Response Policy Why

APPENDED: SECTION TWO: (WHY I HAVE THIS POLICY.)


At least TEN ADVANTAGES FOR YOU (and me) from this new policy:

#1. (No repetition) When you encounter others like me who deny padeobaptism (or the topic at hand), you will not have to type your thoughts twelve plus times over twelve months on twelve different threads; instead you will have one growing entry that you can update and direct people to time and again.  This translate to better time stewardship over the months, instead of repeating the same attacks 12x a year.

#2. (No distractions) If interested, I can read your blog without having to weed out the entries of 6 other people on a FB thread, never having to click the FB "see more" link. It is much easier for your readers.

#3. (No size limitations) If interested, I will read your thoughts in full, you will have 15-20-30 pages to state your case and evidence, you will not be limited to 8-9 paragraphs; I personally find it difficult to read 10 paragraphs in the little blue FB margins, especially when it is among 30 other replies in that thread. I would imagine that you would be bothered by me coming to your post and pasting 8 pages into the comment box;

#4 (No time pressure) On your blog you can state your case over 12 weeks of editing, not 24 hours of constant reactions to the latest reply. I have no interest to hunting down a thread from 8 days ago on FB, thus the pressure is to exhaust the topic in 2-3 days, which is a counter-productive restraint. You now do not have to cram all your points into 2-3 days of tit-for-tat replies on a thread, weeding out 8 rabbits, hoping to resolve everything by sunrise. Now you can use your blog without time pressure.

#5. (Less Tangents). Admittedly blog entries can accidentally tackle multiple topics at the same time, but with practice we can edit them, and isolate topics into separate files. This constant editing is not possible on FB threads. If someone comes to your wall and raises 4 topics, then you can give them 4 links of the 4 files you have been working on over the past months.

#6 (Less emotion-driven rants and raves). Admittedly blog entries can include emotion-driven rants and raves, but with practice we can edit them, delete the rant/rave component, delete weaknesses, add strengths, remove previous ad hominems, strawmen, fallacies we have accidentally used previously.

#7 (No fighting for the Last Word; No accusation of being argumentative). If I disagree with your blog entry, I can add my rebuttal to my on-going blog entry; but in due time the majority of topics will be exhausted, we each will have as much space as desired to state our case. In essence every 2 weeks you can tell each other of the updates to our file, but no one is getting the last word, because every one is getting their presentation granted. If you are no longer interested in updating your file, that is up to you; there will be times when I am not currently motivated to revamp my corresponding file.

#7b. When FB has 20 exchanges on a thread, persons will accuse the other to being argumentative, due to the nature of the conversation length. However on our own blogs, we only have 2-3 growing entries per topic which is updated and improved upon through the weeks; In such a setting the blogger can be as thorough and detailed and methodical as they would like, without being accused of being argumentative.

#8. (Even my blog is not an attempt to convince you.). We can have 50 pages about the errors of Mormonism, Atheism, Hinduism, the Pope, Praying to Mary, Islam, post it, link it and it not convince our readers.

Even among other topics this is true. We can have 50 pages about the errors of King James Onlyism, Padeobaptism, Women deacons, Sunday-Sabbath, 10% tithe....post it, link it, and it not convince our reader. So I am not sending my blog link to "convince you" as the basis of my validity. There are many topics which you can send me your link and evidence, and I remain unconvinced. If life were this easy, I would quickly find the ultimate file on who should be baptized, send it to all dissenters, and unify Reformed Denominations under the same banner, which ever it may be. So my blog, and your blog, is not presented with the primairy aim of changing someone's mind. If so, our joy will be robbed daily. We will find hundreds of people who remain unconvinced on 50 topics that we have posted on.

#9. (Will not make it, take it, personally). FB threads can quickly turn into name calling. "You are a heretic, You are a false prophet. You are a blasphemer. You are crazy. You are pitiful. (etc, etc)." There are times when we can call someone a heretic and a false prophet, but repeating this mantra every 10 sentences really amounts to nothing. If you want to create a blog and call those supporting Unconditonal Election or Particular Redemption to be heretics, then you are free to do so; but do it on your own blog then link me to that blog; Do not write the entry as pinpointed to "me", but pinpointed to the "topic". Other persons, like me, who do not support women-elders will visit your site and not be bogged down trying to figure out who this Todd-dude is in your material.

However, my advice is, on any topic, not to build your case on repeated labeling. You waste your time from the constructive evidence needed to support such a deduction. I've had Mormons and the Kingdom Hall repeatedly in my home, and even for an hour at a time. I told them both that I saw Joseph Smith and Charles Russel Taze as false prophets, but I did not say this more than three times within the hour, doing so is not productive. This model would translate into typing the deduction once every four pages, not every 10 sentences.

I hope my blog entries keeps the focus on the topic, not the individuals asserting the counterpoint. I am sure the majority of you are nice, helpful, friendly, moral, benevolent, and enjoyable; you can make a better breakfast, lunch, supper, and batch of cookies than I can; you offer great wisdom and skill on car repair, house repair, and computer repair. So do not take my disagreement with you personally. I will try to state everything in objective neutral terms, without "hammering" my point.

In college-debate class one is forced to represent views they disagree with, it is a helpful practice to stay focused on addressing the TOPIC, not the INDIVIDUALS who support the topic. If you are a theist, how would you present a case against THEISM? If you are an Arminian, how would you present a case ARMINIANISM? This mindset should be the approach for presenting your counterpoints to my assertions. Stick to my assertions, not the one asserting.

#10 (no sense of being out-numbered, flooded from 4 directions, innundated, esculation). This outcome can happen to both parties: to the affirmative side, and to the negating side. It is unpleasant. Everyone feeds off the other comments they like and dislike. People amen each other. People start using the same slogans made in rebutal. "your sad"....."no your sad"...."no really your sad". While admittedly this new policy protects me from being out-numbered, flooded from four directions, and being over-whelmed, it also protects you from the same experience. You might see 4 posts in the thread, but be unaware of the 3 private email notifications calling me a false-prophet repeatedly and a blasphemer repeatedly.

I sincerely told the person I was very busy addressing other studies and projects, but that was immediately rejected with insults, attacks, vehemence and fervor. I found it very hard to be constructive for the next hour because I was now being buried by private inbox notes, multiple posts on mulitple threads, and all the while my personal project was suffering from all these distractions. This new policy aims to prevent YOU from being distracted in your projects, as well as prevent myself from being distracted from my projects as multiple notifications and in-box materials overwhelm both of us.

So these 10 benefits (among others) are a few reasons why I am adopted the aforementioned policy. This policy is presented in all the friendliness and good-will that I pray the grace of God will manifest in me, with the hope that in due time I might possibly read your blog; and if so motivated might reply back on my own blog.

Finally and most importantly, Colossians. 1:18 And he (Jesus) is the head of the body, the church. He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent.