The twentieth century has bequeathed to us two contrary insights: 1) the pervasive character of violence, and 2) the moral and strategic possibilities of nonviolent action. We have a choice between retaliation and reconciliation. Today the Western world confronts a religiously inspired terrorist enemy. Many stereotype all Muslims as potential terrorists, oblivious of the rich faith of historic Islam that is capable of tolerance and respect. Peacekeeping discusses both the Just War approach and the Just Peace approach, accomplished only through just and peaceful means. Active nonviolence is seen as the antidote to absolute pacifism and unlimited militarism. The Law of Retaliation is discussed along with the Old Testament theology of Shalom. The New Testament "law" of reconciliation, together with Jesus' principle and practice of "non-retaliation," is seen in sharp contrast to both the Law of Retaliation and the Just War theory. Our ethical dilemma is: 1) How can a Christian bring himself to commit violence, advocate or defend it, and remain true to his faith? 2) How can a Christian refuse to use all means necessary to aid in relieving human misery and still be true to his faith? If we opt for nonviolence, how do we repay evil with good without becoming party to evil? If we opt for violence, how can we overcome evil with evil and avoid greater evil in turn? Elwood, ordained minister and author of thirteen books, holds a B.A. in Philosophy, Wheaton College; Master of Theology, Princeton Seminary; and Ph.D. in Philosophy of Religion, University of Edinburgh (Scotland). His career spans pastoral ministry, college chaplaincy, and college and seminary teaching in the States and Southeast Asia.He is currently Director of Publications and the Volunteer Program for Little Children of the World, Inc., a mission he and his wife, Bettie, founded in 1987.