Is -THIS- What Journalism Has Become?

I realize, at 49, I'm as old as dirt, but back in my day, it was expected that a professional journalist would report the facts, free of purposeful bias, exaggeration, inflammatory remarks, and personal opinions. Way back then (the 80s), people had respect for journalists because, in general, they could be trusted to report the truth. 

Fast forward to 2018. Purposeful bias, exaggeration, inflammatory remarks, and personal opinions seem to be 90% of what so-called journalists report these days. And I'm not pointing fingers only at liberal news media because, unfortunately, many conservative news sources are reporting from obvious slants, as well. And, we the general public have completely bought into it. Why? Because our itching ears listen for what we want to hear. And the news media, now monetized for tweets, posts, comments, etc., will regularly toss out what is tantamount to click bait. 

Here's a case in point, representing a microcosm of what we see today: Soledad O'Brien, formerly of CNN where she gained great notoriety as an anchor, is now the CEO of "Starfish Media Group." Here's how the Starfish Media describes itself (from their website): "Starfish Media Group is a multi-platform media production and distribution company, dedicated to uncovering and investigating empowering stories that look at the often divisive issues of race, class, wealth, poverty, and opportunity through personal narratives."

This is not a news outlet. This is a private company. But this company produces "news" for HBO, Al Jezeera America, and dozens of other sources. Ms. O'Brien and Starfish Media utilize social media whenever possible, as do most media outlets these days. But today, Ms. Obrien posted a "Tweet" about Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey. Apparently, Mr. Dorsey had decided to have a meal at Chik Fil A and posted about using his new "Cash App" to pay for the meal. (If that's not big news, whew, what is?)

Ms. O'Brien saw the tweet, retweeted (is that the correct term, young folk?) the following: "This is an interesting company (Chik Fil A) to boost during Pride month." 

Immediately half a dozen media outlets seized upon the story and ran with it, usually posting subsequent Tweets from angry folk from the LGBTQ community, as well as, response Tweets from angry folk in the Christian community. Outrage, clamor, insults from all over the spectrum. Instant story. 

This is not journalism. It's sensationalism. This is the combination of private companies and news media outlets "selling a product" at the expense of the people they claim to serve, as well as, other unsuspecting people all over our nation. Look again at Starfish Media's unabashed self-description: "...dedicated to uncovering and investigating empowering stories that look at the often divisive issues..."

Their product: divisive issues. Who gets empowered? They do. More money. More notoriety. More press. More tweets, etc. Can you hear the cash register cha-chinging? Can you hear the outrage as people groups get "played" by these dubiously empowering stories and thousands like them? 

As purveyors of any kind of news, we need to say, "Wait, a minute, I see what you're trying to do here, but I am NOT going to let it work on me." If you're reading and you grew up with multiple siblings, did you ever have one sibling try to play two other siblings off of each other? Or maybe the cunning kiddo tried to play parents off of each other? That's precisely what's happening here, except it comes from "professionals," and the stakes are much higher.

Is there an adjective that better describes America over the last several years than "divided?" Why? Two reasons: 1) journalist care more about $$$ and notoriety than they do about the truth. and 2)  an overwhelming number of Americans are as gullible as Gomer Pyle (young folk: you'll have to look up that reference). 

If you're wondering why I haven't posted any links to these news stories or tweets, it's because I don't want to contribute to the problem I'm criticizing.

The solution, my friends, is ignorance. Ignore the media. Ignore the their attempts to kick the hornet nest. Do not retweet. Do not click links that have inflammatory headlines. Do not comment. Ignore them, and like your older brother/sister, maybe they'll just go away. 

I'm not going to be surprised if the CEO of Twitter gets censured or issues a very public apology or even gets fired. Hey, it happened to the CrossFit spokesperson. Nope. No links. Not gonna do it. But it happened. An otherwise well-respected professional lost his livelihood for expressing at worst a religious conviction or even a simple opinion. 

To those in any minority (heck or majority), don't let yourself be led into anger, fury, insults, contempt, etc. Think things through. See the angles being played to stir you up. Christians aren't killing this country. LGBTQ people are not killing this country. African Americans aren't, Whites aren't, and neither are all the other groups these media outlets claim to empower. Big mouthed blowhards are the villains here. Don't get fooled again.

Son of God & Noah: What to Make of Hollywood's Ventures into Christianity?

Begin Rant Now.

Two movies getting a lot of press in Christiandom lately: Noah and The Son of God. I wish the press was better. And I wish so much of the negativity wasn't coming from Christians. No offense meant to my Christian friends or family, but I have some thoughts on this:

1) I'm going to see both movies. I don't really care about all the negative press. I want to decide for myself.

2) I'll tell you what though: the previews of Noah gave me chills based on the visual representation of the power of God at work. That alone is worth my money.

I've seen the previews of Son of God. Again, chills. Just seeing the Lord walking on water makes me want to cheer and worship.

3) I tend to think movies in general and these in specific fall into the category of "Permissible based on level of Faith." If you feel a weakness to the content, DON'T see it. If something about it will skew your belief system, fine, stay home. But why jump out there acting like there's no way anything redeeming could come out of these movies? There are a couple of articles circulating that basically condemn both movies for being the worst thing next to the antiChrist. I mean, come on peeps. These so called experts spouting off about heresies unnumbered, well, they are imperfect people too. Imperfect with their own baggage, biases, and slants.  

4) This reminds me of the "Christian" reaction to so called "secular" music: if it doesn't honor God overtly and according to the latest checklist, hold up a cross, spew negativity, and stick head in sand. For me: I know some of that music is not meant to honor God, per se. But certain songs make me praise Him for the melody, or the lyrics, or both. Don't agree? Fine. Let's agree to disagree and try -JUST TRY- for once to do the whole unity of the Body that Jesus was so keen on.

I think we Christians need to chill on getting all wadded up over movies and media, unless they depict Noah as a Transformer who worships the Devil while juggling kittens. Amen?

PS: If we want to show the movie-making powers that be that we want more Christian oriented movie fare, we might want to be a little less picky. 

End Rant. 

Epilogue #1: Just got back from Son of God, the movie. Seriously glad I didn't listen to the naysayers. Last thing in the world I want to do is start a debate within the family of God, but from my heart-of-hearts, I can't see anything in the movie that was so wrong, so heretical that any Christian would discourage others from seeing this movie. And I would think that any skeptic or unbeliever watching the movie would be confronted by the truth of Jesus in a powerful way. 

For me, the movie absolutely showed Jesus' humanity, the gladness in His heart, the mercy, the compassion. SPOILER ALERT: not much of a spoiler, really because it was a relatively small scene. But I just LOST IT when Jesus knelt down to the woman caught in adultery. The first thing He does is lift. her. chin. Something about that just cracked my heart right open. Jesus is the lifter of our chin. I thought the movie was stunningly beautiful and meaningful. It reminded me of how critically important the creative arts are to spreading the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Lord, Make Me a Sledghammer of Your Will...

Roll over. Play dead. Fetch. Heel. Sit. 

You're probably thinking that the list above is a collection of doggie commands.

What if I told you that these are actually commands for Christians?

No, not commands from God. These are the commands that the world and the enemies of our soul throw at Christians every day. And every day that passes, these shouted commands become louder and louder and louder.

The sad thing is: too often, we Christians obey. We roll over for the world's whims. We play dead by behaving just like everyone else. We fetch by amusing the world with Christian infighting. We heel by compromising what we believe. And we sit on our butts when we ought to be serving. Please understand, I'm not calling you for your splinters without first wrestling with the telephone pole stuck in my own eye. I'm as guilty of this as anyone else.

But it makes me wonder: How did we get here?

How did we Christians come to the place where we are outworked, outsmarted, out-faithed, out-argued, out-created, and outdated by the world? How indeed.

Like many Christian troubles, I suspect we got here because of three things: 1) We've forgotten who we are.  2) We've forgotten to fight.   3) And worst yet, we have doubted our God. 

This could easily be the subject of a multi-volume book series, but this message is so urgent that it has to be brief and to the point.

1: We have forgotten who we are. You, Christian! Yeah, you! God says you are a royal priesthood, a chosen people, Sons and Daughters of the MOST HIGH GOD. You are ransomed by the blood of Jesus Christ. Your debt is settled. You are citizens of Heaven. Nothing can do you much relative harm, not even death! Now, don't go getting a fat head. Arrogance is just as bad (or worse) than ignorance. But soberly, SOBERLY, understand that you are not to be anyone's puppy dog. 

1 Peter 2:9
"But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light."

Galatians 4:6-7
"Because you are sons, God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, the Spirit who calls out, "Abba, Father." So you are no longer a slave, but a son; and since you are a son, God has made you also an heir."

John 15:15
"I no longer call you servants, because a servant does not know his master's business. Instead, I have called you friends, for everything that I learned from my Father I have made known to you."

Brothers and sisters, KNOW who you are in Christ. How dare anyone treat you like something to be wiped from the bottom of their shoe! How dare the enemy or his demons tell you that you're worthless! You are God's chosen people. You may be weird, but that's okay. John the Baptist ate bugs. And Jesus spit in the mud and healed someone's sight with it. If Jesus calls you "friend," if He says you were worth dying for, then you are absolutely precious.  

2: We have forgotten to fight. Somehow, we Christians have been conned into believing a little too hard in "Blessed are the meek" and "turn the other cheek" doctrine. Have you looked at those verses in context? Are they really saying, "Followers of Christ, whenever confronted with evil, let it walk all over you?" Are we commanded to wave the white flag to the world? Does Jesus ever advise us to stick our head in the sand and pray that the big, bad evil world will go away? I don't think so.

¹⁰ Finally, be strong in the Lord and in the strength of His might. ¹¹ Put on the full armor of God, so that you will be able to stand firm against the schemes of the devil. ¹² For our struggle is not against ^[a]flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places. ¹³ Therefore, take up the full armor of God, so that you will be able to resist in the evil day, and having done everything, to stand firm.
Ephesians 6:10-13

Have you ever looked at the Full Armor of God? You do realize that there's a SWORD included, right? And friends, that sword is not for slicing cucumbers.

FIGHT. That sword is the Sword of the Spirit. Get on your knees and pray. Jesus talked about having twelve Legions of Angels on call, but He didn't use them because He had a different mission to accomplish. But us? We are in a struggle. This is war. God doesn't mince words on this. We are in the fight of our lives, and there are eternal consequences. So surrender is NOT an option.

To fight, however, we need to recognize our enemy. Our struggle is not against people. Not really. It will FEEL that way. But it is NOT that way. If someone comes against you, against your view of Jesus, it is only because that person has been raised in a poisoned world and--like most of us currently or at one time--has been deceived. If someone tries to tell you that what is wrong is actually right, remember, this person has likely been conditioned over a lifetime to believe that lie. So what we do is actually kind of sneaky in a cool, subversive way. We pray. We ask God to vanquish the demon structure upon which the person is standing. We ask God to knock down the strongholds of evil and to use us as the sledgehammer with which He might do it.

And then, we hit below the belt.

3 For though we live in the world, we do not wage war as the world does. 4 The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds. 5 We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ. 2Cor10:3-5

Christians don't fight with conventional weapons. We fight with love. We fight with service. We fight with encouragement. We fight with shared experience. And, don't forget this: we fight with greatness. Be GREAT for God. If you want to write: be a great writer. If you want to be an accountant, then be the best one you can be. You know why? Greatness brings glory to God. Greatness makes people ask questions. We fight with all these weapons, but we DO fight.

When the blowhard at the office scoffs at the very notion of God, you do NOT sit in silence. You do NOT walk away. And you do NOT laugh along with him. When the smart-allecky secular humanist princess in your sociology class explains in no uncertain terms that people of faith are weak; that human spirit is strength, you do NOT miss the chance to counter. When the heckler gets on your facebook page and tells you that you are an intolerant bigot, you don't bend over and say "thank you, sir, may I have another."

Do NOT succumb to the playground-name-calling tactics of the world: You are intolerant. You are a homophobe. You are judgmental. Seriously, the world uses name-calling as a "Silencing Club," to batter down the fearful so that you won't speak anymore truth. Don't let those accusations cow you. Answer them. "I am not intolerant. You are using the world incorrectly." "I am not a homophobe any more than you are a Christ-o-phobe." "I am not judgmental. I am discerning. There is a difference. Let me explain it to you." And after all this, the secret weapon: love. "Can I get you a cup of coffee?" or "I heard you need a babysitter. My daughter..." or "You need some help with your move?" Bammm, just try to stop those missiles.

Important Sidenote: There is one population, however, we need to stop fighting. Each other. When Christians fight each other, satan laughs. The world laughs too.  And mankind loses.

²⁰ “My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, ²¹ that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. ²² I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one— ²³ I in them and you in me—so that they may be brought to complete unity. Then the world will know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me. John 17: 20-23

This is serious. We Christians have become WAY too WELL-KNOWN for shooting our wounded. We argue over just about every point of doctrine you can think of. We make mountains out of molehills, major on the minors, and act like we've each cornered the market on truth. People, Jesus wants us to be one. ONE. Why? So that the world will know that God sent Jesus for them. So that the world will believe that God really loves THE WORLD. If Christians can't even seem to love other Christians, what in the world would lead anyone to believe we could love the world? If we bicker over baptisms and rock music and tv shows, and every other cotton-picking thing, who wants to be a part of that? If that's what God's all about, then who wants to know God? 

We like to get all righteous, don't we? "This is a point of doctrine I must defend because it's true." Or, "I must correct my wayward brother who has clearly erred in this bit of theology." Or worst-of-the-worst, "This poor fellow in THAT denomination may not really be a Christian because...blah blah." Excuse me? Does that sound like being one? Actually, it sounds like dividing the Body of Christ. How many of you want to get to Heaven and hear Jesus say to you, "Why did you cut up my body?"

Does that mean there are no points of doctrine upon which we must stand? No, of course not. Jesus is Lord. He died for us so that we could have eternal life. It is the gift of God, the grace of God, through faith. Are there other points? Probably, but I dare not mention any more out of fear that you'll start a fight with me. That would be funny...if it weren't so sad. 

What does God say about theological arguments and infighting? 

Romans 14:19 "Let us therefore make every effort to do what leads to peace and to mutual edification."

I Thess. 5:11 "Therefore encourage each other and build each other up, just as in fact you are doing."

Titus 3:9-11 "But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and arguments and quarrels about the law, but these are unprofitable and useless.  Warn a divisive person once, then warn him a second time.  After that, have nothing to do with him.  You may be sure that such a man is warped and sinful; his is self-condemned."

¹⁰ I want to know Christ—yes, to know the power of his resurrection and participation in his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, ¹¹ and so, somehow, attaining to the resurrection from the dead.
¹² Not that I have already obtained all this, or have already arrived at my goal, but I press on to take hold of that for which Christ Jesus took hold of me. ¹³ Brothers and sisters, I do not consider myself yet to have taken hold of it. But one thing I do: Forgetting what is behind and straining toward what is ahead, ¹⁴ I press on toward the goal to win the prize for which God has called me heavenward in Christ Jesus.

¹⁵ All of us, then, who are mature should take such a view of things. And if on some point you think differently, that too God will make clear to you. ¹⁶ Only let us live up to what we have already attained. Philippians 3: 10-16

⁸ Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. ⁹ For we know in part and we prophesy in part, ¹⁰ but when completeness comes, what is in part disappears. ¹¹ When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me. ¹² For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.
¹³ And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love. 1 Corinthians 13: 8-13

There is no room for questioning another believer's salvation. There's no room for red-faced sweaty arguments on premillenial, amillenial, postmillenial dispensations. There's no call for bickering over styles. And there's certainly no room for judgment. See the verses up there? There's not a one of us who has it all figured out...at least not down here on earth. We see through a smudged glass. We've each got hold of some truth, and we each know it in part. But we don't KNOW IT ALL.

Can you imagine what would happen if every Christian denomination came together to serve? Can you imagine if Christians stopped shunning those who struggle with sin? Can you imagine if Christians put aside our petty arguments and went out and did some good? The world would trample the bushes trying to get in the doors of the local church.

3: We Have Doubted Our God: Look, I hate to admit it myself. I hate to peal back the curtain or lift off the carpet to reveal the unseemly truth. But I'm also getting too old to delude myself any longer. The reality is: IF I am more afraid of the world than I am of missing service to God, I really don't believe God. Not in an eternal sense. I may well have believed that Jesus died for me. I may have crossed that line of faith into eternal life. But, in terms of day-to-day life, I looked sheepishly away and decided, "God is not powerful enough to help me here." Or, "God doesn't love me enough to sustain me through all this." Or, "God is not enough to risk the rejection I'm likely to feel if I..."

If we really believe that God is who He says He is...that He created the world, that He holds time in the palm of His hand, that He is omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipowerful...then, we don't roll over. We don't play dead. And surely, we don't heel.

So my prayer is that God will embolden me to fight, to love, to understand, and to server. That God would forge me into a Sledgehammer and then use me to knock down the devil's strongholds in this world. It's a dangerous prayer, I think. But honestly, aren't you a little sick of satan beating you like a pinata? Aren't you a little tired of the world using Jesus as a punchline? Aren't you searingly, achingly tired of all the hurt in this world? So, get on your knees and pray. Then, get up and fight.

Are you with me on this? Want to join the Sledgehammer Club? If so, leave a comment.

Epidemic Part 1: The Spreading Contagion

When the Black Plague swept through Europe between 1348 and 1350, it gouged out 30-60% of Europe's population and reduced the world's population by an estimated 100 million souls. With all due respect to the Black Death, there is a far worse contagion spreading in the world today. I suspect it has claimed more lives than the plague, cancer, and all other horrifying diseases put together.

Its symptoms include the following:

• persistent, gnawing pain radiating from the abdomen
• severe, agonizing heart constriction
• erosion of the mind, dementia, anxiety, and depression
• slow necrotizing (rotting) of the flesh
• perpetual death-like episodes
• almost 100% fatality rate  

Lest you hurt yourself sprinting to the nearest pharmacy for face masks and rubber gloves, this contagion cannot be prevented by any of the so-called Universal Precautions. No amount of antibacterial gel will protect you from this. It enters through the eyes or ears. Often, it spontaneously generates within the brain tissue or in the lining of the heart itself. You cannot run from it; you cannot keep it out; you cannot retreat to some secluded spot and hope to avoid it. For in the very act of isolating yourself, you will cause the contagion to spawn within you.

The worst aspect of this disease, indeed the facet that makes this contagion the greatest tragedy in history is…that there is a cure for it, but the cure is almost universally shunned.

The name of this contagion is Selfishness, and it is spreading.

The Bible has much to say on selfishness. This verse from Philippians 3 is particularly expressive:

¹⁸ For, as I have often told you before and now tell you again even with tears, many live as enemies of the cross of Christ. ¹⁹ Their destiny is destruction, their god is their stomach, and their glory is in their shame. Their mind is set on earthly things. (Phil 3: 18-19, NIV, BibleGateway.com)

Did you catch that phrase? "Their god is their stomach." In other words, their lives are all about their wants, lusts, and appetites. That is a scathing rebuke. But Christians, lest we sit back and think, "Yeah, those hell-bound heathens really are selfish, aren't they?" Perhaps we ought to consider our own selfishness. I won't speak authoritatively about all Christians, but I suspect that many of us are infected with the most virulent forms of selfishness. And I contend that we are, in fact, worse than the lost because we know the cure and yet we still shun it. And our selfishness does more damage than any nonChristian's selfishness ever could.

More to come on the Nature of this Contagion, Causes, and Cure in future posts...

Personal Response

I recently posted about a yahoo article where comedian Conan O'Brien officiated a gay wedding. As you might expect, most of the responses here agreed with the Christian perspective. However, I recently received a comment that opposed it. But, for the most part, this was not some bombastic irrational person screaming out vitriol. This was a person who had serious heart and bravery and really seemed interest in investigating. I tried to comment back, but apparently, it was too many characters. So, I post it here. Hopefully, Anon, you come back and get a chance to read it.

Hi, Anon, thanks for entrusting the readers here enough to post a contrasting view. I can totally hear the compassion in your words and the heart behind it. The only way I can respond coherently is to reprint your words here with my replies immediately following. See below:

You Wrote: This makes me sick. Sorry, Mr. Batson, but I comoletely disagree. What is wrong with being gay? Gays are born with something different in their brain, something that makes them attracted to the same sex.

Response 1: 2 different questions here. What is wrong with being gay? If you believe the bible, then homosexual lust and sex are wrong. No way around that. But what about the genetic component? Are people actually born gay? There is huge sociobiological debate on this. But no this: there is NO conclusive proof that anyone is born gay. There are some genetic points of interest that might support the "born gay" position. But there are equal scientific grounds to show otherwise.

BUT: even if it could be proved conclusively that people were born with traits that would make it far easier for them to become gay, that would have nothing to do with it being sin or not. We are all born sinful. And each of us struggle with certain sins. It may be that all of our genetic codes are messed up in one way or another. One person might have the genetic fingerprint to be addicted to alcohol, sex, drugs, violence, etc. etc. But that doesn't mean we excuse the acts that often follow.

To suggest that there's something wrong with these people is, in my mind, completely ridiculous.

My response: it's not ridiculous if the Bible is your guide. And I'm not being bigoted in the least. I think there's something WRONG with every person on earth, especially me. It's called a "sin-nature." We all have it, and it makes it easier for each one of us to lean toward certain sins.

 I understand that maybe marriage must be between a man and a woman, but this is not right.

My Response: Thank you for granting that point. Marriage always has been understood as man and woman. The word is defined that way. If words are to have meaning, then we must not simply change to meet politics or cultural trends. And the word "marriage" is not just some flexible term that has become antiquated over the years. Marriage is a critical social custom that builds the foundation of a nation.

 Maybe it is a sin to be homosexual. But is that what you are going to say? That people that are different than you are worse?

My Response: No, I never implied that homosexuals are worse than me or worse than heterosexuals. All sin is counter-God. A homosexual's sins are no worse than my own. The trouble is that some segments of our society are fighting hard to normalize activities are wrong. It is the same as a sitcom that makes it seem like casual sex is fine and dandy. It's not. It's sin, and even if you don't believe in the bible, casual sex leaves a terrible hurt on most people who engage in it.

 Who cares if someone isn't like you, isn't heterosexual? Why can't people just leave other people alone?

My Response: again, you seem to want to blame me, as if I am the measure of what's good and right in the world. Thank God it is not me! As to why can't people "leave other people alone?" No one is attacking anyone here. America is an open marketplace of ideas, isn't it? So when Yahoo publishes an article with a well-known celebrity going so far to support gay marriage as to officiate the "wedding," then it is my right (and as a Christian) a duty to speak out. The trouble is that many in the homosexual community confuse different opinions with bigotry. I'm tired of being called "intolerant" and a "bigot" or "homophobe" simply because I maintain and support a differing opinion on the subject. Those who support homosexuality are often very aggressive and in-your-face with their beliefs. Fine, but don't "name call" when I oppose you and oppose you well. Either support your beliefs or concede defeat. Don't resort to immature name calling. 

Reading that it makes people sick to think about gay marriage is truly sad, sad that they can't leave it be. It's the way people are, and it's not going to change.

My Response: It's not sad. Imagine someone taking something dear to you and staining it. That's what's happening here. Marriage is what it is. Don't be upset because the word has meaning. If homosexuals want a union, then call it something else. And as to saying, why not leave it be because it'll never change? Think about where that logic takes you. Some people commit incest. Should we leave that be? Some rape. Some commit sexual abuse. Should we leave those things be as well? People commit adultery ALL THE TIME--Christians included. Should we leave that be? Of course not.

I really don't understand this. Is your entire life governed by the bible? Are you simply the puppet of the written word, to kill or shun those that are different or against this? Explain yourself, please.

My Response: Yes, my entire life is governed by the Bible. Not when I sin. And that is my own personal tragedy. God's word is my guide and keeps me from so many destructive paths and horrors. Am I a puppet for holding to a standard of right and wrong that transcends what I simply "feel" is right or wrong?

But, I want you, Anon, to take a very VERY careful look at your words there: "to kill or shun those that are different." You brought those words to the table. I never mentioned them. I don't urge anyone to kill or shun. That's the kind of emotional propaganda that gay rights leaders so often employ.

Love everyone. Hate the sin, especially that sin in my own life. But do not remain silent when beautiful, sacred things are being attacked.

This is Not Funny. Not at all.

Maybe I spend too much time surfing the Net. Today on Yahoo, I found this article on Late Night TV host Conan O'Brien officiating a gay wedding. Looking at the headline, I thought, "You're kidding me." Nope. Not kidding at all. Here's the article if you want to read it: Conan's Big Day

Note to Young Readers: This post may be a little R-Rated, just because of the subject matter. I'll be addressing the issue of gay marriage, so please check with parents about reading on.

On some articles, Yahoo gives readers the option to post comments. So, I did. Weird thing is that, as I was writing, I felt a strange hesitance...a sense of "Oh, this is going to ruffle some feathers, maybe I shouldn't." But feeling that makes me mad. It shows just how pervasive the culture's influence has been on me and largely on Christianity as well. Liberals and activists have so "normalized" things like homosexuality that Christians get timid. We become afraid to express our opinions for fear of being called a bigot or worse. Well, forget that. Christ told us we should expect to be insulted for His name. Does that mean we go hate on people? No, of course not. We LOVE people. ALL people. But we don't condone sin--not our sin or others. And we certainly don't sit back and allow sin to be called good.

So, for what it's worth, here's my take on the Yahoo article:

It's completely appropriate that a comedian officiates this same sex marriage because it's a joke. It's a sham and a mockery of a pure and beautiful thing between one man and one woman. Look at it this way: from the beginning of the cultural practice of marriage it has ALWAYS been defined as one man and one woman, as is natural and fitting. Male and Female we have been created. No way around that. (Even if you don't believe in Creator, Created, or Creation). Humans have two sexes: Male and Female. The way the penis is shaped, the way it works, the way it's stimulated is completely in concert with the way the vagina is shaped, the way it works, and the way it is stimulated. Ask any doctor, nurse, or expert in human physiology. You'll see a myriad of amazing features of male and female anatomy and why they work the way they do. Whether you believe in God or not, you have to delude yourself not to believe that Male and Female were made, designed, evolved FOR EACH OTHER. And rational people had always understood this, and so marriage was appropriately used as a term for a ceremonial (and spiritual) union between man and woman.

If gay men or women want a type of union, fine. I don't agree with you. I don't think it's right. But I'm not naive to think that they won't find some way to have a union. Thing is: don't call it marriage. The only reason the word "marriage" is appealing to you is that you want what you do to be equal to what men and women do. You want what you do to be recognized in the same way. But it can never be equal to what men and women do because men and women are different. It can never be recognized in the same way because it is NOT the same thing. Have a union. But call it something else and get over the language barrier. For if words are to have any meaning at all, there needs to be a definition. And as long as the word marriage has been used in human history it's been defined as male united with female.

And let's not have any of this nonsense, playground name-calling. Bigot, homophobe, and the like. This name-calling is what people do when they run out of intellect. They hope to bludgeon those they disagree with into silence. I could just as easy call you a bigot for not accepting my views on sexuality. I might even go so far as to call you a "Christo-phobe." Maybe I should...what with the way some people react when you mention God or, heaven forbid, Jesus. When I speak out against the practice of homosexuality it is no more "hate-speech" than someone who disagrees with your politics or *gasp* your opinion of a sports team. You may be a rabid Dallas Cowboy fan and think me a barbarian for liking the Redskins, but when I diss the 'Boys, you wouldn't likely call it hate speech. It's a difference of opinion and/or preference. So dispense with the name-calling and start offering rational, researched, evidential responses.

And on that note, I want to make clear that, as a Christian, I cannot support or condone sin of any kind. The scriptures make it clear that homosexuality is one kind of sin, just as I mentioned before: sex outside of marriage, incest, adultery, etc. But please know, I understand the depth of love that all kinds of people can have for each other. The Bible talks clearly of friends who are closer than brothers. And there are men I love with powerful intensity. But the problem begins when brotherly love converts to lust and sexual behavior. That perverts actual love into something deviant. No matter how many people want it or "feel it" it's just not right. But here's the thing: if Jesus came today instead of 2000 years back, I bet He'd hang out with gays in much the same way as he did the tax collectors, prostitutes, and Samaritans. He would flock to those who recognized their need for love and relationship, and HE would give them the water that cures their thirst forever.

Epistle to the NFL

The NFL had better be careful. Right now, they've got the goose that lays golden eggs, and everyone wants an egg. But if they screw around and 1) there's a work stoppage or 2) the season gets delayed or canceled or 3) the whole standoff stays in the news for too long--then, they are going to kill the goose. It's not going to matter which side is more greedy than the other. The general public will perceive both sides as greedy--NO MATTER WHAT. And it's ugly. Sickening and freakin' ridiculous. This is a nation built on blue-collar backs. We're carpenters, steel workers, doctors, and teachers--getting paid pidly compared to both sides in this argument.

Owners and Players ought to look at this as an opportunity to right some long term wrongs, to make the game more enjoyable for loyal fans too.

Players: Obscene rookie contracts are an insult to every professional athlete. To pay a guy who's never taken an NFL snap ridiculous money is INSANE. Give rookies the NFL minimum as a standard salary, but make the contract laden with performance incentives; the more incentives reached the more bonus money, and the higher the base contract goes with each successive year. Build in an insurance clause which pays the rookie big money if there's a career ending injury or some such. Reducing the rookie salary to the incentive-dependent minimum is going to leave a HUGE chunk of change in the collective pot. With that, provide stat bonuses and veteran bonuses for those who've proven themselves already. Perhaps let their be NFL bonuses for statistical leaders across the board.

For the Owners: You absolutely have to provide $$$ for injury insurance. The guys are out there putting their lives and futures on the line, playing a sport that thrives due to its violent contact. You've got to cover the players and their families. Someone gets a career ending injury, the insurance kicks in. The slush money that's still left from the minimal rookie contracts should be funneled into research and development of new helmets and pads to better protect players from injury. The number of concussions these days is alarming. If something isn't done, we'll soon be getting pretty close to the Roman Coliseum. Those people who deplore Michael Vick for the dogfights, turn around and cheer when a quarterback gets destroyed by a DL who is twice the QB's size.

For the Teams: Rosters need to increase in size. If we go to 18 games, that's a no brainer, but even if not. Every team should be able to be 4-deep at every position. Salary Caps are still a must so that all market teams can compete. But the whole Free Agency thing has to change. How many times have fan fanatics been hurt when long-time team player favorites have asked for more money than they are worth to keep and ended up shipped off to finish their career on some other team. Many times, the team would love to keep those players, but the cap is prohibitive.

There should be a "Legacy Exemption," maybe as many as three per team, where fan favorite veterans could be paid extra $$$ to keep them on their home team without impacting the salary cap. No more Joe Montana playing for the Chiefs, Art Monk for the Jets, or Brian Mitchell to the Eagles.

Next, you have to blast these so called "voluntary meetings" and "OTA's". Players need time to heal. Players need time with family. Make several mandatory minicamps, but be done with it.

That's my .02. I love the NFL. I hope they don't drink the kool-aid.  

Take a lesson on Character from the NFL; Who'd have thunk it?

If the title of this post made you gag, get a quick drink of water and bear with me. Just a single day after posting an article insisting that ex Florida Uber Quarterback Tim Tebow's faith would get in the way of his being picked by certain teams in the NFL Draft, Yahoo Sports turned around and published an article about how important a role Tim Tebow's character played in him being drafted so highly.

Just to be clear, I'm not knocking Yahoo for hypocrisy. Two different authors with two very different takes on the state of the NFL. In fact I laud Yahoo for publishing today's article because it was all about the NFL reevaluating what's important when it comes to draft day. At least with Round 1 of the NFL draft, there were several surprising developments, and they all involved teams choosing character over better talent.

In the first round, Tim Tebow (above) was chosen by the Broncos over several quarterback choices, even though many "experts" don't believe Tebow has the form/tools to be a star NFL QB. But in the wake of Steelers QB Ben Rothleisberger's recent troubles with morality, it seems the Denver Broncos wanted a "good guy" to captain their team. Bravo for them. The Broncos also selected wide receiver Demaryius Thomas over ultra talented Dez Bryant. Why? Character. Bryant's had troubles, lots of questions about his work ethic, etc. Not so with Thomas. Thomas (below) is a "good guy."

The San Diego Chargers went out of their way, trading up to select running back Ryan Matthews, stressing that he is the kind of guy they want as a leader in their locker room. Ryan, we learn, keeps his commitments. He signed to play college FB with Fresno State, but after that, several bigger, more influential schools came asking and offering. He turned them down. He's a good guy.

So what can we learn from the NFL? Well, maybe we can learn that when we do our inevitable picking in life, maybe we can make our picks based on character and substance over flash and style. No, we don't hold a draft for picking friends, girlfriends, or spouses, but we all go looking. How do you choose? I remember high school too well to have lost the chip I had on my shoulder then. It used to make me ill that so many of the girls I had crushes on went after the rudest, most disrespectful, foul mouthed guys in the school.

And how many times has "Nice Gal A" made a mess of her own life by marrying "Bad Boy A?" Too many to count. Some of our readers will probably support that. And it's not just the ladies choosing flash over faithfulness. Men often become bumbling idiots, fawning over the babe with the low cut neckline. Shame on us. We ought to be fighting to lay down our coats for the sweetheart next door. And forget romance for just a minute, what about plain old friends. Who do we hang out with? Do we gravitate towards good character? I contend that we should.

What would happen if we did? What would happen if we all chose friends, romantic friends, spouses, careers, neighborhoods, etc. etc. based on quality of character? My hunch is, we'd end up with a tenfold better society. Why? Supply and Demand. As a middle school teacher of 19 years, I've noticed something very interesting. If you have a class where the good kids get the majority of the attention, disciplinary issues begin to vanish, and good kids multiply. If the opposite occurs, and the idiots get most of the attention, sooner or later, you'll end up with a room full of idiots.

Imagine a high school where the girls all went after the "nice guys." Pretty soon, the jerks and blowhards would straighten up. Think about it, ladies, who do you really want for a husband? The cute high school guy who cuts class, smokes, and defies authority? Extrapolate what that will look like in ten years. Uh, yeah, not so good. And guys, who are you going to bring roses to? The sexy party girl who flirts with ALL the boys? What kind of mother will she be for your kids? Hmmm...

And if you do decide to hang with the kid who drinks underage and occasionally shoplifts, where do you think you'll end up? I'm just asking. Because if the NFL can figure out that character matters, should we be able to figure it out as well?

eBooks: Bringing Down the House?

 

I'm probably in the minority, but I truly believe that digital publishing will, for all intents and purposes, replace print publishing. Here's how I think it will happen:

1) Over the next 15 years, Amazon Kindle, Sony Reader, B&N Nook, The iPad, etc. will be joined by a dozen other eReaders, and the price of those devices will come down markedly. Some shrewd companies will offer to "give" their eReaders away with a paid yearly contract, say, you'll purchase 20-30 eBooks a year. Much like cell phones now. You can get a BOSS COOL phone, IF you sign up for a plan, right?

2. Print Publishers will continue to operate, but they will need to change the way of doing business or they will perish. Here's how they will need to change:

A) Forced to compete with ePublishers who offer much better royalty percentages to authors, print publishers will offer dual royalties, raising the percentage of print royalty money and including a very high percentage of eBook money.

B) Over time, print publishers will have smaller and smaller print runs of all but the biggest name authors. Smaller quantities will be shipped to brick-n-Mortar stores and be available to the consumer in what will be a "collector's only" market.

C) Print Publishers will modernize their operations to become "Print on Demand" publishers. With smaller print runs and smaller numbers of books in-store, publishers will find a way to take "demand" orders, print, and send books as fast or faster than Amazon currently ships. It may be that brick and mortar stores will open up their own printing presses, kind of like Kinkos, and will be able to print your book "while you wait."

3) Authors will wake up and realize that they are strong. For decades, the creative artist has been exploited by the music industry, publishers, radio, tv, film, etc. In publishing for instance, it's very common for an author to make just 10-12% of what a book actually sells for, in many cases, that's off the publisher's sell price to the brick and mortar chains. That means 88-90% of the book money is going somewhere else besides the artist. Obviously, there are a lot of people who currently play a part in getting a book to the shelf, and all these people need to get paid too, right? But shouldn't the artist get a larger percentage? Look at it this way: Can you imagine if Pro Football players only received 10-12% of their contracted millions, and the rest went to the people who coach, train, design uniforms, etc? It's not a perfect analogy, I admit. But if it worked like that, how long would the NFL survive?

With the advent of ePublishing, authors who are being exploited will begin to break away from their traditional print publisher shackles. They will become their own publishing companies, publishing eBooks exclusively or forming partnerships with print-on-demand companies.

4. We'll also begin to see a massive drop in price for eBooks. Right now, publishers are going to the mattress with Amazon over eBook prices. Traditional publishers want their "eBooks" priced at 60-80% of what the hardcover paper book would cost. Makes sense for the publisher who would make a MASSIVE windfall of profit since they can chop 70% of their production budget on every eBook. After all, no charge for paper, no charge for binding, no charge for shipping, warehousing, etc. Amazon wants the price low. Why? Increased profits. They know that pricing eBooks too high will cut WAY down on who buys. It is digital info, after all. Intellectual value? Yes. Material value? No. And that leads to the next reason that the price will go low: High price leads to digital piracy.

We live in a broken world where people redefine right/wrong all the time. Guaranteed as soon as you price The Door Within Part 7 at $16.99, there are going to be those who pirate it. What about DRM protection? Sure, they'll try. But someone will find a way around it. Let's take a look at some hypothetical numbers.

eBook A priced at $12.99 sells 4,600 copies in a year. If the publisher makes 50% profit on that book, then, the publisher takes in $29,877 profit on that book.

eBook B priced at $2.99 sells 50,000 copies. If the publisher takes in even 30% of that pie, the publisher makes $44,850. That's a substantial upgrade.

5. The Public Will Decide. In the past, publishers have used their various formulae and observations to determine what they believe they can sell. Then, they judge the quality of potential manuscripts and make the call about what will sell. Hopefully, they get it right, and good books get published. Poor quality books, don't.

That may continue in some capacity as Amazon and other online publishers may adopt some quality standards for what they will publish. But largely, the public will decide. People will go hunting for new books, trying to discover the "next big thing." Word of mouth will travel--at light speed online. And goodstuff will rise out of the murky not-so-good-stuff.

Maybe Amazon will adopt a "sell so many copies or get booted off the site" policy. Not sure. But more than ever before, the public will determine what they like. And that sounds good to me.

But, you might argue, you mean ANYONE can get published? Then there will be tons of terrible material out there to wade through. Yes and no. There might be a quality control standard in place, kind of watchdogs for the digital marketplace. Or, there may not. But either way, the reality is that most people want to have a book published. But most people don't want to do the work required to get a book published. Writing a book is hard work. It requires discipline, passion, and sacrifice. Butt-in-chair means it's not on the golf course or at Don Pablos sipping a cherry Pepsi.

So will there be a little extra chaff to sift through? Yes. But look at it this way. Isn't there already a ton of chaff out there being published? I've read a few books in my time that made me want to say, "Now there's six hours of my life I won't get back."

In conclusion: I love paper books. I may never buy an eBook myself. I like rooms full of books. I like holding books. I take books to the beach and up into my bed. But I was born with paper books. I might feel very differently if I was born with an iPad in my hand. And, unless I'm way off here, the publishing world is about to be hit by a digital temblor...because this generation is the digital generation.

The CONTINUING evolution of Evolution...

How convenient it must be to be an evolutionary biologist. Ignore the obvious. Look for an alternative. Invent a theory. Then, no matter how much evidence to the contrary, just retrofit your theory with each new discovery.

Forgive me folks. But the whole evolution/creation controversy just gets my blood boiling. Surfing Yahoo this morning, I found this interesting story, and it just kind of stirred my thoughts a bit. Here's an excerpt from what I read:

"Moreover, we found smectite in only some locations in South China, and not uniformly as one would expect for marine deposits," Bristow said. "Taken together, several lines of evidence indicated to us that these early animals lived in a lake environment."

This discovery raises questions as to how and why animals appeared when they did.

"It is most unexpected that these first fossils do not come from marine sediments," said researcher Martin Kennedy, a geologist at the University of California at Riverside.

"Lakes are typically short-lived features on the Earth's surface, and they are not nearly as consistent environments as oceans are," he explained. "So it's surprising that the first evidence of animals we find is associated with lakes, which are far more variable environments than the ocean. You'd expect the first appearance of animals to be in the most conservative, stable environments we could imagine."

It remains possible, Kennedy noted, that animal fossils of similar or older age exist that remain to be found that are marine in origin. However, at the very least, this work suggests "that animals had already taken on the ability to deal with the environmental fluctuations one sees in lake environments," he said. "That suggests that their evolutionary response is much more rapid that I would have supposed, and that the earliest animals were far more diverse than imagined."

Hmmm…whaddaya know? The earliest animals were far more diverse {read complete} than imagined. Note the key word: imagined. You see that's what evolutionists since Darwin have done…they imagine an explanation, pretend it is fact, and ignore the obvious. Wow, the reptilian back bone is awfully similar to the avian back bone. Huh, must be evolved from one another. Forget the fact that both species still exist at the same time. Look at the human fetus at its earliest stages. Wow, it sure looks like a fish. We must be evolved from marine life.

The Yahoo article just goes to show that science does NOT know it all. Things keep inconveniently being discovered that mess with their theories. Think about some of the evolutionary claims over time. Darwin himself believed that the fossil record MUST have evidence of transitional forms, that is millions of gradual changes between on species to the next. Darwin was bedeviled by the lack of these transitional forms, but hoped that future discoveries would bear out his theory. Well, a century later: {Game Show Wrong Answer Buzzer} Sorry Darwin, thanks for playing. We have some swell consolation prizes for you backstage! The fossil record is void of transitional forms. What we see are fully formed species suddenly "appearing." You'd think that perhaps, that would have done evolution in. Nope, it was just too good of an "out" from the whole "God made us and might have a claim on our lives" idea. So what did evolutionary scientists do? They propose the theory of punctuated equilibrium. Basically, evolution doesn't really happen in a long, drawn out process like they thought. No, instead, it happens in dynamic bursts. WHOOSH! And then it goes cold and slow again. Yeah, that's the ticket.

As I've said in the past, isn't it possible that maybe, just maybe the reason that living organisms share so many common traits is that the same Artist created them? After all, you can look at a series of paintings and tell if they are Monet versus Dali. And how? By the traits they share in common. You do not look at one painting and conclude that the other evolved from it. That would be nonsense.

I remember sitting in an anthropology class at the University of Maryland as an undergrad and hearing the Prof spout on about evolution as a fact. Drawings, animations, a fossil here and there, and the Prof just concluded for all of us: you are descended from apes. You are a genetic accident…having arrived by a miraculous chain of random events. Oops, I said "miraculous." Thing is, I wasn't even a Christian at the time, and I remember thinking, "That's ridiculous! Look at all the frauds from Pilt Down Man to Nebraska Man to Haekel's Drawings! How can I trust this stuff?"

Now I know why we cannot trust this stuff. It's just not true. The most powerful evidence supporting evolution is "Imaginary Evidence." Theory built upon theory, built upon theory.

You are not a galactic accident. A knowing, loving Creator made you. He designed you with great care and has put purpose in your life.

Obama-Mania, A Cautionary Tale

Well, it's Inauguration Day. The whole country--check that--the whole world is abuzz with hope, love, and change! Barack Obama is now President of the United States of America, as well as, the darling of the media and well, just about everybody. Honestly, I'm a little concerned with the combination conquering war hero, super bowl winner, rock star treatment we're giving Obama. I'll explain why in a minute.

I keep seeing news features with people swaying in jubilation over the event. And then, there are the tears. I've never seen so many tears. People just weeping over this man's ascendancy. And I get it. He's the first black president. He is kind of an embodiment of the hopes and dreams of MLK and others. He gives hope to all races that if you work hard, you CAN do anything. This is all great and very heart-warming. In all honesty, if he wasn't so Pro-Abortion and Pro-Gay Rights, I might have voted for Obama as well. He's quite charismatic and brave. I will be praying for him as often as I can. I hope he does wonderful things for our country, and I hope he'll bring about the "right" kind of change. But folks, can we quit the hysteria? Barack Obama hasn't done anything yet.

He reminds me of one of those college football quarterback prospects. There's all this hype about the guy. He's risen through great hardship and emerged victorious in all these contests. Maybe he's even won the Heisman Trophy. So on Draft Day, Mr. All America QB goes #1 and signs a contract that will make him a gazillion dollars. But Mr. All America hasn't played a down in the NFL. Many of these "can't miss" athletes do miss and miss badly. The NFL has a level of pressure and expectation all its own. It's a different world. And not everyone can weather the storms it throws at you. That's just the nature of football.

Barack Obama has just been handed the keys to the most important position in the world. I'd have to say the Presidency has a little more pressure involved than the NFL. Don't you agree? And as of today, Obama hasn't taken a snap. I pray that we can look back on his career and see that he has changed America for the better--and not just the public opinion kind of better either. I mean the kind of better that God would approve of. I hope he lowers taxes, keeps America safe, fixes the economy, and ushers in an era of personal responsibility. But I also hope that, if he is a Christian as he claims to be, that he will take God at His word. I pray that we will look back and see that Barack had a change of heart and did not sign things like FOCA or appoint pro-abortion supreme court justices. And I pray that he will not champion the destruction of traditional marriage and family. But until we can look back and see how President Obama serves, we need to stop idolizing him.

Have you seen the above Time Magazine cover, placing Obama into FDR's likeness? Okay, we have history on which to judge FDR, but not Obama. Mr. Obama, you're not FDR…not yet. Maybe you'll be better. Maybe not. But seriously, with all the hype, I'm surprised Time didn't show Obama wearing a long white robe and coming on clouds with heavenly light shining down on him and a dove in his hand. This hero-worship is unreal.

There is only one God and only He deserves our adulation.

CSFF Tour, Day 2: Sharon Hinck, The Restorer

Welcome to Day 2 of the CSFF Blog Tour focusing on Sharon Hinck's The Restorer. Before we get to business, I've been feeling restless in spirit about something, and I want to address it here, if briefly.

The purpose of the blog tour, as I've understood it, is to make folks on the Internet and elsewhere more aware of Christian Fantasy and Science Fiction. We do this by concentrating on an author, book, website for a specific period of time--which gets blog-tracking sites like Technorati to notice, and so...hopefully will the public. Those of us who are involved are avid readers of SciFi and Fantasy, and we'd all like to see more Christian-friendly fiction available. We'd also like to see the secular world drawn closer to the King of Kings through the fiction we write and promote.

When we do a Tour, we introduce the author(s) and the book(s), we do interviews, we do behind-the-scenes-features, we post art and photos, and yes, we review the books. The last couple of book blog tours, however, have troubled me a little bit. I think some of the Blog Tour participants have forgotten the purpose of the tour. I've read some absolutely scathing reviews of some of the books we've featured. Use of sarcasm, condescension, and belittling is common--without apology, I might add--in such reviews. And in a Christian community, that bothers me. I think reviews like these promote division in the body of Christ, not academic honesty as is the purported excuse for such reviews.

I think there's a problem with most extremes, and book reviews on the Blog Tour can fall into one of two extremes, both problematic, but not equally so.

1. The Blind Praise Review: This is when the reviewer gushes on and on about how spectacular a book is--even when it's not. The book might be good, but not great, and yet the reviewer sings a hallelujah chorus of spectacular joy over the story, the character, the settings, everything is perfect. The author of a blind praise review comes off as a flatterer, and in so doing, loses the reader's respect.

2. The Flame: This type of review basically hammers a book from top to bottom, never considering the merits that are there. Often, harsh criticisms are rendered with little or no rationale. Even when ample rationale is present, the review still has the tone of a hatchet job. It feels like a personal attack. The author of a "Flame" review comes off as spiteful or perhaps as an intellectual snob, and in so doing, loses the reader's respect.

In my humble opinion, I don't think either kind of review is appropriate for the Blog Tour. Most people don't like either one. Most people will give more credence to a balanced review--one that seeks the positives without ignoring the negatives. I think that is what we should strive for. Be honest, be fair, be critical--but all in love.

Remember, the authors of the books reviewed here are people--nice people--who have feelings. And most of the authors like to visit these blogs and contribute a lot of insight from which we all benefit.

I'd like to end my rant with this advice for some of the folks on the tour who have published recent "flames"---like my mother used to say: "If you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all."

And now, back to our regularly scheduled broadcast!

I said yesterday that Sharon Hinck's The Restorer could change the Fantasy Genre forever. Big claim, that. But seriously, let's consider the Fantasy Genre. Prior to the last 15 years, who read fantasy? Mostly guys, right? When I went to the Trilogy Tuesday Showing of all three Lord of the Rings Movies, who else did I see camping out for tickets? Mostly guys. But things are changing. Lots and lots of men and women of all ages are discovering or rediscovering fantasy. And this is a good thing. The more people who discover fantasy, the more titles we fans get to read. The more hopeful writers become authors. The more great communities like the CSFF Blog Tour spring up. It's all good.

Sharon Hinck has just thrown wide the doors to this great genre for a population that typically doesn't read SpecFic. Soccer moms, homemakers, stay-at-home-moms--whatever the title, now have an invitation to come and read. And once in the door, we all know what happens. Someone handed me a copy of The Hobbit in 6th grade. I read it, and it was all over. A fan for life I became. The Hobbit was my "gateway" read into the Fantasy Genre.

The Restorer will be a gateway for thousands more. Great work, Sharon. Keep writing for the King!

In conclusion, I thought it might be fun for those who come by here to post about your own "Gateway" book. What fantasy/sciFi book made you a fan of the genre? What hooked you?

-WtB

Reviews: The Good, The Bad, and...

The Ugly.

Time for a rant.

I have to admit, I'm a little overwhelmed by the number of positive reviews of The Door Within Trilogy books. 99% of the review have been great.

There have been a couple that hurt a bit. I've had 2-3 from Christian reviewers who, incredulously, claimed that the books were "too preachy" or that the message of Christ comes through too clearly. Uhm...okay. I can sort of understand. Christian writers don't want to beat secular readers over the head with the Bible. But to this date, out of hundreds and hundreds of reviews and personal comments, I've only had one nonChristian ever say, they felt the book was preachin' Jesus too hard. Odd, don't you think that Christians would be the ones to complain the most about Jesus' message being too clear. Hmmm...

And then there was one FLAME review that just blasted The Door Within up one side and down the other. This review gave like 3 pages worth of absolute scalding (and mostly unfounded) criticisms--using language that I suspect got the review purged from Amazon. Either that or God stepped in.

And hey, look, I realize my first book isn't perfect. Neither is my 4th book. None of them ever will be. I will write them the best I can, and my editors will help. But I'll never be Hemmingway or Tolkien. I'll just be Wayne and grateful to be able to tell my stories.

But the other day, I found a review on a prominent fantasy site that just blew my mind. It was, to my mind, the most ill-conceived and careless notion I've ever seen printed in a review of a YA book.

Here are some snippets of the comment that irked me:

"Emphasis on their physical traits, “her skin was ghostly white”, “’You! Dark Skin!’ he ridiculed”, “And through the gaping hole, like a sea of black and red, poured the armies of Paragory” unfortunately brought to mind unsettling comparisons to another self-declared supreme ruler."

Self-declared supreme ruler??? I immediately posted a reply to make sure I was reading it correctly, and this is the reviewer's clarification:

"Actually, I had some trouble articulating my feelings here and deliberately left my comment a bit ambiguous. In fact, I was hesitant to bring it up in the review because I wasn't sure that I was interpreting things the way you intended. However, it bothered me enough to finally include some comment on it.

I found the references to skin and eye color throughout the book to be uncomfortable reminders of Hitler's racial superiority/cleansing theories. I hope I'm way off base here, but, nonetheless, those are the feelings it invoked in me."

I have since posted a point by point discrediting of this suggestion and asked that all of this reviewer's offending comments be removed from the site. Who knows what will come of my request. I don't really think the reviewer has it "in" for me, but the comment--even if heartfelt--had no place in a review of a YA title. It was unintentional slander, but slander nonetheless. Imagine a parent thinking of getting The Door Within for his kid, sees this review and those comments and doesn't know any better...

I won't say I've seen it all. I'm sure there's worse to come.

There's a reason it was a Secret.

It's a Bonus Day here in my hometown of Eldersburg. A little clipper system made it over the mountains and began dumping a nice feathery layer of powdery snow on the area. And so, my school system called out, giving me and my kids the day off. Bonus.

So now, I have time to play with the kids, time to write, time to blog.

I was checking through the bestseller list on Amazon and I saw that #1 on the list was this cool looking book called

The Secret.

The cover looks like an old parchment with a red wax seal. I thought, "Mannnn…this has got to be a fantasy." But I'd never heard of the author.

So I read the synopsis and then the reviews…and, guess what? It is a fantasy. The problem is, the author doesn't seem to know that. Rhonda Byrne presents The Secret as if it's nonfiction, self help. And apparently people are being fooled…in droves.

Let me be blunt: This book is absolute rubbish. It's dangerous. It will give itching ears what they want to hear, promise the moon, and deliver anguish.

Now, I haven't read it, so some might say I'm being unfair. Look, I've read what the publisher says about it. I've read what the author says about it. And I've read dozens of reviews. Here are some of the claims this book makes:

• There's a secret that existed from the dawn of time, a secret that all the great religions and philosophies have had a part of. This secret will allow you to change your life.

• If you learn the secret "You'll begin to understand the hidden, untapped power that's within you, and this revelation can bring joy to every aspect of your life."

• "The law of attraction is a law of nature. It is impersonal and it does not see good things or bad things. It is receiving your thoughts and reflecting back to you those thoughts as your life experience. The law of attraction simply gives you whatever it is you are thinking about."

• "This is really fun. It's like having the Universe as your catalogue. You flip through it and say, `I'd like to have this experience and I'd like to have that product and I'd like to have a person like that.' It is You placing your order with the Universe. It's really that easy."

• The author claims that folks who are overweight can be made thin by the secret.

• The author claims that people can ward off disease or cure disease with the secret.

• The author even makes the claim that natural disasters could be averted if people could all align themselves with the secret.

• The author claims that if you see a lady/man you want as your mate, just think it into happening.

Is your blood boiling yet?

Mine is. This is a new age panacea, snake oil guaranteed to cure all your ills. It is hellish fraud. My heart aches for the sick or infirm who might read The Secret. When it doesn't work, how will they feel? Guilt, blame, despair.

In one sense, The Secret proposes to make gods out of ourselves. We control the universe, we pray to ourselves, we heal ourselves, and decide our own future.

In another sense, it reduces people to rudimentary organisms, stimulus response-reflex driven zombies. All we need to do is press the right buttons and the little food pellet plops at our feet.

People are not gods. Nor are they single-cell drones. We are precious, sentient beings made in the image of the one true God. He loves us and waits for us to pray to Him.

Disease, disaster, unmet needs, longings for relationship, horrible tragedy, and all the evil in our society are a result of living in a fallen world. Sin, our sin, broke the world and continues to make it worse. We will never be rid of all this until we reach Heaven. God made a way for people to know this. He made His incredible love known to us. He made a way for us to endure the hardships of this life. He offers us contentment through adversity, NOT the elimination of adversity. And this is NOT a SECRET. This is the message we need to give away through our love and through our words--every day of our lives.

What I want to know is how does a book like this get to #1 on the bestseller list? I suppose, a publisher recognizes the $$$ potential. After all, the public showed its interest in supernatural secrets--and its gullibility--with the DaVinci Code. But it just galls me to see it succeed.

Please read what the publisher has to say about The Secret:

"The Secret is truly the most outstanding book to date that we have published. I am so pleased that Rhonda Byrne was able to bring together this life-changing information so masterfully. This book gives hope for what many have been waiting for-- a shift in the way the world thinks. Its a very exciting time that we are living in, and I as well as everyone at Beyond Words and Atria Books are grateful to be a part of it." --Cynthia Black, President, Beyond Words Publishing

Chilling.

I wonder if the publisher will feel so self-satisfied when the first lawsuits roll in. Can you imagine? The parents of a child who committed suicide over a failed attempt to use the secret. Families whose marriages have collapsed through "secret" infidelities. Clinically overweight or depressed people who throw away their medication in favor of the secret. I truly hope that people will not be duped and experience this kind of tragedy. But I fear they might.