"Fanboys"

JAGIS SAID:

“I don't even know where to begin. I have been reading your posts and can not believe how it seems that your desire above all else seems to be to degrate another brother in Christ.”

I’ve been over this ground before, but I have to repeat myself every so often. This is my motto:

If you want to be treated like a Christian, then act like one!

I do not equate a profession of faith with a consular passport which confers diplomatic immunity on the holder of so that whenever he begins to misbehave, he can wave his “Christian” passport in our face to escape accountability for his misconduct.

There’s a pattern to how these debates generally progress—or perhaps I should say, regress.

A critic of Calvinism gives his putative reasons for rejecting Reformed theology. We (at Tblog) respond to him on his own grounds.

Now, if the reasons he gives were his real reasons, then he should either show where our counterargument is defective or else withdraw his original objection.

But what usually happens is that our opponent then becomes evasive and/or abusive. At that point I change my tone. He is no longer dealing in good faith.

“This is so baffling to me. refering to the person that you are discussing Christ centered things with as a ‘little girl’ is so out of the realm of seeking to be of one achord that it saddens me.”

i) I’m simply following the precedent of Scripture. For example, when Jeremiah compares warriors to women (48:41; 49:22; 50:37; 51:30), that isn’t meant to be a compliment.

Likewise, when God tells Job to gird up his loins like a man (38:3; 40:7), God is using a macho-man simile drawn from the ancient world of wrestling.

So, yes, it’s possible for a grown man to act like a girly-girl. Scripture itself employs these comparisons. And I’m not saddened by the usage of Scripture.

I did a very dry, dispassionate post in which I distinguished between affecting an outcome and changing an outcome. Instead of addressing the substance of the post, Kangaroodort launched into very hand-wringing post which was, by turns, accusatory and larded with self-pity.

That’s frankly effeminate. And I said so. There are times when it’s perfectly appropriate to tell a grown man to act like a man.

The Bible isn’t Emily Post. Too many Christians have a very dainty and decidedly unscriptural notion of Christian etiquette. Not only is this false to Biblical manhood, but it’s not as if the Scriptural heroines of the faith were far from fainting violets either.

ii) In addition, there’s something a bit hypocritical about how saddened you are. You’re very lopsided in what offends you. This is the sort of thing I was responding to:

“The gentlemen at Triablogue are apparently hurting for material…Why do they feel like they need to addrsss my arguments if they are not a threat to their position…Just what has gotten these gentlemen so freaked out and rattled?…The games continue as Steve Hays chimed in with his own post…It makes me wonder. Why are they still so insecure about their position?I am amazed that I have somehow managed to get them so riled up…They have already convinced their fanboys…For now I am leaving the playground so Paul and Steve will have to figure out some new ways to entertain each other.”

Ben’s characterizing of his own opponents is littered with denigrating asides. I don’t see you expressing the same anguish where the other party is concerned.

Remember, this is your yardstick, not mine. Why aren’t you more equitable in the application of your own yardstick?

iii) Finally, comments like yours, while well-meaning, simply contribute to the very problem you say you deplore—for instead of discussing the substantive issues, you shift the question to subjective, touchy-feely matters of tone and style and body language.

“This does nothing but discourage me into thinking that we as christians will never be able to unite under the cross.”

I don’t know what that’s supposed to mean. Were you expecting all Christians to agree with each other? If so, then I suppose you have good reason to be discouraged inasmuch as that will never happen in this life.

“I guess I would ask you if you and Ben were sitting in a room discussing this with Christ would you be willing to say these same things to Ben or me for that matter?”

This comment wasn’t directed at me, but it’s worth addressing:

i) If Christ were in the room, I’d let him do all the talking. I’d be there to listen and learn.

ii) If I were speaking face-to-face with someone, I might well take a different approach—but it’s not as easy for your opponent to be evasive in a live, face-to-face encounter than it is on the Internet.

iii) Finally, there’s nothing inherently wrong with treating someone we know rather differently than a perfect stranger. That’s the basis of friendship.