Violence Breeds Violence

Do the video game industry, media and movies cause violence?  The debate rages over the impact of our entertainment choices as they affect our behavior with gun violence. 

Our culture is saturated with violent images, yet the vast majority of people do not act on such as motivation.  Even those who are armed do not.  For example, in the US in 2009 there were an estimated 310 million non-military firearms (CNN, 09/09/12), and 326,090 firearm incidents* (factcheck.org).  That is .0015 firearm incidents per gun.

The US is not uniquely violent.  Our 4.5% of the world’s population owns 40% of all non-military firearms (Huffington Post, 12/20/12, Joe Van Brussel).  Yet our overall rates of per capita violence are similar to Australia, Canada and Western Europe, other than homicide.  There are nations with worse per capita rates for gun homicide:  Mexico, South Africa and Colombia for example (United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime).  Japan’s movie and animated literature industry is one of the most graphically violent in the world, and yet, as a society, its rates of violent crime are some of the lowest.

Rather than the media/movie industry causing violence in our culture, I would suggest our culture’s attitude towards violence is what fuels its expression in our media.

We hold a deeply ingrained cultural conviction that violence can solve our problems, and we find fictional depiction of that conviction entertaining.

The “good guy” shoots the “bay guy” and walks away having saved the day and securing possibilities for the future.  We dilute the impact and terror of violence by reducing it to cartoon images.  Our movies and video games present violence in ways we can manage; giving us the illusion that it can be controlled at some level, or that it has some enduring meaning.  We want to believe that violence can have a redeeming purpose, as ugly and brutal as it might be.  So we act it out in our media/artistic/entertainment expressions in safe and stylized ways.

Haven't humans done so since the dawn of history?  Europeans have been doing so since the tragedies of Aeschylus, Sophocles and Euripides (5th century BCE); primal people did so around the evening fire; our youth do so today watching it on screens, big and small.

This is not necessarily a bad thing.  Rehearsing violence and our response to it may allow us vicarious and safe ways to express the anger and fear that go with it.  But as rational as such behavior may seem for the survival of a community, in the end that is not how violence works.  

Violence destroys, demeans and ruins the both victim and the perpetrator at one level or another.  Singular acts of violence may be necessary for self-defense or preservation but "the good guy" never just walks away from it; the increasing rates of PTSD (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder) and suicide in our armed forces after ten years of war in Iraq and Afghanistan may be indicative.   

Nations may have no choice but to use deadly force to defend or survive, but victory rarely guarantees peace; it may buy a period of the cessation of violence, but by definition that is not "peace."  Attempts to make violence palatable are inherently false, misleading and spiritually bankrupt.

We go and pay our entertainment money to see/hear/or play at violence only if we have disconnected the reality of violence from our psyche, our souls.  Such compartmentalization may be an effective defense mechanism.  It may be a necessary defense mechanism.  But there is a cost to pay for it.

In response to the recent exchange of rocket violence between the Palestinians of the Gaza Strip and Israel, US President Barack Obama said in Israel's defense, "There's no country on Earth that would tolerate missiles raining down on its citizens from outside its borders."  (11/19/12)

This is an astonishing statement from the executive of a government doing just that with robotic drone aircraft.

The New America Foundation estimates that in Pakistan, between 1,953 and 3,279 people have been killed by drones since 2004, and that between 18% and 23% of them were not militants. The nonmilitant casualty rate was down to about 10% in 2012, the group says.  In Yemen, the group estimates between 646 and 928 people have been killed in a combination of drone strikes and airstrikes, and 623 to 860 of those killed were militants.  Only about 2% of those killed have been high-level targets, the group said (CNN, 02/10/13).

We are at war against a real and determined enemy to be sure.  There are certainly going to be collateral victims.  We can be confident that our military forces go out of their way, even putting themselves in danger, to limit such collateral losses.  The citizens of our country, myself included, do not want to see our uniformed men and women take casualties, and drones can always be replaced.  Drones are effective war machines, getting to locations other assets couldn't.

And.

We absolutely are asking other countries to tolerate our missiles raining down on their citizens from the sky.

I have to imagine that you can only do that if you've been able somewhere psychologically, spiritually, emotionally to disconnect the realities of such violence from the intentions of your actions.  I imagine that a President can only make such a statement as President Obama did last November while authorizing violence on other countries by disconnecting the realities of such violence from one's mind. 

Jesus says, "Those who live by the sword shall die by the sword." (Matthew 26:52)  

Violence may at times be necessary, but it is always an evil, and it rarely solves our problems.  There will never be enough targeted assignations or armed guards at schools to keep us safe.  You can't kill enough "bad guys" to be safe.

Violence only breeds more violence.  When will we invest ourselves in the peacemaking?

*Use of a firearm in an act of crime or suicide

Fifty Shades of Grace # 4

Mike Liguori is a former United States Marine and veteran of the Iraq War. In his book, “The Sandbox, Stories of Human Spirit and War,” he describes his two tours in Iraq (’04-‘06) and his struggle coming home.  Mr. Liguori battled Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and struggled finding a purpose in life after war.

Mike Liguori

In a recent panel interview on KQED Public radio (03.13.13, 9:00am Forum) marking the tenth anniversary of our invasion of Iraq, Mike Liguori described how he grew up in San Carlos as an active Roman Catholic with a typical adolescent machismo attitude toward life and war.  He went into the military with heroic visions of defending his nation and retribution for the attacks of 9/11.  His first experience of live fire battle changed all of that.  In fact, he was describing it and his service in Iraq as a “loss of faith”…in his nation, himself and God.    

Following his discharge from the service he bounced around a variety of jobs and schools with little success or focus.  He experienced so much of what we are learning about Iraq/Afghanistan PTSD; serious issues with anger, isolation, alcohol.  One night as he was fixing dinner alone in his apartment, he contemplated suicide, using the knife he had in his hands.  It was at that moment that he heard a voice speak clearly to him as if someone was in the room with him; “…this is not your time to die”.  It was a turning point in his life and a moment that he credits to God as he understands God.   

In 2011, Mike graduated with a B.S. in Business Management and Administration from Menlo College.  He is the founder of Operation Work Warriors, a non-profit organization helping veterans reintegrate into civilian life by providing education, counseling and career guidance (www.operationworkwarriors.org).  He is active in the veteran’s community, lobbying veteran legislation in Washington D.C. with the Iraq Afghanistan Veterans of America (IAVA).  He is a public speaker about hiring veterans in today’s workforce; our nation’s unemployment rate is 7.7% but for veterans it is 9.4%.  President Obama was recently quoted as saying, “No one who fights for their country overseas should ever have to fight for a job here at home.” (Washington Post, 03.19.13)  Operation Work Warriors is about honoring those who serve our country with the dignity and respect that comes with honest work and a chance to build a future.

However one understands the Easter story…history or metaphor…life by its nature is organized for resurrection.  A seed dies and springs to life with new growth in its season.  Every day our bodies replace old cells die as they die with new cells.  And it can happen in the life of any good man or woman who finds themselves with the second chance to choose life and make the most of it.  For Mike Liguori, resurrection came as he buried the illusions of the past and dedicated his life to doing something good for somebody else.  Service to others has renewed his faith in a Higher Power, a compassionate God who cares about him and his future.  And he would tell you that such faith has made all the difference.

Movies and Music

The final movement of Beethoven’s 9th Symphony is referred to as the “Ode to Joy” (1824).  Beethoven was inspired by Friedrich Schiller's poem of that title dedicated to the joy of "universal brotherhood" (1785).  The poem was written prior to the upheaval of the French Revolution (1789-99), one of the first results of Europe's embrace of popular democracy.  Following the Renaissance, Europeans began to see divine authority within the individual rather than in elite institutions of royal hierarchy.  There was great hope in the prospect of the common person’s future versus the past of monarchy.  One can hear the theme of universal brotherhood in France’s national motto born in the Revolution:  “Equality.  Fraternity.  Liberty.”

Beethoven was empathetic to these ideals.  The French Revolution impacted Beethoven’s 3rd Symphony, the “Eroica” (1804, “eroica” = “heroic” in Italian).  It was originally dedicated to Napoleon Bonaparte whom the composer saw as a heroic champion of democracy.  When Napoleon proclaimed himself emperor of France, Beethoven renounced him and tore off the title page of his symphony.  Like many of the intelligentsia of the day, Beethoven hoped for a democratic future minus the poverty, hypocrisy and militarism of a society governed by royalty.

Ludwig Van Beethoven

As the Revolution matured, Beethoven’s hope for society’s future did as well.  He looked for an opportunity to set Schiller’s poem to music.  The connection of his fourth movement to the “Ode to Joy” is a strong statement of Beethoven’s intention to see a future of "universal brotherhood" and peace.

Many consider the 9th Symphony to be Beethoven’s greatest piece of work, if not one of the greatest of all time.  For example, on Christmas Day in 1989, to celebrate the fall of the Berlin Wall, the unification of the Germanys and the end of the Soviet Union, Leonard Bernstein led an international orchestra in performing Beethoven’s 9th.  The moment was a celebration of "joy", "freedom" and "universal brotherhood" in the hope for peace.

Consider then that the trailer for the hit movie A Good Day to Die Hard (2013) shows a series of car explosions, murders and general mayhem set to the final movement of Beethoven’s 9th Symphony.  Linking the “Ode to Joy” to images of violence and death…even Hollywood’s theatrical violence and death…is the height of irony, to say the least.

Scene from A Good Day to Die Hard

The musical settings of film can be powerful and inspiring.

Director Philip Haufman and music director Bill Conti set a fan dancer's burlesque to Claude Debussy's "Claire de Lune" ("Moonlight", 1893) in the movie The Right Stuff (1983) about the beginnings of the U.S. manned space program.  Conti would win the Academy Award for best musical score for the film.  A strip tease danced to such a classical masterpiece entitled "Moonlight" as the test pilots considered the privileges that the fates had brought them to be the first Mercury astronauts seems genius.

In the 1986 Academy Award winning Best Picture, Platoon director Oliver Stone and music director Georges Delerue chose the passionate crescendo of "Adagio for Strings" by Samuel Barber (1936) in the pivotal assignation scene as one U.S. Army Sergeant shoots another in the back, one of Stone's hints to America's betrayal of itself in the Vietnam War.

Tchaikovsky's "1812 Overture" (1880), a tribute to Russia's resistance against Napoleon's invasion and eventual defeat beginning at the battle of Borodino (1812), is now played at scores of July 4th fireworks displays for the noise of its cannonade finale, with little consideration of its historical context.  Movie makers have so overused this great piece of music that it has become clichéd.  Yet in V for Vendetta (2005), director James McTeigue and music director Dario Marianelli use the "1812" quite appropriately for their climactic conclusion scene as the British Parliament Building in London is blown up with spectacular special effects fulfilling the intention of the Guy Fawkes’ failed gunpowder plot (1605).  As the Russians in Tchaikovsky's time succeeded in fighting off their oppressor, celebrating with cannons and ringing church bells in salute, the film makers of V for Vendetta wanted to suggest that their fictional hero was successful in resisting the tyranny of anti-democratic government.

Final scene from V for Vendetta

Church folk know the spiritual impact when music speaks to transcendent themes.  Music is the heart and soul of what we call communal worship.  Sacred music connects us to something beyond ourselves and the ideals of hope, faith and love.  Music can evoke real emotion and inspire great ideas when theme and context are matched.  We know that in ballet, opera and the theater, rock concerts, street minstrels and church choirs.  That's even true in the movies. 

Which may be one reason it is so glaring when cinema artists purposely choose not to do so.  Director John Moore and music director Marco Beltrami's choice to use Beethoven's "Ode to Joy" in the trailer for A Good Day to Die Hard is insulting on so many levels.  Along with Beltrami's resume of scoring horror films, he was also nominated twice for Academy Awards (Hurt Locker and 3:10 to Yuma).  Certainly he knew what he was doing when he juxtaposed "Ode to Joy" to movie cartoon violence?

Does it matter?  Do we the moviegoers even care?  Have we become so accustomed to cartoon violence in film that the music behind it is irrelevant?  Does it take an amateur's appreciation of classical music and an entitled sense of self-importance to be thus offended?

Or does the misuse of one of the great European contributions of music, a tribute to human hope for a world of peace and joy, in A Good Day to Die Hard speak to the continual numbing of our culture to violence?  To date (03/12/13) this "shoot em up" film which cost $92 million to produce has grossed over $240 million globally.  Maybe the answer to that question is in the numbers.

Fifty Shades of Grace #3

The studio had been collecting dust for 20 years or so.  It is a real challenge to do pottery on your own when it is hard to walk, when the strength in your arms is gone.  The tools, kiln and wheel were all in good shape.  Boxes of glaze materials were lined up in order, oxides in their jars.  Bags of clay had long since dried into 25 lb. bricks but could be revived with water and effort.  There was a Voulkos poster on the wall along with a cartoon depicting the choice between one's studio and one's spouse; as if there could be one!

Audrey died at 92.  But one never stops being a potter once you've caught the fever.  For the last decade we had been friends and fellow pilgrims.  We spoke of family, politics, friends, history and pottery, always pottery.  It was part of our bond.  As her family prepared her home for the estate sale they asked if I would come by and take anything I wanted from her studio before it all disappeared.  They wanted me to have first choice.  It would mean a lot to them.  It would mean a lot to me.

As I rummaged through the stuff of a lifetime it became clear that there was more there than the remnants of a "hobby."   I hate that word applied to ceramic art.  Webster defines "hobby" as "an activity or interest pursued for pleasure or relaxation and not as a main occupation."  That one doesn't sell one's pottery for a living or get paid to teach it, or even if your proficiency doesn't reach the level of craft, it doesn't mean that what you are doing with clay is not "art":  "The expression of a transcendent moment of creativity."  You don't learn how to mix your own glazes, fire your own kiln, crush and knead your own material and hang a Peter Voulkos poster on your wall for a "hobby" for crying out loud!  Audrey found pleasure and relaxation in the clay, certainly.  But there was so much more than that. 

You could see it in her pieces.  The family had organized those left in storage on a table top.  They were all about the same size.  You could see what weight of clay she had grown confident in centering. 

You could see it in the dusty tools left behind.  Batik stamps, dental tools, seed pods, patches of fabric and children's toys all used to decorate, all used to record discovery in the clay.

You could see it in the score of dried out glaze buckets, the residue of experiment.

Each simple piece of pottery now organized on a dusty table reflected a texture tried, a stamp imprinted, a variance in glaze and the journey an artist was making to find her voice.

This housewife, farmer, historian, nature-loving mother/grandmother found in clay a medium for her moments of transcendent creativity.  It drew her to the solitude of her studio where her reservoirs were filled again and again.  That her pieces had no price tags, that her resume listed no exhibits or awards, made her no less an artist than the few whose names we remember.

I saw my own process in hers.  The same process for most potters I imagine.  I thought of the day when my kids have to organize my own dusty studio, scratching their heads over what to do with tools and equipment and books and boxes of stuff I found invaluable.  I suppose they will find it a hassle to dispose of such stuff and the memories that go with it.  But they will know, as my friends do of their mom, that clay was one of the ways a potter finds some peace in this world and within.

In spite of their insistence that I have "first choice," the only thing I could take from the table was a perfect tiny bowl made by my friend.  It will go in my collection next to the Hamada, the Ferguson and the Leach that my kids will have to find a home for after I am gone.  But the Audrey is as much a treasure as any other.

A Pastor’s Plea about Guns and Suicide

Something is getting lost in the national debate about gun violence in our country.  As horrific as those occasions of mass killings at schools or in public places are, statistically they are very rare.  Workplace violence and street crime are far more likely the occasion for firearm homicide.  But the largest effect of gun availability is suicide.

Two-thirds of all gun-related deaths in the US are suicides (2010 saw 30,470 gun-related deaths: 19,392 or 63% suicide; 11,078 or 36.4% homicide).₁ Guns remain the most common method of suicide (50.7% of suicides in 2006 were gun-related).₂

The US, with 4.5% of the world’s population, owns 40% of the world’s civilian firearms.  But the US is not uniquely violent.  Our overall rates of per capita violence are similar to Australia, Canada and Western Europe other than homicide.  There are nations with worse per capita rates for gun homicide:  Mexico and Colombia for example.  Compared to other developed countries, the US death by firearm rate of 10.2 per 100,000 is highest in the world.  Finland is second with 4.47 per 100,000.₃ The difference is in part the wide spread availability of guns in the United States.  Dr. Garen Winemute, University of California Medical Center, Davis, was recently quoted saying, “That’s the weapons effect.  It’s not clear that guns cause violence but it’s absolutely clear that they change the outcome”.₄

That’s especially true with suicide.

Over 38,000 people in the US die by suicide every year.  A person dies by suicide about every 14 minutes in the US.  90% of all people who die by suicide have a diagnosable psychiatric disorder at the time of their death.  There are four male suicides for every female suicide but three times as many females as males attempt suicide.  Men are far more likely to use a gun.  Although most gun owners reportedly keep a firearm in their home for “protection” or “self-defense”, 83% of gun related deaths in these homes are a result of a suicide, often by someone other than the gun owner.₂

There are an estimated 8-25 attempted suicides for every suicide death.₂  The use of a gun changes the outcome of the attempt dramatically.  Those attempting suicide with means other than guns often fail and are given a second chance in recovery from the attempt.  The devastating effect of a gun rarely fails.

Gun availability is a risk factor for suicide especially for youth in the US who often attempt suicide on impulse.  If they attempt with a gun, usually a handgun, they are more than likely to succeed in comparison to other suicide means.  Adolescents who commit suicide with a gun overwhelmingly use guns owned by their parents or other family members.  In one study in the Northwest, 90% of teen suicides were from guns, 5% from drug overdoses [or] cutting and piercing (the second most common means of attempted teen suicide).  Statistically those states with more guns per capita have more deaths by suicide.  Gun owners do not have more mental health problems than non-owners nor are they more suicidal than non-owners.   The difference is that more guns are available.  The availability of suicide method has a huge impact on the rate of successful attempts.  If there is a gun available the likelihood of suicide dramatically increases for those considering suicide as an option.₅

It is not that guns cause suicide but that they dramatically change the outcome.

The vast majority of gun owners in the United States are law-abiding people experienced in the safe handling of firearms.  They grieve every loss to gun violence, every mass murder victim.  They don’t want the criminal or insane to get their hands on guns any more than those who don’t own guns.

It is incumbent upon gun owners to safely secure their weapons, especially if they have teenagers or frail elderly in the home.  Trigger locks, home gun safes or vaults or local storage at shooting range lockers are essential for the safety of those at home.  If you choose to have guns in your home, teaching young people the safe use and care of firearms is paramount.  

Such an admonition may seem patronizing or trite coming from a preacher who chooses not to own guns.  But I’ve hunted.  I’ve enjoyed the firing range.  I learned a lot in one of California’s “Hunter Safety Courses”.  I’ve associated with gun owners throughout my life who hold safety as their top priority.  I honor those men and women in uniform who arm themselves to defend our community and nation.

And.  I have had family members go through clinical depression and suicidal episodes.   God forbid that they would choose using a gun at their homes to end their lives before seeking help.

As a volunteer police Chaplain in Clovis, California it was my responsibility to make “death notifications” to residents when family members died.  Delivering the news of a suicide, especially by gun, brings with it overwhelming pain and shock to survivors that leaves their lives forever changed. 

As a pastor, twice I have talked men out of killing themselves with guns.  I don’t want to ever do it again.

If we are going to continue to be a nation with wide availability and access to firearms, the cost of suicide by gun must be taken into the equation.

₁      National Center for Health Statistics, CDC, 2010

₂      American Foundation for Suicide Prevention quoting NCHS/CDC 2010

₃      United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime

₄      Huffington Post, 12/20/12, Joe Van Brussel citing

₅      Harvard Injury Control Research Center, Harvard School of Public Health

Fifty Shades of Grace: #2

They grew up in the same home, with loving parents and the same DNA.  Yet the two sisters couldn't have been more different.  

"Sisters and a book"
Iman Maleki

There were lots of warm memories from their childhood and school days.  Young adulthood took them in entirely different directions.  "Leah" tried her hand at college but was much more interested in getting married and starting a family.  "Rachel" found college academics exciting.  Her excellence at higher education would open many doors including a professional career with significant social responsibility.  She didn't have time for marriage and a family.

It was in "Leah's" first marriage that her addiction to alcohol began.  Her husband turned out to be a mean drunk himself.  The relationship didn't last long.  The second marriage was to a much older man who didn't mind "Leah's" drinking as long has she provided for the home.  When he died of a heart attack a few years into the relationship "Leah" hardly noticed.  There would be other "common law" relationships along the way of "Leah's" journey but drinking was her first love in life.

"Rachel" would reach out to "Leah" as time allowed.  "Rachel" was the dutiful daughter.  As her parents aged, faced illness and eventually died, it was "Rachel" who was consistently a caring presence in their lives.  In spite of "Rachel's" overtures to her sister, "Leah's" lifestyle was not conducive to caring for her aging parents.  Her shame kept her away from even rudimentary participation in holidays or family events.  Jealousy drove a wedge between her and “Rachel”.  Communication between the two sisters became increasing painful, angry and recriminating. 

One Christmas Sunday, "Rachel" had an overwhelming premonition to phone "Leah" who, by now in her 70's, was living alone in a flop-house motel.  She survived on Social Security and the remainder of her portion of the family inheritance, most of which had disappeared in her hoarding habit.  To distract the check-out clerks at Wal-Mart, K-Mart and Safeway from her addiction, she would purchase “stuff” in addition to her drink of choice.  She had managed to fill up a number of storage sheds with never-opened merchandise.  In the course of a day, such service employees and the couple that ran the run-down motel were the only people with whom she spoke.  

After her repeated calls to "Leah" went unanswered, and frustrated by the indifference of the motel managers, "Rachel" called 911 requesting a welfare check on her sister.  The paramedics found "Leah" on the floor of the motel, unconscious but alive.  She would die of massive liver failure a week later on New Year's Eve.  She had drunk herself to death.

But that is not all that happened in her last week.

"Leah" was cared for by a compassionate hospital staff that did everything they could to keep her comfortable.  Unlike her existence in the cockroach-infested motel, "Leah" was clean and fed.  The sister whom she had cussed out over the phone in their last conversation months before stayed by her bedside, oversaw her care directives, cleaned up the mess at the motel and made arrangements to dispose of the accumulation in the storage units.

When "Leah" reached out to hold "Rachel's" hand, she took it and would not let it go until "Leah's" last breath.  No words were spoken.  "Leah's" deteriorating condition would not allow her to speak.  But the compassionate gesture of holding hands was all that needed to be said.  Two sisters with a common bond, a lifetime of wounds and disappointments, simply shared their last hours in this life together.

"Leah's" life of isolation and shame ended with a small measure of dignity.  Her last week would never resolve the accumulation of pain.  Yet she was not alone at the end.  And there was a moment of reconciliation between two sisters.  Now "Rachel" can let her go in the hope that in the next life "Leah" will find the peace she never found in this one.

The Christmas Stories We Don't Talk About

Slaughter of the Innocents,
by Giacomo Paracca, c1587

At Christmas time we expect to hear about the manger scene, the angelic chorus, a star in the east, shepherds and wise men. And we should, the story of Jesus' birth still inspires us today. Northern Hemisphere culture has added Santa Claus, evergreen trees and December 25th. It’s all good.

But it's not the whole story. In fact, there are parts of it that we'd prefer to avoid or ignore:

• Mary is an unwed mother that without divine intervention Joseph would have divorced. (Matthew 1:19)
• The monarch then in power, Herod, responds to the news of the new-born King of Israel with an order to kill every male infant in and around Bethlehem, 2 years old or younger. Jesus, Joseph and Mary will become refugees to Egypt as a result (Matthew 2:16-18).
• The gifts of "gold, frankincense and myrrh" (Matthew 2:11) are veiled references by the author and redactor of the gospel Matthew that this baby is born to die the death of a martyr; the three gifts each are associated with death and burial traditions.
• When Mary sings her magnificent song of praise to the God who acts in the life of a poor, unwed youth to work out the divine plan of salvation, she sings:

"He has brought down the powerful from their thrones, and lifted up the lowly; he has filled the hungry with good things, and sent the rich away empty." (Luke 1:52-53)

Can this be good news for those of us in the most privileged social classes of the most powerful nation on earth as we dash about buying up Christmas presents? We don't hear that preached very much in North America these days!

We are quite selective about the Christmas story. We miss something significant in the homogenized telling.

For example...

I’ve got a good friend who is exploring atheism. The other day we discussed the biological impossibility of the virgin birth, the contradictory traditions of the dating of Jesus’s birth and the atrocities of war and violence one can find in the Bible as proofs that no reasonable person should believe in God as described in the Bible, especially the Christmas story. The point that “we hide” the parts of the story we’d rather ignore was only more evidence of our shallowness to my friend.

Fair enough. Explaining that divine conception was a typical literary device in the Ancient Near East or that historical documentation was often manipulated for political purposes back then made little impact on my friend who was looking for evidence not to believe. If you are seeking fault you will always find it.

If you are looking to expose the hypocrisy of a faith tradition that proclaims “God is love” (I John 4:8) and has a history of bloodlust you don’t have to go very far in the Bible to find it. Both Hebrew and New Testament scriptures report incidences of genocide, murder and mayhem (Just as examples note: Genesis 4:1-16, 19:12-f, 34:1-f, Exodus 12:29-32, 32:25-35, Deuteronomy 2:34, 3:6, Mark 6:14-29, Acts 5:1-11, 7:54-8:1).

This has long been an argument by atheists to reject faith. Asserting divine authority in irrational and violent texts is an excuse to do all manner of evil in “God’s name”. Certain stories of faith in Abrahamic monotheism have been used to justify the very cruelty and injustice it preaches against. If you are on God’s side you can do just about anything to one who isn’t, including colonizing their nations, burning of their cities, raping their women and killing their children.

The dichotomy is often explained away with selective interpretation. We pick out the parts of the Bible we like, which agree with our point of view, that justify our opinions and ignore the rest. We all pick and choose to what we will pay attention in life so it may seem natural to do the same with sacred writings.

The opposite approach is also argued suggesting that since it is written in the Holy Book each and every believer adheres to each and every word. Thus if there is sanctioned violence in the Holy Book then the believers must be violent people.

The most contemporary example of this notion is "Islamophobia"; the irrational fear of Islam and Muslims.

The Koran, the Holy Book of Islam, contains verses that justify violence. Islam was born out of a violent history and warred against the West for centuries. Islamic terrorism and terrible interfaith violence are realities of our times in all too many places. Yet to suggest that all 1.2 billion Muslims are out to kill non-Muslims because of what is written in their Holy Book is based on fear. It ignores the reality of Islamic diversity in thought and practice, as diverse as Roman Catholic and Protestant sects in Christianity. Islamophobia asserts that there is a single-mindedness in Islam that has never existed or appears to be non-existent only due to a very successful global conspiracy of stealth jihad among 1.2 billion people (?!).

Even the most strident Christian literalist will not argue that the Lord is literally a "shepherd" (Psalm 23) as if tending sheep in a heavenly pasture or that God is literally a "rock" just because God is called "a rock" or "my rock" 19 times in the book of Psalms. Christians don't cut off their hands or pluck out their eyes just because Jesus said to (Matthew 5:29-30,18:7-9). Poetic metaphor and symbolism has long been an aspect of Christian interpretation. No one lives by the Bible's literal "each and every word", let alone all 2 billion followers of Christ as if we were single-minded simply because we call ourselves the same name.

Although they all have the same Holy Book the Hebrew community has known significant diversity in interpretation and practice for centuries. Why would anyone suggest that all Muslims think and intend to act the same way because they have the same Holy Book?

It’s hard to argue against the atheist's denunciation of hypocritical, violent religion. There are too many historic and contemporary examples to ignore of the failure of religious communities to live up to their ideals. But the atheist misses an essential point basing such condemnation on the selective interpretation of sacred texts or blind and irrational devotion.

The Abrahamic tradition that posits both a loving and violent God is describing a dichotomy that is in each one of us. Most of us will not admit it but we all have the capacity for great acts of compassion and/or cruelty. Sacred texts combine myth, metaphor, theology and history recording the capacity of human love and violence in the most obvious terms. It may be a dichotomy we would just rather avoid. But the thoughtful reader and/or adherent is left to choose not just which part of the story they will believe but which aspect within themselves they will nurture and act upon. The choice is always ours and we need to face it. The saga of the Abrahamic faith forces us to do so.

If we avoid the dichotomy of our traditions as expressed in our Holy Books we avoid it in ourselves. And by avoiding it in ourselves, we remain isolated in our small worlds of logic, reason and fear. Our atheist friends dream of a world ruled by reason, logic and science as if those values are the best guarantee for a human future. History is full of examples of human carnage and exploitation when those values aren't anchored in moral and ethical grounding often found in the very sacred texts the atheist rejects.

Indeed the specifics of the Christmas story may be hard to believe if one insists on reading it through the lens of 21st century rationalism, without appreciation for the historical context from which it came. Virgin birth, stars in the east, angels singing from heaven are all part of a saga trying to grasp the possibility of incarnation.

We who embrace the story lose a lot if we avoid the implications of those parts of Christmas that don't fit with our cultural sentimentality:

• The birth of the Christ child has political ramifications for those who rule by greed and power. And still does.
• The death of Jesus on the cross will be the ultimate act of unconditional love and the authors of the gospels Matthew and Luke where we find the origin of the Christmas story want their readers to know this was no accident of history.
• If the values of love, peace and justice were to govern human society, the rich and powerful would indeed be sent empty away as the world would be organized to insure that everyone had enough. Millions still make that a dream worth living.

I don't mean to wash-way the challenges of faith or specifically the implications of violence in the Bible but having to wrestle with it there and in ourselves makes it very important that the whole story is told.