties of government, most rulers used these powers for self‐aggrandizement and enrichment, which they saw as the privileges of power. And it is this self‐aggrandizement and the luxurious life‐style that was usually the main motivation for seeking government power. And it is this activity of seeking, retaining or influencing government power for the purpose of advancing interests of some at the expense of others that came to be known as politics.

And just as government was in constant interaction with religion, so was politics in constant interaction with both government and religion.

Religious leaders used their authority for the purpose of self‐aggrandizement, and they used politics to place themselves into positions of power. Administrative rulers used religion politically to justify their own powers and privileges. Religion itself was shaped and distorted for political purposes both by religious and administrative leaders. Often religion, government and politics were so tightly interwoven that they became just different manifestations of one single entity — absolute power vested in a single person. Thus the Pharaoh of Egypt was God, the supreme religious leader and the supreme administrative ruler all at the same time; and to keep himself in power he used politics.

The absolute monarchs of Europe and the “oriental despots” of Asia all used religion for political purposes. But closer towards the 20th century, absolute monarchy in Europe gives way to “democratic” electoral government, and religion to secular or secular/religious ideologies.

Having examined the interaction of religion and politics, we come back to the question: “What are the possibilities for resolving conflict between religion and politics?” — And whether such conflict exists.

There is no “conflict” between politics and religion in senses (2) and (4). Politics has always been closely intertwined with attempts of Man to control the world around him, and with various organised religions.

But religion, as a science of the place of Man in the Universe and of honest and successful human government, is incompatible with politics.

Politicians are not against religion as a set of rituals and ceremonies, they are only too willing to use such religion for their own political ends, but they are against honesty and justice, because honesty exposes their deceptions, and justice deprives them of the privileges of abusing their powers. Honesty and justice remove politics from government.

Honest search for successful government leads us to the inescapable conclusion that such government must be honest, competent and just. And this is where politics and religion (as a science of government) collide in an irresolvable conflict, because honest, competent and just government is government without politics.

Religion as teachings of prophetic personalities (sense 3), is also in conflict with politics.

The prophets were calling people towards honesty and justice and by doing so they threatened the powers and privileges of the political rulers of their time. And this is why prophets were persecuted, exiled, imprisoned, tortured and killed by political rulers. And politicians were always distorting and misinterpreting the teaching of the prophets as it was convenient for themselves.

Here again we see, that the real conflict is not between politics and religion as an institution, but between politics and truth, honesty and justice. And it is this conflict that can be only resolved by total eradication of politics from government, because a political government cannot be honest, competent and just.

So, why will people abandon politics and turn to honest government? Because by trial and error they will discover that this is the only way to secure life. And in the same way as their selfishness drove them to politics, the same selfishness will drive them to honest government. God does works in his mysterious ways.

Notes:   -----   to top

1) Alchemy was a science seeking to convert base metals into gold and to discover the elixir of life, which would enable people to live forever. Although this science was popular for a number of centuries, neither of the two objectives had been achieved.

Back to text

2) Phrenology was a science claiming to be able to determine various mental faculties of individuals from the shape of their skulls. It was proved to be totally false.

Back to text

3) Marxism‐Leninism was the theory underlying the Communist experiment in Russia and other countries. Although proved to be false, its influences can still be seen in the philosophies of the various Socialist and Social‐Democratic parties around the world and even in theories of political parties seeking to oppose them. The main idea of Marxism‐Leninism was that by abolishing private property it is possible to establish an ideal society where all the wealth of the society will be owned by the society as a whole, and to which everybody will be contributing in accordance with one's abilities and using it in accordance with one's needs. Attempts to implement such society invariably lead to impoverished countries governed by Communist dictators with unlimited powers.

Back to text

Tweet       Follow @wcj4

If you have found this article stimulating, check out other articles.

If you disagree with us, tell us. Prove us wrong, and we shall agree with you.
If you agree with us, spread the message of Government by Truth, Honesty and Justice.

If you want us to deal with more issues and publish more articles, send a monetary donation.

You can see printed books and publications at Truth and Justice Publications Ltd website and find out how you can buy, borrow or review them.

If you want to be informed of any new articles on this site, send us an empty email, by clicking here. If you are interested in articles only on a particular subject, tell us so in the email.

Home Page - Issues - The World Court of Justice - BOOKS - Contacts - Donate

Copyright (C) 2003 Shams Ali — All rights reserved

WARNING: The Google Search data can be out of date. For up to date search go to the issues and browse through the contents using your browser search (find) facility.

Search WWW Search Search

      to Top