I'm With Gungor

With all the things circulating in social media lately, one of the things that caught my eye was a controversy over something Christian musician, Michael Gungor, wrote in a post on his blog.  It was a blessing, I believe, that I came across an article from Relevant Magazine addressing the "Gungor issue" before I came across an article from Answers in Genesis that addressed the same issue.

Both of the articles above led me to go read Gungor's blogs for myself.  I read three separate blogs that addressed the issue, the issue being that Gungor doesn't take a literal approach to some of the Biblical accounts in Genesis.  The first blog was entitled "What Do We Believe."  This is the blog that started all the problems, but anyone who has only read the article from Answers in Genesis might have the wrong idea of what Gungor was really saying in the blog.  Anyone who has only read the AIG article might also misunderstand the rationale behind Gungor's second blog on the aforementioned issue, "I'm With You."

Ken Ham's approach was hostile from the start, from the accusatory headline, "Award-Winning Christian Musicians Mock Biblical Creationists."  And if you merely read his article, you might think that's exactly what Gungor (and his wife) were doing.  When I read the blog entry, "I'm With You, " however, it was like I was reading something completely different than what Ken Ham had read.  I didn't see a mocker; I saw a thinker.  I saw someone who had gotten flak from a post (the original "What Do We Believe") that wasn't even about creationism, but rather about being slow to judge others when we don't understand the reasons why they believe what they believe.  Many of those who have read "I'm With You" tend to take Ham's approach, that Gungor was being rude or condescending.  Rather, I think he was defending his beliefs.

I don't want to speak for Gungor, because I don't know him and I'm only vaguely familiar with his music and writing style.  But most people realize that it's hard to say how a person sounds when they're writing--whether they're being hostile or conversational or whatever.  Personally, I don't think Gungor meant to sound like he was mocking anyone.  It seemed to me that he was stating what he believed and why, and he was just doing it in a way that naturally came to him.  He might have been trying to be funny, not because he was flippant about his ideas, but because that's the way he thinks and writes.  And I don't think it's fair that he's being called a mocker simply for defending his beliefs in a way that was natural for him to do so.

When I say "I'm With Gungor," please understand, I'm not at all saying I agree with all of his beliefs.  I think he's wrong on some things, BUT I think it's okay that we don't share all the same beliefs.  I don't think I'll ever meet another human being I agree with on every issue.  What I'm saying when I say, "I'm With Gungor" is that I think the dude has gotten a lot of backlash over something that's really not as big of a deal as many are making it out to be.  I'm not saying it's not important.  I'm saying that it's not so important that we should be giving it this much attention, especially with all the other things going on in the world that deserve our attention.

With that being said, I really wrestled with whether or not I wanted to write this blog.  I think the "Gungor Issue" is overblown, so why would I possibly want to add to the chatter?  Well, aside from the snazzy blog title, this post isn't really so much about Gungor and what he wrote as it is about how the Christian community has responded.  I don't want to talk about Gungor or what he wrote as much as I want to talk about how SCARED I am that people have taken the "Gungor Issue" to the extreme.

This is why it scares me.

1. Too many people are believing something they read ABOUT Gungor instead of actually reading what Gungor actually wrote.

I don't really follow Answers in Genesis or Ken Ham as much as a lot of my Christian friends do.  It's not that I don't agree with him or his ministry--he's just not really on my radar that much.  I don't want to make any judgments about what he writes or does, because honestly, I don't know that much about what he writes or does.  It's not because I have any disrespect for him; I just don't follow him or his teachings that closely.

However, what he has recently written about Gungor might have made me lose a little respect for him, had I had enough of an opinion of him to have respect for him (I don't have disrespect for him; I'm just neutral since I know very little about him).   To read the article from AIG, I would have thought that Gungor was on a mission to corrupt the minds of the youth who listen to his music.  And from some of the conversations I've had about the "Gungor Issue," there are a lot of people who believe just that.  This leads me to a second reason why the Christian response to the "Gungor Issue" scares me.

2. If the Christian community believes that Christian musicians are one of the main sources where young people are getting their theology, well, that's a whole other problem.

This is one of my favorite Rich Mullins quotes:

 It's so funny being a Christian musician. It always scares me when people think so highly of Christian music, Contemporary Christian music especially. Because I kinda go, I know a lot of us, and we don't know jack about anything. Not that I don't want you to buy our records and come to our concerts. I sure do. But you should come for entertainment. If you really want spiritual nourishment, you should go to church...you should read the Scriptures.

I think there are a lot of really amazing Christian musicians.  I have gotten so much encouragement from listening to Christian music, from an old cherished hymn to the newest jam on KLOVE.  I've written several songs myself, and I draw comfort and encouragement from writing Christian songs as well as singing and hearing them.  But Mullins understood that Christian musicians are not supposed to be great theologians.  He knew that they were not supposed to be great role models for others to follow.  That's kind of ironic, because Rich Mullins is one of my role models--mainly because he didn't think or make much of himself, but he made much of God.

But if parents are so concerned that their kids are going to start following the beliefs of the Great Gungor Cult, well, that's problematic because there is no Great Gungor Cult, at least not to my knowledge.  I don't think Gungor is trying to proclaim himself as a great theologian.  Ken Hamm (in the aforementioned AIG article) wrote that: "[Lisa and Michael Gungor] are writing as though they know more than people who have spent their lives studying the inerrancy of Scripture."

Actually, Michael Gungor was simply stating his beliefs in his personal blog.  I find Ham's above statement to be a little outrageous, and more than a little unfair.  Apparently, it's not okay to say what you believe if you're a fairly well-known Christian who has opinions that are different from the accepted norm.  That's all he was doing.  He was writing his thoughts in his personal blog, not publishing a manifest he expected everyone to agree with.  Does that mean he shouldn't have people disagree with him and offer rebuttal?  No, of course there's going to be disagreements and rude internet comments from strangers.  That's what happens when anyone has an opinion on anything these days.  I just think the extreme to which Ham took his response was unfair, especially since HE is in a position of influence.

And parents, if you think your kids are going to start believing or mimicking any old wackadoo thing a Christian musician says or does, then that's saying something about your parenting.  That's saying something about how you've taught or not taught them in the Scripture.  Theology begins at home.  Not in the Church.  AT HOME.  And then Church.  If you don't trust your children enough to make informed decisions about what they're going to believe, then that isn't Michael Gungor's fault.  If anything, he was saying (especially in "I'm With You--Part 2") that we need to actively think about what we believe.  We need to question our faith.  Otherwise, how will we ever know what we believe?  He wasn't trying to lead anyone astray.

Yet, it seems that everyone is going crazy, afraid that Gungor is going to play his guitar and lead all the children away like some modern day Pied Piper.

We. are. going. too. far.

Teach your children to study the Bible.  Teach your children to be discerning.  Pray for your children. Chances are that when they're older, they aren't going to be led astray by something as simple as a blog post by a Christian musician.

And don't get carried away every time a well-known Christian says something controversial.

3. People are getting carried away every time a well-known Christian says something controversial.  AND THE WORLD IS WATCHING.

This is what scares me the most.  Some of my non-Christian friends have been watching this "Gungor Issue" unfold.  And I'm embarrassed.  I'm so, so embarrassed.

Why?  Because I've been trying to communicate to them and show them for years that Christians aren't the intolerant people they want to assume we are.  Because I've been trying to break down the walls between us, the walls built because they've seen too many Christians act without love, without consideration of another person's ideas.  Because I've been trying to show them that Christians can use their brains and form their own opinions and not just blindly follow what someone else says about another person or an issue.  And the Christian response to this issue has shown them exactly the opposite.

I'm not saying we have to agree with Gungor.  We don't.  We absolutely don't.  But in the past three days, I've seen people say the most ridiculous things about a man they don't know.

"I've never heard of Gungor before, but I'm boycotting him from now on."

And my non-Christian friends are seeing yet another example of how Christians shut out anything that makes them uncomfortable.  And, side note, it's not really boycotting if you weren't actively supporting something before.  Nothing changes if you're "boycotting" something you'd never heard of before.

"Gungor isn't a real Christian."

And my non-Christian friends are seeing yet another example of how Christians judge without taking the time to understand.  And, another side note, it's not our place to say that someone is a Christian or not.  That's between him and God.  I could say more on my thoughts on his apparent Christianity, but in the end, it doesn't matter.  It's between him and God.

"Gungor doesn't believe in the Bible."
"Gungor thinks he's better than everyone else."
"Gungor is leading people astray."
"Gungor is undermining the authority of God."
"Gungor steps on kittens."

Okay, I might have made that last one up, but the thing is, the overall response to the "Gungor Issue" is too much.  It's just too much.

I am not saying we shouldn't speak up when we disagree with someone, especially over a matter that we deem important.  I think it's important, but I do recognize that there are a lot of people who find this issue a lot more important than I do.  If that's you, I don't want to disregard you.  I don't want to disregard your feelings.

But here's the thing.  When we are fighting to show the world that we're not intolerant, as so many in the world truly believe us to be, then how does it look when we flat out attack someone for saying something we disagree with?  Or do we only have to be tolerant to non-Christians because we want to show Jesus' love to them?  Should we not also show love and grace and understanding to fellow Christians (even if some don't believe he really is a Christian--especially for those some who don't believe he really is a Christian)?

Tolerance isn't what the world thinks it is, okay?  The world says tolerance means we have to agree with everyone about everything, or otherwise, we're intolerant.  But here's what I've seen in this "Gungor Issue" that scares me, that makes me absolutely sick to my stomach.  I'm seeing Christians act with TRUE intolerance.  We've become like the rest of the world, the ones who say, "You disagree with me, so I must disassociate with you."

When we take our ideas to the extreme and start treating a (supposed) fellow Christian like an outcast because he said something we don't like, what does that look like to the world?  Can we not disagree with someone without going crazy?  Can we not say, "Your understanding of Scripture is wrong, and here's why" without attacking a person instead of just addressing his ideas?

This is a quote from the aforementioned article from Relevant Magazine:

...as Christians we tend to act like we have a belief system that is like a bubble: It is fragile and easily popped if anything even touches any part of it. We think we have to protect our bubble.
But when did the Christian faith become so fragile? It is OK to ask the tough questions, to question our beliefs to find them to be true (and if not true to find the truth God is revealing to us).

I'm embarrassed and I'm scared because I'm afraid this "Gungor Issue" has revealed just how fragile the Christian faith might have become--at least to the eyes of those in the world who are watching.  And the world is watching.  

I'm not sure what the solution is, but I'm hoping next time something like this happens (because it's going to happen), the Christian community will respond with a little less crazy and a lot more love.  We need to still be WITH the ones we disagree with.  

Fiction Friday: "Redeeming" Christian Fiction

I'm still not sure whether or not I'd like to be a Christian author.  I'd like to be an author (despite what my mom says, I'm not an author until I'm published).  I am a Christian.  Since God seems to sneak up on me into several of my blog posts here, I guess I already qualify as a Christian writer.  I just don't know if I want to have any of my books published with that kind of stigma label. 

One of my reasons for this is because I don't just want Christians reading my books.  Honestly, I just don't see some average nonChristian Joe...or Joe-ette...walking into a book store or library and picking up something from the "Inspirational" section. 

The other reason is because I really don't know whether or not I'd like to be classified as a Christian author is because there's a LOT of Christian fiction out there that...well...sucks.  I've had this conversation with several of my friends, and most of them agree with me.  Christian fiction doesn't have a good reputation.

But I've decided I need to actually read a little bit of Christian fiction before saying it all stinks.  I'd been meaning to read Redeeming Love by Francine Rivers for many years, and I finally did read it a few weeks ago.

I was actually a little stunned (in a good way) at the honesty of this book.  The book plays on the story of Hosea from the Bible, which is really the only reason I was interested in reading it.  I don't like romance for the sake of romance, but this book wasn't mainly a romance--at least not one between two people.  This story was a very honest story about God drawing His children back to Himself.

The main female character, Angel, is a prostitute.  While there was nothing at all graphic or crude, Rivers didn't make light of her horrible past/present situations.  There were times when it was uncomfortable for me to read, but I actually appreciated those times because they made the book/characters more real.

The human love story (as well as the Divine) begins with a man named Michael Hosea.  He was also a very real character.  Rivers didn't make him just some lovey-dovey man who easily forgave Angel.  He did forgive her, but he dealt with the pain and anger realistically, all the while loving this woman who felt entirely unlovable.

There are other characters and situations that were difficult to read, but they were so honest that I couldn't help but love this book.  There were some stylistic problems I had--such as Rivers jumping the point of view from character to character without any notice.  Sometimes I had to figure out whose brain I was reading.   I also was underwhelmed by a very matter-of-fact and unnecessary epilogue. 

But I think Rivers has shown that there can be such a thing as good Christian fiction, and perhaps even good Christian romance.  This wasn't just another book about the hero or heroine loving someone to Christ.  This was a honestly written story about a woman who desperately needed the love and redemption of God.  It was about what God can do with a changed life.  It was a very hopeful book.

I was actually a little surprised to read parts of this book, though.  The last entire book I managed to write was a Christian sci-fi romance thing.  The main character has this Hosea theme going throughout her struggles and successes.  Without ever having read Redeeming Love, it sounds as though I drew inspiration from it.  I didn't, but it doesn't matter.  I realized through reading Redeeming Love that my story lacks a lot of honesty and needs even more editing than I originally believed. 

I guess that's why Francine Rivers is a full-fledged published Christian author, and I'm just a wanna-be.  Uh...whatever it is I wanna be...?

Thoughts on Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 2

Spoilers ahead. Don't read any further if you haven't watched the movie (and preferably also read the book).  Also, this is not a movie where I sap on about how much I'm going to miss Harry Potter.  You can find THAT post here.

About a decade ago, I got into Harry Potter. And I remember going to that first movie (which also came out about a decade ago) thinking, "What will it be like when the seventh movie is over? The kids will be all grown up." Yes, the kids are all grown up. And there were actually eight movies.

I'm glad there were eight movies. They took their time adapting the last book. I'm not sure they could have done an adequate job of telling the story in one movie. Well, maybe. But I like what they did. Plus, it dragged Harry Potter out a little longer. And now...it's over.

Overall, I really enjoyed this movie. I loved it. I loved the Gringotts scene--of course with the Dragon! I'd been looking forward to seeing the Dragon escape the bank since the book came out. There are some things that are awesome in print, but seeing it on screen is a whole new experience.

I also loved loved loved the Hogwarts battle scenes--especially getting to see McGonagall take on Snape and Molly Weasley take on Bellatrix (even if Bellatrix's death was a little hokey and CGI'd). The only time the battle scenes got tedious were near the end--after Harry had already gone to meet Voldemort in the Forbidden Forest, "died," and come back to life. To me, that was kind of the big major climax. Yes, Voldemort actually dying was also a big major climax, but it wasn't as important as Harry's sacrificial acts, of his meeting and speaking with Dumbledore at "King's Cross."

In fact, I think the whole "death of Voldemort" thing was really overplayed. Sometimes books don't transfer well into movies and need a little help. Sure, okay. Nothing wrong with spicing things up a little visually. But they took it too far. I'm sure the filmmakers were going for more drama, more suspense. They took it past the dramatic and suspenseful and made it just plain boring. I was having to bite my tongue to keep from screaming, "OH JUST SHOW NEVILLE SLICING OFF NAGINI'S HEAD ALREADY SO WE CAN GET ON WITH THIS!" Because, honestly, watching Neville slice off Nagini's head was one of the things I was most looking forward to seeing.  I heart Neville so much.

But, no no, there was this big, long, drawn-out battle between Harry and Voldemort where the latter chased the former through Hogwarts for no apparent reason. It was boring. I was ready for Voldemort to just die, since we all knew that was coming. And when Voldemort did die, I was a little underwhelmed. I don't like comparing books and movies too much, but in this case, I really think the filmmakers missed something important. In the book, Voldemort didn't crumble into pixie dust or whatever that was that he did in the film. No. Harry's signature defensive "Expelliarmus" spell caused Voldemort's killing curse to rebound, and he just kind of fell down dead. Anticlimactically. He just died. No fanfare. No big dramatic death scene.

I really liked the fact that in the book, Voldemort, the greatest dark wizard ever, who went to great, tremendously evil lengths to preserve his own life, died a ridiculously simple, lackluster death. And I guess the filmmakers thought it too simple, so they spiced it up with some more silly fake CGI. But that wasn't too big of a deal--just something that irked me slightly.

I'm also slightly irked by the "King's Cross" scene. For one thing, the whole backstory on Dumbledore was not revealed. Anyone who hasn't read the books still doesn't know a thing about Ariana other than some vague idea from Aberforth that Albus gave her "everything except his time." It reminded me slightly of the film "Harry Potter and the Prizoner of Azkaban" where they left out a lot of important background information about the Marauder's Map and Harry's dad, Sirius, Lupin, and Peter Pettigrew. And I'm not sure if the filmmakers just didn't see Dumbledore's family history as being pertinent information to the story they wanted to convey, or if they didn't think there was time for it, or if perhaps they wanted the movie-going audience to still see Dumbledore as a bright shiny character without any personal demons. Maybe it was a combination of all those things.

But what really bothers me more than it probably should was something movie Dumbledore said in "King's Cross" that wasn't in the book at all. Something like (definitely paraphrasing here--only saw the movie once): "I once said that help would always be given at Hogwarts to those who ask for it. I'd like to amend that. Help will always be given at Hogwarts to those who deserve it."

Dumbledore didn't say that in the book. I'm pretty sure the Dumbledore of the book WOULD NOT EVER say that. I don't know exactly what the filmmakers were trying to convey by that. I think it was perhaps a halfhearted attempt to show that Voldemort didn't deserve help or that Snape really did deserve help...or something (I really need to see the film again and hear the line in its proper context). But see, one of the major themes near the end of the book (and probably running through all the books) was that there might still be some hope for Voldemort if he showed a little remorse.

Rowling revealed that there are intentional Christian themes in Harry Potter, especially in the seventh book.  I don't want to go too deep into something she might not have meant to be this deep, but being the Christian reader/writer that I am, I can't help but wonder.  Metaphorically, is that idea of remorse akin or even figuratively equal to salvation?  I don't know how far Rowling wanted to carry that out.

But it doesn't really matter how deep she meant that idea to go.  The fact remains, she did seem to want to communicate that Voldemort was not beyond help and hope if he would simply show remorse.  And the Dumbledore of the books was always ready to see the best in others--and to offer second chances.  He HAD a personal history that was less than perfect.  He knew first hand that HE didn't deserve help.  He was ready to offer help to others whether they deserved it or not.  And that's probably why he was able to see that there was hope for Voldemort...if Voldemort was willing to let go of his pride and confidence in himself...and ask for help.

And it bugs me that the filmmakers completely missed that.  They fudged it over.  Maybe it's because I want to see Christian themes (dragging them out kicking and screaming), or maybe they really are there in the book, or maybe it's a little of both.  But the fact is, redemption and salvation don't depend on how much someone deserves it.  No one deserves it.  But if we ask for it, it's given.  Ask, and it shall be given.  Seek, and you shall find.  Knock, and the door will be opened unto you.  So no.  Dumbledore would not have said anything about help being given to those who deserve it. 

But that's the biggest issue I have with an otherwise wonderful movie.  I shed lots of tears--starting with Snape's death (everything about Snape in this movie was stinking amazing) and pretty much not ending until I got bored watching Voldemort chase Harry through Hogwarts.  Some things could have been done in a less cheesy manner (Ron and Hermione's kiss just made me giggle in a not good way).  The epilogue was cute and touching, but I was underwhelmed with the "aging makeup/CGI," (sidenote--the makeup/CGI anti-aging on Snape was fantastic!) but it was a good way to end a great series--just looking into the faces of Ron, Hermione, and Harry Potter.

Even without the bad aging CGI, those kids really have grown up.

Fiction Friday: The End

A some misguided people thought the world was going to end on May 21, 2011.  I think more people really believe that today, July 15, 2011, is the true end of the world as we know it.  I have a few words to say in honor of this historic day, and those words are:

Nitwit! Blubber! Oddment! Tweak!

(That's a reference from Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, if you didn't know.  And if you don't know anything about Harry Potter and would eventually like to read the books someday, don't read any further.  This blog is for the family of readers who, like me, have been forever changed by a book series by J. K. Rowling.)

I have yet to see the second part of the seventh (and last??) installment of the Harry Potter films.  I probably won't see it for a couple of weeks because that's about how long it will take for the hype to die down so I can see it in peace.  But I'm pretty sure I know how it ends, unless the filmmakers decided to go crazy.  I've known how Harry Potter ends since the day after the last book came out.

But I'm getting way ahead of myself...

I was 21 when I read the first Harry Potter book.  It was September.  That means that Harry Potter has been part of my life for almost a full decade.  A decade.  Wow. 

As a Christian, I definitely heard all the warnings that Harry Potter was evil and promoted witchcraft.  As a Christian who tries to think before she makes judgments, I knew that I was going to have to eventually read a Harry Potter book before I decided if it were really evil or not.  For some reason, I just hadn't gotten around to reading it yet.  Then my parents--my Christian parents--intervened.  While most good Christian parents were trying to shield their children (and young adults--which is what I was at the time--AND STILL AM) from Harry Potter, mine thrust the books into my hands and said, "YOU HAVE TO READ THESE." 

At the time, the first four books were out, and, at my parents' insistence, I read them all.  In about three days.  I don't know if I slept.  I don't know if I ate.  I just know that I lived and breathed Harry Potter for three days.  And I decided they weren't evil.  Later, when I did some research, I discovered that J. K. Rowling actually claims to be a Christian--and that there's Christian imagery throughout the series, including actual Scripture references in the last book.  But I don't want to get into that right now...

J. K. Rowling's style is so descriptive that I can remember my first cognitive and emotional reactions to so many of the elements of her books.  I remember the mystery of Dumbledore deluminating the lights up and down Privet Drive.  I sympathized with the orphaned boy who lived under the stairs.  I wondered about his scar.  I delighted in the letters that chased his "family" all the way out to an abandoned shack in the middle of an island.  I remember the shudder of fear that came the first time I ever read the name Voldemort.  I remember the wonder and FUN of my first views of Diagon Alley.  I remember the silliness of the idea of Platform 9 3/4 and the enjoyment of the Hogwarts Express.  I remember my immediate love of Hagrid and Dumbledore, my immediate loathing of Draco Malfoy and Snape.  I remember the simple sweetness of Harry, Ron, and Hermione's friendship (along with one of the greatest lines in literature: "There are some things you can't share without ending up liking each other, and knocking out a twelve-foot mountain troll is one of them").  I remember the delight of escaping into the mind of eleven year olds who were experiencing the wonders of living and going to school in a magical castle.  I remember the spookiness of the Forbidden Forest.  I remember the thrill of "watching" my first Quidditch match.  I remember the yearning I felt for poor Harry when he saw his parents in the Mirror of Erised.

But mostly I remember the total and utter shock of learning that Snape was not evil.

Rowling created a fun, magical world full of interesting, believable characters who do silly, sweet, heroic things.  And she knows how to make a good twist ending.

In book six, Rowling fooled a lot of people into thinking Snape was evil again.  She didn't fool me on that note, though she did fool me several other times.  I was shocked to find it was Ginny Weasley (under the influence of the horcrux diary--which also surprised me later to learn it was a horcrux) that opened the Chamber of Secrets.  I was shocked to discover that Sirius Black was really an awesome dude all along.  I was shocked to discover that Mad-Eye Moony was an impostor--and I was devastated when Cedric Diggory died. 

I was a little older (had to wait for them to come out) when I read the last three books.  Maybe that's why they didn't shock me as much.  Don't get me wrong, I was very shocked when Dumbledore died.  I had to read over that sentence about five times before it sunk in.  But even then, I knew that Rowling was trying to trick us again.  I knew that Snape had to be good.  The reason I knew this was because I knew Dumbledore.  I didn't learn about his past until book seven, but I knew him.  I knew him so well because Rowling wrote him so well. 

And I knew that Dumbledore was not a man who would ever EVER plead for his own life.  I knew that when he said, "Severus, please," he was asking Snape to kill him.

And I think I shed some tears when Snape died.  I loved to hate him, but I also just loved him.  He was a brilliant character.  So was Dumbledore.  So were Draco, and Dobby, and Hagrid, and Ron, and Hermione, and Neville, and Luna...and I could go on and on.  These characters have been part of my life for a decade. 

And now I feel like I'm sayng goodbye.  Only I really already know how it ends.  Seeing it on the big screen is just like an afterthought to the goodbye I said a few years ago when book seven came out.  And I stood in line at Walmart.  And got a free Gryffindor arm band.  Though I'd probably be in Hufflepuff.

But the great thing about great books is that you never really have to say goodbye.  They're there to read over and over and over again, revisiting old friends and discovering things that you'd either missed the first time or just plain forgotten. 

So, I'm not saying goodbye.  I'm saying, till we meet again, Harry James Potter.  Thanks for being awesome.

Fiction Friday: Christian Fiction

I have not read a lot of Christian fiction.  I'm actually still in the process of getting over a personal bias I've built up against Christian fiction.  I'm not sure where this bias has come from.  Maybe I read some bad Christian fiction in my teenage years and forgot about it, but have subconsciously built up a mental and emotional block against Christian fiction.  I think a more likely cause is that the sort of people who come up to me raving about the latest Christian romance novel they just read are not the sort of people with whom I see myself sharing literary taste.

 However this bias came into existence, I'm learning that I really need to get over it (at least somewhat--because let's face it: there is a lot of BAD Christian fiction out there).  I don't have a lot of time for reading, but last summer I did manage to read through the Dragon Keeper series by Donita K. Paul.  These are Christian fantasy books centering around a girl named Kale Allerion, who (this might come as quite a shock, given the title of the series) keeps Dragons.

Okay, so these books were actually really good.  And I'm not just saying that because I kinda sorta have a wild obsession with Dragons.  They reminded me of a Christian version of Eragon (and let me take this opportunity to say that Christopher Paolini is sitting in my literary naughty corner until I have the final book of the Inheritance Trilogy Cycle in my hands--gettr done!).


I also took the time to finally read the Space Trilogy by C. S. Lewis.  But honestly, C. S. Lewis doesn't really fit the category of Christian fiction in my head.  I know that it IS Christian fiction on a basic level, but it doesn't fit the category that I still hold a little bit of bias against.  I've read plenty of C. S. Lewis' fiction and always loved it, but that's kind of because he's C. S. Lewis and amazing.

I also read a book by a Christian author named C. S. Lakin called The Wolf of Tebron. It was good and I would like to read a little more by this author, but her books aren't typically in libraries (at least not ones in po-dunk towns), and amazon.com doesn't take "I'll babysit your kids for free if you give me books" as acceptable payment.


So in the next few months, I'm hoping to read some of the Christian fiction that's available at the library in the po-dunk town where I live.  I've been meaning to read "Redeeming Love" by Francine Rivers for a LONG time.  I'm not sure if I'll like it, not because it's not good.  I'm sure it is.  I'm just not sure it's going to be my style.  But I love the book of Hosea in the Bible, and apparently it's based heavily on that, so it's got a good fighting chance.  I'm only skeptical because a lot of those people who have recommended it to me are the type of people with whom I doubt I share literary taste.


I'm also hoping to be able to save up to buy some of the newer Christian fiction that is available.  I've read an interesting blog about a Christian fantasy/sci fi novel entitled A Dream Before Dying: The Initiation.  That's one I am looking into reading in the near future.  You know...when I actually have spare time for reading....


I really think, though, that I need to get over this bias about Christian authors.  The reason?  Well, I think that whether I like it or not, I'm going to end up being a Christian author.  So I'd better start getting used to the idea, and I'd better start figuring out what's going on in the industry.


Do you read Christian fiction?  What are some of your favorites?  I need to build up a reading list!

SEW Sunday: Balance

Happy Easter, readers!  I just ate a pink marshmallow chicky Peep, but that's neither here nor there.

This has been an interesting week, to say the least.  It started out with me heading for church last Sunday, only to find that there were power lines lying on the road in front of my church.  I pulled into the nearly empty parking lot and discovered that there was no church because the power was out.  The bad storms/tornado caused a lot more damage than I had realized.  I still didn't realize it, because I immediately went home from not going to church and figured I should use that free time to go running.  I ran six miles.  That's my record...so far.

The next day, I realized that a lot of people had experienced a lot of damage from the storms.  Many people didn't have anywhere to stay; many more needed some extensive work done on their homes.  My church was set up as a station to help out a lot of the people in the community.  I had an opportunity to go help out.  In fact, I had a whole day off Tuesday.

The thing is, I had already planned on working on my writing on Tuesday.  I had been planning on it for WEEKS.  It needed to be done...and badly.  I guess it makes me selfish, because I am selfish, but I prayerfully decided to stick with my plans to work on my writing...instead of going to help out my community.  I didn't even get out of my pajamas that day. 

I reread my first novel on Tuesday.  All of it.  I have to say, in the past week, I've read three really good books.  Two of them were part of the Hunger Games trilogy.  The other one...surprisingly...was my own.  That first book, which was such a catastrophe when I first penned it, had been edited and edited and edited until I was sick of it.  But after putting it aside for several months and going back to it, I had a fresh perspective.  I was viewing it as a reader and not as a writer/editor.  And I found that I couldn't put my own book down...because, at the risk of sounding vain, it was really good.

That's not to say I didn't edit a little here or there while reading it, but all in all, I'm almost there.  I'm almost ready to try selling this book again.  It's because I'm confident that what I have is something worth selling, something worth reading.  I have a renewed focus and energy to actually try to get all the other stuff done so I can send out some queries.

And, yes, I think that was a day off well-spent.

But I have to admit I'm feeling guilty; whether that guilt is justified or not, it's there.  I know that I could have gone to my church to help out instead of spending that time on my own projects.  I don't know how useful I would have been, but I figure in a disastrous situation, almost any willing person can find some small way to help. 

The other books I read this week, the Hunger Games books, are very sad, very intense...even disturbing at times.  But they're really good and make you think.  The main character had all sorts of ridiculous trials that I've never had to face or even imagine.  And it's easy to say, "Well, that's just a book," but then my mind turns to the real-life atrocities.  There are children dying of starvation all over this world--even here in America.  Even worse than that, in my opinion, are the markets which sell children into prostitution.  There's war.  There's hunger.  There's need.

And I sit in my pajamas and write.  Usually with a big warm cup of tea. 

Sometimes I feel like what I am doing is such a waste compared to what I could be doing. 

Art isn't practical.  I think every artist who strives to serve the Lord probably goes through something similar to what I'm talking about right now.  Why create paintings or stories or poems or songs when there are so many physical needs that need to be met?

I, personally, can honestly say that I know the Lord was pursuing me at a very young age.  I don't even remember the exact time I became a Christian because it's just always seemed that the Lord was with me, guiding me, calling me to Himself.  And it's easy to fall into this trap of believing that God pursued me that strongly because there's something big I'm meant to do with my life, something important.

Or maybe...maybe...God just wants me because He loves me.  And maybe that's better than being important.

And maybe all I have to do is what I have in my hands to do at the time.  I get all riled up and start thinking I can somehow change the world if I work harder, act better, do more more more.  But all the good, hard work in the world is not going to change the fact that I'm a weak fool in need of a Savior.

Do I need to show mercy to others and share that Savior with them?  Yes.

Does that mean that I'm being neglectful of the needs of others if I'm working on something else the Lord has given me to do?  Maybe.  In some circumstances, yes.  But, in this case, I don't think so.  The guilt I feel is not of God.

Because the Lord is creative, and He has breathed that spark of creativity into me.  He has given me dreams and visions, stories and songs.  I'm not a writer because I choose to be.  I'm a writer because that's how God has made me.  And the time was given to me to work on something He had given me to do.  So I did it.  And now I'm just a little bit closer to achieving the goal of being a published writer.  I don't regret it.

I have to say, though.  This week, especially today, has really made me think about balance.  Oh, I'm so wretchedly bad at balance.  I could go on an on about how much I have to work, how little time I have, blah blah blah.  It's an excuse, and not even a very good one.  Everyone is busy.  The thing is, I've got 24 hours every single day with which to use.  True, some of those hours belong to my bosses, but I've still got a lot of time that's mine.  The trick is figuring out how much of that time I'm going to devote to helping others, how much time I'm going to devote to my writing, how much time of that I'm going to use to rest (because rest is important, too...God said so). 

Prayers are appreciated as I continue to try to figure this balancing act out.  I'm greatly encouraged that the Lord is working, both in the lives in this community and in my personal writing life.  Aslan is definitely on the move.

And by the way...

The Stone Table has cracked.  The Lion roars.

Christ is risen!

Fiction Friday: My Favorite Fictional Character Of All Time Ever

I had planned on blogging something about The Hunger Games today, but I've decided not to do so at this point.  Apparently, I've been living under a rock for the past few years and did not realize that such literary awesomeness existed.  Now that I've joined the rest of the cool readers and discovered this amazing book series, I'm anxiously (very anxiously) awaiting the next book in the series to be available at the library.  With that being said, 1) all the cool readers have already read all three books and have already posted their thoughts/feelings about said three books 2) I'd like to have read the whole series before writing anything about it.  So right now, I'm just going to say that the first book in the series, The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins, absolutely blew my mind.  I can't wait to read what happens, but I'm going to have to wait, so I guess that technically, I CAN wait. 

Moving on now.

I've had the same favorite fictional character since I was  in elementary school.  Her name is Meg Murray, and if you haven't been introduced to her, then you're missing out on something amazing.  The first appearance of this extraordinary person can be found in my favorite fictional book, A Wrinkle in Time by one of my favorite authors (I can't decide if I like her or C. S. Lewis better--all right, we'll call it a draw!), Madeleine L'Engle.

A little side note here, just so everyone is aware.  If you've seen the movie/miniseries of A Wrinkle in Time that Disney put out a few years ago, please don't judge a book by its movie.  While I acknowledge that a lot of time and effort went into that movie, I have to say that it basically stunk.  I have it on dvd because my father bought it for me one Christmas, and I'll watch it occasionally because I like the music and because I want to relive parts of the story without taking the time to reread the book (although it would only take a few hours).  But please, if you have seen the movie and think it's horrible (because, well, it is), don't let that fool you.  The book is simply amazing.

Okay, moving on again.

What exactly is it that makes Meg Murray so extraordinary?  I think it's the fact that she isn't all that extraordinary.  In fact, she would consider herself less than even ordinary.  When Madeleine L'Engle first introduced Meg, she was a plain, self-conscious, unpopular, angry fourteen-year-old girl.  She had above-average intelligence (especially in math and science), but didn't do well in school.  Almost everyone misunderstood her, and she even misunderstood herself.

Basically, she was me (except I'm not that good in math and I actually did well in school--except for the math). 

Meg also had a little brother who didn't speak very much outside the home.  People picked on him and on Meg for having a strange younger brother.  I have to say that I could also relate to this pretty well, having a younger brother with high-functioning autism.  Today, autism is fairly well-known.  The diagnosis of autism is getting scarily common, but back in the mid-to-late 80's when my brother received his diagnosis, it was still a disorder that many people had never even heard of.  So people would ask me all the time what was wrong with my brother, and I had to try to explain it because no one knew what autism was.  And while I don't think a lot people actually picked on me because of my brother, I think I thought they were picking on me because I was a defensive, angry, overly-protective-of-my-little-brother kid--a lot like Meg Murray.

As I said in an earlier blog, there are many different reasons why people relate to characters.  Sometimes I don't understand why a character acts or thinks certain ways, and I find their behavior intriguing.  With Meg, it's not like that.  I do find her behavior intriguing, but that's because I understand her very well and think I would do things in the same ways. 

Meg is called to do things that she thinks are beyond her capability to do.  She doesn't do them without first throwing some literal tantrums, which I have been known to do even in adulthood.  All of her emotions are on the surface, especially the negative ones. 

But then she accepts her tasks with grace, she does what she has been given to do, and she succeeds. 

The most interesting thing about Meg's accomplishments is that she didn't have to change in order to do them.  She did have to change her attitude, but she herself didn't have to change.  The guides on her journey told her to keep her faults, even to stay angry.  This was something that I didn't fully grasp until I was probably almost an adult.

For years I didn't like who I was.  While I was NEVER a conformist, I know there were so many parts of myself I didn't like and wanted to change.  I wasn't as pretty or popular as I wanted to be.  I wasn't a people person.  I wasn't a natural leader.  And I used to think that I was basically useless because I had all these things I didn't like about myself.  I didn't think God could ever use someone like me.

I haven't really changed that much (I mean, I do consider myself pretty, but that's the vanity talking).  I'm still shy.  I'm still not a natural leader.  In fact, sometimes it's still a struggle to leave the apartment in the morning--because I know I'll have to deal with people.  But Meg is still with me.  I still see the person who was scared and angry, hurting and flawed. 

Madeleine L'Engle weaved a powerful story through Meg.  Meg's flaws didn't change; God used her anyway.  My current "life verse" from the Bible (that's always subject to change as stages in life are subject to change) is 1 Corinthians 1:27.  "For God has chosen the foolish things of this world to shame the wise; God has chosen the weak things of the world to shame the strong."  L'Engle used this verse in the story to encourage Meg.  It also encourages me. 

I'm not strong.  I'm not wise.  I'm nothing more than a weak fool that God has chosen to use anyway.  A lot of people say we're supposed to believe in ourselves.  I can't believe in myself.  There's not much there to believe in.  My worth is in Christ; my hope is in the Lord.  That's what I believe in.  When I look at Meg, I see someone who shines like the stars because of who she is in Jesus, even if L'Engle doesn't come right out and say Meg is a Christian.  It's implied.

In other stories in the series (and even in other stories L'Engle wrote that aren't directly connected to the "Time Quartet"), we see Meg grow and change.  She gets married and has kids of her own.  She still has some insecurities, but there's so much she accomplishes, so many people she helps.  And she started out as an awkward, self-conscious nobody.

God is in the business of using the weak and the foolish.  There's hope for all of us yet.

Cheating

I'm supposed to be taking a break from writing so that I can read and reevaluate my writing goals. Of course, I've cheated a little bit. A couple of short story ideas have come to my mind. Though I've tried to rein in my enthusiasm, I have written a little bit on both of these stories.

Last night was one of these times. I only wrote a few paragraphs, but something interesting happened. It's a strange thing that has happened before, but it always takes me by surprise. It always serves to both strengthen me and humble me.

Let me back up a bit before I continue. Let me just go ahead and back up about a decade, give or take a couple years.

When I was about nineteen, I had a crisis of faith. I'd been a Christian for about ten-twelve years; I'm one of those people who isn't sure exactly when I was saved--but I think it was somewhere around the age of seven, even though I wasn't baptized until I was nine. But at nineteen, I wasn't sure what I believed about God anymore. I wasn't sure what I believed about anything anymore. There finally came a point when I shut myself up in my little brother's treehouse (seriously, the only place I could find privacy) and left notes for my family to leave me alone until I was ready to come out. I took with me my Bible, a notebook, a pen, and all my doubts and questions and fears. Then, I did business with God.

I was very honest with God about everything I struggled with. Even with all the blessings in my life, for some reason, I just couldn't find a reason to keep believing in what I had always known to be true. So then I told God, "I don't think I can believe in You anymore."

I was an atheist...

...for about ten minutes.

I sat alone in that treehouse trying to contemplate what this new life of disbelief would mean for me. I discovered it was kind of boring.

So I picked up my notebook and started flipping through it. I'm not even sure why--probably just because it was there and I wanted something to do. My eyes fell upon a poem I had written probably about a week or two prior. I read the words and had the unusual realization that I had not written that poem.

It was in my handwriting. I remembered the occasion when it had been written. I remembered sitting out and watching the sunset and taking the pen into my hand. I remember moving the pen across the paper. But the words of that poem were foreign to me; the words of that poem were beautiful. It was a poem of praise and wonder and simple, pure love.

And I didn't write it.

So I got down on my knees and shed tears of joy for the knowledge that I had a reason to believe. God had not abandoned me as it seemed. Rather, He was trying to teach me something through a dark period of my life by seeming distant. He wasn't really distant. I believed, and my faith became stronger than it had ever been before. God wrote through me.

He still writes through me today.

Let's come back to the present now.

Last night, I only wrote a few paragraphs on a short story. When I looked back over the words that had come out of my pen, I read such truth in them. I knew that I had not written them.

Now, I have been told that writing cannot be a Spiritual Gift because it's not listed as a Spiritual Gift anywhere in Scripture. I'm not sure where I stand on that. I don't know if the Spiritual Gifts listed in Scripture are the only ones that a person can have. I don't want to speculate too much on that, because honestly, I don't think it really matters.

For whether or not my writing is a Spiritual Gift or not, I know for certain that there are times when I'm not the one in control of my writing. It's both humbling and inspiring to know that I'm not the one in control. It means that I can't take credit for it, but it also means that I don't have to worry. If God is in control instead of me, then that takes a huge burden off of me. I can't do anything without Him, but nothing is impossible for Him.

And just as I'm confident that He is writing through me, I'm confident that in His timing, He will bring my writing to completion. He is using me; He is using my writing. He will use me; He will use my writing. I don't know if that means I'll get a literary agent and a huge book contract and have a huge following. I don't know if that means I'll go to a lowscale publisher and just have a few faithful readers.

If one person comes to the knowledge of Christ through my writing, if one person comes to a stronger realization of who Jesus is, if one person gains strength or encouragement or a greater understanding of the truth through what the Lord has written through me...

...it will all be worth it.

Soli Deo Gloria.

Do I Want to Be a "Christian Writer"??

I am a Christian. I am a writer. I'm not so sure I want to be known as a "Christian writer" or a "Christian author." There are two main reasons for this.

There is a certain idea I get when someone says the words "Christian author." It is not a good idea. I think of bad romance novels with cardboard characters or sappy stories with no real plot or depth. In fact, off-hand, C. S. Lewis is the only "Christian author" I can think of who doesn't give me that negative idea. I don't want to be a writer that falls into the category of that idea I have of "Christian authors."

On the other hand, there are other authors I'm fond of that also happened to be Christians, such as Tolkien and Madeleine L'Engle. I don't really think of them as Christian writers; they were just writers who happened to be Christian. They were able to artfully weave subtle Christian themes into a story without compromising their art. This is the type of writer I'd like to be.

There is another reason why I don't think I'd like to be known as a "Christian author." If a non-Christian were looking for something to read, chances are, this person wouldn't be interested in reading a work of fiction by a so-called "Christian author." Most likely, the only people who would be interested in reading works by a "Christian author" would be other Christians. While there's nothing wrong with the idea of having other Christians read my writing, I don't want JUST Christians to read my writing. I want my writing to be available for everyone. I want it be marketed to everyone.

After a lot of prayer, I'm beginning to see how little I understand of what God is doing with me and my writing. God's convicted me that I really need to "get skooled" on what kind of Christian fiction actually exists in this world. I've been judgmental of what exists in the realm of Christian fiction. I've been too judgmental to really even investigate. A good friend of mine has suggested several books from the genre of "Christian fantasy" and "Christian Science Fiction"--I didn't even realize those were legitimate genres. I have some research ahead of me (yay reading!). It seems that if there's some groundbreaking going on in Christian literature, it might be a good time for me to try to get in on it. ...foot in the door...

I'm just not sure how the Lord wants me to market my stories. Right now, I'm just trying to be faithful and learn as much as I can. I'll continue to send queries and keep editing. I'll keep asking God for guidance. If you pray for me, my greatest request is that God will get glory from my writing. I'm not sure about all the "hows" that are involved, but I know He's called me here. He isn't finished with this...or with me.