Holy Texts: War Justification in Bible, Quran, Torah

Wars are often waged in the name of religion. So what do key texts from Christianity, Islam and Judaism say about the justification for war?

We asked three experts for their views.

The Bible

Robyn J. Whitaker, University of Divinity

The Bible presents war as an inevitable reality of human life. This is captured in the cry of the Teacher in Ecclesiastes:

for everything there is a season […] a time for war and a time for peace.

In this sense, the Bible reflects the experiences of the authors and communities who shaped the texts over more than a thousand years as they experienced both victory and defeat as a small nation among the large empires of the ancient near east.

When it comes to God's role in war, we cannot shirk from the problematic violence associated with the divine. At times, God orders the Hebrew people to go to war and enact horrendous violence. Deuteronomy 20 is a good example of this: God's people are sent to war with the blessing of the priest but told to first offer terms of peace. If peace terms are accepted, the town is enslaved. Certain enemies, however, are decreed worthy of total annihilation, and the Hebrew army is commanded to destroy anyone and anything that doesn't produce food.

On other occasions, war is interpreted as a tool, a punishment where God uses foreign nations against the Hebrew people because they have gone astray (Judges 2:14). You can also find an underlying ethic to treat the captives of war justly. Moses commands that women captured in war are to be treated as wives, not slaves (Deuteronomy 21), and in 2 Chronicles, captives are allowed to return home.

In contrast to war as divinely authorised, many of the Hebrew prophets express hope in a time where God will bring peace and people will "neither learn war any more" (Micah 3:4) but rather turn their weapons into tools for agriculture (Isaiah 2:4).

War is viewed as a result of human sinfulness, something that God will ultimately transform into peace. And that peace (Hebrew: shalom) is more than an absence of war. It is about human flourishing and unity between peoples and God.

Most of the New Testament was written during the first century CE, when Jews and emerging Christians were a minority within the Roman Empire. The military power of Rome is harshly critiqued as evil in resistance texts such as the Book of Revelation. Many early Christians refused to fight in the Roman army.

In this context, Jesus says nothing specific about war but generally rejects violence. When Jesus's disciple Peter seeks to defend him with a sword, Jesus tells him to put away his sword because a sword only leads to more violence (Matthew 26:52). This is consistent with Jesus's other teachings such as "blessed are the peacemakers" or his commands to "turn the other cheek" when struck or to "love your enemies".

The reality is that we find various war ideologies in the Bible's pages. If you want to find a justification for war in the Bible, you can. If you want to find a justification for peace or pacifism, that is there too. Later Christians would develop ideas of "just war" and pacifism based on biblical ideas, but these are developments rather than explicit within the Bible.

For Christians, Jesus's teaching provides an ethical framework for interpreting earlier war texts through the lens of love for enemies. This counterpoint to divine violence and war points readers back to the prophets, whose hopeful visions imagine a world where violence and suffering are no more and peace is possible.

The Quran

Mehmet Ozalp, Charles Sturt University

Islam and Muslims emerged onto the world stage in the hostile environment of the seventh century. In response to major challenges, including warfare, Islam introduced pioneering legal and ethical reforms. The Quran and the Prophet Muhammad's example laid out clear legal and ethical guidelines for the conduct of war, well before similar frameworks appeared in other societies.

Islam did this by defining a new term, "jihad" rather than the usual Arabic word for war, "harb". While harb refers broadly to warfare, jihad was defined within Islamic teachings as a legal, morally justified struggle, which includes but is not limited to armed conflict. In the context of warfare, jihad refers specifically to fighting in a just cause under clear legal and ethical guidelines, rather than belligerent or aggressive warfare.

Between 610-622, Prophet Muhammad practised active non-violence in the face of the constant suffering, persecution and economic embargo he and his followers endured in Mecca, despite insistent approaches by his followers to take up arms. This showed that armed struggle cannot be taken up within the members of the same society, as this would lead to anarchy.

After leaving his home town to escape persecution, he established a pluralistic and multi-faith society in Medina. He took active steps to sign treaties with neighbouring tribes. Despite following a deliberate strategy of peace and diplomacy, the hostile Meccans and allied tribes attacked the Muslims in Medina. Engaging these attackers in an armed struggle was unavoidable.

The permission to fight was given to Muslims by the Quran verses 22:39-40:

The believers against whom war is waged are given permission to fight in response, for they have been wronged. Surely, God has full power to help them to victory. Those who have been driven from their homeland against all right, for no other reason than that they say, "Our Lord is God" […]

This passage not only permits armed struggle but also offers a moral justification for just war. It means war is clearly just when defensive - while aggression is unjust and condemned. Elsewhere, the Quran emphasises this point:

If they withdraw from you and do not fight against you, and offer you peace, then God allows you no way (to war) against them.

Verse 22:39 outlines two ethical justifications for warfare. The first is when people are driven from their homes (and land) - in other words, through occupation by a foreign power. The second is when people are attacked because of their beliefs to the point of violent persecution and attack.

Importantly, verse 22:40 includes churches, monasteries and synagogues. If believers in God do not defend themselves, all places of worship would be destroyed, so this is to be prevented by force if necessary.

The Quran does not allow for aggression, since "God loves not the aggressors" (2:190). It also provides detailed regulations on who is to fight and who is exempted (9:91); when hostilities must cease (2:193); and prisoners should be treated humanely and with fairness (47:4).

Verses such as 2:294 emphasise that warfare and any response to violence and aggression must be proportional and within limits:

Whoever attacks you, attack them in like manner as they attacked you. Nevertheless, fear God and remain within the bounds.

In the event of unavoidable war, every opportunity to end it must be pursued:

But if the enemy inclines towards peace, then you must also incline towards peace and trust in God.

The aim of military action is to end hostilities and remove the reason for warfare, not to humiliate or annihilate the enemy.

Military jihad cannot be pursued for personal ambition or to further nationalistic or ethnic disputes. Muslims cannot wage war on nations that have no hostility towards them (60:8). But if there is open hostility and attack, Muslims have a right to defend themselves.

The Prophet and the early caliphs specifically warned military leaders and all combatants that they must not act treacherously or engage in indiscriminate killing and pillage. He said:

Do not kill women, children, the elderly, or the sick. Do not destroy palm trees or burn houses.

Because of these teachings, Muslims have had legal and ethical guidelines throughout much of history to help limit human suffering caused by war.

The Torah

Suzanne D. Rutland, University of Sydney

Judaism is not a pacifist religion, but in its traditions it values peace above all else, and prayers for peace are central to Jewish liturgy. At the same time, there is a recognition of the need to fight defensive wars, but only within certain boundaries.

In the Torah, the Five Books of Moses, the recognition of the need for war is clear. Throughout their journeying in the desert, the Israelites (Children of Israel) fight various battles. At the same time, in Deuteronomy, the Israelites are instructed (chapter 12, verse 10):

When you go forth against your enemies and are in camp, then you should keep yourself from every evil thing.

The story of Amalek is the symbol of ultimate evil in Jewish tradition. Scholars argue this is because his army attacked the Israelites from the rear - killing defenceless women and children.

The Torah also stresses that army service is compulsory. Yet, Deuteronomy elaborates four categories of people who are exempt:

• someone who has built a home but has not yet dedicated it
• someone who has planted a vineyard but has not yet eaten of its fruit
• someone who is engaged or in his first year of marriage
• someone who is afraid, in case he influences other soldiers with his fear.

It is important to point out that the disdain of war is so strong that King David was not permitted to build the temple in Jerusalem because of his military career. His son, Solomon, was allocated this task, but no iron was to be used in the building because this represented war and violence, while the temple was to represent peace, the ideal virtue.

The vision of peace for all humanity is further developed in the prophetic writings and the concept of the Messiah. This is seen particularly in the writings of the prophet Isiah, who envisaged an age when, as he describes in his idyllic vision:

they shall beat their swords into ploughshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.

The Mishnah, the first part of the Talmud, raises the concept of an "obligatory war" (milhemet mizvah). This encompasses the biblical wars against the seven nations said to inhabit the Promised Land, the war against Amalek, and the Jewish nation's defensive wars. It is, accordingly, a clearly defined and recognisable class.

Not so the second category, "permitted war" (milhemet reshut), which is more open-ended and, as scholar Avi Ravitsky writes , "could relate to a preemptive war".

After the Talmudic period, which ended in the 7th century, this debate became theoretical, since Jews living in Palestine and the diaspora no longer had an army. This was largely the case from the time of the defeat of the Bar Kokhba Rebellion against the Romans (132-135 CE), apart from a few small Jewish kingdoms in Arabia.

However, with the return of the early Zionist pioneers to the Land of Israel in the late 19th and 20th century, the rabbinic debates of what constitutes an obligatory, defensive war and what is a permitted war, as well as the characteristics of a forbidden war has reignited . This is a subject of deep concern and controversy for both academics and rabbis today.

Robyn J. Whitaker is affiliated with The Wesley Centre for Theology, Ethics, and Public Policy.

Mehmet Ozalp is affiliated with Islamic Sciences and Research Academy

Suzanne Rutland has received an Australian Research Council grant for her research on the Australian Jewry and funding from the Pratt Foundation, as well as an Australian Prime Ministers Centre (APMC) fellowship for her research on Soviet Jewry and Australia. She is also involved with numerous NGOs, including the Australian Jewish Historical Society (patron), the Australian Association for Jewish Studies (past president and committee member), and the Australian government's expert delegation to the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance. In addition, she is a board member of the Freilich Project for the Study of Bigotry at ANU; she is on an academic advisory committee at the Sydney Jewish Museum; she is the director of the Australian Academic Alliance Against Antisemitism; and she is an Australian board member for Boys Town Jerusalem and a board member of Better Balance Futures for faith communities These roles are all undertaken in an honorary capacity. She is also writing the history of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry in an honorary capacity.