I hold no religious faith. I haven’t since I first attained a level of mature rationality. I don’t begrudge people their choice to embrace faith, unless they insist (as many do) that theirs is the “one, true faith” and try to cram it down people’s throats.
One’s religious affiliation is more a function of geography than anything else. Where you are born plays a much bigger role in your exposure to a particular faith than any validity or truth to the specific doctrine.
Educational levels also play a key role. In general, the higher the level of education, the lower the level of religiosity. This is not to imply any derogatory implications. Still, the more exposure to a wider spectrum of philosophy, comparative religious studies, and multiculturalism, the more the unquestioning expectations of most faiths falter.
I’ve read through the major works of Christianity, including several versions of the Bible, Thomas Aquinas’ Summa Theologica, Saint Augustine’s City on the Hill, Luther’s On Secular Authority, Life of Constantine by Eusebius, The Case for Christian Nationalism by Stephen Wolfe (a particularly terrifying book), and the Cambridge Companion to Christian Political Thought.
And I’ve done the same for Islam, including the Qur’an and Hadith, The Muqaddimah, The Ordinances of Government, Milestones by Sayyid Qutb.
And of course, the Torah, the Old Testament, the Guide for the Perplexed by Maimonides, and Law, Politics, and Morality in Judaism for the Jewish perspective.
And I can summarize them all in one line.
“Our faith is the correct faith, our god is the correct god, everyone else is wrong.”
It is this absolute certainty in the absence of evidence that is the most troubling.
I am often accused by the faithful of holding the faith of science. I plead guilty. I embrace science not because it is always right, nor because it believes it is always right, but because it knows it is often wrong and works to correct those mistakes, not reinterpret them to hide its failures.
We may not yet be able to explain how life started on this remote rock in an insignificant part of the Milky Way, in an infinite sea of galaxies. But that does not mean it was God.
Even if evolution turns out to be wrong, that does not prove it was God.
Since the first human varieties evolved (Cro-Magnon, Neanderthal, Sapien), they have sought to explain the inexplicable with magic, myths, and the magnificence, or malevolence, of the gods.
Stars were light from heaven.
Lightning, floods, volcanoes, famine, and earthquakes were the signs of an angry or offended god.
But over time, science brought understanding and overcame ignorance of nature.
Yet there is one consistent theme, often buried in the competing religious sects’ struggle for dominance (primarily driven by the human element responsible) and often overlooked in the fundamental texts.
Sometimes hidden, sometimes merely glossed over for other purposes, there is a fundamental doctrine of tolerance.
Tertullian (c. 160-240 CE) offered these words in his Christian doctrine.
“It is a fundamental human right, a privilege of nature, that every man should worship according to his own convictions; one man’s religion neither harms nor helps another.”
(To Scapula, ch. 2)
“It is assuredly no part of religion to compel religion, to which free‑will and not force should lead us.”
(Apology, ch. 24)
Under Islam
“There is no compulsion in religion. The right path has become clear from error.”
(Qur’an 2:256)
“If your Lord had willed, all who are on earth would have believed altogether. So will you compel people to become believers?”
(Qur’an 10:99)
Under Judaism
“You shall have one law for the stranger and the citizen alike.”
(Exodus 12:49; Numbers 15:16)
“When a stranger resides with you in your land, you shall not wrong him.
The stranger who resides with you shall be to you as one of your citizens;
you shall love him as yourself.”
(Leviticus 19:33–34)
(Author’s note: I wonder how Christians and Jews reconcile this with their cheering on the locking up of kids and their parents by ICE?)
If one takes the time to understand other religious doctrines and to cut through the human-centered secular interests wrapped in selected religious polemics against other religions, the foundational writings all contain explicit exhortations to accept others who follow a different path.
Yet in this country, we now have people who would subvert our secular government to a Christian basis and openly discriminate against non-Christians. They are zealots of their “one true faith” and show ignorance of its foundational teachings.
In this action against Iran, they proclaim their support to “free” the Iranian people and end the oppression of women when their true agenda is to proselytize the Christian faith and impose an entirely different theocratic government worldwide. They may well be a valid reason for the president ordering military action, but so far we’ve not seen any evidence of it, and it is most certainly not found in Christian doctrine.
And yet some have tried.
The true believers have even published a “Christian” justification for war in support of this action. I may not be a religious scholar, but I am certain Jesus’s teachings justify no war. Don’t twist this into something else. I do believe there is justification for war sometimes, but I am just certain they are not part of the teachings of Jesus.
I’ll leave the argument over the actual existence of Jesus and the confidence we can have in those who wrote about him for another time, since Jesus himself never wrote a word. People who weren’t there but had an agenda wrote all the words and teachings attributed to Jesus years or decades after his death.
The following are some intriguing perspectives on religion worldwide, focusing on the major flavors. There are more than 4000 religions worldwide, running the gamut from a few adherents to billions
Within Christianity, there are more than 47,000 denominations, according to the Center for the Study of Global Christianity.
Within Islam and Judaism, there are many sects and divisions.
They can’t all be right. However, if we hypothetically assume that one religion is the true faith, then 99.999% of religious faiths would be incorrect. How do you know which one to pick? Pascal’s Wager says it is a better bet to believe than not to believe, but what if you get it wrong?
A better assumption is that each offers a philosophical path suited to some and not others and the choice of that path is personal, not mandated by a specific supreme being.
I will leave it with this. While I am certain there is no benevolent creature who created the universe and cares whether or not I pray to him, maintain certain dietary restrictions, wear certain clothes, embrace certain beliefs, or recite certain words at certain times facing certain directions, it does not mean there is no value to the fundamental teachings of tolerance, love for your fellow beings, and adherence to the golden rule. Everything else is just window dressing.
Think about this for a minute. Did the Jews really wander around the desert for forty years and not know that murder and stealing were wrong until they received the 15, ah, 10 Commandments?
| Religion / Group | Estimated Adherents | Share of World Population |
| Christianity | ~2.3 billion | ~28.8% |
| Islam | ~2.0 billion | ~25.6% |
| Unaffiliated (atheist | ~1.9 billion | ~24.2% |
| Hinduism | ~1.2 billion | ~14.9% |
| Buddhism | ~324 million | ~4.1% |
| Judaism | ~14.8 million | ~0.2% |
| Other religions (Sikh | ~170 million (combined) | ~2.2% |
| Region | Dominant Faith(s) |
| Europe | Christianity, Unaffiliated |
| Middle East & North Africa | Islam |
| Sub‑Saharan Africa | Christianity & Islam |
| South Asia | Hinduism, Islam |
| East Asia | Unaffiliated, Buddhism, Folk religions |
| Southeast Asia | Buddhism, Islam |
| Americas | Christianity |
| Israel | Judaism |
1. Legitimate Authority
War must be declared by a proper, recognized authority. Romans 13:1 says, “Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities.” Such statements imply that governance is instituted by God to maintain order; thus, decisions about warfare rest with legitimate rulers, not personal vigilantes or factions acting without accountability.
2. Just Cause
A just war cannot be waged for personal gain or conquest. Rather, it must address a genuine wrong, such as defense against violence, protection of life, or the delivery of justice to evildoers. When the nation of Israel faced enemies threatening its survival, Scripture shows that decisive warfare was permitted to uphold the safety of the people and fulfill covenant responsibilities (Judges 2-3). Protecting innocent life remains an overriding concern.
3. Right Intention
The motive for war must be to promote good, restore peace, or correct a grave injustice. In James 4:1-2, wars spring from selfish desires that lead people to violence. A “right intention” means far more than winning or punishing foes; it includes the aim to achieve a just and lasting peace.
4. Probability of Success
Warfare should only be undertaken if there is a reasonable prospect of achieving the intended just outcome. Luke 14:31 reminds us: “What king, when going to war, does not first sit down and consider whether he is able…?” This underscores the biblical counsel to weigh one’s capacity before engaging in conflict.
5. Proportionality
The response must be proportionate to the offense. Excessive force that leads to needless destruction is condemned in Scripture. Even in the Old Testament where wars were fought, there is recurrent attention to limiting harm to civilians and sparing resources that are not part of the hostility (Deuteronomy 20:19-20). The Christian ethic demands that any use of violence must be measured and controlled.
6. Last Resort
All peaceful means of resolving conflict should be exhausted before resorting to war. Matthew 5:9 declares, “Blessed are the peacemakers…,” highlighting the Christian’s charge to seek avenues of harmony. Diplomacy, negotiation, and prayer for enemies (Matthew 5:44) must be attempted when possible. Once all attempts fail, war may be justifiable to prevent greater evil.
