Between God and Power: A Critique of Religious Authoritarianism

Abstract

This article critically explores the authoritarianism embedded in certain modes of contemporary religious interpretation, particularly within Islamic contexts. Drawing on R.B. Friedman’s distinction between “being in authority” and “being an authority,” as well as Khaled Abou El Fadl’s concept of authoritarianism in religious hermeneutics, the article highlights how interpretations can shift from persuasive to coercive forms of authority. When religious figures claim absolute interpretive power, they often suppress alternative views and reduce divine will to rigid, unquestionable rulings. Historical and sociopolitical developments especially the rise of puritanism in the post-colonial Arab world are examined to show how authoritarian religious discourse has gained influence through state power, oil wealth, and ideological hegemony. Ultimately, the article calls for a return to ethical, dialogical, and pluralistic interpretations of religious texts to counteract the epistemic violence of authoritarian hermeneutics.