
This is a response to Gareth Jones's critique of Changing Worlds, arguing that while this critique largely misunderstands the approach taken in the book, it does raise important questions about the prospect of war in the modern world. Crucial differences are identified in the use of theological rhetoric as a means of resolving differences about the legitimacy of war in the modern world.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
