So we’re still getting great numbers of page views at James MacDonald Preaches on Finances on Easter Sunday, and not a small number of comments, especially for this blog. Some of you haven’t been back there since it appeared, but I later added an update to clarify some of the comments I got both on and off the blog:
Update 4/4/13
Basically what you’re seeing in the comments section is four possible responses:
- Supportive (objectively) — People who feel J. MacD. was within his rights to preach this topic on Easter Sunday because it was a legitimate message even for “Holy Week.”
- Supportive (subjectively) — People who rally around J.MacD. as their pastor or shepherd and want to defend him.
- Opposed (subjectively) — People who choose to criticize J. MacD. on whatever grounds or based on whatever leadership criteria, or choose to examine this particular topic in light of other information about James and/or HBC.
- Opposed (objectively) — People who — regardless of whether or not they liked the message — feel the topic was inappropriate for Easter Sunday.
It was the two objective type of comments we were hoping for.
I don’t want to people to comment on the particular issue here — you should do that at the original post — but I was intrigued with a graphic I found at Wikipedia. From the days of letter writers responding to newspaper editorials to modern forums and blogs, writing tends to follow this hierarchy:
Thinking Out Loud 
While I love the graphic for the most part, I think saying “responding to tone” is one of the worst ways to respond is unfair. How you say something (your tone) says something as well. Nonverbals are a huge part of communication (which includes tone). While I do think pointing to the metaphorical “red herring” by addressing tone is problematic sometimes, it can be the primary concern.
Example: Brother Jed. A man who goes around college campuses yelling at and condemning people to hell because they are doing sinful things for the purposes of getting people to go back to the Bible and look again at what it says. While he may have good intentions does that make what he is saying through his tone (that people who sin are condemned to hell and that this is more powerful than grace to get people to find/follow Jesus) ok?
Comment by jdp3227 — May 18, 2013 @ 10:19 am
Your comment reminds me of a story of a guy who with a big smile on his face says, “Have you heard the good news? You’re going to hell!”
I would like to think there’s a story or two of someone stopping Brother Jed on that campus saying, “I need to talk with you, I need to get right with God;” followed by Jed leading them into genuine confession and repentance. And I’d like to think that Jed is equally good at doing that with compassion as he is passionate about proclaiming the sinful state of mankind.
Comment by paulthinkingoutloud — May 18, 2013 @ 10:31 am
Reblogged this on GoodOleWoody's Blog and Website.
Comment by goodolewoody — May 18, 2013 @ 10:29 pm