(September 15, 2015 at 9:08 pm)Stimbo Wrote: You know, I really would like to take Randy's arguments at face value and assess his sources; but I find all the arrogant posturing extremely offputting. I find myself thinking he's trying to misdirect me.
I apologize. Please allow me to explain.
When I first joined the forum, I was EXTREMELY careful to present myself in a pleasant, low-key manner. But after about 3-4 weeks of daily battering from folks like Min (need I say more?) and you (be honest about that!), I began to wonder if I needed to adopt an "in-your-face" persona to earn some respect from what is obviously a very tough crowd. I felt like I had walked into a biker bar wearing khakis and a pink polo shirt. So, I decided to dish out as good as what I was receiving. However, even then, I chose to respond to each forum member in kind - Jenny A, Julia, Jorm...they were respectful to me, so I tried to be respectful to them. Dyresand, Cato and others...not so much. You may recall that I told you point blank that when you asked an honest question, I would give you a courteous and thoughtful answer. This has been my policy for the past 10 years of online apologetics.
Most recently, I had the opportunity to take a two-week vacation away from the forum. I strongly considered making it permanent, but I concluded that for now, I will continue to interact with those forum members who are offering more substantive arguments and discussion based upon logic, reason, facts, evidence, scholarship, etc. I'm not getting into any more "meme wars" with the less mature members of the forum. It's kinda fun...but ultimately unproductive. No one is really benefiting from such behavior.
In short, I'm going to try to find a reasonable balance somewhere between being a complete jerk and tip-toeing around. And although it goes against my thinking generally to ignore anyone (since it gives the false impression that I'm "afraid" of what they might say), I may add a few of the most offensive people to my ignore list. They aren't really engaging in discussion with me, anyway, so why bother reading their posts?
Finally, I understand that interacting with someone online (which is so devoid of emotive elements of communication) who is confident in their knowledge and beliefs can be "offputting" as you point out...especially regarding a subject like religion which can be so subjective and open to doubt. Your criticism is valid, and I will strive to minimize the "triumphalism" in my posts and arguments. I ask that you put that weakness down to me and not to the gospel as a whole.
It deserves far better consideration than I have encouraged thus far, apparently.