A Brief History of Baptists

There are different ways to approach a history of Baptists. One is by studying the Chronology, Creeds, and Organizations. Another way is by comparing the beliefs and looking for similarities and differences among different groups. “The Trail of Blood” http://www.biblepreaching.com/trailofblood.html uses this second method. Some of the groups it mentions are Donatists, Walendsians Petrobrusians and Anabaptists. The position of the Trail of Blood is that these groups make a trail of belief back to John the Baptist. They are looking for a connection in belief rather than organic unity, as opposed to the Catholic and Orthodox churches which rely on organizational ties and connections (Pope to Pope, Patriarch to Patriarch, for example.)

Another method is by using a combination approach of the first two methods. I will use this method and be dealing with American Baptists. American Baptists begin with Roger Williams and the New Providence Colony. The Pilgrims were English Separatists. Separatists did not think the Church of England could be fixed and so they “separated” from it. The Massachusetts Colony consisted of Puritans. Puritans wanted to remain in the Church of England and “purify” it from errors they saw.

Roger Williams was an ordained Puritan Minister in Massachusetts. He went to England and obtained a charter for a new colony. He paid Indians for their land. He had many people who were thrown out of other colonies join him as refugees. He searched the Scriptures to learn what they taught about Church government and set up a congregational form. He closely followed the Puritan/Separatist form of church government.

The individual congregations owned their property. There was no denominational or outside organization. As Americans expanded westward many others accepted this Baptist belief or system. They merged with German Anabaptists, though the true German Anabaptists are represented today by the Amish/Mennonite communities, over 10 million strong in North America.

The Philadelphia Confession of Faith is the major American Baptist statement of faith. http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/creeds/phila.htm  ” On this site it gives two dates. “The Philadelphia Confession is identical to the Second London Confession of Faith (1689), except that chapters 23 and 31 have been added (with other chapters appropriately renumbered). This [more recent] confession was first issued by the Philadelphia Association in 1742.”

Methodists, Presbyterians and Baptists were the three major denominations as Americans moved westward. Methodists emphasized Arminianism with camp meetings and well-educated clergy, creating a shortage of pastors and the Circuit Rider with many small congregations.

Presbyterians also emphasized well-educated clergy and Calvinism. They were likely to be found in more established towns but less likely on the frontier. Both Methodists and Presbyterians had denominational ownership of property and denominationally-appointed clergy.

Baptists were often Calvinistic but varied widely. Freewill Baptists opposed Calvinism and Predestination. They often cooperated with Methodists in evangelistic meetings because they both believed in the need to make a decision for salvation rather than predestination.

 

Each Baptists congregation calls and pays its own pastor unlike the other denominations. At one time this was true of all Baptist churches but it caused severe problems in raising missionary support. Associations were created to raise missionary support. The largest is the Southern Baptist Convention. Northern Baptist Churches split from Southern Baptist Churches during the Civil War. The Northern Baptists from this split came to be known as the General Association of Regular Baptists. There are many other Baptist conventions/associations.

Two good reference sources on Baptists are:

Dr. David Beale’s book, In Pursuit of Purity http://www.amazon.com/Pursuit-Purity-Soft-David-Beale/dp/0890843503 Is a very good source on Baptists.

George W. Dollar The History of Fundamentalism in America http://www.amazon.com/History-Fundamentalism-America-George-Dollar/dp/B0000EEKZL

 

 

Two Mommies?

All across the Internet articles are appearing with the titles are “Two Mommies” or “Three Parents.” Of course these emotionally charged titles are not quite telling the whole story. Human testing has been requested on a procedure that is successful in eradicating some genetic diseases in mice, rats and larger animals.

I would normally link to the original story, but these accounts are so full of highly charged Secular Humanist bias that it is difficult to read the account objectively.

When a woman’s egg is fertilized, there is DNA in the nucleus which is a combination of the DNA of the mother and father. DNA outside of the nucleus, known as mitochondrial DNA is only the mother’s DNA. The new baby comes from the DNA in the nucleus. Mitochondrial DNA controls how the cell works. When this Mitochondrial DNA is defective, genetic deficits are transmitted to the child.

A new technique has proved effective in mice, rats and primates in eradicating some genetic defects. It assumes that the Doctor knows which genetic diseases are contained entirely in the Mitochondrial DNA. It also assumes this is a moral procedure.

A fertilized human egg from a woman with diseased mitochondrial DNA has the fertilized nucleus removed. An unfertilized human egg from a woman with nondiseased Mitochondrial DNA has the nucleus removed and discarded. The fertilized human nucleus is then implanted in the nondiseased egg and reimplanted in the original woman with diseased Mitochondrial DNA. A normal healthy child is born. Without this procedure, the child is likely to have a genetic defect, such as Downs Syndrome.

Is it ethical? Is it moral? Is it adultery?

Belief Excerpts from Antidisestablishmentarianism I from Chapter 11. What Is Science to a Secular Humanist?

Like any religion which enthrones man in God’s place, there is a desperate and irrational need to attack true religion. “Faith is the great cop-out, the great excuse to evade the need to think and evaluate evidence,”³ says Richard Dawkins. In the Bible, in the founding documents of US history and in the US court system prior to the liberal takeover, belief was (and still is in reality) a legal term. Belief is the decision of a juror based on evidence. Faith is the action one takes based on belief based on tested evidence. The modern Secular Humanist twists the word “faith ” to mean the opposite of its historical definition. “Faith is belief in spite of, even perhaps because of, the lack of evidence.”⁴ This is the “blind leap of faith ” of Karl Barth and neo-orthodoxy, not the historic meaning of faith found in the Bible and US history.

The faith of the secularist, which is truly “in spite of, even perhaps because of, the lack of evidence,” has a religious belief that the material universe is all that is, was or ever will be. The material universe is the ultimate reality. “Who is more humble?” asked Carl Sagan, “The scientist who looks at the universe with an open mind and accepts whatever the universe has to teach us, or somebody who says everything in this book [the Bible] must be considered the literal truth and never mind the fallibility of all the human beings involved?”⁵ Sagan is pretending humility while arrogantly dismissing the possibility that God might have actually written down His words out of love for his creation.

_________________________________________

1 Pierre Charron, De la sagesse (Of Wisdom, In Three Parts), French version, 1601, Translated by Samson Lennard, Eliot’s Court Press for Edward Blount and Will, Aspley, London, c.1615.

2 Charles Watts, “The Secularist’s Catechism,” complied in an undated book published by Watts & Co. entitled: Pamphlets by Charles Watts, Vol. I, originally written in 1896.

3 Richard Dawkins, from a speech at the Edinburgh International Science Festival, April 15, 1992.

4 Dawkins, The Richard Dimbleby Lecture: “Science, Delusion and the Appetite for Wonder,” BBC1 Television November 12, 1996.

5 Carl Sagan, in an interview with Charlie Rose, late-night PBS talk show host, 1996.

What is Salvation?

“The Lord is … not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.” (2 Peter 3:9)

“For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God.” (Romans 3:23)

“There is none righteous, no not one.” (Romans 3:10)

Since we are all sinners, we need to have our sins atoned for. Jesus Christ, the sinless Lamb of God “gave his life a ransom for many.”

First we must recognize that we are sinners in need of salvation. Then we must understand that as a sinner there is nothing we can do to atone for our own sin or bring about our own salvation. But salvation is like a marriage, it is not a 50%/50% relationship, it is a 100%/100% relationship.

Though salvation is “Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us” (Titus 3:5) we still have total responsibility to serve God. “Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.” (James 2:18)

Our works are technically called Sanctification, since only God can work the work of Salvation.

God also commands us to be fruit inspectors. “By their fruits ye shall know them.” (Matthew 7:20) But we must be very careful to be guided by God’s Holy Spirit. The parable of the wheat and the tares illustrates our difficulty. Tares are a variety of weed which look very much like wheat until the time comes to produce seeds. The Bible teaches us that seemingly wicked men, such as Abraham’s nephew Lot are actually righteous. Others that appear to be righteous, even talking with God, such as Balaam, are actually evil. In the matter of salvation, we must be very careful to “Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.” (John 7:24)

The fruit (works) we are to look for is a love for the Lord, a desire to fulfill the great commission and the fruit of the Spirit (love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith).

Our beliefs on the doctrine of salvation are written down in detail in our books, Findley Family Video Biblical Studies and Antidisestablishmentarianism. The Biblical Studies books are written for homeschool so there is a student and a teacher’s edition. The only difference is that the teacher’s edition contains the answers. They include our commentary on Great Doctrines of the Bible by Evans. All of these are available in ebook format and all four books (Our three and Evans, which can be obtained free online) can be purchased for less then $10 total.

They Got More Than Hannah’s Blessing — A review of Hannah’s Blessing by Collette Scott

If any contemporary romance gave excellent advice to its readers, it’s this one. It tells lovers, and readers, not to make assumptions. It reminded me a lot of Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice. There is a small amount of language and non-graphic sexual reference in the book dealt with appropriately for any adult or young adult reader.

I mostly read romance because I write romance. Sometimes after I finish one I want that piece of my life back. This one charmed me from beginning to end. Collette Scott writes about real people. The book explores the consequences of our assumption-making. It also makes an excellent point about how many people we can affect or hurt with the best of intentions. There are so many fun and interesting secondary characters in the book.

Diana, the main character, starts the story as a wronged woman. The fate of her husband was a perfect “let the punishment fit the crime” irony. The title character, their daughter Hannah, unwittingly brings into Diana’s life her late husband’s stepbrother, Devlan, who has made his niece his sole heir. Devlan’s rich, handsome, brilliant, successful, and yet can’t manage to communicate clearly to the one person in the world who matters most. It’s not Hannah. She loves, trusts, and relies on him with all the sweet innocence of a child in spite of his social blunders.

Diana is deeply wounded after six years of marriage to the wrong brother. She has listened to lies, tried to trust, and felt the pain of betrayal too long. Devlan, experienced with business, celebrity and all the rest of life, is too inexperienced with “real” women to win her trust. Diana is a runner, and how and why she runs from Devlan is pretty stunning. How and why he finally decides it’s time to chase her, and how that turns out is also stunning.

http://www.amazon.com/Hannahs-Blessing-Collette-Scott/dp/1463539967

I am a Trucker’s Wife

We travel all over the forty-eight states, so we see a lot of life. This does not make us experts, but we want to attempt to show how our culture is on a downhill slide, mostly because of sin and secular humanism. There are people who don’t speak English and don’t intend to learn, people who want space for their religion but don’t want us to have any for ours, people who are infected with the deadly diseases of damnation-directed thinking, don’t know it, and won’t be convinced of it. They think they’re ok, and we’d be ok too if we could just shut up about that Bible stuff. Sorry, no can do. It’s the only thing that matters.

I say “we” when I talk about my husband and I and what our future holds because I consider our lives to be united and our goals and plans to be intertwined. Charles Dickens, in David Copperfield, has a young female character who married a much older man. When asked about the state of their marriage by a person who tried to make her worry about potential gossip and speculation, she said simply, “We have a unity of mind and purpose.” Women who talk about being truckers’ wives usually point out the separation, the loneliness and the need for them to be apart yet to trust and wait. These women are simply enduring, and it sounds like their lives together are on hold, stagnant. I think that’s a bit selfish, with all due respect for the truth of these points. The two of you are one. Isn’t he lonely, too? Doesn’t he need to trust you? Men have been leaving their wives alone for necessary careers for centuries: Military, diplomatic, evangelistic missions and pioneering are just a few. And for centuries women have been guilty of betraying trust and deciding they couldn’t handle the loneliness as well as men.

The first thing you must do is stop being selfish. Don’t think you aren’t. Don’t believe you’re sacrificing so much just by agreeing to be a trucker’s wife in the first place. Think again. You agreed to get married, and that took you out of the category where you get to say, “I” very often. You have a husband. You may have children. Responsibilities keep expanding, such as a house, a car, and other things you own or have and have to pay for. If you own the truck he drives there can be a whole new set of responsibilities. These things are the responsibility of both members of the marriage, yet women pour out their resentment, saying, “He went away and left me to handle all this.” The problem is magnified exponentially in a bad economy where you may not be making enough money to handle anything except collection calls.

Here comes my “I” paragraph. I said a wife doesn’t get to say “I” much but here are the things that are just “me” things, the stuff I do that I have to do myself or to keep the crazies away and that he doesn’t really take part in. While I was living at home and he was on the road, I found many things to occupy my time. I always worked, at least part time, usually full time with overtime, as a book editor, childcare and eldercare giver, teacher, factory worker, office assistant, receptionist, clerk, and other occupations. I write, obviously, producing puppet scripts, short stories and novels. I have written scripts for Cable TV commercials, a local museum video tour and an in-store infomercial as well as church programs. I draw, and create craft items, and serve in churches, making puppets, putting on plays, designing bulletin boards and decoration for programs as well as writing and test-teaching original church teaching materials and creating the crafts to accompany them. I also polish and convert my husband’s writing to book format or video scripts. Our dream is still alive, of course, to make the video work a reality in the future.

Let me return to the reality of the near-present. My husband was on the road. I had a 3rd shift temp job which I took after two years of “stable” but health-wrecking 12 hr shift factory work. My changing jobs helped our older children out with transportation since we would all be working at the same place. Our youngest had just gone into the military. It became clear that I was not going to be hired on permanently at the place I worked. Our elder two children, while still living at home, had jobs and our daughter’s car as backup to get to work.

My husband and I decided to go on the road together, especially since attending our son’s graduation from boot camp required a trip to Fort Leonardwood, MO and it was the only way I was going to get there. I elected not to get my CDL but to support him by helping with all the paperwork I was legally allowed to do and assisting in trip planning, handling phone use and load finding. I have talked to many husband and wife team drivers and the women always agreed with my decision not to drive. We have met many teams who cannot get enough work to support both of them. Besides, I freely admit to being a basket case when it comes to backing up and that’s pretty much the bulk of a trucker’s job, with a giant rectangle tagging along behind.

This also gave us the opportunity to work on writing and researching the books and videos we want to produce, to be together to brainstorm and polish ideas, and to restore the unity of mind and purpose that flags when you’re apart. We read Scriptures, comment on what we’ve read, deal with the bill collectors together, and it is in all ways better. The economy is still bad, and may be getting worse. Our house is in danger of forclosure, our daughter wrecked her car trying to travel on icy roads and ended up with our car, and both our older children were laid off and had to move to find other jobs and housing. It looks like soon the truck will be our only home. That simplifies life, in some ways. No utility bills, except the cell phones and computer to look for loads and do research for our projects. We are newly returned to being owner operators, which makes for a much less simple life, but we hope it will soon begin to pay off. Our last truck blew the engine with one payment left but once again company driver was not for us.

Life in the truck is not easy. The bed is small and so are the cabinets. Eating on the road is expensive but so is an electrical system that supports a microwave and a refrigerator, as well as making the space to install them. Chances to get to a regular store, even a Walmart, are scarce. We shower and do laundry at truckstops.

Several women have bitten their tongues as they asked me how I like living in the truck because they want so badly to tell me what my opinion should be.

My opinion is that I am better with him than without him, whatever the hardships might be. And he keeps saying he is better with me than without me. I get cranky and resent all the stuff that I have to do and he puts up with that. He gets so focused on the job and the mileage and the performance of the truck and I have to put up with that. He talks to everybody he meets, mechanics, other truckers, any people who can add to that staggering store of knowledge he’s got in that head of his. I hate to talk to people but I realize how much this habit of his has helped us. We see a lot of countryside, even if we do spend a lot of time walking through oil and smelling diesel and listening to idling trucks and whining reefers. We’ve been to places in Canada and back and forth across this country. We’ve listened to volunteers in truckstop churches doing their best to minister to some hard cases. We’ve been in churches where people praised God for truckers.

So, to truckers’ wives who need to vent, I say it works both ways. Except your husband’s too busy driving, so instead of venting, take every chance you get to run him up, not run him down. Love him, instead of resenting him. Dwell on what makes him great, not what makes you miserable. Sure, I’m with mine and you’re not with yours, and it may not be possible for you to go, because your children are still young. I was there, too, but I still had to stop people and my own mind from making me resent the way things were and are. Help him and help yourself by refusing to rise to the temptation of complaining or of sounding like a martyr. Focus on what you are together, what good married couples have always been, stronger together than apart. Unified in mind and purpose. Together, always, whatever, forever.

Viral Video by Jefferson Bethke: “Why I Hate Religion but Love Jesus.”

Jefferson Bethke, from his Facebook page

Jefferson Bethke of Tacoma, WA posted a Youtube video on 1/10/2012 which has 10,886,714 views as of 1/15/2012 which is entitled “Why I Hate Religion but Love Jesus.” Because of some of the more outlandish comments people posted, he posted this on his facebook page on Friday 1/13/2012 “If you are using my video to bash ‘the church’ be careful. I was in no way intending to do that… The Church is Jesus’ bride so be careful how you speak of His wife. If a normal dude has right to get pissed when you bash His wife, it makes me tremble to think how great the weight is when we do it to Jesus’ wife. The church is His vehicle to reach a lost word. A hospital for sinners. Saying you love Jesus but hate the Church, is like a fiancé saying he loves his future bride, but hates her kids. We are all under grace. Look to Him.”

This is not a line by line analysis, but this is in response to some of the uproar it has created.

It opens with the words “What if I told you Jesus came to abolish religion?” Very simple: then you are wrong. Jesus said, “Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill.” Matthew 5:17. The Law is the religion God Himself set up under Moses. Jesus opposed hypocrisy and false religion, but he did not come to abolish religion. Christianity is both a relationship with Jesus the Christ and a religion.

Many of the questions he asks are obviously true, but like so many true statements are either misleading or dishonest. For example, Jefferson Bethke says, “What if I told you ‘Republican’ doesn’t automatically mean ‘Christian’?” I have never met, talked to, read about or heard of anyone who either believes that or believes anything like that. This is a either a straw man argument, that is, deliberately misrepresenting your opposition or religious hypocritical mockery. It is an appeal to man’s pride, the “I am not like this so I am better than you” type of pride. Voting for righteousness is important and the democratic party disdains righteousness. Why do we who vote Republican, understanding that we are choosing the lesser of two evils, have to be mocked by you?

But the worst lines are the outright lies. “I mean, if religion is so great, why has it started so many wars?” This is one of the Big Lies atheists constantly use against us. The Christian Religion has never started a war. period. False religions start wars and Christian use the military to defend themselves when attacked, but the Christian Religion has never, ever started a war.

“Why does it build huge churches but fails to feed the poor?” The Law commanded the building of the temple, mostly of gold, yet Jesus said “For you always have the poor with you.” Matthew 26:11 The greatest help to the poor the world has ever seen are the hospitals, orphanages, poor houses, retirement homes, rescue missions, etc. built by the Religion of Christianity.

“Tells single moms God doesn’t love them if they’ve ever had a divorce?” The Religion of Christianity does not say that. Anyone who says this is not a Christian.

Though there are many hypocrites who fit the descriptions he gives, he fails to realize that by condemning all religion, he is just another hypocrite. “Now I ain’t judging, I’m just sayin’, ‘Quit puttin’ on a fake look.’” Yes, you are judging.

“Which is why Jesus hated religion, and for it he called them fools Don’t you see it’s so much better than just following some rules?” Jesus hated hypocrisy, not religion. God gave Moses the Ten Commandments, as well as the rest of the Law. He is equating religion with the Law.

The key to this video are the lines “Now back to the point: One thing is vital to mention How Jesus and religion are on opposite spectrums See, one’s the work of God, but one’s a man-made invention” If he means by religion the works of sinful man to obtain salvation by his own efforts, then this section is entirely correct. But that is not the Religion of Christianity.

Jesus did not come to destroy the Law, but to fulfill it. A proper relationship with Jesus Christ will fill you with the power of His holy spirit to obey His Word. This is the Religion of Christianity.

Author interviews and Historical Research for Hope and the Knight and the Black Lion

Some recent blog interviews for our books. Thank you!

http://marjilaine.blogspot.com/2012/01/author-interview-with-mary-c-findley.html

http://davidcleinman.com/writings/education/curiouser-and-curiouser-an-authors-adventures-in-twitterland/

http://nicolestorey.wordpress.com/2012/01/11/guest-post-by-mary-c-findley/

For the “I Want to Write Historical Fiction but I Don’t Want to Research” Writer

I write historical fiction, but I do not like a whole lot of detail in the books I read, nor do I really like to write it. Hope and the Knight of the Black Lion is set in England, originally just sometime vaguely during the Crusades. Actually, I toyed with the idea of the character who returns after an absence going to Turkey under Suleiman the Magnificent. I thought I might be able to tie the story in with the Reformation and even Martin Luther, rather than the Crusades. I spent a year learning about Suleiman and his time, but also discovered how many conflicts an Englishman could have gotten himself involved in and eventually went back to the Crusades. (Fortunately I worked at a state university library at the time.)

I discovered Crusader Songs appropriate to the time period and was able to include them, and they even advanced the plot by showing the changing attitudes of the Crusaders on their sea voyage. I finally found a letter from “Guy, a Knight” describing the battle of Damietta, a port-controlling city in Egypt. Circumstances surrounding this battle included an armada of ships that set out for Alexandria and mistakenly arrived in Damietta after a huge storm. Many ships were also lost in this storm. Since my knight was supposed to disappear in his Holy Land quest, I had found my opportunity. This battle had a specific date, and better yet, a specific historical man, under suspicion of disloyalty to the French crown, who fought there. Providentially I found my time period and my villain, Hugo Brun de March, together. April 2, 1249 was the date of the battle and it took place as part of Louis IX of France’s first Crusade.

This battle is also important to the story because of an orphaned Arab, Sadaquah, who lives in Damietta but is forcibly removed very shortly before the battle, thus saving his life. He is brought to teach Arabic to, and becomes friends with, my main male character, known simply as the Christian Dog to the Arabs. Later Sadaquah refers to this incident that brought them together as both destroying any ties he might have had with his home and says his friend saved his life simply by being where he was when he was.

The names in my story are either local to the part of England where the people live, like Cloyes, or significant in their meaning. Hope’s name has obvious significance to a story of hardship, loss and desperate danger. Hope in Arabic is Raja, and Sadaquah points out that his English comrade said that word many times a day while trying to get back home, hardly understanding fully all the hopes that would and could be realized. Sadaquah refers to the alms Muslims give to the poor, and also means Righteousness. Rasoul, another Arab character in the story, is a messenger of sorts, reuniting friends, providing safety and help, and that is the meaning of his name. Tahira means purity, and the Arab woman in the story learns that God is the judge and restorer of purity.

I had to find an abandoned castle for some of the story to take place. Fortunately, there is Colchester Castle, a well-known and well-documented location. I was able to find industries appropriate to the time period, places of worship, even an oyster festival to help establish Hope’s character at the beginning of the story. Building the setting around Colchester, I was able to create a manor house for my minor nobleman, and learn about how life ran in such a place. I even got to study earlier English government and how common people involved themselves in the affairs of the nobility. One reviewer commented on how much he learned about medieval life, a whole new vocabulary in the clothing and customs of the day. Robin Hood, for example, may not have worn Lincoln Green but Lincoln Grayne, a finely woven linen fabric that could be any color but was often dyed red.

Nobility bedding down in the hallways of a castle and every available fireplace being commandeered to cook meals for a horde of retainers and guests was another “fun fact” I picked up along the way. I made a decision to use modern speech with a somewhat archaic flavor and the insertion of vocabulary important to the occupations, government and activities of the time. Realistically, if I had written in Chaucerian English, few would have understood it. I have a few Arabic words and phrases as well. This story came after more than twenty years of research and reading, checking sources, confirming most of the facts in many different references, online and in libraries, and though it may not be as detailed as some historical fiction, I am comfortable with the idea that it will give the reader at least of taste of a real time and place.

One sidelight is that this book also has an illustrated version. I tried to capture some of the feel of a Medieval manuscript with gilded leaves, jeweled page corners and elaborate designs, though mine are created with shapes and textures from my graphic design program, Photo Impact, and reproduced throughout, instead of painstakingly hand-drawn page by page.

 

 

Guest-Posting

Cogsworth, Lumiere, and Mrs. Potts, in full “Be Our Guest” mode, from the stage show of Beauty and the Beast at Walt Disney World. It was a great show!

Our journey in self-publishing, or indie-publishing, or whatever it is that we do, has recently begun to include the concept of guest-posting. This is when another blogger, usually another writer or avid reader, offers space on his or her blog to others to write. This is a great opportunity for both bloggers, because we have different followers and can reach a wider audience and promote each other.

So far we have only had one guest-poster, as part of a reciprocal agreement with the Indie Writers Unite Facebook page I belong to. But folks should keep in mind that if you submit a blog to use on a topic that fits our site, we will pay you $25 when we post it.

Here are some guest blogs we have done lately and a couple still to come. This gives us a chance to give an extra shout-out to those who help with the hardest part of writing: Promotion.

Nicole Storey’s just went up today. Benny and the Bank Robber and Doctor Dad. It looks wonderful! Thank you, Nicole!

http://nicolestorey.wordpress.com/2012/01/11/guest-post-by-mary-c-findley/

Interview for Vienta (Sorry, old cover, but same book) with Karen Baney. Thank you again, Karen!

http://www.karenbaney.com/archives/1427

Rom Con, scroll down the page for Send a White Rose (with the “New, New” cover, formed by a committee of great suggestions):

http://romconinc.com/index.php?option=com_lyftenbloggie&view=lyftenbloggie&category=historical&Itemid=23

Awhile back, we had some interviews for Hope and the Knight of the Black Lion. Thank you again, Angela Fristoe, Spencer Brokaw, David Wisehart of Kindle Authors and Rachel.

http://rai29bookreadnreview.blogspot.com/2011/09/author-interview-mary-c-findley.html

http://www.spencerbrokaw.com/2011/09/interview-with-mary-findley.html

http://www.angelafristoe.blogspot.com/

http://kindle-author.blogspot.com/

And coming soon, so I’ll give a thank you ahead of time, Marji Lane, on The Baron of Larcondale. She promises to include pictures of actors who might play my main male when it’s made into a movie. Can’t wait!

http://marjilaine.blogspot.com/

Also coming soon, on the blog of Athansios Galanis, an interview on our Christian perspective, Homeschool curriculum, and our own homeschooling adventures! Can’t wait to see it!

www.mad-gods.com

We also have an ad running on WoMen’s Literary Cafe this week, for Vienta. Check it out, on the left side. Next week they will run an ad for our blog. I’m also an “official” reviewer for that site. I will post reviews of books that fit our audience, if I can manage to pick the right books to read.

http://womensliterarycafe.com/

Guest Post by Helmy Kusuma

I belong to a Facebook page called Indie Writers Unite! As part of our “membership,” we share blog space with the other writers in the group in something called “blog hops.” Today Helmy Kusuma has the floor. Welcome, Helmy!

I am Helmy Kusuma and a writer from Indonesia. I mostly write in English, though. My background in IT has played a major role on that, beside, of course, my fondness of English as one of rich languages to convey meanings.

I started writing seriously as a career about two years ago. Seriously in the meaning that I dedicate my time on finishing a title that beg to be written, and not, at least for the time being, enjoying financial freedom from it.

I have written two novellas, one is written in Indonesian language while the other one is, obviously, in English titled Mementoes of Mai. Mementoes of Mai is a non-fiction fiction – fiction that based largely on non fiction, my own life experiences that is – that foretells the story of a young man, me, who faces a fork, love or passion, in his journey and has to decide which way to take.

I have also collaborated with other authors in producing a flash fiction anthology, A Flash of Inspiration. It was a tremendous experience for me to be able to work side by side, err email by email, with various writers from England and America. Oh yeah, it’s free.

Inverta: The Truth is the title of my coming science fiction novel, hopefully will be finished by mid 2012, which dwells in the vicinity of parallel dimension and what-if scenario. There Is Hope is my first attempt at writing science fiction, and I was immersed deeply in writing it making me decide to write a longer one.

If you want to know more about me just contact me through these venues :

Blog http://www.helmykusuma.com

Goodreads http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/4576592.Helmy_Kusuma

Facebook http://www.facebook.com/EL.Publish

Twitter @hanzpk

Curiouser and Curiouser … An Author’s Adventures in Twitterland

I set up a Twitter account awhile back because that was on my promotional “to-do” list. However, I did not really understand what it was for, so I did not use it much. I tweeted our blog posts, and that was pretty much it. My experience with Twitter was somewhat like Alice staring down the rabbit hole. The White Rabbit is marketing, and I want to go where it goes, but I hesitated looking down that small, dark hole. I know that Twitter resembles email, except that you have to be extremely careful what you say. You only have 140 characters in which to say it. Interestingly enough, this ties in with another part of my writer’s journey, inspired decades ago by Strunk and White’s The Elements of Style, my pledge to “Omit needless words!”

I never really understood writers who needed to write long books. Some people love long books with complex descriptions of places, clothing and every little detail. I like the characters and the stories. Excuse me while I skip the travelogue at the beginning of every chapter of Jules Verne’s Michael Strogoff. I am not quite at the point of writing phone-screen-sized chapters or text-messaging novels, but I keep hearing that echo, “omit needless words,” and so I edit, trim, and refine my work. As a matter of fact, I have only recently learned the art of text messaging, another thing that resembles Tweeting. Our daughter is hard of hearing and our communication is almost exclusively by texting. I refuse to use all the abbreviations, symbols and jargon. It makes it difficult, but I have my limits.

Back to Twitter. Recently I timidly took the step of retweeting posts by some authors I have befriended and admire. I don’t just randomly retweet, and I don’t even retweet everything I agree with. I do, however, tend to retweet my author friends. In the meantime, our blog posts go on Twitter automatically, and the other day I was startled to discover that our blog followers had more than tripled in the last month. I was also startled to discover that our books were beginning to sell a little. Our chosen niche market is niched indeed, more like Scout and Jem’s secret space in the hollow tree where they exchanged treasures with Boo Radley. I don’t expect to have bestsellers. In fact, more than one blogger has refused to read our books for review or carry posts we have written because they are “too…” Well, I’ll let you fill in the blank and ponder what an unfair world it is.

I noticed also that strange Tweeters were beginning to say they were following me. I’m not going to tell you how many followers I have because it’s still embarrassing, but people do notice when you retweet a lot. The next step in my Twitterland journey was when I joined a Facebook authors’ group that seemed to fit better with my niche than those I had previously joined. I participated, talked, asked for advice, as I always do when I join a group. Then I noticed they were posting Tweets for their books or interviews or blog posts. I grabbed them and retweeted them, and everybody said “Thank You!”

Then someone said, “Where are your tweets? We will repost them all sorts of ways.” Aaaggh! I had no tweets. So I have been forced to create Tweets. I am still struggling to grasp the hashtag thing, but I think it makes it stand out more, like tagging your book on Amazon. I still hate having to abbreviate, to leave out my beloved exact spelling and punctuation, but I press on. And, though in some respects I am still staring down the rabbithole, I am getting the hang of this Twitter thing. Because of something I am doing, our blog is getting a higher profile and our books are getting some sales. A recent article said that Twitter will cease to exist this year. Perhaps. But in the meantime, it seems to be working for me. Go through your Twitter feed every day, look for the ones you want to retweet, decide if you want to follow people who say they are following you, and don’t forget to Tweet yourself!

How to create a Twitter Post (from an admitted newbie.)

Look at what other similar posts contain in the way of hashtags. For example, I write #Historical and #Fiction and #Adventure, my husband writes #SciFi and #Nonfiction, and there are TONS of other hashtags. Just add the Hash or pound sign in front of a word and you have a hash tag. They are subjects that people search for that can get your post noticed, and retweeted, and possibly get you followed. Punctuation and correct spelling take up extra characters, so grit your teeth and leave them out. Use a URL shortening program like bitly to cut down your links. HootSuite is a free program that can be used to schedule recurring tweets, I am told,. That’s the next step in my journey, I guess.

Some examples of tweets using hashtags

#SciFi #Christian The future of persecution. Lunar colony, gas-collection in the outer planets, forbidden romance http://bit.ly/x5Doq7

#Nonfiction doesn’t have to be dull! 200 illustrations, Nimrod’s worship foundations to founding fathers’ fears http://amzn.to/tUo6Kb

#Mystery Adventure Series, All Things New Doctor tests, Boarding school, secret society, Christmas ball, twin trouble http://amzn.to/vG8jGW

#romance #suspense #historical Occult attacks, child sex slavery, a lost prince, regain a throne, king’s hole peril  http://bit.ly/wnxxpt

#Blog, #Issues, #History, #Education #Science It’s tough but you need it. From a fan, “Need me some elk jerky, I do” http://bit.ly/vfdw8v

Rick Santorum Won in Iowa! Or, How Much Difference Can Just One Delegate Make?

To those in states with Primaries, the entire Caucus system seems confusing. We stayed up until 2:00 AM to watch the media proclaim Mitt Romney the winner by 8 votes. But the popular vote is not what counts. What counts is the delegates sent to the national Republican convention. While nothing is certified at this point and things can change, it appears that Rick Santorum might have one more delegate than Mitt Romney. How?

The widely publicized vote is actually a straw poll. http://www.iowacaucus.biz/IA_Caucus_Howitworks.html The votes are actually for delegates to a state convention on March 10. At this convention, these delegates will vote for the national delegates. Since they are morally pledged to their candidates, it seems the widely proclaimed Romney 13 delegates, Santorum 12 delegates will be the final outcome, plus Superdelegates (delegates picked by the state Republican convention). Not so fast.

First, at least 2 Ron Paul supporters monitoring vote counts have claimed errors in the vote counts. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/01/05/santorum-vote-count-error-in-iowa-is-no-big-deal/ The vote counts are not certified, so the totals, and the winners, could change.

Second, in another long shot, Michele Bachmann could attempt to transfer her few votes to Rick Santorum. While there is a lot of buzz about this on the Internet, none of the candidates in the Republican Party has commented on this possibility. The talk has ranged from “almost a done deal” to “not legal, not possible.” It is legal and possible because the state delegates pledged to Michele Bachmann now have no one to vote for and no legal requirement to vote for anyone in particular.

Third is the important part. From state party workers on caucus night, to county caucus, to state caucus, to national convention, these thousands of workers are all volunteers. This heavy time requirement means some of these delegates, especially on the state and county levels, will be unable to attend and vote. Alternates will fill these positions. The state party attempts to fill these empty delegate positions with alternates pledged to the same candidate so the missing delegates are not even noticed. This year saw a massive change. Ron Paul had a well-planned and well-executed plan to grab all the alternate slots throughout Iowa. Because of the late, close race many Rick Santorum supporters stuck around to provide enough Rick Santorum alternates. So if Ron Paul picks up some county delegates, at whose expense will they come? Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney. It is almost certain that Ron Paul will gain some county delegates. The big question is will Ron Paul gain from this strategy or will Rick Santorum be the only beneficiary?

So Which Republican Candidate Do You Support? And Why?

It seems like every day someone is asking me this. So I am finally writing this blog and from now on will just link to this if anyone online asks me. First, I will support the candidate who most closely supports the United States Constitution and has a chance of winning the general election. The worst Republican candidate has more respect for the Constitution and Law and Order than the best Democratic candidate.

Second, and this is critical, the Constitution of the United States is written in English and anyone who is willing to spend some time on archives.gov can understand what the writers intended. It is not in code and anyone who is unsure as to the meaning of a word, phrase or even an entire Article in the Constitution can research and find the intended meaning.

Third, how honest is the candidate? Members of his own party constantly “praised” Bill Clinton for “being a really good liar.” The average politician does whatever he wants to do and then attempts to justify those actions by claiming that either the Constitution is unclear in that area or the Constitution does not address whatever it is that he wants to do.

Michele Bachmann had the best grasp of Constitutional principles of any candidate in either party. She confronted Rick Perry with his Gardasil fiasco, for which I am grateful. However, when her entire New Hampshire campaign staff quit and she not only did not know it but also denied it, that ended my support for her.

Jon Huntsman is unelectable, either in the primaries or the general election.

Newt Gingrich is unethical. Though he raised a lot of money, most of it is gone. His bulldog attack style turns many people off. He seems to be conservative on several important issues, but is he really?

Rick Perry would be an excellent choice if not for 2 things He insisted on forcing Gordasil on Junior High girls (which thankfully was stopped by the Texas legislature) and giving free tuition to illegals. The problem with these two major issues is the way he defends them. It seems that this man could justify just about anything in his own mind. Ann Coulter gives a very good reason why he could not win in general election.

Ron Paul can win both the Republican Primary and the general elections. I understand that very few of my friends and family members agree with me on this, so please hear me out. America is a very divided nation. Ron Paul has very strong national support. If he is consistently coming in 2nd and 3rd, he will be a major contender at the Republican National Convention. I do not believe that any Republican candidate will pick up enough delegates to win on the first ballot. So compromises and deals will have to be made. If the Republican delegation goes to a forth or fifth ballot, anything can happen. In the general election, he has one advantage over every other Republican. Certain issues, such as the legalization of Marijuana, immediate withdrawal from Afghanistan and closing some foreign military bases, would take votes away from Obama. People who would otherwise vote Democrat will vote for Ron Paul. Ronald Reagan also took away votes from Democrats. Every one of these votes not only increases his chance of winning but also decreases Obama’s chances. It is the same as picking up two undecided votes. Also, President Obama did not win in a landslide and he has far less support in his own party this time. The margins will be close and Ron Paul has the ability to squeak out a victory by appealing to millions of pacifists who normally do not block vote. While no one knows how many Amish/Mennonites there are in this country, estimates place that number over 10 million. Though many of them do vote, most will not support any kind of military intervention. They will not pick up arms and will only serve in the military in noncombatant roles such as Chaplin’s assistants or medical personal. They did not vote for John McCain or George Bush. Enough of these people voting for the first time could swing several key states where they have large populations such as Pennsylvania, New York and Ohio.

Ronald Reagan was our oldest President. He took the oath of office for the first time when he was 70 years old and 74 for his second term. Ron Paul is 76 and would not be sworn in until he was 77. With the average life expectancy in this country being 78.1, the odds are that Ron Paul would not live out his first term. He does not have the health to put his entire agenda into place. So which of his stated goals are most important to him?

The vast majority of Republicans will agree with everything, or almost everything up to this point. I like Ron Paul’s reduction in government. His foreign policy and military positions seem dangerous at best and suicidal at worst. Though Ron Paul and I both believe that recreational use of drugs is destroying the fabric of this nation, we disagree on what to do about it. Because of his age, position on legalizing drugs, reducing our military and his position toward Israel, I cannot wholeheartedly support Ron Paul. Unlike other fellow conservatives, I could vote for Ron Paul if he would miraculously survive the nominating process.

Ann Coulter wrote last week that we must nominate Mitt Romney because he is the only candidate who can win the general election for the Republicans. This seems to be the major point of conservatives who support him. Mitt Romney is an establishment Republican. I am not sure if he is a RINO (Republican In Name Only), but he is certainly not what I want in a President. Compared to Arlen Specter or Chris Christie, Mitt Romney is a conservative. But Ann Coulter also said that the most important 2 issues are stopping the invasion of illegals and ending Obamacare. The very day Ann endorsed Mitt Romney as the only candidate capable of winning, Mitt Romney had a press conference where he said that he would repeal Obamacare as one of his first acts in office. But he also said that he thinks the core of Obamacare, the individual mandate, “is fundamentally a conservative principle.” He defended the individual mandate in Massachusetts with Romneycare. So Mitt Romney believes the details of Obamacare are wrong, but the fundamental principles of Romneycare are “fundamentally a conservative principle.” Mitt Romney believes that Obamacare is wrong in the details, but its fundamental principles are conservative? This is exactly what Ann Coulter condemned as unacceptable, yet she endorses Mitt Romney anyway.

Mitt Romney had questionable judicial appointments and the MA government grew larger under his administration. To be honest, Ronald Reagan saw the government grow while was Governor of CA and while we was President. Mitt Romney, Michele Bachmann, Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum take the same positions on the illegal issue.

This is sad, but I support Rick Santorum because he has the fewest negatives. Isn’t this the way American Politics usually works out? Rick Santorum can win PA, NY and maybe one or two New England states. It will be very difficult and close but I believe that he can win the general election.

He is a Roman Catholic who opposes abortion, favors the death penalty, will cut trillions from the National budget including eliminating several federal agencies, will reduce (though not eliminate) federal taxes, bomb Iran if necessary, and support the military. He homeschooled his children (which is the major reason he lost re-election to the senate), is a member of the NRA and owns guns, wears sweater vests, is a lawyer, allows (not requires) government funds for contraception, is opposed to all stimulus and welfare, opposes homosexuality, wants to cut all corporate taxes to zero, is in favor of tort reform, believes that the sagging economy is caused by the federal stop sign on oil drilling, believes that the major cause of poverty is the lack of 2-parent families, had a 100% voting record according to the Christian Coalition, wants the President to have a line item veto, believes our trade and labor laws need to change to make the USA more competitive with China, believes that higher minimum wages contribute to unemployment, believes that Social Security, welfare and all other entitlements need to change to remain solvent and that the Bush era tax cuts need to become permanent. Those tax cuts should only be a starting place for more tax cuts.

Stopping short of an endorsement, Rush Limbaugh said that he could sleep well at night knowing that Rick Santorum was commander-in-chief.

Rick Santorum authored the book It Takes A Family to counter Hillary Clinton’s It Takes A Village. I have yet to meet a Republican who did not like Rick Santorum. He is likable, with probably the best speaking abilities of the major candidates. When Rick Santorum had just been sworn in as Senator, I called him and had severe problems reaching him because the Senate refused to give him a phone or office. The only serious complaint I hear is that he is too conservative to win a national election. The last man that charge was leveled against was Ronald Reagan.

 

Review of Hope and the Knight of the Black Lion by Michael Findley and Guest blog “Character Interview”for Vienta

Also, please check out our cover redesigns and let us know what you think!

https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.351117068247836.100610.149992491693629&type=1
Every Star Trek the fan must admit that nothing exciting ever happens until someone does something incredibly stupid. By writing this story from the first person point of view of a 17-year-old girl, Mary Findley makes the opening chapters very believable. Hope is stubborn, proud, ignorant and keeps the action moving. Unlike Star Trek, TV and movies in general, where the stupidity never seems to stop, Hope learns from her mistakes.
This is a highly readable historical novel. Unlike Tolstoy’s War and Peace, I can remember who the characters are. I both read and studied Tolstoy and he still confuses me. The much shorter Hope and the Black Lion has a consistent point of view and a limited cast of characters. This is a big plus for me, because I can keep them straight.
For those of you who love period vocabulary, this will be a great book. For me, this was the chance to become intimately acquainted with the online dictionary. Just click (or tap if you have touchscreen) and for a brief definition and you may continue reading. For instance, what is damask, anyway? The setting and titles of nobility are historic, though none of the characters are.
The story is set during the time of the Crusades. Hope is a Lady whose father died. Hope and her mother go to live on the estate of her mother’s brother. She pitches a fit for oysters, trades an heirloom for man’s clothes so she can run in a race for boys only, nods off during Latin lessons, sneaks off to meet a boy by climbing down a castle tower and this is all in chapter one. This is followed by seventeen more action packed chapters.
We have action, love, romance, swords, castles and unbelievable stupidity all in the same book. Actually, it’s all very believable; and lovable.

Karen Baney’s Blog features a Character interview with Maeve Collinswood of my Historical Romance Vienta. Please check it out, and thank you, Karen!

http://www.karenbaney.com/archives/1427

Is Mitt Romney Really Our Only Hope?

I commented to a Mitt Romney supporter that he should be careful to be honest. He immediately wrote back that I was calling him a liar. No, I was just cautioning him. With the latest Ann Coulter column from TownHall.com, however, I believe a line was crossed. http://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2011/12/28/only_one_candidate_is_right_on_the_two_most_important_issues/page/full/

There are two parts to this article. She opens by saying “In the upcoming presidential election, two issues are more important than any others: repealing Obamacare and halting illegal immigration. If we fail at either one, the country will be changed permanently.” That is an opinion; and a very good one, I might add.

She makes several well-thought-out arguments to prove her point, bolstered by enough facts to convince most reasonable people. So her major premise is honest, factual and well thought out. She might not convince everyone but there is no question that she is very honest in her major premise.

She then moves to her minor premise, that only Mitt Romney can defeat Barack Obama. Ann opens with several solid points. “Michele Bachmann, Ron Paul and Newt Gingrich have never had to win votes beyond small, majority-Republican congressional districts.

“Jon Huntsman, Rick Perry, Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum have won statewide elections, but Huntsman and Perry ran in extremely red states that don’t resemble the American electorate. Only Romney and Santorum have won a statewide election in a blue state, making them our surest-bets in a general election.

“But if Santorum wins, we lose on the second most important issue — illegal immigration — and he’ll be the last Republican ever to win a general election in America.”

This last sentence seems to be absolute nonsense on the face of it, but a well-respected commentator like Ann Coulter gets the opportunity to make her case. She then shifts to explain the horrors of illegal immigration finishing with “Any candidate who opposes E-Verify is not serious about illegal immigration.” Once again, her opinion, but one I go along with.

She then says: “Kowtowing to business (while pretending to kowtow to Hispanics), Paul, Perry and Santorum oppose E-Verify. As a senator, Rick Santorum voted against even the voluntary use of E-Verify.” Though Ronald Regan’s 11th commandment “Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican,” should keep Ann from saying this even if it were true, this is a lie.

The truth is that Rick Santorum voted for the “Basic Pilot Program” HR 3610 (E-Verify) on 7/18/1996. He voted for E-Verify again on 11/12/2003 under the name “Basic Pilot Program Extension and Expansion Act of 2003.” Rick Santorum voted against the McCain/Kennedy amnesty for illegals bill which was deliberately mislabeled with the propaganda term “E-Verify.” Ann Coulter is very confused on this point. Mitt Romney actually worked with Rick Santorum to help defeat this bill. In fact, Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum have worked on the same conferences, committees, etc. to help stop illegal immigration. So where is the difference?

The same day (Wednesday, Dec 28, 2011) Ann Coulter’s piece choosing Mitt Romney as the only right candidate for defending us from Obamacare, Mitt Romney says that the foundation of Obamacare, the individual mandate, is “a conservative fundamental.” Ann Coulter admits that every single Republican candidate, without exception, has pledged to repeal Obamacare. Again, this is a matter of honesty, telling the truth. Every other candidate will actually repeal Obamacare. Mitt Romney, however, plays with words. He actually believes that socialized medicine is a fundamental right. Mitt Romney actually believes that the only problem with Obamacare is in the details, the way that it is worded. Mitt Romney actually believes that the solution is Massachusetts style healthcare. http://www.redstate.com/erick/2011/12/28/today-december-28-2011-mitt-romney-calls-obamacare-conservative/

So for the repeal of Obamacare, one of Ann Coulter’s two foundational issues, Mitt Romney is the only Republican candidate who is completely UNQUALIFIED. Using Ann Coulter’s own standards of illegal immigration and Obamacare, the only logical conclusion is anybody but Mitt Romney. There is no other honest, logical conclusion.

2011 in review

The WordPress.com stats helper monkeys prepared a 2011 annual report for this blog.

Here’s an excerpt:

A San Francisco cable car holds 60 people. This blog was viewed about 1,300 times in 2011. If it were a cable car, it would take about 22 trips to carry that many people.

Click here to see the complete report.