Individual Violence
1. Introduction.
The understanding of the term violence at first glance seems to be clear enough, but the more closely we examine violence, the more elusive it becomes. This addresses the issue of individual violence; trying to understand the concept, forms of violence, the laws and constitution on it, as well as the Christian response to individual violence.
2. Overview of Violence.
Violence is not new, and there is certainly no one simple way of defining, classifying and understanding it.[1] World Health Organization defines violence
.jfif)
Collective violence can be divided into three categories as situational collective violence, organized collective violence and institutional collective violence. Within the context of collective behaviour, situational collective violence can be understood as spontaneous behaviour, and organized collective violence and institutional collective violence can be combined into the category of organized collective behaviour.[6]
3. Statistics and Data.
According to the report by the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, close to half a million road accidents occurred across India in 2014, in which 140,000 people died. Over 53,000 of the accidents in were hit-and-runs, which killed 19,569 people. In 79 percent of all road accidents in 2014, the driver was found to be at fault.[7] According to the NCRB compilation of "Accidental Deaths and Suicides in India 2015", the 413,457 deaths in this category in 2015 amounted to 47 deaths every hour. Deaths due to forces of nature have been termed as "natural accidental deaths" while deaths blamed on deliberate or negligent conduct of humans is termed in official records as "unnatural accidental deaths". It is said out of the 413,457 accidental deaths, 10,510 (2.5 per cent) were due to natural causes, 336,051 (81.3 per cent) due to unnatural causes and 66,896 (16.2 per cent) due to other causes. The age group of most victims was between 18 and 45 years. This group accounted for 59.7 per cent of all unnatural deaths in 2015.[8]
Honour killings in India have grown by more than 796% from 2014 to 2015, according to latest crime data. While 28 murders were reported under this category in 2014, this number jumped to 251 in 2015, as per the National Crime Record Bureau statistics.[9]
The murder rate (murders per lakh population) for 64 years (from 1952 to 2015) from the NCRB were compiled by the Clio Infra Project—a project which has collected worldwide data on social, economic, and institutional indicators. Data show that the rate has declined from 4.6 in 1992, the peak year of violence (in terms of murder rate) to 2.6 in 2015. After a steady rise from 2.7 in 1952 to the highest rate witnessed in the early nineties—with the rate staying between three to four murders per lakh population in the eighties—we are back to low figures. Among mega cities, Patna turns out to be the least safe, having a murder rate of 11.3 — four times that of the national average in 2015. Meerut, Ludhiana, Faridabad and Agra come next. Kolkata, Kochi and Mumbai happen to be the safest, all having a rate of less than one murder per lakh population.[10]
4. Various form of individual violence (cause and effect).
Physical violence:
Physical violence occurs when someone uses apart of their body or an object to control a person’sactions. It is a deliberate action imposed on someone. It includes using physical force which results in pain, discomfort or injury, hitting, pinching, hair-pulling, arm-twisting, strangling, burning, stabbing, punching, pushing, slapping, beating, shoving, kicking, choking, biting, force-feeding, or any other rough treatment, assault with a weapon or other object, murder. Physical abuse is more strongly associated with externalising behaviours and aggression.[11]
The effects of physical violence can be both acute and far-reaching. The immediate effect of physical violence may be a bruise or a cut, but the long term effect may be drastic like-post dramatic stress disorder. The short term effect of physical violence is typically obvious and treatable by an emergency room physician or other health provider. They can range from cuts, bruises, broken bones and other physical maladies. However, many of the injuries sustained affects the victims they grow older. The long term effects of physical violence include such as arthritis, hypertension (high blood pressure), heart disease, sexually transmitted disease (In the cases where sexual abuse was part of the physical violence), chronic pain syndromes. Other physical illnesses such as diabetes may be worsened due to physical abuse as the victim may have been denied of care. Murder and suicide are also frequently associated with physical abuse. Pregnancies are also frequently impacted by physical abuse. The effects of physical abuse on a pregnancy includes poor weight gain, pre term labour, miscarriage, low infant birth weight.[12]
Psychological violence:
Psychological violence occurs when someone uses threats and causes fear in an individual to gain control. While psychological violence can occur without physical violence, physical violence is almost always accompanied by psychological abuse. It includes insults, yelling, screaming, bullying, swearing spiteful words, rejection, humiliation, threatening to harm the person, threats of abandonment, stalking or criminal harassment, Verbal aggression, socially isolating the person, not allowing a competent person to make decisions, inappropriately controlling the person’s activities, intentional withholding companionship or affection, unrealistic and extreme demands, comparing kids negatively to others, constantly telling them that they are no good, worthless or a mistake.[13]
Psychological violence increases the risk of emotional damage, especially to children, e.g. lack of self-esteem, emotional maladjustment, dependency, underachievement, depression, failure to thrive, suicide, aggression and homicide.[14]
Religious violence:
A great deal of research has been done into the role religion plays in violence and many scholars consider whether religion is in itself inherently violent. In this section we will discuss the current stage of research into what extent religion can promote violence. In recent years, since the world wars according to Appleby, the involvement religion in violence has increased.15 Some may argue that this reflects the inherent violent nature of religion. Hall argues, however, that there is no explicit relationship between religion and violence, only a relationship which appears in certain contexts and under certain circumstances.[15] Religious violence is mainly a result of the way religion is used as a vehicle for other identity markers, such as ethnicity, and ideologies, such as national is anti-colonialism, and as actualising force for violent acts.[16]
Why is it that a surge in religious violence has taken place in recent years? Many scholars agree that religious violence is a reaction to modernisation and secularisation. Religious groups and individuals feel that their traditional ways of life and values are under threat and increased religiosity and sometimes violence are the ways they feel that they can combat this.[17]
Religious violence in India:
Religious violence in India is a much-discussed issue and the debated questions are similar to those when discussing religious violence in general. Scholars debate on its origins, did it start before colonialism or during and because of colonialism; on its cause, do religious ideologies cause the violence or is religion just a tool in the hands of those who seek to gain through the violence. We will focus on Hindu-Muslim riots rather than any other form of religious violence.
A case study of religious violence:
We would like to explore the history of religious violence in one city in India, namely Hyderabad, in order to see whether the general theories on religious violence apply in this case. Hyderabad was ruled from the seventeenth until the twentieth century by the Nizams, a Muslim dynasty. The feudal rule of the Nizams favoured Muslims who ruled as a minority over the, mainly Hindu, inhabitants of the state. Muslims dominated state employment and the official language of the state was Urdu, despite the fact that this was not the language of the majority of its inhabitants. Despite the fact that the Nizams clearly suppressed their Hindu subjects, religious violence did not break out until the first Hindu-Muslim riots in 1938. This was a result of the emergence of various rival Hindu and Muslim organisations which raised the population's religious and political awareness. The two main organisations were the Arya Samaj,a Hindu revivalis torganisation, and the Majlis-e-Ittihadul Muslimin (Majlis).[18]
Organisation for the Unity of Muslims, an Islamic organisation aimed at unifying Muslims, converting non-Muslims and supporting the Nizamun questioningly. The years 1937 and 1938 saw a build-up of tension due to a wave of conversions from both sides, leading to the first riot in April 1938. Over the coming decade, the Nizam suppressed any Hindu or secularist organisations and gave his full support to the Majlis, a move which had disastrous consequences for Hindu-Muslim relations in the state. In 1938, the Majlis founded the Razakars, a paramilitary organisation which viewed the Muslims as the natural rulers of the state. When, in 1947, India gained its independence from the British and was partitioned into India and Pakistan, the Nizam declared himself independent from both, but was put under increasing pressure to join India. Surrounding this, the Razakars started a campaign to terrorise Hindus and committed many murders and other atrocities in the name of Islam and with full support of the Nizam. When the Indian government sent in troops in 1948 and forced Hyderabad to comply to India, the Muslim rule was at an end. As well as losing their livelihood, Muslims also suffered directly after the agreement of Hyderabad due to the wave of violence Hindus unleashed as retaliation for what the Razakars had done.[19]
Self-directed violence:
In the year 2000 an estimated 8,15,000 people died from suicide around the world.This represents an annual global mortality rate of about 14.5 per 1,00,000 population or one death about every 40 seconds. Suicide is the thirteenth leading cause of death worldwide. Among thos eaged 15-44 years, self-inflicted injuries are the fourth leading cause of death and the sixth leading cause of ill-health and disability.20 Deaths from suicide are only a part of this very serious problem. In addition to those who die, many more people survive at tempts to take their own lives self-immolation or harm themselves, often seriously enough to require medical attention. Furthermore, every person who kills himself or herself leaves behind many others; family and friends, whose lives are profoundly affected emotionally, socially and economically.[20]
The term ‘‘suicide’’ in itself evokes direct reference to violence and aggressiveness. Apparently, Sir Thomas Browne was the first to coin the word ‘‘suicide’’ in his Religio medici (1642). A physician and a philosopher, Browne based the word on the Latin sui (of oneself) and caedere (to kill). The new term reflected a desire to distinguish between the homicide of oneself and the killing of another.[21]The term ‘‘suicidal ideation’’ is often used in the technical literature, and refers to thoughts of killing oneself, in varying degrees of intensity and elaboration. In the literature, the term also refers to a feeling of being tired of life, a belief that life is not worth living, and a desire not to wake from sleep.[22]
Another common form of self-directed violence is self-mutilation. This is the direct and deliberate destruction or alteration of parts of the body without conscious suicidal intention. Favazza has proposed three main categories:
· Major self-mutilation: including self-blinding and the amputation of fingers, hands,arms, limbs, feet or genitalia.
· Stereotypical self-mutilation: such as banging one’s head, biting oneself, hitting one’s arm, gouging one’s eyes or throat, or pulling one’s hair.
· Superficial-to-moderate self-mutilation: such as cutting, scratching or burning one’s skin, sticking needles into one’s skin, or pulling one’s hair compulsively.[23]
Social Violence.
Patriarchy:
Violence against women is the most-compelling social problem in India. The Thomson Reuters Foundation has listed India as the fourth most dangerous country for women in terms of sexual violence, trafficking, health and economic resources. Analysis of the growing cases of violence against women reveals how gender-based violence cuts across divisions of class, religion, age, ethnicity, cultural and geography. Women are victims of various kinds of ill-treatment, humiliation, torture and exploitation which start even before birth and remain still the end of life. Agirl embryo becomes victim of sex-selective abortion, during stages of infancy discrimination towards access to food and medical care is common.During adolescence, young girls often face harassment, wolf whistling, winking and passing of loud remarks, stalking, trafficking, genital mutilation, child marriage and sexual abuse by family members and strangers.In their reproductive age, this process continues and women are subjected to honour killings, acid throwing, rape, intimate partner violence and dowry-related violence. A consensus definition of violence against women is: “Any act of gender-based violence that results in, or is likely to result in, physical, sexual, or psychological harm or suffering to women, including threats of such acts, coercion or arbitrary deprivation of liberty, whether occurring in public or private life".
There is no single theory which can fully explain violence against women. The social learning theory is most often used to explain women abuse. It shares one common argument, that is violence and aggression are not inherent properties of the individual; rather they are learned behaviours.It maintains that male children are more likely to grow up to assault females if they have observed their fathers assaulting their spouses. This has some empirical support and is accepted across the political spectrum. There are others who maintain that men abuse women to maintain power and control over them.Power and patriarchy are the key explanatory factors.[24]
Caste:
Crimes against the historically marginalized Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (SC and ST) by the upper castes in India represent an extreme form of prejudice and discrimination. In India, former untouchable castes and several tribal groups continue to be subjected to discrimination, economic and social exclusion and a stigmatized identity. These instances are in blatant violation of the Indian constitution that abolished untouchability and upholds the ideal of equality among all citizens. In 2006, acknowledging the gravity of the problem, Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh equated the practice of untouchability to that of apartheid.
There is ample evidence suggesting that upper castes use and justify various forms of violence as tools to ensure adherence to caste-based norms and traditions by the lower castes. Attacks often take the form of collective punishment, whereby entire communities are punished for the perceived transgressions of individuals who seek to altere stablished norms or demand their rights.[25]
5. Laws and Constitution
Right to Freedom: Article 19.
(1) All citizens shall have the right—
(a)To freedom of speech and expression;
(b)To assemble peaceably and without arms;
(c) To form associations or unions[or co-operative societies];
(d)To move freely throughout the territory of India;
(e) To reside and settle in any part of the territory of India;
(g)to practise any profession,or to carry on any occupation, trade or business.
Article 20.
(1) No person shall be convicted of any offence except for violation of a law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an offence, nor be subjected to a penalty greater than that which might have been inflicted under the law in force at the time of the commission of the offence.
(2) No person shall be prosecuted and punished for the same offence more than once.
(3) No person accused of any offence shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
Article 21.
No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.
Article 21A.
The State shall provide free and compulsory education to all children of the age of six to fourteen years in such manner as the State may, by law, determine.
Article 23.
(1) Traffic in human beings and beggar and other similar forms of forced labour are prohibited and any contravention of this provision shall be a no offence punishable in accordance with law. Nothing in this article shall prevent the State from imposing compulsory service for public purposes, and in imposing such service the State shall not make any discrimination on grounds only of religion, race, caste or class or any of them.
Article24.
No child below the age of fourteen years shall be employed to work in any factory or mine or engaged in any other hazardous employment.[26]
6. Bible and the Individual Violence
David, Bathsheba and Uriah (2 Samuel 11:1-27a)
Here in this narrative, the David’s story is depicted in which there is a shift from public to personal, from king to man, from blessing to curse and from power to vulnerability. Also, violence at the personal level is depicted alongside with the larger violence of war.[27]
Chapter 11 contains four episodes of the narrative. The first episode (vv1-5) is David’s affair with Bathsheba. The second one (vv6-13) depicts David’s efforts to tackle the nasty consequences created by his adultery and that is to mislead the cuck olded husband Uriah. The third episode (vv14-25) shows David’s plan to murder Uriah and its eventual execution. And the final episode (vv26-27a) lists both the tragic and disgraceful events; Bathsheba’s lamentation for her husband and Bathsheba becomes David’s wife. As the story ends here with an unrepentant David and without any divine judgement, chapter 12 is required for the completion.[28]
In order to protect David’s honour, David would have liquidated Uriah, husband of Bathsheba. It is ironic that the one who supposed to be the guardian of people’s right and justice should murder his loyal servant in order to protect his honour which he himself had already disgraced. Even David’s plan to kill David would have involved the death of other innocent Israelites. The David’s comment to the messenger who brought the news of Uriah’s death is very much notable that can be interpreted as the loss of men was an unavoidable part of the war. It is unbelievable in the case of David that he was not even afraid to commit a murder with his authority to cover his adultery. He was more concerned with the protection of his badly injured honour.[29]
The later narrative offers a severe divine judgement upon David’s life, to the extent of death of Bathsheba’s first child. This narrative of David is hardly complementary to him. In another perspective, this narrative could be retold in less critical manner. Also it could be interpreted harmlessly by the addition of David’s repentance, Yahweh’s forgiveness and the punishment imposed.[30]
The sexual perversion of the Gibeahites. (Judges19.22-28)
This story deals with hospitality and human lust and violence. [31] From the narrative it is evident that Gibeah had become another Sodom of ancient time. In those days, the position of woman was very low and the disgraceful thing during those times was to molest the man. The old man was ready to offer the town people his own daughter and the Levite’s concubine instead of letting them attack his guest. Thus, the Levite’s concubine had been sacrificed to the lust of the men of Gibeah. This was something disgusting that happened.[32]
The demand of the men of Gibeah had violated the rule of hospitality to strangers, the prohibition of adultery (Exodus.20.14), and the clear command against homosexual intercourse (Leviticus 18.22).[33]
The story depicts violence in the form of sexual crime. This story depicts the incrimination of the city by two Epraimites, one a Levite, protecting themselves at the expense of the women. Thus, Israel got united by the unethical and gruesome behaviour in order to take action against one of its own tribes.[34]
On one side, the Levite’s act of cruelty and contempt for his concubine is unforgiven. But, on the other side, it is the men of Gibeah who demonstrated the depths of violence.[35]
7. Christian Response.
Ethical Response:
Individual violence is a serious moral concern today. Moral judgment speculates certain claims upon our actions which are supposed to pursue with goals. Ethics help us to critically examine the basis of these claims and goals. When individual violence is brought under ethical scrutiny to stand the moral concerns and ethical paradigm we delves upon the ethics of obligation and duty called deontological ethics regarding what is right. Individual violence is based on personal factors-compulsion, brutality, pride and loss sense of reason which resides in individual and only leads to total depravity and harmful to others accordingly it is no tright. Also, it is the total disregard and mockery of divine purposes and does not obey the law of God. The Ethics of ambition, good and ends (Teleological) concerned with the highest good or final goal of life to wards a person which negates strongly the individual violence as the ultimate end is harmful for the whole human chain in a society without good and beneficial. The context of a network of relationship (responsibility-relationality ethics) individual violence dynamically destroy the emotional, physical and spiritual relationship, unity and fruitfulness.[36]
8. Biblical Response.
Christianity acknowledges the emptiness and brokenness of the world and offers hope, newness, and abundant life. Jesus shared in man’s pain and suffering and provides redemption and restoration.
Recognize signs of individual violence, which include: talking about suicide; statements about hopelessness, helplessness, worthlessness; preoccupation with death; sudden happiness and calm; loss of interest in material things; disposal of material things; etc. Just as with every other issue of life, we need to understand what God’s Word says about individual. God created man in His image with an eternal soul. As such, we have a special distinction from animals in our consciousness, our relationship with God, and our purpose to reflect God’s glory (Genesis 1:26–27). Being created in His image means that we are to reflect God’s attributes, such as His holiness and righteousness (Ephesians 4:24).[37]
Scripture also tells believers that our bodies are not our own but a temple for the Holy Spirit; we have no right to destroy that temple by harming or ending our lives (1 Corinthians 6:19–20).
As Christians, our relationship with Christ should be a witness to those who believe that their life is not worth living. As Christ transforms us into His image, we should pray for His goodness to shine through us and draw others to Himself. Through our own growth in Christ, they may come to understand that they were created in God’s image and can be conformed to the image of His Son after salvation (Romans 8:29).
9. Theological Response.
More than ever, we are living in a society of structured violence. Therefore, the Christian movements needs to have a robust theological response to the violence that we are encountering on a daily basis. In an age of paradox and contradiction, an age where plurality seems the order of the day, and the gathering of the Church can seem outdated, redundant an irrelevant. However, if Christians are to successfully navigate their way into and through the postmodern epoch they need to engage an increasingly cynical and disengaged society. The Church, as an organic movement of followers and disciples of Christ, must remain committed to ushering in restoration, wholeness and mercy to a broken world in a way that is contextually relevant. Undoubtedly the greatest challenge that theology faces will be overcoming the assumptions and characteristics of postmodernism. A contemporary and strong theological approach to justice must have something to say to this. Which creates a huge opportunity and responsibility for the Churches to infuse their localities that the truth concepts on which that community establishes their worldview are taken form the Church. Thus, we must interpret and exegete Jesus to our culture carefully and appropriately.The biblical narratives presented earlier gives clear guidance that peace cannot compromise with error or make concession with injustice. The Church therefore have a special role and obligation to usher in peace and reconciliation, and furthermore oppose the violence that caused it assertively. The biblical mandate can perhaps best be summed up by taking the major call of the Bible seriously. Much like the suffering of Christ on the cross were not just His sufferings but of the oppressed and the weak, with whom Jesus shares His own body and soul in solidarity, the suffering of the world or as the paper suggests to individual, must be tackled by the body and soul of the church.[38] Niebuhr sums up that what the response of the Church should be in the light of the biblical ethic towards justice and conflict. “in the Christian faith the final law in which all other law is fulfilled is the law of love. But this law does now abrogate the laws of justice, except that loves rises above justice to exceed its demands.”[39]
10. Practical Response.
We should prepare for the wide range of potential individual violence we encountered in a very practical way. The perpetrator of violence should seek pastor or counselor as a helper to free from the clutches of aggressiveness. Awareness about the destructive consequences of individual violence should be realized from the grassroot level and grasp the seriousness of its bad outcomes. Cultivate the fear of God in ourselves and to those who perpetrate violence and should motivate them carefully to avoid consciously. Focusing to the lives of Jesus as a role model for using non-retaliation in a harsh and tense situation. The church should communicate to the congregation in order to alleviate any kinds of violence and plan a decisive action to tackle it knowing that, no where in the bible it condones violence. We should prepare our congregations to be ready for whatever threats of violence we may face. Yet we must also be ready to sacrifice everything—including our security and our lives—for the sake of the gospel. We can make our churches “hard targets,” but we must do so with soft hearts acceptable to God.[40]
Conclusion.
Individual violence is one of the most horrendous kinds of abuse suffered by an individual in our society today. It can happen to anyone, and if this issue of violence is not dealt with in a manner, then this type of abuse will continue in the society with no ending. Therefore, in order for us as a society to eradicate this horrendous type of violence, we need to stand together to bring change and also protect the victims.
Bibliography
Anderson,A.A.2Samuel.WordBiblicalCommentary11.Dallas:Word,1989.
Butler, Trent C. Judges. Word Biblical Commentary 8. Dallas: Word, 1989.
Armerding,CarlEdwin.“Judges.”New International Bible Commentary. Edited by F.F. Bruce. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 1979.
A.Favazza, Self-mutilation, In: Jacobs DG,ed. “The Harvard Medical School guide to suicide assessment and intervention,” San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1999.
Chismer,Janet.“SuicidefromaChristianPerspective,” British Article of Godly wisdom for Suicide, September 9,2010.
Dharmaraj,Havilah.“Judges” in the South Asian Bible Commentary.Editedby Brian Wintle; Rajasthan: Open Door, 2011.
E. K. Moscicki, “Epidemiology of suicidal behaviour,” In: Silverman MM, Maris RW, eds. Suicide prevention: toward the year 2000, New York: Guilford, 1985.
G.Minois,“Historyofsuicide:voluntarydeathinWesternculture.Baltimore,”Johns Hopkins: University Press, 1999.
Hall R. John, “Religion and Violence: Social Processes in Comparative Perspective,” in: Michele Dillon (ed.), ‘Handbook of the Sociology of Religion,’ Cambridge University Press: Cambridge 2003.
Kalland,EarlS.ed.Deuteronomy-2Samuel.Vol.3ofTheExpositor’sBibleCommentary. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 1992.
Mall,Jerald.“2Samuel”Pages373-404intheSouthAsianBibleCommentary.EditedbyBrian Wintle. Rajasthan: Open Door, 2011.
Niebuhr,Reinhold,“LoveandJustice,”Kentucky:Westminster/JohnKnoxPress,1957. Volf, Miroslav, “Exclusion and Embrace,”Nashville: Abingdon, 1996.
VarshneyAshutosh,“EthnicConflictandCivicLife:HindusandMuslimsinIndia,”New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2010.
Journal
Eshleman,Sarah“LovingOurNeighborsbySharingChrist’sAbundantLife”BritishArticle on Christians and suicide pervention, September 9, 2016.
Injury: a leading cause of the global burden of disease. Geneva, World Health Organization, 1999 (document WHO/HSC/PVI/99.11).
Kandel Englander Elizabeth,.Understanding Violence. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2003.
Paykel E Setal.“Suicidalfeelingsinthegeneralpopulation:aprevalencestudy,” British Journal of Psychiatry, 1974.
R. Scott Appleby. The Ambivalence of the Sacred: Religion, Violence and Reconciliation. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2000,
Jonathan Fox, “The Rise of Religious Nationalism and Conflict: Ethnic Conflict and Revolutionary Wars, 1945-2001”. Journal of Peace Research, 2004.
Talyor J Pamela. Violence in Society. Great Britain: National Power PLC.
Webliography
http://lawmin.nic.in/olwing/coi/coi-english/coi-4March2016.pdfhttp://www.huffingtonpost.in/2016/12/07/honour-killings-reported-in-india-have-increased- by-796-in-a-ye_a_21622177/
http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/Murder-rate-declining-in-India/article16791696.ecehttp://www.tribuneindia.com/news/comment/violence-power-and-patriarchy/449165.
html https://www.britannica.com/topic/collective-violence#ref1201639
https://www.britannica.com/topic/individual-violence
https://www.indiatvnews.com/news/india-413-457-accidental-deaths-in-india-in-2015-ncrb- 364669
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/violence
https://www.pri.org/stories/2016-04-24/drivers-who-kill-people-india-have-little-worry-about
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0147596714001048
[1] Pamela J.Talyor,Violence in Society (Great Britain: National Power PLC, 1993),7.
[4] Elizabeth Kandel Englander, Understanding Violence (London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,2003), 2.
[9] http://www.huffingtonpost.in/2016/12/07/honour-killings-reported-in-india-have-increased-by-796-in-a-ye_a_21622177
[10] http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/Murder-rate-declining-in-India/article16791696.ece
[11] https://www.gov.nl.ca/VPI/types/
[14] http://www.the-ripple-ef
[15] R.Scott Appleby,The Ambivalence of the Sacred: Religion, Violence and Reconciliation, (Lanham:Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Inc.), 2000, 4; Jonathan Fox, 'The Rise of Religious Nationalism and Conflict: Ethnic Conflict and Revolutionary Wars, 1945-2001', (Journal of Peace Research), p 41 (2004), 715-731, 715-716.
[16] JohnR.Hall,'ReligionandViolence:SocialProcessesinComparativePerspective',in:MicheleDillon(ed.), Handbook of the Sociology of Religion, (Cambridge University Press), Cambridge 2003, 359-384, 365.
[17] JohnR.Hall, 'Religion and Violence: Social Processesing Comparative Perspective’,379.
[18] R . Scott Appleby, The Ambivalence of the Sacred, 58 and Jonathan Fox, 'The Rise of Religious Nationalism and Conflict', 718.
[19] AshutoshVarshney,EthnicConflictandCivicLife:HindusandMuslimsinIndia, (NewDelhi:Oxford University Press), 2010, 187-195.
[20] Injury:aleadingcauseoftheglobalburdenofdisease.Geneva,WorldHealthOrganization,1999(document WHO/HSC/PVI/99.11).
[21] Moscicki EK.Epidemiology of suicidal behaviour. In Silverman MM, Maris RW,eds, Suicide prevention: toward the year 2000. New York, NY, Guilford, 1985, 22–35.
[22] MinoisG.Historyofsuicide:voluntarydeathinWesternculture.Baltimore,MD,JohnsHopkinsUniversity Press, 1999, 54.
[23] Favazza A.Self-mutilation.In:JacobsDG,ed.The Harvard Medical School guide to suicide assessment and intervention (San Francisco, CA, Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1999),125–145
[27] JeraldMall,“David’sSins of Adultery and Murder,” in the SABC (ed.BrianWintle;Rajasthan:OpenDoor, 2011), 385.
[28] A.A.Anderson,2 Samuel(WBC11;Dallas:Word,1989), 152.
[29] A.A.Anderson,2 Samuel,… 156.
[30] A.A.Anderson,2 Samuel,… 165-166.
[31] TrentC.Butler,Judges(WBC8;Dallas:Word,1989),411.
[32] Earl S. Kallanded., Deuteronomy-2 Samuel, vol.3 of The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, edited by Frank
E.Gaebelein (GrandRapids,Michigan:Zondervan,1992).
[33] Havilah Dharmaraj, “Hostility of the Benjamites,” in the SABC (ed. Brian Wintle; Rajasthan: OpenDoor, 2011), 327.
[34] Trent C.Butler, Judges (WBC8; Dallas:Word, 1989), 429-430.
[35] Carl Edwin Armerding, “Judges,” New Internationa lBible Commentary, edited by F.F.Bruce (Grand Rapids: Michigan: Zondervan, 1979), 336.
[36] Hunter P.Mabry, ed. Christian Ethics: An Introductory Reader (Serampore:ITL,1987), 7-8.
[37] SarahEshleman,“LovingOurNeighborsbySharingChrist’sAbundantLife”BritishArticleon Christians andsuicidepervention, September 9, 2016.
[38] Janet Chismer, “Suicide from a Christian Perspective,” British Article of Godly wisdom for Suicide, September 9,2010.
[39] Miroslav Volf, Exclusion and Embrace (Nashville:Abingdon,1996), 22-23.
[40] Reinhold Niebuhr, Love and Justice (Kentucky: Westminster/John Knox Press,1957), 25.
.jpg)
