M.L.S. Weech's Blog, page 35

Reviews! So Many Reviews!

Greetings all,

I’m just simply amazed at the number of reviews I am lucky enough to share with you. I’ll articulate how this was made possible in a future blog (I’m doing more research on that). For now, I have several reviews to share with you.  Some of them are only on Audible, and I don’t know how to link to just those reviews, so I’ll just copy-paste them in their entirety here. Then I have another review for Caught I’d like to spend a bit more time discussing.

First, let’s look at several new reviews for the Audible version of Stealing Freedom.

[image error]Five Star Review from Anne-v:

“Wonderful novella!

Loved it! Loved the originality. Loved the characters. Loved the writing. Loved the story. Loved the narrator.

I’ll devour everything from this author. It’s that good.

Give me more!! I want a prequel and a sequel.

This is a future world where speaking has been deemed “dangerous” to established order. Speech is only allowed per word purchased. A mother risks everything to allow her daughter the freedom to speak.

I was given this audiobook in exchange for an honest review.”

 

 

Isn’t that great?!

I mean, I don’t even know what to say! This is the kind of review every author dreams of, and I’m so grateful to Anne for leaving it. Bless you!

Five Star Review from Dee:

“Great listen!!

I enjoyed this listen very much!! In the beginning, it’s hard to know where this story is going. The writing is incredibly well-done and the world-building was exceptional, albeit scary.

That ending was inventive and quite frankly, mind-blowing.

The narration kept pace with the other worldliness of the story. Love it!!!”

 

 

Again, this is a very kind review. I put in a lot of effort for the endings of my stories, so any time they get compliments, I’m particularly pleased.

Five Star Review from B VanDyk:

“I absolutely loved this sci-fi

I thought the premise of this future was fantastic. A great heist style story against an oppressive regime.

Thinking of the current culture to extrapolate to this end was an awesome commentary. I’m looking forward to more from this author!

I received a free copy of this audiobook in exchange for an unbiased review.”

 

 

All I can say is, “I’m happy to provide more!” All these reviews are so kind, and I’m so blessed and happy that people like Stealing Freedom. Honestly any rating and review is nice, but when they’re this kind, how can I not appreciate it that much more?

[image error]That brings me to this four star review for Caught:

The reviewer once again (she’d listened to Stealing Freedom and was kind enough to try another of my stories) left a review on both Audible and Goodreads.

This review is awesome! Now, is it as complimentary as some of the above reviews? Maybe not, but it’s so insightful, and I wanted to talk about one specific segment. You can read the whole review through the above link, but I wanted to focus on one part.

“The premise is very interesting, however, I was disappointed that this was book 1 of a series. This shares a lot of good elements from books like Dark Matter by Blake Crouch, and with 1 tweak (the death of someone), this would have made a great stand alone. As it is, and someone survives that shouldn’t have been allowed to, there will clearly be a book 2, and said character will be back.”

Later she says, “Also, the charm of this book is largely rooted in the dreams and the experiments. Without that mystery, I imagine sequels will basically be the A-Team with powers.”

I’m in no way about to “respond” to this review. That’s bad form. Her opinions are hers, and I value them. The interesting thing is that she would have liked Caught better if it was a stand alone.

[image error]Here’s why that’s interesting: I originally intended it to be a stand alone.

I’d just finished Bob, and I really needed something light, fun, and fresh before I started on another ambitious project.

So then, I spoke with others in the business. If you look at my work, you’ll notice I barely hold still. Their advice was to generate books in a series to build a following. That advice made perfect sense to me.

Before you go too far, I’m not saying I invented Betrayed and Discovered just to pander to an audience. Yes, my goal was to provide people who like Caught more stories from that world, but it wasn’t just for that reason. I was speaking to my brother about some of the things I knew.

In once scene in Caught, Steve (one of the main characters), notes Kira (a secondary character in that book) has more reason to hate the general than anyone else.

My brother asked me why. When I told him, he loved the idea. I’d just filed the detail away as part of the world building and history of Kira’s character. But I wasn’t planning on going back to those characters for quite some time if at all. Once I told my brother that spolierific detail, he urged me to write that sequel, and that demand, combined with the advice of self-published authors I respect, led me to go ahead and write the other stories.

[image error]Oneiros Log, even Caught as a stand alone, was always designed to be my super hero universe origin story. I love X-Men. I think the Avengers movies are great! But I’m frustrated at the lack of other super heroes. In my opinion, you’re either an X-Man, an Avenger, or a member of the Justice League. Everyone wants to write for those series. I wanted to create something that at least has a fresh perspective on supers.

But I think Brook makes a very valid and fair comment, and I felt that was a great point. I’ve often said I would go back and write several books in one universe if I had it all to do again. I’d still publish Bob. I’d still publish Oneiros Log (at least Caught). But I typically write the stories that are most energizing to me at the time.

It’s a interesting challenge to be an author who is a discovery writer at heart trying to make sure he’s building an audience. I made the decision to move forward with the rest of the story (which is way more about Kaitlyn and Kira), but it’s interesting to see someone feel the way I felt about Caught. I can only hope that the rest of the trilogy (and Kaitlyn’s little side story) are entertaining enough to justify writing them.

I thought about adding this information. I truly, TRULY, hope that this isn’t seen as a rebuttal to Brook’s very kind review. It was a wonderful review. It was a thoughtful review.

But I though that keen observation demanded an open and honest admission of my original intent and how I came to change my mind.

I’ve never had so many reviews to share at the end of one week, and I’m humbled and honored to have these to share. I can only hope and pray that the reviews keep coming.  I just want to offer my most sincere appreciation one more time to all of these reviewers. It’s my hope that the reviews inspire more people to give my work a try.

As always, thanks for reading,

Matt

 

 

 

 

 

Story Review: Bulletproof by Mark Lawrence from Unfettered II

 

 

 

[image error]Cover for Unfettered II taken from its Amazon buy page for review purposes under Fair Use doctrine.

Spoiler Free Summary:  Bulletproof by Mark Lawrence is the sixteenth story in the Unfettered II Anthology.  The story is set in a sort of alien western world. There are fantasy creatures and alien creatures, but it’s all set in a western age civilization. Mikos (I think. This is an audio book, so I have to spell by sound),  is about to watch a gunfight. That battle will determine who is in charge of the town, which is a foothold of the planet aliens intend to use.

Character:  I like the characters in this story. They’re sympathetic and proactive, which is all I really want out of any character. Mikos is a young boy (I think), and his father was the sheriff not too long ago. A story this short really demanded the listener to keep track of a bunch of faces, races, and terms. 

Exposition: I actually think this needed a bit more exposition. I’m glad the story didn’t drag down, and I don’t necessarily think all the pacing issues would be resolved by exposition, but I definitely could have used a bit more here. 

Worldbuilding: This was the other area I felt was lacking. The author just sort of forces you to go with whatever is happening. This may be because the story is from a larger series, which would make some sense. Still this story didn’t rank higher in my opinion because I just didn’t really know what was going on, and by the time I had a grasp on just what I needed to enjoy this story, it was over. There were so many cool details and implications in this story, and I felt a bit left out of all that cool information.

[image error]This image of Mr. Lawrence was taken from his website for review purposes under Fair Use doctrine. 

Dialogue: This was good. Each character sounded unique. The conversations advanced the plot without sounding like author explanation. 

Description: This is probably where the story shines. The action sequences were cool.  The town felt real. The creatures and aliens all felt real. Like I said, listening to this story felt more like I was listening to an excerpt of a bigger story than the entirety of one. I had a glimpse into this really cool world and concept, but I never got to investigate it the way I wanted. 

Overall: This story is worth a listen. If you’ve read Lawrence’s work before and know if this is part of a series or bigger story, please let me know. This tale is one of the better ones in the anthology, but it wasn’t one of the best.  

Thanks for reading

Matt

 

 

Musings on Christianity 45

Why Should I Listen To A Book Written By Men?

The next conflict we must resolve before we can truly look at obedience to Christ is that of the men who wrote the Bible. Perhaps you believe in a God. Perhaps you even believe in Christ, but you draw the line there because the Apostles, prophets, and other Biblical authors were mortal men.

The Christian belief is that the truth is God wrote the Bible. He filled His mortal authors with the Spirit who put the words of the Bible in the minds of His instruments.

But what happens if we don’t want to accept that in faith.

That argument doesn’t actually have merit. If you believe in a God who created the Heavens and the Earth and all the host of them (Genesis 2:1), you then have to acknowledge that God can also place words in the minds of His chosen. Moses, credited as the author of the first five books of the Bible, even argued that he was unfit to lead Israel because he wasn’t so good with words.

God replied, “Now therefore go, and I will be with your mouth and teach you what you shall speak (Exodus 4:12).”

The Bible is no different.

Even if one insisted on believing in God as He is portrayed in the Bible, but refuses to acknowledge the authors of that same Bible, one must remember that those authors were still chosen representatives of God.

Moses, Samuel, the judges, the prophets, David, and Solomon  were all chosen by God to be His representatives. He attested to many of them through prophecies, miracles, or both. Therefore, even if those men wrote the Bible as men, they were still the men God chose to spread his word.

So we return to the fundamental choice. You either believe, or you don’t. If you, then, choose to believe in God, you must then respect and submit to those he selected as His representatives, even as mortal men. God would not choose men and then allow them to speak falsely of Him. He certainly wouldn’t endorse those men with miracles if they were not indeed speaking truth on behalf of the LORD.

The same is true of the new testament. Matthew, John, Peter, and Paul were all personally chosen representatives of Christ, Apostles. Mark was essentially Peter’s biographer, and Luke was a historian, documenting the actions of brothers. James and Jude were Christ’s biological brothers.

One can not acknowledge Christ as their lord and master and then refuse to acknowledge the authority of the Apostles Christ commanded to establish the body. The temptation is to refuse that authority so they can reject the commandments established by scripture. To want to follow Christ, but refuse to follow His very first disciples, is simply hypocritical.

Those who choose to follow Christ, submit to Him, and through Him those He appointed to lead and teach the gospel on Earth, must submit to the commandments left by Christ through his Apostles regardless of their humanity. Christ named Peter as the stone on which the church would be built. If Christ chose to build his church on Peter, who then are we to ignore that stone?

My theory is that those who want to take this path do so because the Apostles categorically deny actions and lifestyles that today’s society wants to embrace. How can someone reconcile religion with today’s tolerant society? The only way to do that would be to try and deny the words of those God the Father and God the Son chose to minister to humanity, and we simply can’t do that. This means we must acknowledge their authority.

There may be debate over translations. There may be arguments over application, but there can not be any denial of their authority without also denying the God who gave such authority.

One may rebut this assertion by saying anyone can do anything and claim it is in the name of God. That happens all the time. I don’t deny that happens, but I remind you that the Biblical authors were all authenticated by prophecy, miracles, or both. Indeed anyone (just look at this very book) can write whatever they want. Some may even go so far as to say they’re writing the words of a God. The Bible even tells us the Antichrist himself will come and perform miracles and wonders. The difference there is the Bible warns us about these individuals. When Christ returns, everyone will know in that moment. He’ll come with the army of Heaven like a steak of lighting that stretches across they sky (Matthew 24:27).

Christ’s chosen were authenticated by Christ Himself, and Christ authenticated their ministry with miracles and wonders, many of which occurred even before the Passion.

This brings us back again to the ultimate yes or no question. You can choose to believe in Christ and submit to Him, and in doing so, His chosen Apostles, or you can choose to reject Christ. Once more we see that one can not try and do both. There is no middle ground in this respect.

For our panel: What other reasons would there be for people to want to believe in Christ but reject the Bible? Are the words of the Apostles (or other Biblical authors) truly trustworthy even though they are only men?  What evidence is there that those who wrote the Bible truly did so while filled by the Spirt of God Himself? What if someone today started writing, proclaiming to be doing the same thing? If the Antichrist is said to come and perform miracles, how can we trust the miracles of the Apostles and other Biblical authors?

4-Star Review for Stealing Freedom!

Greetings all,

[image error]I get to do one of my favorite things, which is share a review for one of my books!

She received a free Audible version of Stealing Freedom and was kind enough to leave a voluntary review on both Goodreads and Audible (click either link to see the review).

I’m always grateful for reviews. If you’ve read something of mine, please take a moment to offer a rating and/or review. If you’re interested in reviewing any of my books, please feel free to email me for a free Audible version of pretty much all of my titles.

As always, I thank you for reading,

Matt

Story Review: The Raven by Erin Lindsey from Unfettered II

 

 

 

[image error]Cover for Unfettered II taken from its Amazon buy page for review purposes under Fair Use doctrine.

Spoiler Free Summary:  The Raven by Erin Lindsey is the fifteenth story in the Unfettered II Anthology.  Tom is brother to the king, and his kingdom is at war. The war, caused by the king’s transgressions, is causing bloodshed and strife. The only alternative, rebellion. Will Tom betray his brother for the sake of peace?

Character:  It took a good minute for me to remember this story, but once my memory was jogged, I remembered liking Tom. The arc made a ton of sense, and watching a loyal brother be placed in an impossible position time and again was a very powerful source of conflict (and therefore interest) for me. While the author did a fantastic job of showing the strain Tom went through to protect his brother and aid him out of several questionable situations, what I think made this fall short (i.e. forgettable) was the author didn’t do such a great job showing me how much the brothers loved each other. I understood it, but I didn’t feel it, and that’s why the story didn’t stick with me. 

Exposition: On the other side of forgettable stories is the benefit of not remembering it was bad. Usually this means the exposition was just fine. The story flowed well and quickly. The prose was solid. Poor character plus poor exposition = a bad story. Poor character with good exposition = an easy to read but forgettable story. 

Worldbuilding: This was good, especially if you like political intrigue and things like that. Those who liked The Game of Houses from The Wheel of Time of the economic details in Dune will appreciate that part of the story. The best and most interesting part of this story is the political ramifications of the choices Tom and his brother make.

[image error]This image of Ms. Lindsey was taken from her Goodreads profile page for review purposes under Fair Use doctrine. 

Dialogue: The conversations were interesting. There’s a debate about a course of action to take that I found very compelling, but I don’t think the characters felt unique to listen to. That puts the dialogue for this story in the “not bad” category. It’s probably better than average since that scene is one I remember most. 

Description: There wasn’t much in the way of description. Sure, there was battle, but that’s not what I remembered about the story (see above). I think this could have been a bit better. At the very least it could have been a bit more vivid. I think if the characters were at least memorable by description, this story would have been stronger. 

Overall: This was a good story; it just wasn’t memorable, and that’s because the characters didn’t quite meet the mark for me. I understood the goal and complications, but the motivation seemed off. I didn’t get that sense of love for the brother. It felt more like duty, which took away the potential for emotional power. It’s still interesting. It still has scenes that grab you, but like most average stories, I read it, wasn’t too disappointed, and then I forgot it soon after. If that relationship were better conveyed, I connect with the character, and this story is probably one of the better stories, especially considering Lindsey’s strong prose.  Still, if  you like good world building and political intrigue, this story has merit and deserves a fair shot. 

Thanks for reading

Matt

 

 

Musings On Christianity 44

But Christ Died For My Sins, So I Can Do Whatever Right?

Nobody’s perfect.

We’re only human.

Our God is a forgiving God.

It’s only natural.

I don’t know about those who may be reading this, but I’ve certainly said every one of those phrases at least once in my life. I wanted to live in a world where I could do what I wanted, even knowing it was wrong, and it would be fine because my sins were paid for.

Let’s look at this from a human level. Let’s say you had a loved one or friend who kept getting into financial trouble. You loan him a bit of money, but he falls right back into debt. You give him more, but he loses his house. You give him a place to stay, but he never makes much of an effort to find work or provide for himself. He seems perfectly content to do what he wants and let you pay for everything. He doesn’t even so much as help clean up around the house or even cook a meal.

Wouldn’t you, even the most patient and loving of you, eventually grow tired of it? Isn’t that person really just using you?

The above phrases are absolutely true, every single one of them. There are simply two ways (there are always only two ways when you boil them down) to look at it. One way is for a person to accept those truths and let them convict their hearts to strive to do what is right. The other way is to accept those truths and simply not bother to try at all. Even someone who fails time and again, but continues to work and pray and find ways to turn from their sins is still working under the first perspective.

It’s to those who try and shrug it off I offer this warning. You can’t live in sin and call yourself a follower of Christ (1 John).

“Whoever says, ‘I know him’ but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him, but whoever keeps his word, in him truly the love God is perfected. By this we may know that we are in him (1 John 2:4-6).”

God is forgiving of those who strive to keep his word but slip (1 John 2:1). There is no such forgiveness to those who continue in sin (1 John 2:9-11).

“No one who abides in Him keeps on sinning; no one who keeps on sinning has either seen Him or known Him (1 John 2:6).”

“Whoever makes a practice of sinning is of the devil. No one born of God makes a practice of sinning, for God’s seed abides in him, and he cannot keep on sinning because he has been born of God. By this it is evident who are the children of God, and who are the children of the devil: whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor is the one who does not love his brother (1 John 2:8-10).

We’re still working our way toward recognizing sin. But before we look at sin for what it is, we have to abolish the myths people cling to so they can excuse their sins or avoid the need to even look at sin. I’ve demonstrated that one must either believe in Christianity, or not. I’ve demonstrated that it is impossible for one to believe in Christianity and any other path, since belief in Christ means accepting him as the way, the truth, and the life.

Now we must abolish the myth that accepting Him somehow allows us to continue sinning as if we didn’t believe in Him. This simply isn’t true.

Paul pondered this same subject in his letter to the church in Rome. He asked a direct question: Can we continue to sin so that God’s grace can continue to abound? He offered a very simple response:

“By no means (Romans 6:2)!”

A true Christian dies to sin, so they can no longer live in it (Romans 6:2).  Romans 6:2 is 14 words long, and it holds such deep, meaning. The question Paul asks points out the very same excuses some people claiming Christ make without realizing they haven’t turned to Christ.

Paul and John were not the only people to dispel this falsehood.

“If you love Me, you will keep My commandments (John 14:15).”

Those are the words of Christ Himself.

Once more we can reject Christ and do as we wish, or we can accept Him, but if we accept Him we must, therefore, keep His commandments, for that is what those who love Him (and therefore accept Him) do.

Jesus didn’t mention this once in passing. He emphasized this in His final words to His disciples as I mentioned above, but it was a part of His ministry throughout His life on Earth.

“Jesus said to them, ‘If God were your Father, you should love Me, for I came from God, and I am here (John 8:42).”

There Christ openly states that love of Him demonstrates a relationship with God (since they are two parts of the one triune God).

Then Christ explains the actions of those who follow the devil.

“‘You are of your father, the devil, and your will is to do your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him (John 8:44).”

There is no position in which one can say he belongs to Christ and then continue to live for himself rather than for Christ.

This does not in any way indicate that one slip, one instance of failure means damnation. Again, the words I began this chapter with are all true. What this means is that those who follow Christ strive to live in accordance to His commandments.

For those who do this, Christ advocates on their behalf when they stumble (1 John 2:1).

God Himself declared David a man after His own heart (1 Samuel 13:14).  Yet David committed adultery and murder (2 Samuel 11:4, 2 Samuel 11 14-15).  How can such a sinner then be of God.

David absolutely sinned against God, but David repented each time. David accepted the severe consequences of those sins. He didn’t challenge God or question Him. He understood his sin for what it was. He asked for forgiveness. He accepted God’s sovereign punishment for those sins.

This is the difference between one who lives in sin, and one who lives in Christ. Never in scripture does David plot in this manner. He never (in scripture) says, “Well I know I shouldn’t murder Uriah, but I’ll do it, and God will forgive me.”

This isn’t to say he didn’t know what he was doing was wrong. He did, and he worked very hard to hide it. But when rebuked (through the prophet Nathan), he confessed and repented.

That brings another important concept to mind. Even those seeking earnestly to please God sin, and those sins have consequences.  David, God’s anointed, sinned, and he, the one whom God declared was after His own heart, was punished. If David was not free of consequences, who is?

This shows us that even though our sins are forgiven, they are not necessarily without punishment. If God still reserves Earthly punishment for His chosen, what hope do those who deny the Son He sent to rule us have?

The myth that, “I’m Christian, so nothing will happen to me” or “I’m Christian, so I can sin, and God won’t judge me” dies.

What about the myth that “I’m blameless, so I’m guaranteed a wonderful, prosperous, pain-free life”?

Job was that man. He indeed had a life full of prosperity and blessing, but his story in the Bible isn’t about how great his life was or how great it ended. Instead, it shows us Job’s great trail. Even Job had no right to demand a life free of pain from God. Even Job had no right to question God and his sovereignty. Job, a man who was blameless (Job 1:1) saw the worst sorts of emotional and physical pain. His fortune was taken. His family was taken. Everything he had was taken. Indeed, he was once more blessed beyond even what he once had (Job 42), but his life wasn’t free from pain or turmoil. How much more those of us who openly admit we have done wrong?

No Christian life is free of pain. No Christian life is absent of blessings. Indeed, on this Earth, God gives and takes away (Job 1:21). God does this to sinners and the righteous (Matthew 5:45). That’s because the real reward is in Heaven. The real reward and blessings exist in God’s kingdom, and those rewards are only reserved for those who serve Him.

Nobody’s perfect, but a Christian strives to be as much as he or she is able, trusting in God’s forgiveness and accepting His divine sovereignty.

We’re only human, but a Christian strives to live like Christ, God in the flesh.

Our God is a forgiving God, but no Christian tests God (Deuteronomy 6:16 and Matthew 4:7).

It’s only natural, but a Christian doesn’t live of this world, but of Christ (1 John 2:15-17).

We had to dispel the myths those outside the faith want cling to. We had to reveal those myths to those who are of the faith but don’t understand they’re misguided.

We had to do these things before we look at sin for what it is because only those who see sin for what it is can then truly choose to live in it or turn away from it.

Again, that choice belongs to you, but you can’t have it both ways. You can’t now be Christ’s and live whatever life you feel “makes you happy.” You can’t be Christ’s and sin as you please. You can’t be Christ’s and follow after other religions.

These are the truths a Christian must accept. You can accept them or reject them, but you can’t reject them and accept them.

For our panel: What are some other excuses people cling to? How would you dispel those excuses? What are some other areas of the Bible we can study to better understand the myths we’ve covered?  How do we come to terms with the fact that even Christians receive trials and consequences for sins? How does a Christian stay focused on the real rewards even while losing some (or even, unfortunately all) of their Earthly blessings? How does can one know they’re lost in sin?

Free Audible Download Codes!

Greetings all,

[image error]This is my newest audio title, and I love this cover. 

It’s been a while since I spread word about this, so I thought I’d post a friendly reminder. I have a total of six audiobooks available exclusively through Audible. In an effort to generate interest and reviews, Audible has been kind enough to offer me download codes.

I have bunches! So if you like audiobooks, and you want to help an author out at no expense for yourself, please, shoot me an email and let me know which book (or books) you’d like. I’d be happy to give you a copy regardless, but I do hope you’d be kind enough to leave a rating and short review when you finish it.

How it works:

You shoot me an email asking for codes.

I send you the codes.

You redeem those codes at Audible.

You get an audiobook!.

I hope you’ll decide to give my work a try. Regardless, thank you all again so much for all the support you have shown me over the years.

 

Thanks for reading,

M.L.S. Weech

 

 

 

Musings on Christianity 43!

Don’t All Paths Lead to God?

In the last chapter, we established the first essential truth. That truth is essential no mater what area of life you’re considering. One must choose a path. Any person has that right. People can even change their minds. However, when that first essential decision is made, all other decisions logically flow from there.

So what happens when one decides Christianity is right? If one makes this choice, they must then submit to the principles of the faith.

If one decides to diet, they must decide what foods are good to eat and what foods are bad. If one decides to go to a school, they must decide what study habits are good and what other habits are bad.

This isn’t unique to any particular religion. Unless you are one who thinks all paths lead to God. This is a popular—let’s use the word—compromise. There are those who simply want to live in a world where everyone who means well eventually goes to Heaven. While I can understand the desire to see anyone wishing to find Heaven getting there, the simple truth is, that statement can’t be true. 

There may be some agreement between one religion or another. There may even be some shared history. The Jewish religion and Christianity even hold the same history. The larger difference there is belief that Christ was indeed the Messiah or not.

I bring this up because it shows the simple truth. Even if many roads lead to God, it can not be true that all roads lead to God because some religions are indeed at complete disagreement.

Even if many roads lead to God, the Christian path does not allow for a world where all roads lead to God. This is because the Christian faith is based on the idea that Christ is indeed the only way into Heaven.

“Jesus said to him, ‘I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me (John 14:6).’”

Biblically, from the very mouth of Christ, we see a choice must be made. You can be one who believes there is more than one way (non-Christianity) or you can believe that there is only one way (Christianity).

If we ponder this, then even if all roads do indeed lead to Heaven, Christianity is still valid because it leads to Heaven. Even in this situation Christianity is still at least a path if not the path for no other reason than it is a path. The danger is if one considers the alternative. If there is only one path, then anyone on a different path is doomed.

If, all roads, including the Christian one, lead to God, then those following the Christian faith are still doing what’s right. To violate the Christian faith, however, because one suddenly believes there are more ways to Heaven means the individual who has changed is no longer (and probably never was) Christian.

This maintains the choice which must be made. The problem is if there was more than one way to Heaven, there would be no need for Christianity. If there are many paths to God, one doesn’t need a savior to get to the Father. This forces us to circle right back to the fundamental choice I discussed in the last chapter: Either Christianity is right, or it is wrong, even if it is only wrong because there are indeed other ways into Heaven. This means that, for a Christian, they are still promised Heaven because they’re trying, but if Christianity is right, then all other beliefs must acknowledge the principle foundation of Christianity, who is Christ.

As a Christian, my only option remains to stay true to the faith. Those who believe in Christ and accept Him as their salvation are still saved, and those who do not risk damnation because that is what awaits them if Christianity is right. If I live to follow Christ, set myself aside, pick up my cross and follow Him, I hold a guarantee no other religion can make.

Again, all of this is to eventually lead up to understanding what a Christian should never do. However, what tends to happen is that people want to have it more than one way. People want Christ to intercede for them, but they don’t want to follow Him, so they choose to hold onto a belief that is the antithesis of Christianity (either there is one way or there is more than one way).

Some people understand that Christianity is right, but then they see the discipline one must have to live a Christian life. They see sin they want to accept, but they know Christ demands us to live for Him.  So again, they try to split the faith apart wanting to have Christian benefits without living a Christian life. The choice remains. It is either right, or it is wrong.

In the case of all roads leading to Heaven, it is still right even if it’s not the only way to be right. However, I urge you to note the contradiction. The Christian faith (as provided above) states plainly there is only one way. It can not be both right and wrong.

C.S. Lewis created a fine argument for the life of Christ. History confirms the existence of the man Jesus Christ. There is no denying his mortal existence. The only debate that can be made is whether he was indeed the son of God or simply a man.

That creates a trilemma, according to Lewis.  “A man who was merely a man said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic—on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg— or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut him up for a fool. You can spit at him and kill him as a demon, or you can fall at his feet and call him Lord and God, but let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about his being a great human teacher.”

To expand on this, no great moral teacher would lie. I don’t think I’d find any place where a person would call a lie a good thing. Even one who buys into the nonsense of a white lie, would not consider the clause, “No one comes to the Father except through me,” anything but either truth, or heresy.  So the choice returns. Either Christianity is right, or it is wrong.

Therefore, all roads (or even many) can not lead to Heaven. This because Christ can’t be both right and wrong. One. Must. Choose. At least one must either choose Christianity or to be against Christianity.

For those who choose against Christianity, we can now refer back to the previous chapter in which either I am doomed, or those who are against Christianity are doomed.

However, now those who claim to choose Christianity must then accept the doctrines expressed in that religion. Even still, there are other factors that must be discussed before we can talk about actions forbidden by the faith or not. We will ponder the next factor in the next chapter.

For our panel: What are other verses prove Christianity can’t be both right and wrong? What about other religions that are closely related to Christianity? Can Judaism be right?  What about Catholicism? If Christianity is right because of faith in Christ, isn’t Catholicism just another type of Christianity? If not, why?

They’re the Same Character!

[image error]Low res image used for review purposes. All images here used for character study purposes under fair use doctrine.

I was talking to a student about narratives recently, and the topic of characters, story arch and Star Wars came up.

The student affirmed that he hated Rey, but really liked the main character from Rogue One.

Those were his words.

“What’s her name?” I asked.

The student looked at me blankly.

“How can you say you like a character you can’t even name?”

Comedic interaction aside, a classmate looked up her name, Jyn Erso. During some good natured back and forth, I asserted that Jyn and Rey are, in fact, pretty much the same character. You can hate both, but you can’t hate one and love the other. They are pretty much the same character.

Let’s just start with the simple biometric data: Both actresses (and therefore characters) are shorter (less than 5’9″). Only four inches separate them. Both have dark hair. They have the same build (healthyceleb.com says they’re exactly the sam weight). They both have lighter eye colors (green and hazel). So they do, in fact, look very similar.

Now let’s look at the character’s specifically.  Both were abandoned by their parents.  Both have a serious investment in their familial legacy/origin. Both are incredibly skilled in their craft and seemingly learn at alarming rates. Both are witty. Both are prone to “rage” moments.

[image error]Seriously folks, @me on this. Heck, I can line up Rise and Rouge One plot point for plot point if you want in terms of their arch:

Establish abandonment.
Establish isolation.
Introduce impact character who brings them to the rebellion/alliance.
Character inspires large level action against threat.
Character get’s captured/pinned down.
Character faces idiotic odds.

The only actual difference between the two is that only one lived.

I suppose one could argue Rey’s arc is more complete, but ironically that’s the thing everyone (I talk to) disputes about why this trilogy is bad.

So I leave it to you wonderful readers. Assertion: Rey and Jyn are pretty much the same drn character. Agree or disagree?

Thanks for reading,

Matt

Story Review: Victim with a Capital V by Scott Sigler Durst from Unfettered II

 

 

 

[image error]Cover for Unfettered II taken from its Amazon buy page for review purposes under Fair Use doctrine.

Spoiler Free Summary:  Victim with a Capital V by Scott  Sigler is the thirteenth story in the Unfettered II Anthology.  Lisa is a Victim. Yes, she was once a victim, but then she was trained to become something more, an avenger. She trained her whole life to prepare for the day she came face to face with the man who hurt her. That day has just arrived. What will she do? There are others nearby who are showing a bit too much interest in her as well. What will they do?

Character:  I actually like Lisa. She’s not the driven killer most stories make characters like her out to be. In fact, that’s why this story is unique. Here she is faced with her “opportunity for vengeance,” and she doesn’t respond the way most books portray it. There’s a fine line between “weak” or “stereotyped” women and characters who simply have every right to be afraid or sad. I affirm that people may be over sensitive to women being emotional. In Caught, my book, Sal, a man, cries plenty. No one has ever said he was too weak. But Kaitlyn, a teenager, sheds one tear and some people declare her type cast. But, there is a point at which people need to evaluate a female character to see if they’re being too weak. I advise authors to listen carefully to their editors when this is mentioned. Don’t be over defensive, but don’t be quick to make changes either. Just listen carefully.

I think the author does a great job of letting a traumatic event actually be traumatic. This story has nice development. I’d read another story about Lisa if it were out there (time and TBR list permitting).

Exposition: This was probably a little heavy handed in my opinion. I really felt like the story was great. I didn’t need the additional context that was there, but that’s just me. There wasn’t so much exposition that I felt the story came to a screeching halt, but I definitely noticed it. 

Worldbuilding: This was standard rouge’s tale. This might be early Earth history or it might be a different planet. I don’t know. Neither changes the plot very much. Now, if it was a different world or setting (and not just historical), I would have been happier with a bit more world building instead of the exposition I got. It’s possible that was the author’s goal, but it fell short.

[image error]Photo by Joan Allen taken from the author’s website. Permission to use this photo was expressed in the caption.

Dialogue: This was good. It wasn’t the greatest dialogue I’ve ever read, but it might be the second best dialogue in the book (all respect to Dresden and crew). The characters had unique voices, and I appreciated that. The narrator may have helped in this regard, but the words and style were still unique.   

Description: This probably could have had a bit more description. I can’t tell you what Lisa looks like, but I have a pretty solid memory of the other men around her. I’d assert that if I felt it needed more, it probably did because I never really want that much description in any story. 

Overall: this is one of the better stories in the anthology. I’d definitely read more about Lisa, and I’d probably be willing to read more from the author (again, time and TBR permitting). It’s a great vengeance story with plenty of action and drama. 

Thanks for reading

Matt