There are very few certainties in this world, but one of them seems to be that humans will carry on killing each other. You only have to look at a newspaper or listen to your radio to work that one out. However, one rather less certain issue is how we as Christians are called to respond to these conflicts. Over the page, you will see that my friend believes we should rise above violence; that descending to the world's standard is never justified. I, on the other hand, take a different view.

A quick glance at the Old Testament turns up quite a bit of violence, often meted out by the Israelites to anyone opposing them. A fair amount of this was actually sanctioned (or indeed, expressly ordered) by God, and the main function of such great Biblical men as Gideon, Samson and David seemed to be liquidating anyone who stood in the way of God's will. I won't argue that times haven't changed - indeed our whole religion has changed since the coming of Jesus, so these can't really be taken as a precedent for our own actions. I'm certainly not proposing any new crusades! However, I would like to make the point that our God is no pacifist.

My main problem with modern day pacifism is this: when I see something wrong, I want to help. I wish it was in my power to put things right. Watching the news, if I see a country where a few people are making the lives of many a misery, and I know my country has the power to put an end to this, how could I not wish that we should be able to help these people under oppression? In the words of Jesus (the very same Jesus who whipped corrupt traders out of His temple), "Whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me" (Matthew 25:40).

I know that all forms of violence and conflict, whether it be the sort we see (and maybe even inflict) every week, right up to international warfare, are horrible. I would never wish to use them except as a very last resort. Look at the former Yugoslavia, though. The ethnic cleansing went on for years there, until the Americans finally had enough and took over the country. (Sadly, the troubles there seem to be resuming). Neville Chamberlain tried to appease aggressors in the 1930s, but it didn't work, and one can only wonder, if we had gone to war with G e r m a n y earlier than we did, would Hitler's evil regime have not lasted as long? Would fewer people have been killed in the end? I hate to think what would have happened if no one had stopped him at all.

The essence of my argument is I feel that if we're not prepared to accept the lesser of two evils, and try to help others even if it is a grisly business where we may sustain personal (or national) losses, that amounts to not caring. And not caring for other people is something I hope I'll never have to answer for.