Shared Essays: Christian Marriage

Sometimes coincidences are purely interesting. I recently attended a wedding and the bride and groom prepared some essays for their guests about why they were doing a Christian Marriage. I meant to share this earlier last week but lost access to my computer and only just received permission from the bride to share it. As a result, I'm posting this on Valentine's Day which is a Christian feast day but also famous for showing love to one another. Hope you enjoy the interesting insights this married couple wrote their their guests.

With Love,

N. D. Moharo

Why the Crucifix?

You may notice after entering the church there is a crucifix, an image of Jesus when he died. Why do we prominently display this image, which should seem to appear to be the worst thing to happen? This is because God is an interesting Director and used this event to show how much He loves us. By recalling the death and passion of our Lord, we remember how he took flesh and suffered one of the most painful deaths to show that even though we treat Him unjustly, desert Him, and even insult Him and speak words of hatred, He loves us so greatly that He died for our sins. We pray that this example of Love never leave our minds as there is no better example for Christian Marriage.

There will be times where we make mistakes and hurt each other emotionally, but it takes a strong will to endure the pain, forgive each other, and continue to love each other. We must willfully desire what is good for each other, even at the sacrifice of ourselves. Love is influenced by the heart, but it is an act of the will. This makes it possible to “Love our Enemies” and to love each other even when it is difficult.

Why Christian Marriage?

We often consider Marriage to be about Love even though the joke is that very few actually still love each other after a few years. Christianity, on the other hand, is and always has been about Love.  It is about true, authentic, and undying love. There is no other religion that can claim the title of Religion of Love.

Consider this chain of logic. God is Good. God is Love. God created Man in His Image.  God called Man very good.  If God is Good and Love, then Man’s perfection and Happiness lies in being Good and to Love. Christianity reveals that God created us out of Love in order to Love. God even became Man to show us that perfect model of Goodness and Love. Therefore, Christianity must be the Religion of Love.

Christianity has not only the perfect example of Love, but it challenges us to strive towards that perfect example. Even if we cannot reach the perfect model, there are many heroes called Saints that show us how we can still love greatly. The first heroes we have are our parents bound through marriage, committing to love each other “Through Good Times and Bad, For Better and Worse.”

In today’s society, it’s hard to maintain that commitment, but by focusing on Christian Models and Ideals, we look ahead with hope. We have adhered to its teachings while we dated, and now we shall work to thrive through them as we live as husband and wife.

Why the Mass?

The Mass consists of two liturgies. The first is where we listen and reflect on the Bible. This is to help us appreciate the Love of God and prepare our minds to participate in the second liturgy. The second is where we participate in the passion of Jesus by receiving Holy Communion and praying.

The Mass is where we see a miracle every time with transformation of Bread and Wine into the Body and Blood of Jesus. While the physical attributes of Bread and Wine do not change, we believe that God has changed the substance within. This is amazing because it allows God to dwell within us.

In the Bible, Jesus states that those who want to enter heaven must eat His flesh. It’s a strong statement, but reading it carefully, we see that He was serious. But if Jesus is no longer present here on earth, how is this possible?

We believe the Mass to make present the sacrifice of Jesus. We do not believe that we offer up Jesus to die again and again, but that through a divine miracle, we are somehow present at the one sacrifice.  By this, He who created the world, turned a sea into blood and then back again, and turned water into wine, is perfectly capable of changing bread and wine into bodily flesh without changing anything physical. It’s called a Miracle.

How a Mother Killed her Son and Got Away With It

Warning: This story, though fiction, is a prediction of the not-so-distant future. It will happen because the defenses have been and currently being taken down. It may make you feel sick. My hope is that y sharing this with you, we may prevent it from happening. My points are below the "article".

-----------------------------------------------------------

SAN FRANCISCO WOMAN FREED AFTER KILLING TODDLER

    In a decision from the 9th Circuit Court, a woman guilty of killing her one-year old male offspring has been released in a victory for Human Rights. Following the precedents of major Women's Rights cases such as Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) and Roe vs Wade (1973), the court found no valid argument for imprisoning a woman who decided to free herself from the slavery of a white-male parasite.
    Nancy Smith, age 27, stabbed her one-year old toddler in the heart when he wouldn't stop crying. "I just could not take it anymore," she said with no regret. As a single mother after divorcing her ex-husband, George Smith, she was deep in debt from student loans and found the burden of a toddler unbearable. Her attorney, Hilary Sanger, successfully argued that "that toddler threatened her Constitutional Rights... It sucked the life out of Ms. Smith by its excessive crying, keeping up from sleep which has been clinically proven to be necessary. It also produced an undue burden financially that would only grow the longer she kept it." She provided studies that showed the estimated cost of raising a toddler to age 18 would be at least $1,000,000. "Since Ms. Smith was already deep in debt, it would escalate to the point beyond repayment. No only that, but the mere existence of the toddler limited her career options, proving to be an undue burden that threatened her Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness."
    The DA, a white male from Silicon Valley, argued that the toddler should have been given to the father, who previously fought for custody after the divorce. However, precedents paved the way that the woman, who held the burden of carrying the fetus to term, should have the say in how its life is lived. This Right to Choose meant that even after the fetus was born, if she no longer wanted it, she could dispose of it. Ms. Sanger pointed out that if a woman could terminate a pregnancy by the 9th month, why should she be constrained because of going through the most painful experience? She continued to argue that a woman could complete an abortion even after it "fails" and the fetus emerges alive. This was supported by President Obama, who as a state senator, voted against a bill that would have prevented such an action because it would undermine Roe vs Wade. President Obama is currently being appointed to the Supreme Court by President Hilary Clinton.
    The DA tried to argue that the toddler was a person and had a right to live. The defense scored another victory by proving that even in conservative philosophy, a child is not able to reason until age 5. Also, by reminding the court that the toddler could not vote or serve on a jury, it could not be considered a citizen. It was only a burden to the client and society, taking tax dollars which could be better spent on college scholarships and nature preservation projects. The closest the toddler could be considered being a person is 1/18th of one as it would take another 17 years before it could perform any services. Since 1/18th is not even close to 1, then the toddler was not a person...

End of Fictional Story
------------------------------------------------------------
Start of Opinion Piece

    Now this is prediction and such a case may not go entirely like that. However, I do beg the question, "How do you fight against this?" When a child can be killed even after being born alive, which the issue has been brought up many times but shot down, how can we prevent murder of toddlers when they are considered "inconvenient"? There are still some barriers as some members of Congress and some State Legislatures fight for the protection of those still in the womb. Unfortunately, the U.S. Democratic party is strictly in favor for abortion, as stated by the party platform and one thing it appears very united on.
    So what arguments do I have for against abortion? First, something you must know is that women do require love and support, especially when caring for a child. Therefore, the debate actually stems to the current culture attacking true love. Husbands should be caring for their wives and be fully loving at all times. Children create a very strong bond for married couples to stay together and exercise their love. Those who father children should not be freed of their responsibilities. Yes, abortion and contraception was actually a trick in order that men could free themselves from having to love a woman. After all, by having abortions and contraception, they think they can hide their adulterous acts. Abortion doesn't free women from men, it enables males to avoid being men.
    You may have noticed many of the tactics I placed in that article. The biggest thing was the personhood of a child. In order for this to be considered a "Human Rights" victory, the child would have to be declared "Not Human". Hence, the pronoun used was "It" which describes objects. This is appropriate because children have become considered objects rather than living things. This mentality exists in Human Trafficking, the artificial creation of children, and even in adoption in some cases (which is why adoption agencies can be strict about who can adopt).
    A question we must ask ourselves is "At what point did we become human?" Is it when we are born? Then how about those babies who were born alive as part of the abortion procedure? What about those after 6 months of being in the womb? A baby born after 6 months can survive and grow up if taken care of. I actually know someone with that situation.
    Another heavy question is "What gives us the right to say who can live?" We were all embryos and fetuses, and we were all given the opportunity to live. How can we deny that? We were in that situation and were given the right to live.
    There is a joke where someone asks God, "If you are so great, why haven't you sent us someone to cure cancer?" and God replies, "I did. You killed her in an abortion." When you consider how many great figures in history were unwanted or unexpected children (including Jesus for Christians), you can't help but wonder how many more great people were killed through an abortion.
    In terms of politicians and their stances, if they support abortion, which would mean the death of the defenseless and those who need support the most, why should they care to defend you? The inconvenient truth here is that they just want your votes for power.
    The current situation is that the courts continually recently strike down laws that attempt to restrict abortions. Things will only get worse as the next president can possibly appoint 4 Supreme Court justices. Hilary has already stated that she thinks it would be a great idea to appoint Obama, and we know his position on babies born alive being killed (as well as how big of a liar he is when he's campaigning thanks to information revealed by his Campaign Manager). Now do I approve of any of the Republicans? Not really but I am curious about Carly Fiorina, but she also needs to clean up her campaign a bit if she want to win. On the other hand, at least I can have more faith that she won't appoint people who will legalize murder of children. If a woman president, I would definitely prefer her over Hilary. We cannot trust Hilary who wants all restrictions on abortions removed and also expressed dissatisfaction with a Supreme Court ruling that upheld the ban of partial-birth abortion in 2007.

N. D. Moharo

P.S. I did not write this piece with the intent of condemning just Hilary Clinton, but all presidential candidates who support abortion. I just know more about Hilary than the others.

Tips on Budgeting

To the Tight-Budgeted,
    I am by no means a financial expert, but there are things that I do which I have found helpful with my own finances and planning my future. I won't give advice about investments, just the mentality about the cash you have now or receive. A lot of people have a bad mentality when it comes to cash. They coins as burdensome and a waste. However, coins are what make up the dollar bill which makes up the $5 bill, and then the $10, and so on. It's weird to think, but while we can't really buy anything in the United States for a penny, it's worth a lot to other countries. Also, it can save you time.
    So the United States finally got the chips in the credit cards that Europe has had for quite some time. However, it's slower than the old method and a waste of time if all you are trying to do is pay for a quick snack in the grocery store for lunch. After all, grocery store lunches are more affordable than going to restaurants or even vending machines. And yes, that was tip number one for budgeting. Anyways, in these times, cash is fast, especially if you have exact change, which is a fantastic feeling.
    I mentioned it before that I learned how to use pennies. In fact, my wallet barely ever has more than 10 coins, which is pretty manageable. What you do is occasionally overpay at the cash register so that the cashier will give you a bigger coin instead of a bunch of small coins. For example, if the bill is $4.96 and you pay $5, you will get 4 pennies. If you have 1 penny already, use it with the $5 bill and the cashier will give you a nickel. Since it's the cashiers that always dispense the pennies, and hence the ones that need them, they'll appreciate you giving one back. It's actually less of a hassle for them. The result will eventually be that you will have exact change quite a bit and you don't waste anything.
    My third tip is to have a spreadsheet and track your spending. I find this helpful because it helps you predict how much you will spend in a given month and where you can cut on spending. I know I don't need to pay for car insurance every month, but when it comes, it'll be a lot. Hence, I do need to budget for it every month. If an unexpected fee comes, then I know I can save some money by not going to my favorite pizza place a few times and get the cheaper, and probably healthier, sushi from the grocery store.

    For a bonus tip, I suggest use services like Bing Rewards which give you points for using the search engine. After about a month of doing the searches, you can get a $5 Amazon Gift Card or other credit to different stores and services. The Skype ones pretty nice since you can use it for phone calls. With one being free unlimited calling to US and Canada for a month, you can possibly save quite a bit on your phone bill assuming you are using wi-fi instead of your data plan. This is bonus tip because the service could always disappear or change its terms. However, right now it's pretty useful.

    What about credit card rewards points? Don't bother unless you can fully pay for a big purchase right away. It's a trick to get you to spend more and the conversions aren't favorable even if you don't incur fees. My one praise for Bank of America is that the conversion was pretty simple for 100 points equaling $1. Other banks like Citi make it confusing like crazy. For Citi, you can use the points to pay your credit card bill but it's 133 points for every $1. You can use them on Amazon, but you spend 125 points for $1. You can get gift cards with a 100 points to $1 conversion, but you need 2500 points before you can use it. Considering that you have to spend $100 for 100 points, but you need at least 2500 points before you can redeem... Not worth counting on. The only people who earn money from you using a credit card is the credit card company. Not only because they charge the merchants a fee (Apple Pay adds an additional fee as well), but then they also charge you interest if you cannot pay the full amount right away. In fact, they will charge you as much as they can even if you could and did pay the full amount (Bank of America). If you use cash, then you know how much you can spend.

So there is my quick advice for some better money-sense. Hopefully it helps you out. After all, if you can save a few dollars, that's another meal, which can possibly get you through until you can get into a better situation.

Good Luck,

N. D. Moharo

P.S. Have your own helpful advice you wish to share? Feel free to leave it in the comments below

New Design

So I decided to change the template of the blog. I feel like the old design made it difficult to read my writings sometimes. This new style I hope accommodates reading more. I'll probably see about removing the background image but at least you should be able to see the text more clearly.

Here's the before image

And here's the new

If you prefer the older style, feel free to comment. Right now I'm experimenting with styles so I may go through a few more tweaks before I'm done. I'm open to suggestions.

N. D. Moharo

Warning about "Friends"

To Those with Frenemies,
    While everyone is giving Daisy Ridley advice about life and fame, I might as well chip in: Beware of the Entourage! Why? "Be careful of who your friends are" because "a friend is another self." The moment when you are first friends with someone is when they comment that they like something and you say, "you too?!" This is because friendship is built on common ground and your best friends are the ones you share a lot in common. This is also part of the reason why your spouse does not need to be your best friend despite what young people say on social media.
     That sort of example of a group voicing their thoughts is exactly why the entourage is so dangerous. If your crowd of "friends" are all bad examples, then you will become a bad example yourself. Is it possible to overcome this? Yes, but that is dangerous in itself because you risk becoming too prideful. What I mean is that it's only possible if you have a very strong spirit and stick to ground.
    My father would often say that he was proud that I knew how to pick friends. It's not exactly that I didn't hang out with "bad friends", but I was the leader who generally decided what would be done. I was also the one who would determine what was appropriate to do. Age was probably part of the reason why I was able to do this. The combination of Sanguine and Choleric (Fun and Leadership) blood was also likely beneficial. However, the core was that I stuck to my core values and was respected for it. Even in college, I didn't have to say anything for my friends and roommates to know what I would watch with them and what would cause me to leave.
    That ability to leave is powerful and is probably the best way that show you are above the influence. If my friends did something I really didn't like, such as gossiping and talking bad about "friends" behind their backs, I would just leave and find another group to hang with. That's how you find out who are your friends and who is just trying to control you. Eventually, only those who really want to be your friend will come and follow you, and to be honest, you really only need maybe 3 good friends to be happy with life. It's fine to have lots of friends, but very rarely would you have more than 5 good friends. There's no need to worry because it's not the numbers that matters but the quality of those few friendships. If you can find good friends, those who encourage virtue and love you as a friend, then there's hope that you can survive even fame and fortune.

With Love,

N. D. Moharo

Critical Thinking: Blue Light and Sleep

To the Idle Mind,
    Whether or not a theory is correct is not always important. Sometimes, the important thing is to exercise the mind by practicing critical thinking. Musing is essentially just that: critical thinking. When we speak out our thoughts, it can help put them in order. We might find flaws in the thinking, but the lessons we learn from the process can assist us in finding those flaws faster in the future. In today's post, I don't really care so much about if my theory is true, but rather that you have an example of the critical thinking process. More research could certainly go into this topic and if you have comments and thoughts, I would be glad to hear it. Enjoy.

N. D. Moharo

    I've lately been having trouble sleeping. It's not so much about falling asleep at night anymore but waking up in the middle of the night and being unable to return to dreamland. I'm certainly guilty of using computer screens at night, but I try to at least have them off 1 hour before going to bed. Unfortunately, I might need more than one hour, but what's the problem with computer screens to begin with?
    I've heard that the culprit is Blue Light and maybe bloggers recommend installing a program called f.lux to adjust your PC's light at night. In fact, Google and Amazon recently updated their own applications and tablets to enable the same thing. Apparently, using warm colors like orange and yellow instead of Blue is more conducive to sleep, but why?
    I recall reading that the warm colored light might remind our brains about candlelight or the incandescent lights we used before bedtime and therefore our bodies get ready for bed. I will note that I recall finding it easier to fall asleep when I have the light on. Maybe the reason why was because of the warm orange glow filled the room and that helped negate the blue light from electronics. However, I doubt that's the case since that doesn't explain the physiological aspects of our bodies. We didn't always have fire (or maybe we have, but that's up for debate), so how can warm color lights have been useful for telling our bodies to prepare for sleep? In fact, when I look outside at night, I often think of the Moon as giving off a blue light, even more so than the Sun. So where in nature do we see Warm Colors to signal going to bed?
    Sunset! If you think about it, most people in the old days probably didn't stay awake long after sunset until the discovery of fire. With the warm colors of the sky to signal the day is about to end, our bodies probably took that cue to say, "prepare for sleep." Since the farming life was work while the sun is out, people would wake at or before sunrise and then sleep after sunset. There must be a reason that it used to be that the day was considered over after sunset (Hence, the Sabbath for the Jews began on Friday night, not Saturday morning).
    What do you think? Is the blue light thing a myth or reality? Is there somewhere else in nature that we see warm colors to signal going to sleep? Don't be afraid to share your respectable thoughts.

Shared Post: Magic Confusion, LOTR, and Shining

Sharing this post from J. D. Nyle (with permission, of course). After going through this, I actually recommend that you read his novel even more. For those who haven't read Neostriker: Shining, scroll to the bottom for important terms and definitions. Now for the post, though it's probably easier to read on his blog at http://neostrikershining.blogspot.com/2015/11/magic-confusion-lotr-and-shining.html :



Society today has an interesting practice when it comes to words and meanings. They change the definition of something but then try to imply it was always the case. For example, the definitions of “witches” and “magic” are being changed while the creators imply that it was always this way. I find it interesting and terrifying because of the implications of changing these definitions can have.

When you take something that is by nature evil, such as magic, and then strip away the elements that make it evil, you have something completely different. Even though you may end up with the same word, the substance that makes up the word is now completely different. However, if you were to go back in time, people would not accept your "new definition" because it would not correspond. While you may be able to "re-cast" the old word to fit your new definition, you cannot impose your new definition on old interpretations of the word. The fact that you had to change the definition means that you understand they are different. Hence, what we must be careful of is that when we teach our children the concept of "good magic," they might not be able to distinguish the old definition and therefore think what is evil to be okay.

Definition of Magic

Now what does this have to do with Neostriker? There were no witches or apparent magic in Shining. As for my next novel, there won't be witches yet, but there will be magic according to what I have determined to be its original meaning. Magic is the use of evil spirits (or evil nature) to do "your will" with the twisted notion that you have power over them. In the new and modern confusion, you can see traces of this definition present. The problem is that authors did not properly convey this when they wrote their stories and their influence made it even worse.

By “authors”, I'm referring to the likes of J. R. R. Tolkien and C. S. Lewis. When you read their stories, they indicate that their meaning for "magic" is different, but they never explained why or how it's different. So when new authors recall their stories, these new authors remember that, "since those guys used magic for good, it must be okay." In these minds, magic is a tool and the evil stems from the purpose it's used for. A recent series I saw that followed this line of logic was BBC's Merlin. However, this isn't what Tolkien or Lewis had in mind when they used the word.

For the old and venerable authors, magic is how the humans described what they saw but could not rationally explain it. The analogy would be that if we took a flashlight to medieval times, they would not be able to understand the concept of electricity and therefore it would appear as "magic". In Tolkien's case, there is a section of the Fellowship of the Ring that explains it's advanced science that we would be unable to comprehend.

Now it could be said that Tolkien failed to easily convey the difference between the "magic" that corresponds to my earlier definition and "magic of nature". For example, powers that are intrinsic to the nature of the being can be considered as okay and as a tool. In this case, Gandalf as the wizard (or Tolkien's equivalent of angels) is okay, but a normal human who studies to become a warlock is not. This is because, even in the magic of nature, there is evil when one tries to grasp for it, such as the One Ring from Lord of the Rings.

Problem 1: Grasping

When you look at the One Ring, I recall it being referred to as a "magic ring", and that is key. We often assume that its power is simply to make one invisible. However, that doesn't make sense when you read the "Ring Monologues" each character has when presented with it. In fact, both Isildur and Sauron had the ring but never turned invisible. The ring's power was actually to amplify an aspect of the nature of a character to the point that it corrupts. Hobbits are described before as already good at hiding and so invisibility makes sense. Sauron was powerful and so the ring granting him even more power makes sense. Gandalf mentions that he would initially use the ring to help his magic for good but he would eventually become worse than Sauron. The thing is that evil happens when a character tries to grasp for the Ring or, in Sauron's case, all of the rings. However, when the ring comes to a character, they are eventually able to get rid of it, with the exception of Isildur. Those who grasped: Sauron, Boromir, and Gollum. Those who didn't grasp: Bilbo, Frodo (until the end), Gandalf, Aragorn, Faramir, and Sam. The ones who grasp are seeking magic to do their will, but those who didn't were able to overcome their own desires for the good. In this sense, you can say magic is the tool for the author to develop his characters, but you should still never grasp for it.

Something N. D. Moharo says is that "tragedy occurs when someone does something they were not supposed to or not do something when they were supposed to." This falls in line with what I am saying about grasping. For example, if I'm driving and want to make a turn, I need to check to make sure there is no one in my way. Even if I really want to make the turn now, I must wait and allow the right moment to come. Otherwise, I might hit someone. That would have happened because I turned when I wasn't supposed to; I grasped at the ability to turn instead of waiting for my turn. One problem with magic as I defined it is that you are trying grasp for something to happen instead of letting it happen (more on that in my novel).

Problem 2: Calling of Evil Spirits

The second problem with magic is the calling of evil spirits. Evil spirits don't change. Hence, the only reason why evil will help you is if they believe you will cause a greater evil. Therefore, the use of magic will lead to evil unless you are able to break from it.

This part of the traditional definition is perhaps played with the most. When authors say that their definition of magic is that it’s a tool and of the nature of the character, that can be okay. However, if that’s the case, they cannot use spells or enchantments. The nature of spells indicates that another spirit is being called and therefore contradicts the idea that magic is part of the nature of a character.

The second aspect authors may play with is by suggesting that spirits can change. However, there is a philosophy that probably stems from Thomas Aquinas or Aristotle and Buddhism (if I'm interpreting the idea of reincarnation correctly) where spirits cannot change unless they have their own body. It's interesting because it could mean that the test of the angels was that they were given bodies. In fact, it could be that C. S. Lewis was onto something when writing the Magician's Nephew in that "angels" actually had their own world with a morality similar to our own and its time finished before our own world began (or maybe they existed before the dinosaurs). Anyways, hence the old understanding of magic is that evil spirits will always be evil, hence summoning them is evil.

Problem 3: Possession vs Inspiration

The third problem with magic is what essentially becomes possession. This occurs when you seek a spirit's power and they give it to you, linking you to them. You may think you are in control, but slowly and surely, you surrender one part of yourself after another. In stories, it'd happen like this: "I cannot do that now, but if you do this, then you'll have that power." Sometimes authors are nice and blatantly write it as "surrender your soul and you will have all the power you want." Now let's mark a distinction. Evil spirits possess; good spirits inspire. That's important because that's how it applies in Neostriker.

When I wrote Shining, I didn't have this full understanding of magic. As a result, you get an idea that it's the Asens that give David his powers, but it's supposed to be that they guide David to manifest and grow his own spirit. I actually determined this when preparing for my next novel (still trying to figure out a good name for it) so when I went back to edit Shining for publication, I tried to hint towards and explain this logic properly. The funny thing is the misconception actually makes sense in Episode 11 and is completely appropriate. In that episode, an evil spirit/Dark Power starts the process of "surrender for power". To contrast, Zel as a good spirit only assists, guides, and protects. With inspiration, there is still fullness of freedom in your actions, and nothing is sacrificed except for perhaps your ego.

Something you must be careful of is the nature of possession. Throughout human history and the cultures of the world, no one is able to free himself from possession. It always requires someone else or God to intervene. This is because of three things: 1) the evil spirit is more powerful than you simply by nature otherwise you wouldn’t use them; 2) The spirits can convince you that they are part of your mind and hence the actions are your will; 3) Only those siding with the powerful Good Spirit (aka God) can cast them out.

Summary and Closing

In summary, Old Magic is the use of evil spirits (or evil nature) to do "your will" with the twisted notion that you have power over them. This old meaning indicates the three things evil of magic: Grasping for something you shouldn't be; Calling upon evil spirits; and what amounts to as possession. Therefore the opposite of magic is: patience and self-sacrifice, the avoidance of evil spirits, and inspiration.

Not too long ago, N. D. Moharo, in a mutual exchange of ideas, brought up in my mind that people are skeptical about the idea of the Holy Communion changing from bread to the body of a God but they practice something very similar when it comes to definitions. I saw this to be true when I was playing a demo for a game and I came across the concept of good witches. I originally meant to cover the evil nature of witches but magic was the first step. However, I do hope you appreciated this insight not only into the philosophy of magic, but also the look into the process of writing Neostriker: Shining. If you want a more clear explanation on how Neostriker is advocating the defeat of magic, feel free to say so.

J. D. Nyle

Terms and Concepts

P.S. For those who haven't read Neostriker: Shining, here is a brief explanation of the terms used:

    David is the main character of the story who has the ability to don special armor and become a "Neostriker". It's revealed halfway through that this armor is a manifestation of his own spirit/soul called "neo" and therefore the term "Neostriker" means "Spirit Striker".

    Asens are also revealed halfway through to be spirits. Zel is the Asen who helps David grow and become more powerful.

    The Dark Power is the source of evil and hence, for the purpose of this essay, can represent magic.

For those who want to read Shining, I shared the entire story here on blogspot. You can find the links to each episode/chapter at http://neostrikershining.blogspot.com/p/full-story.html or click "Full Novel" on the top bar

I also shared half of it on Wattpad if you would like to read it on your tablet. If you like the story, please tell your friends. I would totally love to publish a hardcopy version to make it easier to read but I need support. At the moment, the only thing I can add to it is a page for each episode devoted to how I designed the chapters, characters, and ideas that changed. Unfortunately, that alone isn't enough to convince publishers that it will sell so I need some vocal support. Maybe we need a twitter campaign #publishNeostriker