Billy Graham: "A Daily Process"

"Being a Christian is more than just an instantaneous conversion. It is a daily process whereby you grow to be more and more like Christ."

~Billy Graham

    It's really a breather to think about being a Christian as something gradual rather than instant, isn't it? Not that it wouldn't be awesome to become totally pure in heart and spirit the second one accepts Christ as Savior; but alas, that isn't what happens. Becoming more like Christ--more heavenly minded, selfless, faithful, strong, and all the other things God teaches us to be--is a daily process of growth. Something that's supposed to happen over a long period of time.
    Which is also a relief, when one thinks about it, because growing and making changes in life isn't easy! It's a physical impossibility for a rose bush to spring up a day or week after its seed was planted, just like it's impossible to overcome or at least lessen numerous natural sinful things like pride. The Lord does strengthen us to do it--and not too slowly--but it's very good to know that He won't get angry because one year's gone by and we're not perfect.
    Plus, the fact that growth is a daily thing gives the hope that we become "better" each and every day; that we can wake up every morning and know that we'll be getting stronger, and go to sleep every night knowing the Lord has taught us something. It's like going to a favorite class knowing we'll be learning another aspect of a skill--only without the homework!
    Growth is really an awesome part of our lives as Christians; amen? :)

Steering Wheel or Spare Tire?

Life's always a road trip without any stops, but prayer
can be two different things at any given moment:
the steering wheel of the car, or its spare tire.

"Is prayer your steering wheel or your spare tire?"

~Corrie Ten Boom

    Man, this is a really awesome quote! It's short, simple, and the imagery that Corrie Ten Boom uses is something that anyone in the world can picture and understand.
    Plus, it gives a healthy dose of conviction. Prayer is such an amazing and good thing that it's almost unbelievable--the ability to speak with the Lord, to "cast [our] care upon Him" (1 Peter 5:7, NKJ), and to even accomplish things for His kingdom as we pray for others and for His will to be done in our lives. It's a great relief and haven of sorts in life, an awesome blessing, and a great way to be fruitful, but sometimes it's too easy to act like it can be left on a shelf, untouched until something really bad happens.
    That's when prayer becomes a spare tire, only to be used in emergencies. And that's not the way the Lord intended prayer to be. He wants it to be something we hold to every day to connect with Him, and to direct our path in life, just like a steering wheel guides a car. It's a navigator that steers us away from troubles and dangers before we run into them, and it keeps us going in the ways God wants us to be in.
    This awesome quote by Corrie Ten Boom embodies that truth in a way that's perfect for helping us avoid stagnation in prayer life. It's like a simple equation we can hold up and compare the past few days to, providing a good idea of what prayer currently is to us within very little time.
    Do you already have this quote memorized? Is it a favorite saying of yours? :)

Ernest Hemingway: "About what Hurts"

Things that hurt really hurt. So writing about those
things should naturally be accurate, right?

"Write hard and clear about what hurts."

~Ernest Hemingway

    The first thing that comes to my mind when I think of things that hurt is death.
    That's a difficult subject to write about, isn't it? Because it's a touchy, sensitive thing that many people go through; and the last thing we would want to do is misrepresent its effects in our writing--or worse, misuse it just to make the story more dramatic.
    I once read a book that did just that (though I won't name names). Near the end of the story, the main character's best friend dies. And a couple chapters later in the final battle, the best friend's sibling also dies with long-winding last words, which pushes the main character into a very palpable fury/grief that (naturally) gives her the strength to destroy the enemy. Those character deaths were infuriating not just because it came off as cliché, and not just because it seemed awfully convenient, but because it was so unnecessary. Both of those characters didn't have to die--the sibling, at least, could have lived on and overcome his grief--but they were offed as if it was exactly what they were meant for, like the only reason those characters existed was to make the protagonist feel gutted in that one moment. The dramatic air around the losses was also kind of obscuring the fact that death had occurred; it made what happened seem unrealistic, and easily forgettable once the book is closed.
    However, in Kiera Cass's The One, there's a scene that doesn't make that kind of mistake, and lines up perfectly with what Ernest Hemingway is advising in his quote. In one of the last major scenes (SPOILER ALERT!), there's a surprise attack by the vicious rebels, and in the chaos and carnage, a lot of secondary characters are killed. It was a really gut-wrenching plot twist (and personally, I thought a few too many characters we've come to care about were lost), but in the scene's context, a high death toll makes a lot of sense. If the enemy had attacked so directly, and only nameless wallflowers (or nobody at all) had been harmed, the story would have totally lost the realistic element the author had created so artfully in the series. Plus, the shock and sadness that the scene prompts is exactly what a person should feel when they hear about such an event. Kiera Cass didn't gloss over anything; she made the bitterness of death bitter, and gave the topic of death the solemn recognition it deserves.
    Have you ever just stopped because a book is so good (or not good) at portraying the gravity of hard, hurtful things in life? Have you ever gotten really stressed about portraying death in a story as realistically as possible?

 

Clarence Hall: "But it Won't Stay There"

The Lord went into a grave, but He didn't stay there! :D

"Easter says you can put truth in a grave, but it won't stay there."

~Clarence W. Hall

    What an interesting way to describe the Resurrection! Truth, put in a grave, but not able to be held there long.
    Jesus Christ is the Truth. In John 14:6, He even states it's one of His titles:"'I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me'" (NKJ). And His claim is clearly supported by His actions and the affects of His actions. Never once has He spoken or suggested anything that isn't 100% true, and never once did He act hypocritically. His words hold all the answers to life's questions and dilemmas, and He's made ancient prophecies and mysteries clear and understandable. Even today, we can look at the world and then look at the Word, and things make a lot more sense.
    Indeed, Jesus Christ and the message of salvation He pronounced is truth for all time. And when His enemies arranged for Him to be crucified (unwittingly fulfilling prophecy) and His body was put in a tomb, He had died, but He didn't stay dead. On Easter Sunday, the tomb was empty; the grave couldn't hold Him. The Lord had risen from the dead, is still alive today, and His message lives on!
    So this analogy Clarence Hall has written is a really awesome way to think of one of the most important events in history. It's like a victory cry! Amen?
    Have a wonderful Good Friday!

John Rogers: Understanding the Antagonist

Some antagonists see the world with a view that differs
 in only one or two areas; but then there are some
who see everything in reverse--and those are the
tough ones to write!

"You don't really understand the antagonist until you understand why he's a protagonist in his own version of the world."

~John Rogers

    Writing antagonists can be tough. Because we want to write characters that are realistic and relatable on at least a few matters, but it's difficult to relate to someone who does horrible things and has a poisoned perspective on life. And when someone's mindset is that foreign to you, writing about them is like describing a place you've never been. The risk of using clichés and cheesy dialogue is probably at least twice as large for antagonists than it is for other characters. So it's pretty helpful how John Rogers phrases the claim of his quote so simply; that the key to understanding an antagonist is to understand why they think they're right.
    There are basically two ways to understand something: intellectually, or personally. Between them, understanding intellectually seems a lot easier. Because it's just gathering data from observations and maybe some backstory and putting it together to form a conclusion, a simple label. President Snow from Suzanne Collins's Hunger Games, for example, sends children to their deaths to remind the Districts of the Capitol's strength, and uses the surviving "tributes" as pawns for his own gain. Diagnosis: he is power-hungry, and his heart is too hardened to show any sympathy. Coming up with that conclusion was easy; it just involved looking at his actions and making connections.
    But how would you come to understand why he's a hero in his own mind? How would you understand his actual thoughts on his behavior, how he justifies his actions so he can live with himself? This would take some digging that goes beyond the surface of his actions; it would call for actually knowing what he's thinking personally, being aware of how he treats matters when he's not putting on a show for others. One way that might shed light on such personal thoughts would be to write a scene where the antagonist is acting outside of the story, out of view of the other characters, just doing what s/he does in regular life. Another way to understand their beliefs is to hear it from their own lips--maybe in an interview-style dialogue. Those bring out the distinctness of their personality, and they're good for learning new things about the character.
    So, have you ever given much thought to understanding the mindset of an antagonist on a personal level? Do you take extra time before starting the story to write something where they explain why they think they're in the right?

G. K. Chesterton: Fallacies

"Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become popular."

~G. K. Chesterton

    I love this author so much; he wrote the Father Brown mystery stories, where a humble, small town Catholic priest goes about solving murders. The stories are really awesome not just because they're well written, but Chesterton has a talent with balancing the pure, precious subject of faith and the gruesome topic of murder. In his writing, he also reflects biblical principles without bluntly preaching in the readers' faces.

    Which gives a bit of foundation work when considering this quote he wrote. Chesterton clearly had a solid faith and a strong awareness of spiritual matters and people; he wasn't ignorant to God's truth, or to the way people think, and he specifically stated that fallacies--practiced characteristic flaws--are not good, but that they tend to be thought of as acceptable.
    That's definitely happening today. A lot of things that are common now were unthinkable a hundred years ago, particularly things that the Bible deems sinful. Taking the Lord's name in vain, getting into brutal arguments with parents, idolizing rebellious figures, entertaining inappropriate humor. Issues like this have somehow become so common that everyone seems to take it as the norm in life.
    And it's not just the non-Christians who go with it. A couple years ago I started hanging out with a classmate who said she knew the Lord, and had a testimony of a genuine conversion (meaning that she recognized her need for a Savior, asked Christ to redeem her from sin, and became serious about her faith), and finding this fellow believer was really awesome, a cause for celebration. But the happy dance I was inwardly doing kind of faltered once I heard this fellow believer sprinkling cuss words into most of her sentences. It was a little shocking, to say the least, for someone who's grown up being taught that cussing is something we're never supposed to do.
    The other Christian acknowledged that the profanity wasn't exactly Christ-like, but didn't seem to think it was that big of a deal.
    Wasn't it?
    I'm not a preacher, and neither was G. K. Chesterton, but Chesterton was well acquainted with them. And from the way he spoke about fallacies in this quote here, it's very apparent that he thought fallacies are not acceptable at all, even when everybody else doesn't see what the problem is.
    And just what is the problem? Well, let's look at cussing. Foul language can be identified as wrongful in the Bible; in Colossians 3:8 (NKJ), Paul says that believers need to take "filthy language out of [our] mouth;" and in Exodus 20:7, one of the Ten Commandments reads that we are not to "take the name of the LORD your God in vain, for the LORD will not hold him guiltless who takes His name in vain" (NKJ).  Plus, there's the fact that Christ never cursed or used the term h-e-double-hockey-sticks unless He was actually talking about the place. So with these examples in Scripture, it's clear that cussing displeases God, and since we want to please Him, it'd make sense to not practice it, right?
    Another thing to consider is that the way we behave affects how people view us, and in turn, how they view God. As Christians, we represent the Lord; the Bible calls us His ambassadors (2 Corinthians 5:20). If I wasn't a believer and I looked at that Christian who cussed as a prime example of a follower of Christ, I wouldn't see the Lord the way He truly is. I would see someone who uses more profanity than my war veteran grandfather; and if things got really bad, I might think about all the Christians who have said that cussing is wrong, and come to the conclusion that the church--and basically the whole Christian faith--is full of hypocrisy.
    So there are two serious problems that come from embracing a fallacy; but yet it can still be so tempting to think that some of it is just a natural thing in life.
    All I can say is: thank goodness we have God's word. The Bible is so clear cut and detailed that it offers explanations for every aspect of life. And with the discernment it gives, whether we just abstain from practicing a fallacy, or if we actually speak out against it, we'll understand where we're standing and why.
    So what are your thoughts? What do you think of fallacies?

Terry Pratchett: "Telling Yourself a Story"

"The first draft is just you telling yourself a story."

~Terry Pratchett

    I love the way this author puts it: telling yourself a story. It has a nostalgic feel about it; an almost musical tone, smooth and eloquent.
    And quite true. It sounds like a perfectly accurate way to summarize the experience of writing first drafts. Because for a lot of writers, it's the draft that no one else sees. It's the rough draft, the document where the bare bones of the story is placed just to see how it all fits together. In many different ways and by very different people, the first draft has been described as the one where we writers just write like crazy, shoveling in the main plot points without worrying about impressing others with quality (no wonder the concept of burning the first draft once the second one is complete is such a common writer's joke). The first draft is definitely something that can be exclusively for the person writing it.
    And the first draft isn't like hearing just any old story; it's the story we're creating, taking special time to build up. And that draft is full of so many firsts! It's the first time we actually flesh out the story, it's the first draft where we get to hear the characters speaking to each other, the first time we can see exactly how they act, and it's our first opportunity to find plot twists that didn't pop up in the plotting stage. With all these new discoveries and moments where we just have to make certain things up as we go along, writing the first draft is just like hearing a story for the first time, as told by oneself.
    It's definitely one of the most exciting and sentimental parts of writing a story; and Pratchett's quote here captures that concept fantastically, don't you think? Have you ever heard his quote before?

A.W. Tozer: "To Be Right with God"



This is kind of what it can feel like when one tires to contribute
God's truth into a discussion.

"To be right with God often means to be in trouble with men."

~A. W. Tozer

    It's good to live life walking in God's ways. Believing His truth, we have peace and joy; staying away from things and practices He warns us of, we have safety; and in developing godly attributes (like love, patience, and faith), we have a full, productive life. Following God's will is good, both for us and for those around us.
    But we all know that living for God isn't a bowl of ice cream. We still go through problems that other people experience (though the Lord leads us out of them with far more peace), but more than that, we face problems that come because we choose to live according to the Lord's will.
    Like sharing the gospel, for example. That's good news (it's the message that God loves everyone and offers salvation from sins based on pure grace!), but in this world, it's not very acceptable to say that the gospel of Christ is absolute truth. Or that certain sinful practices are wrong. Just mentioning Christ in a conversation with friends can prompt them to walk away, or pretend to ignore you and keep talking about their own philosophy. And it's not just talking about spiritual matters, but sometimes just obeying God's commandments can get us in hot water--like refusing to join everyone else in approving of an ungodly practice. Following God's way instead of the often-popular sinful ways can get us glares, it can get us shunned, and in a lot of places, it can get us harmed or even killed.
    But doing what God says is right doesn't only get us in trouble; it's not merely some unpopular thing that we have to do. Doing God's will--hearing and obeying the things He teaches us--is a good thing to do. It's what's right because it's truth, and because the Lord is our God, our Creator and our Redeemer. He has always done the right thing, and His kind wisdom deserves to be harkened to.
    Plus, obedience is pleasing to the Lord (1 Samuel 15:22). And doing what's right in His eyes when it means losing approval from others is like making a sacrifice for Him, showing Him that He means more to us than being accepted by society. And I think that makes Him very, very glad.
    That makes a loss of temporary popularity worth it, don't you agree? Have you ever had a moment where you had to pay a costly price for doing what God says is right?

Alfred Hitchcock: "Only in the Anticipation"

"There is no terror in the bang, only in the anticipation of it."

~Alfred Hitchcock

    This is a pretty good point. Although having unforeseen surprises suddenly happen isn't bad, a lot of scenes are better off with the action being something the reader already knows is coming. It adds extra layers of emotion and suspense to a scene, and it also adds one of the unique things a person can only experience while reading: foresight.
    Lots of Alfred Hitchcock's films apply this method pretty well; one in particular. I don't want to give anything away since the scene is very important for the plot, but there's a part of a story where we see a "bang" coming, and there's a whole countdown scene in which we see a sympathetic minor character (who has absolutely no idea of the imminent disaster) in peril, and we watch him going along his way, taking his sweet time to get in a position where he'd be safe from the danger, and by the time the countdown finally reaches its end, the viewer's heart is pounding (well, mine was, at least).
    Dramatic irony has a lot to do with this kind of thing, with the reader/viewer knowing about the oncoming disaster without the character being aware of it. That makes any hesitation or dawdling on a character's part a cause for anxiety to the reader, and when a character actually comes close to discovering the threat, it's exciting (and sometimes frustrating, when the character almost gets the big picture but then loses it). The dramatic irony is key for prompting these emotions, stirring up anticipation of what's about to happen.
    Personally I think it also helps a lot to make the scene unpredictable, so that the situation could go either way. Because predictability is something we try to avoid at all times in writing, right? And if the main character is being threatened with death in the middle of the story, and it's not a genre where they could be brought back to life or something, it's kind of obvious that the hero is going to get out of their situation. But if it's a minor character being threatened with something that would take them out of the picture, or if the main character just risks losing something important but not absolutely vital, then there's a cause to be concerned because the loss can actually happen. An unpredictable situation like this is something that a reader wouldn't be able to guess on; a scene they would have to keep reading in order to find out if the "bang" really occurs.
    So this concept that Alfred Hitchcock (who's been called "the master of suspense") is talking about is really an interesting one to use in writing. Has anyone here watched any of Hitchcock's films before?

Oswald Chambers: "Worry is Caused by Calculating without God"

Trying to map out a situation while one is worried
can seem a bit like this, right?

"All our fret and worry is caused by calculating without God."

~Oswald Chambers

 

    This is a really accurate way to think of it. Worrying about something involves a whole lot of thinking (or at least, a whole lot of thoughts); considering the bad things that can happen, and predicting what will possibly happen if things don't start changing. Meditations like this, unfortunately, can bring up a lot of negative conclusions, can't they? It's almost like plotting out a story, or multiple versions of a story, only doing it isn't satisfying or pleasant at all; it's depressing. Worrying is not fun, and it does indeed involve a lot of calculating that doesn't factor in God.
    The Lord doesn't want us stressing out like this. In Matthew 6:25 and Luke 12:2 (NKJ), Christ tells His disciples, "do not worry about your life." A couple verses later in Luke 12:25, He says that worrying doesn't accomplish anything (it can't add "one cubit" to a person's height); and as stated in numerous Psalms like Psalm 27:1, the Lord's reliability as one's light, salvation, and strength makes worrying unnecessary. 1 John 4:18 states that "perfect love" (like God's love for us) "casts out fear" (NKJ); and one of Christ's titles is "the Prince of Peace" (Isaiah 9:6). Without the Prince of Peace, without the Lord in our lives and His assurances given to us, there would undoubtedly be reason to worry about dilemmas.
    But we do have the Lord leading us in life; we do have a Savior. Trying to think out a serious problem without Him can only bring on stress and fear; but by exercising the gift of being able to factor in His promises and trust in Him, the need to worry dissolves. He preserves the faithful (Psalm 31:23), and with that kind of promise, we can be calm!
    This quote by Oswald Chambers summarizes that truth very neatly, don't you think? :) Do you also think of worrying as the result of incomplete calculation?

Anne Lamott: "Until They've Done It"

 

"Very few writers really know what they are doing until they've done it."

~Anne Lamott

    This quote is funny! And also very inspirational; a good phrase to remember when one's feeling doubts about a project. And personally, I think this marvelous quote can be applied to every part of the writing process, not just one.
    During the plotting of a story, a writer thinks up the basic ideas and tries to graph it all out, either in their mind or on paper. During this period, some ideas can sound too crazy or too random to work well, and it can be difficult every now and then to finding ways to connect two events in the story together ("now how does the main character get from their epiphany to the climax scene?"). There could be a whole lot of plot holes and unknown factors in this planning stage, like what a character is actually like when they're written, and this could make the story seem skeletal. But this is okay, because the plotting stage isn't the final result, but the launching pad for the next steps, the time to go crazy with "what ifs."
    Then there's the first draft stage of writing. While writing this draft, it can seem like everything's a mess in comparison to how beautiful it was while imagining it; but fortunately this isn't a disaster because the first draft is supposed to be that way! It's the draft meant for walking the grounds of the story for the first time, getting an insider's view of who the characters actually are, what the scenery is like, and which actions work well in the story. It's the discovery draft, and discovery expeditions can come across a couple unexpected finds before reaching what they were seeking in the first place.
    After the first draft is done, the rewrites (or the editing stage) can happen. And this might be even more difficult than the first draft, because now a writer has the task of bringing change to factors in the story that need improvement without changing things that were actually done well. But throughout this whole stage of the process, the question of "Which changes are the right ones?" is always there, and very pressing because no one wants to accidentally get rid of something good. Making those decisions can seem blind sometimes (a really frightening thought), but the revision stage is more than just taking things out; it's putting more things in, making additions. It's as much as a creative process as plotting the story and writing the first draft was, and this means that new awesome things can be created in the revisions.
    So in every area of writing, this quote by Anne Lamott can be applied and used to give encouragement. Do you agree? :)

John Rogers: "Don't Write Action Scenes"

"Don't write action scenes. Write suspense scenes that require action to resolve."

~John Rogers

    "Don't write action scenes? Uh, no way. You can't not have at least one action scene." Did anyone else think something like that when they first saw this quote? I did. But it makes a lot more sense when one thinks about it.
    I don't think Rogers is saying that writing scenes in which there's action (like a fight or a chase or something like that) is ineffective writing, but he's saying that writing scenes that are completely about the action is ineffective. Maybe it's wrong to make action the only point (or the only important one) of a chapter, because then all the other things in that chapter just exist for that particular action. The setup's purpose would only be to lead up to it, and it would seem that after the action, there'd be very few options for ending the scene aside from a cliffhanger.
    It also risks having faulty reasoning, prompting a reader's questions such as: "Wait, how did that little argument turn into a full-out fight?" or "Why was she even there in the first place?" or "If he has a phone he can call for help with, why is he going after the guy himself?"  Most people would try to avoid conflict until they have no other choice, so when there's a fight (or another action event) there's got to be a very, very good reason for it; there's got be something building up to it, a suspenseful series of events, like John Rogers proposes. This would make the action the natural effect of other events in the scene, instead of making all those other events unnatural effects of the action.
    What's your opinion on the matter? Do agree with John Rogers and think that chapters should be "suspense scenes" with action occurring only as a result of the suspense, or do you think that "action scenes" are "action scenes," and that there's nothing wrong with making the fight (or whatever action it is) the main attraction? Or are you in a gray zone between the two?

Martin Luther King Jr.: "Faith is Taking the First Step"

"Faith is taking the first step, even when you don't see the whole staircase."

~Martin Luther King Jr.

    Life is a lot like a staircase. A long staircase, with a lot of twists and turns (maybe one of those fancy spiral staircases), and a staircase that you can't see the end of until you're actually there.
    I think certain things we do in life are also like a staircase. A ministry that one commits to, for example, or a career path, or a new relationship. Like a spiral staircase, it's a journey that one can't see the end of from the bottom; one actually has to embark on a trek without knowing what exactly is going to happen, or how long it'll take. When we start a new project or plan, we don't know for sure how it'll turn out, or if it'll even turn out at all! That can make it seem a lot like a risk.
    But it isn't really an unreliable risk with the Lord in our lives, is it? Since we've given ourselves to God, He's placed a purpose in and a diligent plan for our lives, which means that He's got everything figured out step by step, all the way. When He places a "staircase" in our lives to climb, He'll give us the strength and endurance to make it to the top, to a good and fruitful end.
     But to make it up to that good and fruitful end, one actually has to take the first step, which requires faith, as Dr. King states in this quote. To live out God's wonderful plan, one has to believe that He has a plan, a whole set of stairs for us to climb, and that He'll guide us through each one to the end. It takes faith throughout the whole way, but faith is especially needed at the beginning; it ignites the action that starts the whole thing.
    A staircase is a pretty interesting way to picture this, don't you think? :)

Albert Einstein and Science and God

 

"The more I study science, the more I believe in God."

~Albert Einstein

    Science is so epic.
    It not only shows what exists, but how it exists. And it pairs up so perfectly with the Bible, which not only states what exists, but also why it exists.
    It drives me nuts when people try to say that science disproves God's existence, because when one really looks into it, they can see that the exact opposite is true! God's fingerprints are all over creation (Romans 1:20 says that this in itself is enough for a person to believe He's real). Plus, science (and archaeology, studies of history, and the Dead Sea Scrolls) not only shows that our faith in Him isn't completely blind, but seeing things like laminin and the creative design of genetic coding is sort of comforting. It's a reminder of how intricately thoughtful God is, and how much consideration He's put into making us and everything else.
    Books/articles/documentaries that talk about how science supports (not contradicts) God's word are the best! Some of my favorite books about God and science are Evolution Exposed by Roger Patterson, and the Case for books by Lee Stroble. There are also some really great articles on this website called godandscience.org.
    Do you have a favorite concept/fact about God's hand in science? Or a quote? Please feel free to share in the comments section! :)

Edmund Wilson: No Two Persons

"No two persons ever read the same book."

~Edmund Wilson

    What an interesting thought! That everyone reading a book is getting their own unique perception of it.
     It's easy to imagine. Even if two readers are extremely alike in behavior and attitude, if they read the same book, they're not going to notice the exact same things as each other. One might pay more attention to the characters, while the other's focus catches on to the descriptions of the settings. One might look at dialogue intently, and the other might keep a diligent eye on the plot. If a reader likes one character in particular, they might pay more attention to them than they would to others. And if one likes to read slowly, they have a better chance at soaking in more details at once. All of these factors affect the way each reader takes in a book, and would cause their readings of it to be totally different. It would produce different opinions, or a similar opinion with different reasons for it.
    Maybe the biggest (and most fascinating) difference in reading would be that of  the author of the book and a person picking it up for the first time, don't you think? As the author re-reads their book, they would probably notice basically everything--and then some, if they had scenes that they couldn't fit into the book--to the most intricate detail. But meanwhile, as the new reader reads for the first time, they'd probably just get the first few layers of the story's plot, characters, descriptions, etc., and not notice as much as the author would. This particular difference in perceptions would be more of a positive than a downside in editing though, since a new reader's observations and thoughts are vital in showing the author what's actually written in the book, and what might need to be changed.
    Have you ever thought about this concept before, and the way it plugs into the editing process like that? Isn't it intriguing? :)

Max Lucado: "Our Prayers May Be Awkward . . ."

"Our prayers may be awkward. Our attempts may be feeble. But since the power of prayer is in the One who hears it and not in the one who says it, our prayers do make a difference."

~Max Lucado

    There's a really cool verse in the Word that this quote reminds me of. Romans 8:26, in the NKJ version, says that "Likewise the Spirit also helps in our weaknesses. For we do not know what we should pray for as we ought, but the Spirit Himself makes intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered."
    This seems to line up so perfectly with what Max Lucado is saying here, that the Lord hearing our prayers means more than our actual spoken words in the prayer. That God's ability to do things isn't limited at all to the number or eloquence of words we use when we pray to Him, but He already understands what's on our hearts (Christ said something like this in Matthew 6:8) and He knows exactly what He's going to do in response.
    God's gift of prayer is such a wonderful blessing. Speaking to Him (and knowing that He won't roll his eyes at poor word choice or stuttering) is absolutely wonderful, don't you think? :)

William J. Toms: the Only Bible Some People Ever Read

 

"'Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your
good works and glorify your Father in heaven.'" Matthew :16 (NKJ)

 

"Be careful how you live; you will be the only Bible some people ever read."

~William J. Toms

    This quote is right on! Living with care, following Christ's examples and exhortations, living a godly life; it's a great witness that can show people how awesome and strengthening it is to have a relationship with the true and living God. It can show them a different picture of Christianity than what they might have heard.
    In addition to doing good, however, I think it's also very important to take the next step and actually tell people about Jesus. An act can speak paragraphs, but actually saying the words ensures that the true message gets across. Someone just being impressed with how "good" we are doesn't mean that they understand that God is the one who causes the good in us. They've got to actually hear the explanation in order to understand the meaning of the act; right?
    Words and action. They're good on their own, but together they're complete.
    Have you ever heard William J. Toms' quote before? What do you think of it?

Johnny Cash: It Takes a Real Man

 

 

 

"Being a Christian isn't for sissies. It takes a real man to live for God--a lot more man than to live for the devil."

~Johnny Cash

   

Pablo Picasso on Inspiration

"Inspiration exists, but it has to find you working."

~Pablo Picasso

    Inspiration. Wouldn't everyone like to always have it as they start writing? I would. But unfortunately, it isn't always that way. Sad are the days when one has a lot of time to write, but seemingly nothing to write about, and little desire to keep writing a passage that seems bland.
    I think writing is like running. One can start slowly or quickly, but it always takes effort to move from stillness. And if writing is like running, short passages of practice writing are like a warm up lap. Something to get the gears going and the creative juices flowing. Even if it's dry writing, it's still writing, an effort to create, the kind of work that Picasso might be referring to here.
    Does anyone regularly do some practice writing before working on a project?

C.S. Lewis: Peace In Difficulties

 

"Life with God is not immunity from difficulties, but peace in difficulties."

~C.S. Lewis

    Isn't this the truth? No one's life is absolutely problem-free. Everyone faces the same sort of difficulties at some point; financial problems, loneliness, worry about the near future . . . it's a long list. Being a Christian doesn't make us immune from the causes of these things, but our relationship with God does give us a way out of being constantly stressed and worrying ourselves sick.
   God cares about us (1 Peter 5:7) and He has a plan for our entire life (Jeremiah 29:11).  The fact that God can create an intricate world in six days and part a sea within minutes (or moments!) is enough to prove that He's capable of turning the tables of a situation quickly. And even when the tables aren't turned, we can still have peace in God; Christ Himself is said to be our peace (Ephesians 2:14). He is our living hope; His grace is sufficient for us (2 Corinthians 12:9).
    So we don't have to freak out or wring ourselves emotionally dry. The peace of God is perfect (Isaiah 26:3), and He gives it to us freely.
    C.S. Lewis has so many fantastic quotes! Do you know any off the top of your head?