| Papers [1-14] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 8] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 —> | Search results on "KORAN JUSTIFICATION WAR": |
|
|
The Koran and the Justification for War, 2002.
This paper discusses the Koran, the holy book of the Muslims, that sets forth the basic requirements of Muslim life including spiritual, social and legal codes of conduct, especially those sections that justify war.
2,880 words (approx. 11.5 pages), 3 sources, MLA, £ 59.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that there is a wide range of interpretation from the moderate Muslims who emphasize the peaceful character of the religion to those who use Islam to support violence. The Koran supports both types. This paper points out that the Koran contains several passages by which the Muslims have been exhorted to fight the unbelievers. The author points out that the Koran is the source of inspiration for the early Muslims, contributed to the remarkable series of Muslim conquests and continues to be the rallying cry of the present day Islamic militants.
Table of Contents
Early Muslim History
The First Revelation
The Early Battles
The Spoils of War and the Hypocrites
Treaties with ?Pagans? and their Aftermath
Jihad
Causes of the Early Muslim Conquest
Islam?s Message of Unity
Weakness of the Opposition
Is Islam a Peaceful Religion?
Conclusion
From the Paper
"Jihad is an Arabic word that has become internationally known in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. To most people ?jihad? means a Muslim holy war that means killing of all non-Muslims, innocent women and children included. The broader meaning of the word ?jihad? is ?struggle.? To the moderate Muslims ?jihad? means the inner struggle that one endures in trying to practice Islam. This point of view by some Muslim scholars propagates that fighting in a war to defend their faith is also called ?jihad? because such a fight is also a ?struggle.? They contend that there are several forms of jihad (struggle) such as the struggle against self-desire, against a tyrant ruler, or even against temptations in life. On the other hand, others?the Islamic militants and opponents of Islam reject the point of view of the moderate Muslims?and believe that ?jihad? is an all-out, no-nonsense, aggressive war. Let us see what the Koran has to say about ?jihad?."
| |
|
Justification, 2005.
A definition of justification from the perspective of the Christian religion.
3,030 words (approx. 12.1 pages), 11 sources, MLA, £ 61.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper begins with a definition of justification, both from the author's point of view and from a scholarly point of view, and then goes on to take a look at the concept of justification as explained by the biblical character, Paul. The paper then describes how one achieves justification and the consequences of justification, as well as how it can be sustained and how it is an ongoing process.
Outline
Definition of Justification
The Basis of Justification
The Means of Justification
The Results of Justification
Permanency
Time Factors
From the Paper
"Some scholars have defined justified by means of translation from the original Hebrew and Greek languages, as the term occurs in the Bible (Agape Press). In Hebrew, "zakah" is translated as being clear, clean or pure. "Tsadeq" is to be just or righteous. In Greek, "dikaioo" is translated as showing a person to be righteous, or to declare righteous, while dikaioma is an ordinance or sentence of acquittal. "Dikaiosis" is a Greek work meaning the act of pronouncing righteous, or again an acquittal. It is interesting to note that none of these terms refer to the act of making a person righteous. Rather, justification as defined above is the act of declaring what is already righteous. Justification then refers to the consequence of Christ's death. Christ's righteousness is used as a substitute for sinful human nature (Romans 4:6-8)."
| |
|
Justification in the Christian Religion, 2007.
A comparison of the definition of justification by the Augsburg Confession and the Council of Trent.
2,636 words (approx. 10.5 pages), 18 sources, APA, £ 54.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the concept of justification in the Christian religion. The paper presents a comparison of justification as defined by the Augsburg Confession and the Council of Trent. The paper also discusses the views of Martin Luther with regards to justification and the public opinion of his views. The paper concludes by suggesting that these views are possibly the result of very different worldviews and lie deeply embedded in different religious expectations and understandings.
From the Paper
"The above illustrates the Catholic belief and emphasis on the formal aspects of justification as well as the law and "works". As Canon 4 of the Trent document points out, for the Catholic faith justification must occur through the sacraments, especially the sacrament of baptism. This view is opposed by the spirit of the Augsburg Confession with its view that faith alone is sufficient for justification."
| |
|
Luther vs. Aquinas on Grace and Justification, 2005.
Considers the question of grace and justification, or salvation, in the church according to the theology of both the Catholic Church and Lutheran Protestants.
757 words (approx. 3.0 pages), 3 sources, APA, £ 18.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper considers the concept of grace and how it leads to justification, or salvation, for Christians, with a focus on the writings of St. Thomas Aquinas in the "Summa Theologica". It then considers the Protestant response to the issue with the "39 Articles" and the "Westminster Confessions".
From the Paper
"The state of grace, for Aquinas, is completely intertwined with justification. He explains this concept by arguing that grace is the consequence of Divine love, from which the sins of man are remitted and he is made worthy of eternal life. It is clearly the position of Aquinas that, without grace, no person can merit eternal life. However, Aquinas takes a position where justification requires more than just the grace of God; it requires faith and a movement of free-will against sin. Specifically, he states that man must move his mind toward God , which in itself involves a shift in man's free will where he is moved away from sin and towards justice."
| |
|
Justification, 2007.
An analysis of Keith Lehrer and Thomas Paxson's understanding of justification and Laurence Bonjour's criticism of foundationalism.
1,018 words (approx. 4.1 pages), 2 sources, MLA, £ 25.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This essay describes Keith Lehrer and Thomas Paxson's understanding of justification as it relates to epistemic knowledge. The paper uses Lehrer and Paxon's article "Knowledge: Undefeated Justified True Belief," as a basis of the explanation. The paper also discusses and explains Laurence Bonjour's criticism of foundationalism.
From the Paper
"Bonjour makes two fundamental criticisms of foundationalism which work together to attack foundationalism. The first problem for foundationalism is a contradiction between accepting both (1) and (2) as a priori claims. Bonjour states that B is "ex hypothesi, and empirical belief, and it is hard to see how a particular empirical belief could be justified on a purely a purely a priori basis." This argument means that the foundationalists can have one of the two premises justified before the use of empirical evidence but not both. Therefore, the foundationalists must rely on empirical knowledge to justify basic beliefs therefore there are no truly basic beliefs."
"The second argument Bonjour makes is that in order for a belief to be justified the subject must have justification, not just in the abstract, but also have cognitive access to the justification employed in support of the belief. The reason for this claim is that a subject could not be held epistemically responsible for a belief if they did not have cognitive access to the justification for holding that belief, because without that access the subject has no reason for thinking said belief to be true."
| |
|
Justification of the Iraq War, 2004.
An analysis of the justification of the war in Iraq.
1,319 words (approx. 5.3 pages), 4 sources, MLA, £ 30.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper confesses that so much has already been said about the war in Iraq and the grave error that the United States made by invading Iraq that it seems absurd to even suggest that this war was justified. The paper continues to claim that we must not ignore both sides of the coin. The paper presents a deeper look into some of the reasons Iraq was invaded in order to decide whether the government did the right thing or not.
From the Paper
"David Kay also confirmed that Saddam was a threat to the world because he had blantantly ignored UN regulations on several occasions. The Saddam regime had to be toppled because his dictatorship was becoming more of a liablity for the international community since Saddam simply refsued to abide by the international laws. He was consistently amassing dangerous knowledge about development of sophiticated weapons but refused to report his activities."
| |
|
Piaget's Conservation and Childhood Justification, 2005.
This paper explores research to determine the efficacy of Piaget's conservation and childhood justification theories.
3,220 words (approx. 12.9 pages), 8 sources, APA, £ 63.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that, although Piaget's theories of child development have been generalized and widely accepted, his work is not unassailable because he based the majority of his observations on the study of his own children. The author points out that, even today, there is little agreement as to the precise accuracy of his stages or the way in which they may be measured and determined especially the impact of cultural differences and the issue of giftedness among children. The paper includes (1) a literature review of several studies and (2) an interview of a child conducted by the author.
From the Paper
"Of course, if children are just responding to subtle cues given by the interviewer, then one would expect studies to bear this out -- and they do. McGarrigle and Donaldson (1974) found that if Piaget stage tasks were performed in a way that minimalized the appearance that the first answer was wrong, the success rate of an average group of four year old children jumped from 22.5% to 80% -- a total reversal of the trend towards failure for that age. In this study, the researchers pretended that a "Naughty Teddy" toy escaped his cage and messed up the lines of objects. They researcher then asked for the child's help in making sure the lines were still had the same number of objects."
| |
|
The Falklands War: Justification and Misperception, 2002.
Examines both the Argeninian position and the British position on the Falklands War.
1,900 words (approx. 7.6 pages), 12 sources, £ 49.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The author believes that the war should have never been fought, since it was filled with misperceptions on both sides. Argentina was wrong to think that the British would not respond. The British, meanwhile, were naive in assuming that Argentina would not try to grab the Falklands. At the same time this escalating situation was filled with justification. The Argentines were justified in believing that the British would never go to war over the Falklands. The British, meanwhile, were justified in fighting for the territory. This paper examines these two positions.
| |
|
Lockes Social Contract: A Convincing Justification for the Political Order, 2000.
This essay examines Locke?s social contract between people and sovereign and how Locke embraces the people?s right of revolution, and assigns the sovereign reciprocal responsibilities to his subjects that Hobbes does not do.
2,160 words (approx. 8.6 pages), 3 sources, £ 46.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
To substantiate the social contract as a valid justification for the political order, I will primarily examine Locke?s social contract between people and sovereign, rather than Hobbes?s social contract among the people, because Locke?s theory is generally superior and more contemporarily relevant. I will first examine the pre-political state of persons, which is the state of nature, and demonstrate that rational individuals are compelled to enter society by agreeing to the social contract. Secondly, I will discuss the principal advantage of the social contract, which is that the government is legitimized by the consent of the people. Thirdly, I will discuss the principal advantage peculiar to Locke?s formulation of the social contract, which is that the sovereign is held accountable for his actions. To more thoroughly examine the validity of the social contract in justifying a political order, I will discuss a possible objection to the use of the social contract, namely, that the social contract cannot oblige any but those who originally formed such a contract.
From the Paper
"After the English Civil War, justifying political authority became a particularly pressing concern. After all, the nation fought a bloody war to determine whether its supreme authority would be King Charles I, who claimed rule by divine right, or the Parliament. Thomas Hobbes?s Leviathan was published in 1651, shortly after the Rump Parliament voted to execute the often-intractable Charles I in 1649. The chaos of the Civil War, regicide, and the establishment of Cromwell?s Protectorate surely led Hobbes to favor a sovereign with absolute power. In contrast, Locke?s Second Treatise on Government, published in 1690, was greeted by a starkly different English political culture. The 1688 Glorious Revolution, a bloodless coup in which the last Catholic monarch, James II, was finally deposed, allowed for the acceptance of the English Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights finally guaranteed the supremacy of Parliament and the political and civil rights of the people. Granted the historical fact of the Glorious Revolution, Locke embraces the people?s right of revolution, and assigns the sovereign reciprocal responsibilities to his subjects that Hobbes does not do. Although Hobbes and Locke ultimately design markedly different states, each justifies the political order with a social contract. The social contract does, indeed, provide a convincing justification for the political order."
| |
|
Justification by Faith Alone, 2006.
This paper offers an analysis of Luther's understanding and discusses the Christian tradition.
2,250 words (approx. 9.0 pages), 5 sources, £ 61.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this essay, the writer notes that the long and eventful history of Christianity demonstrates that a number of significant developments can be identified which have had profound implications for the Church, Christian tradition, and the world community of Christians. The writer points out that while there have been many developments worthy of thorough analysis, some have had more historical and doctrinal impact and implications than others and deserve more emphasis and evaluation. Further, the writer maintains that the major developments that qualify for this emphasis are important because they served to identify or clarify theological principles that hold true throughout eternity and thus redeem Christian tradition.
From the Paper
"This site contains a significant amount of information pertaining to the time period surrounding the topic and explains how the jeremiad views evolved since the beginning of the nation. The site begins with the landing of the pilgrims at Plymouth Rock and discusses how these individuals had been accustomed to a world in which every element of their lives was predetermined by rules. In the new world the opinions of many were waiting to be expressed and through new literary forms this became possible. The site is important to the research because it offers a background to the paper topic, and allows insight into the world of the people that embraced the American jeremiad."
| |
|
War: No Justification for the Consequences, 2006.
A discussion regarding war and its consequences.
1,484 words (approx. 5.9 pages), 4 sources, MLA, £ 34.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses how war has been waged for thousands of years, dating back to ancient civilizations like Greece, Macedonia, Hittites, China, the Three Kingdoms etc. The paper reports that through the years, warfare has evolved. With the invention of gunpowder by the Chinese around 300 - 650 AD, and the introduction of smokeless gunpowder in 1886 by Paul Vieille, war has quickly become a means for countries to extend their borders and influence friends and neighbors alike through strong arm tactics. The paper goes on to discuss how there is never any action without consequences but throughout history, leaders have always been more concerned with the outcome of the conflict than with the consequences of their actions.
Outline:
Introduction
CONGO: Africa's First World War
Middle East: War-A way of Life
Conclusion
From the Paper
"War and the Middle East have had an ongoing love affair for centuries now. Dating back from the Ottoman and Persian Empires to modern day Iraq and the Palestinian territories, conflicts on a grand scale have existed there. Today, the focus is on the Palestinian and Israeli conflict and the devastation caused by both sides. With the lack of a modern day military Palestinian militants have adopted a brand of guerilla warfare, with suicide bombers killing themselves, along with innocent Israeli civilians, in the name of Allah. On the other side you have the Israeli military, arguably the best trained military in the world, conducting military campaigns across the border in hopes of destroying the militant infrastructure. This conflict has been going on for years and there seems to be no end in sight. "
| |
|
Southern Justification of Slavery, 2001.
Southern intellectuals' justiications based on physiological, racial, social, religioius, cultural and economic levels. Argument that slavery was a more benevolent institution than Capitalism.
1,800 words (approx. 7.2 pages), 15 sources, £ 43.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"In spite of the process of emancipation and criticism against slavery, the South hung onto slavery even after the Revolutionary Period (Moore 140). At first, they defended the institution of slavery as a necessary evil. However, in time, the South, through the voice of the intellectuals, wove an impressive web of justifications. It not only defended the institution, but extolled it as an ideal system to be emulated by all societies. In their complete embrace of slavery, these intellectuals justified the institution on several levels: physiological, racial, social, religious, cultural and economic.
By pointing out the physiological and racial differences from the whites, the doctors and scientists of the South played a large part in undermining the humanity of the slaves. This ?knowledge? set the stage for the justification of the ..."
| |
|
The Justification of Torture, 2008.
An overview of the torture techniques used by the French in the Battle of Algiers.
1,647 words (approx. 6.6 pages), 5 sources, APA, £ 36.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper gives an overview of the use of torture in general and specifically the torture techniques used by the French military in their interrogation efforts during the Battle of Algiers. The paper also discusses the rationale behind the use of torture. Additionally, the paper identifies the costs and benefits of using torture and looks at the lessons that can be learned from France's use of torture during the Battle of Algiers. Lastly, the writer discusses his own views on the use of torture.
Outline;
Torture
Rationalization for Torture
Benefits of Torture
Costs of Torture
Battle of Algiers and the U.S. War on Terror
Analysis
From the Paper
"Although the French military won the first round in the Battle of Algiers, France ultimately lost the war and withdrew from Algeria in 1962 leaving the FLN as the new rulers. The use of torture and notorious interrogation techniques may have been a tactical success, but it was undoubtedly a strategic failure for the French. The torture techniques used by French military heightened support for nationalists in and out of Algeria. Torture use also discredited the French army and in the process, senior ranks in the French military became disenchanted with the French civilian leadership which eventually led to several senior officers to turn against the government and to attempt to assassinate French President De Gaulle. Torture further led to domestic political scandals in France, and traumatized French political life for decades. "
| |
|
Islamic and Christian Approaches to War and Peace, 2002.
An examination of the Koran, the Old Testament and several academic sources to help explain the views of war and peace in Islam and Christianity.
2,889 words (approx. 11.6 pages), 16 sources, MLA, £ 59.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper looks at the worlds two largest religions - Christianity and Islam and tries to understand why they are often battling each other over moral and religious issues. The writer examines what makes these religions battle and whether they are "commanded" to according to their religion. It examines the Koran, the Bible and other religious texts in order to define the terms "jihad" and the term "war" in the bible.
From the Paper
"Islam, with approximately 1,200,000,000 followers, is the second largest religion in the world. Christianity, with almost 2,000,000,000 followers, is still holding as the largest. With these two religions competing for the top spot, and even sharing some of the same origins, it is no wonder the followers fight with one another. The question I asked myself, however, was not whether these people fight, because I know they do, but if their religion demands them to fight. In this paper, I attempt to study the religious texts, the views of war within both religions, and how the people express the teachings of their religions."
|
|
|
