Christianity & Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) (Edexcel GCSE Religious Studies B): Revision Note
Christian teachings and attitudes towards the use of weapons of mass destruction
What are weapons of mass destruction?
Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs) are powerful weapons that can cause large-scale death, injury, and destruction
Unlike regular weapons, WMDs can harm or kill many people at once and have long-lasting effects on the environment
They are typically divided into three main types:
Nuclear Weapons: These use nuclear reactions to create massive explosions, causing widespread damage, death, and radiation that can last for years
Example: The bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki during World War II
Chemical Weapons: These release toxic chemicals that can cause severe illness, breathing problems, burns, or even death
Examples: Mustard gas and nerve agents like sarin
Biological Weapons: These use harmful bacteria or viruses to spread disease, causing illness and death
Examples: Anthrax and the smallpox virus
WMDs are extremely dangerous, and their use is banned under international law due to the massive harm they cause
Christian attitudes and teachings to the use of weapons of mass destruction
There are no direct teachings about Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs) in the Bible because they did not exist when the Bible was written
Therefore, Christians interpret other Christian teachings and the example of Jesus to guide their opinions
Christian teachings about WMDs focus on the principles of peace, justice, and the sanctity of life
There is not a single unified Christian view on WMDs, but there are key themes in Christian teachings that relate to this
Christianity teaches that life is sacred because it is created by God
The use of WMDs, which can kill large numbers of innocent people, goes against the belief that every human life is valuable
This is supported by teachings like ‘You shall not kill’ (Exodus 20:13) and Jesus' command to ‘love your neighbour as yourself’ (Matthew 22:39)
Jesus taught the importance of peace, reconciliation, and loving one's enemies (Matthew 5:44)
Many Christians believe that war, especially using WMDs, contradicts these teachings and should be avoided unless absolutely necessary
The idea of just war theory, which some Christians accept, argues that war can be justified only if it meets strict ethical criteria (e.g. self-defence, protection of the innocent)
It is impossible to guarantee with WMDs that innocent people will not be killed, and therefore they are considered unacceptable
Christians believe that nations should act justly and be responsible stewards of God's creation
The massive destruction caused by WMDs, which harms the environment and future generations, may be seen as irresponsible and unjust
Many Christians believe that WMDs are morally wrong because they cause indiscriminate suffering, violate the sanctity of life, and contradict the teachings of peace and justice found in the Bible
Some Christians believe that war can be justified because there are examples within the Old Testament which seem to support going to war
‘Today you are going into battle against your enemies. Do not be fainthearted or afraid; do not panic or be terrified by them. For the Lord your God is the one who goes with you to fight for you against your enemies to give you victory’ (Deuteronomy: 20)
However, many Christians believe that war involving WMDs can never be justified due to the innocent lives that will be lost and the destruction of the planet
Christianity and non-religious attitudes towards weapons of mass destruction
Atheist attitudes to the use of weapons of mass destruction
Atheist attitudes towards Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs) are generally shaped by reason, ethics, and human well-being, rather than religious beliefs
Atheists tend to focus on the harm and suffering that WMDs cause, and many believe they are morally wrong for many reasons
Atheists often argue that WMDs are unethical because they cause massive destruction and suffering, especially to innocent people
The use of such weapons can lead to long-term harm, such as radiation sickness from nuclear weapons or environmental damage from chemical and biological weapons
Atheists typically believe in the importance of human life and dignity
WMDs, which can kill or harm millions of people indiscriminately, are seen as a direct threat to these values
Many atheists support peaceful solutions to conflict and believe that diplomacy and negotiation should always be preferred over war
They argue that modern weapons, especially WMDs, are too destructive and that there are always better, more rational ways to resolve conflicts
Atheists may also be concerned about the threat that WMDs pose to global security
The existence of nuclear weapons, for example, creates the potential for catastrophic accidents or escalation into global conflict, which could endanger the survival of humanity
In summary, atheists generally oppose WMDs because they cause unnecessary harm, are ethically wrong, and pose a threat to human life and global security. Their views are based on ethical values rather than religious teachings
Humanist attitudes to the use of weapons of mass destruction
Humanist attitudes towards Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs) are based on the belief in the value of human life, reason, and the importance of working for the well-being of all people
Humanists generally oppose the use of WMDs for a number of different reasons:
Humanism places a strong emphasis on the importance and dignity of every human life
WMDs cause indiscriminate killing and suffering, which goes against this core belief
Humanists believe that people should act in ways that benefit humanity
The use of WMDs, which cause long-term harm to people and the environment, is seen as irresponsible and unethical
Humanists support peaceful solutions to conflict and believe that war should only ever be a last resort
They argue that diplomacy and cooperation are the best ways to prevent violence and ensure the safety of people worldwide
Humanists are concerned about the long-term impact of WMDs, such as nuclear fallout, environmental damage, and the risk of global extinction
They advocate for the reduction and eventual elimination of these weapons to protect future generations
Ethical theories which support the acquisition of weapons of mass destruction
Utilitarian attitudes to the use of weapons of mass destruction
Utilitarian attitudes towards the use of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs) are based on the principle of the greatest good for the greatest number
IMAGE REQUIRED
This means that utilitarians judge actions by their consequences and whether they lead to overall happiness or suffering
Utilitarians would look at the potential outcomes of using WMDs
If using WMDs leads to a large amount of suffering and destruction, they would likely be opposed to their use
However, if a war or conflict could be ended quickly and prevent greater harm in the long run, some utilitarians might argue that their use could be justified
Most utilitarians would argue that the massive and indiscriminate destruction caused by WMDs, including the loss of innocent lives and long-term environmental damage, outweighs any potential short-term benefits
The harm caused by these weapons is seen as too great to justify their use
Utilitarians generally support peaceful solutions to conflicts, as avoiding war or destruction causes the least harm and maximizes happiness for the greatest number of people
They would argue that the risks and suffering caused by WMDs make them unacceptable
Utilitarians would also consider the long-term effects of WMDs, such as the environmental damage, radiation, and psychological harm
They would likely oppose WMDs due to the lasting negative impact on future generations
Christian responses to the ethical theories
Christian responses to ethical theories regarding weapons of mass destruction
Utilitarianism, which seeks the greatest good for the greatest number, would generally align to Christian principles of avoiding harm and trying to achieve peace
While some might argue that the use of WMDs could end wars quickly and save lives in the long run, most would reject this due to the overwhelming harm and suffering they cause, which would not align with the principle of promoting the greatest happiness
Christians and utilitarians would generally believe that peaceful alternatives should be prioritised
There may be some situations where utilitarianism might justify the use of WMD because it may lead to less suffering in the long term
Some Christians who are pacifists would be against violence of any kind, regardless of the positive consequences this might create
Worked Example
Outline three Christian teachings about weapons of mass destruction
(3)
Answer:
Christians should not use WMDs as they might not meet the conditions of a Just War (1)
Christians should protect life not end it, so they cannot use WMDs (1)
WMDs destroy the land that Christians as stewards should protect (1)
Examiner Tips and Tricks
Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs) does not just mean nuclear weapons, although nuclear weapons are also WMDs
WMDs also include Chemical and Biological weapons which are not nuclear weapons but can cause widespread harm and suffering
Questions about WMDs can include responses relating to any of these types of WMDs
You've read 0 of your 5 free revision notes this week
Sign up now. It’s free!
Did this page help you?