Religions have functioned throughout human history to inspire and justify the full range of agency, from the heinous to the heroic. Their influences remain potent in the 21st century in spite of modern predictions that religious influences would steadily decline in concert with the rise of secular democracies and advances in science. Understanding these complex religious influences is a critical dimension of understanding modern human affairs across the full spectrum of endeavours in local, national and global arenas. An important dimension of diminishing religious illiteracy is to provide resources for how to recognise, understand, and analyse religious influences in contemporary life. This chapter provides a methodological framework for understanding religion in contemporary human affairs through the overarching theme of conflict and peace.

For a variety of reasons dating back to the Enlightenment (including Christian-influenced theories of secularisation that were reproduced through colonialism) there are many commonly held assumptions about religion in general and religious traditions in particular that represent fundamental misunderstandings. Scholars of religion are well aware of these assumptions, and have articulated some basic facts about religions themselves and the study of religion that serve as useful foundations for inquiry (see AAR, 2010).

First and foremost, scholars highlight the difference between the devotional expression of particular religious beliefs as normative, and the non-sectarian study of religion that presumes the religious legitimacy of diverse normative claims. The importance of this distinction is that it recognises the validity of normative theological assertions without equating them with universal truths about the tradition itself. Unfortunately, this distinction is often ignored in public discourse about religion. For example, religious leaders and practitioners are often looked to as ‘experts’ of their tradition. This is problematic because their experience as devotees is limited to a particular theological or interpretive strand of the tradition as represented by their sect and community. Unless they have also pursued education about their tradition from a non-sectarian Religious Studies framework, they will not be exposed to the diversity of interpretations represented among other sects and even within their own.

In a second example, there is a great deal of contemporary debate about ‘what Islam teaches’ regarding the proper dress and behaviours for women. In truth, there are a variety of theological interpretations of the tradition that lead to different, sometimes antithetical, practices and assertions.