• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

For a Christian, Nuclear War Can Never Be Justified

Extracts from this document...


'FOR A CHRISTIAN, NUCLEAR WAR CAN NEVER BE JUSTIFIED' I disagree totally because there are many different types of Christians, even if we split them into the three main groups (pacifists, just war believers and crusaders). So it is virtually impossible that all these Christians to have the same point of view. Obviously pacifists are always against the nuclear war due to their beliefs, they believe to never resort to violence what ever the cases may be. Just War believers; can't agree with it either because they only believe in a war that is 'Just' and nuclear war can never be 'Just' because it breaks one of the main rules of Just War, a Just War must be waged with all moderation possible (without massacres, excessive violence, etc). ...read more.


then thousands of people would lose their jobs due to the great importance the nuclear weapon industry is to be country's national economy. Many Christians are against the keeping of nuclear weapons because the more weapons that are created the more the chance of launching one. If we did use one it would destroy God's creations both human life and the nature of the world. Some Christians believe that you should love everyone and not bring harm to anyone, if you are keeping these weapons it is going against God whole theory of, "love thy neighbour as yourself" Many Christians are also against nuclear weapons because they are very expensive to build and to keep improving them. Nower days, a lot more money is spent on the keeping of nuclear weapons than the development aid to poorer countries. ...read more.


The Christians, who believe in the just war theory, cannot support nuclear war because a war can never be just. It can never be just, because nuclear weapons are so explosive, that you could not distinguish between non-combatants and combatants. Also another reason to not use nuclear weapons, is that the damage and grief caused by such a weapon can never be equalled in damage and grief from a common war with common weapons such as guns. Therefore different types of Christians from the main three groups (pacifists, just war believers, and crusaders) can think differently about justifying a nuclear war. On over all I think most Christians are strongly opposed to justifying nuclear war. So on overall, most Christians are opposed to it, because they think of it as a blasphemy against God. JONATHAN ROBERTS JONATHAN ROBERTS ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Morality of War section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Morality of War essays

  1. Christian views on a just war.

    This belief is going to have an influence on the believer, as they will not fight in a war. However, this believer can still be involver in the war but as an aid, driver of a medical vehicle.

  2. Israel and palestine is it justified?

    Not only does it have a massive effect on the people living by it, but as supposedly being the 'border' it swerves in and out of the West Bank which obviously shows that Israel are still trying to claim more parts of Palestine as their own.

  1. Even if conventional war is acceptable in Catholic teaching, the possession and use of ...

    acceptable from Christians in order to stop it, Mark 11:15-18 said, but nuclear war should not take place since it is no different form terrorists. In the Romans 12:9-21, it says that any evil sins and violence should be left to God to be punished rather than using violent to


    Dadsam received reports that the large deposits of oil were being stolen from his country by his Neighbour. This time it wasn't the horrible people of Nrai, but the small principality of Wakuit. They were drilling holes through the planets crust and extracting all the fuel for themselves.

  1. Biological weapons

    But we can also conclude that this is an old idea because nowadays terrorists are not afraid to die, as long as they can achieve their goal of terrorist attack. Nowadays more and more measures are being taken to avoid and try to eliminate biological weapons used in biological attacks.

  2. Domestic violence.

    This ideology is not validated by the study and the author did not find this piece of work reassuring. The work indicates that the United States is no further advanced on the subject of domestic violence screening in pregnancy. Clearly defined protocols are not indicated for health care providers, continuity of health care provider is lacking.

  1. Barrington Dyer and develops the inception of this report, its thesis, and motivation as ...

    weapons of mass destruction or the dissemination of information regarding them to hostile nations. In addition to this, the U.S. also tries to encourage proliferant states to end their weapons of mass destruction programs. To accomplish this, the U.S. uses an array of political tools.

  2. Considering creatures by the name of Hard Cases, we are to assume that their ...

    We see perceptions just the same as the hard cases see perceptions, but since perceptions and memories are subject to an involuntary belief pattern that a deontologist can justify with epistemic duty and a Hard Case cannot, we have to say that "soft involuntary" perceptions are part of a deontologist's

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work