The Hubris behind "The Full Truth"

[Jeffrey]

If you recall, Prax, my first response to you was a TIC joke -- and a "you'd have to understand his writing style" and then I asked what specifically made you think it was poorly written. You replied, essentially, that he was overly verbose -- but said in this way: The author sounds like a 6th grader trying to sound like a Pulitzer prize author.

If that's your opinion, NP. I can still disagree with you. But then I learn you not only are just not "getting it" and aren't familiar with his writing style, but you didn't even read hardly any of his post.

Anyhow. Say you're right. He sucks. How about, in the future, before putting a blogger on public blast that he writes like a 6th-grader, you give him enough respect to actually read what he has to say before saying such things. Deal?

Now... to the topic, if you care? I think you may actually agree with, JR.

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Actually I said

You went on about being cry babies, then queried me on why I said what I said and in the course of my explaining to you why I thought it was not well written I said somethings. Again, I gave my opinion, you wanted to argue over it

In fact I probably won't even read the blog as long as Im supposed to have happy feel good thoughts only on what the guy wrote

I knew you'd do this... I got your playbook down, Praxy.

I didn't "go on about you being a cry baby" -- I was ribbing you all, and this is what I typed: Bunch of cry babies chiming in lol (notice the "LOL" just in case you decided to get offended)

I then proceeded with a follow-up question:

It was indeed, well written. I guess you'd have to be familiar with the author. How did it fail your criteria, Prax?

For the, let's see, at least 6th time, I can careless if you have happy thoughts or if you go down the side of your leg while you read. I'm just calling you out for crapping on the guys writing without even taking the time to read it. I don't even critique authors before I've read their books.

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Why not NOT engage me on why I thought it was not well written? You did ask why I thought that. Then rather than get all bent out of shape you and I would not be having THIS discussion.

Face it, if you didn't want this discussion it would not have happened. It takes at least 2 persons to have one

You're right, I did engage the WHY, trying to understand why you had such a matter-of-fact opinion. And it turned out, YOU DIDN'T READ THE BLOG!!! You browsed over maybe a paragraph (maybe you can tell us how much) and then made the conclusion.

I honestly think you just don't get his schtick because your new to the blog. Even then, I posted this because I thought the content was thought-provoking, and it may be something that would create good discussion on AFF. Instead, it's been a Praxy and Jeffy Show... AGAIN.

[Jeffrey]

Ironically, the subject of this thread was about the "hubris" of the "full truth." Our bantering, in the end, is all about our individual hubris. Sort of ironic, if you think about it.

[Praxeas]

Ok I was right. I started reading and honestly it's like reading a very very bad novel. You know the kind? That begin with a long run on sentence "It was a dark and rainy night......"

This guy could probably win that contest they have every year for the worst opening for a novel.

I love this oxymoron

From what I gather, most of us think ourselves hopelessly good looking.

I tried to read it all. Honestly that kind of stuff is just too hard for me to read. It's like sitting through a really really really bad movie. After getting to the end, my conclusion is still the same.

He may have a good idea, and as far as "the whole truth" chants, "Apostolic Identity" et al, Not only do I agree but I've been a big critic of these kinds of things myself.

However my conclusion remains the same, in fact I hope the author might consider my suggestion to Keep It Simple Stupid. Don't blog on and on like an evangelist that knows he has 2 hours and he intends on preaching every second of it.

And yes there are many people out there that will read a lot of grammar errors, spelling errors and other things as just some novice out there who got his little piece of the internet.

I'd suggest smaller and simpler. Take more time. Spell check. Have a friend or two read it critically and not be afraid to make corrections.

I know Jeffry will be upset with all that but I think a blog that is done cleaner and shorter will get more readers.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

You're right, I did engage the WHY, trying to understand why you had such a matter-of-fact opinion. And it turned out, YOU DIDN'T READ THE BLOG!!! You browsed over maybe a paragraph (maybe you can tell us how much) and then made the conclusion.

I honestly think you just don't get his schtick because your new to the blog. Even then, I posted this because I thought the content was thought-provoking, and it may be something that would create good discussion on AFF. Instead, it's been a Praxy and Jeffy Show... AGAIN.

His schtick isn't the message but the terrible grammar and spelling? Well I didn't get that but I was beginning to wonder. But intentionally NOT authoring well written blogs doesn't make me wrong then. It was NOT well written. Ironically you said it was well written. I said it was not, then you said that was just his schtick?

I'm glad I don't get that...I'd probably be insane if I did.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

I knew you'd do this... I got your playbook down, Praxy.

I didn't "go on about you being a cry baby" -- I was ribbing you all, and this is what I typed: Bunch of cry babies chiming in lol (notice the "LOL" just in case you decided to get offended)

I then proceeded with a follow-up question:

It was indeed, well written. I guess you'd have to be familiar with the author. How did it fail your criteria, Prax?

For the, let's see, at least 6th time, I can careless if you have happy thoughts or if you go down the side of your leg while you read. I'm just calling you out for crapping on the guys writing without even taking the time to read it. I don't even critique authors before I've read their books.

Yes I know you were ribbing US, btw I said "crybabies" not "a cry baby".

You went on about being cry babies

I just gave you the order of the discussion.

BTW this post is really REALLY not well written. What you should have said is "I couldn't care less". You might be careless and perhaps you really could care LESS, but I doubt that was what you meant. You sure you didn't author that blog?

BTW if I read several quotes from any book and they were all poorly written...yes Jeffy I would critique the authors on their poorly written words.

Anyways, this was fun.

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Ok I was right. I started reading and honestly it's like reading a very very bad novel. You know the kind? That begin with a long run on sentence "It was a dark and rainy night......"

This guy could probably win that contest they have every year for the worst opening for a novel.

I love this oxymoron

From what I gather, most of us think ourselves hopelessly good looking.

I tried to read it all. Honestly that kind of stuff is just too hard for me to read. It's like sitting through a really really really bad movie. After getting to the end, my conclusion is still the same.

He may have a good idea, and as far as "the whole truth" chants, "Apostolic Identity" et al, Not only do I agree but I've been a big critic of these kinds of things myself.

However my conclusion remains the same, in fact I hope the author might consider my suggestion to Keep It Simple Stupid. Don't blog on and on like an evangelist that knows he has 2 hours and he intends on preaching every second of it.

And yes there are many people out there that will read a lot of grammar errors, spelling errors and other things as just some novice out there who got his little piece of the internet.

I'd suggest smaller and simpler. Take more time. Spell check. Have a friend or two read it critically and not be afraid to make corrections.

I know Jeffry will be upset with all that but I think a blog that is done cleaner and shorter will get more readers.

I'm happy you read it.

I will tell you, though you may have good feedback about shortening up the posts, it is sort of the SAL schtick. The blog (not the novel) is broken up into 3-4 main parts, in an argumentation/persuasive-style manner.

I will also tell you that SAL has plenty of followership and readership and has been going at it for a couple years now. It's audience, however, is most likely 20-30-something, single or young married, college-educated Apostolic Pentecostals.

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

His schtick isn't the message but the terrible grammar and spelling? Well I didn't get that but I was beginning to wonder. But intentionally NOT authoring well written blogs doesn't make me wrong then. It was NOT well written. Ironically you said it was well written. I said it was not, then you said that was just his schtick?

I'm glad I don't get that...I'd probably be insane if I did.

No, of course his schtick isn't poorly written blogs. The verbose nature of the blog, the long end-arounds, etc are sort of the personality of the blog. Reading this blog on-and-off over time would show that. The criteria you pointed to as "6th grader" level writing is likely being perceived in the wrong way. But such as it is, you are not representative likely of the blogs audience, it's not your thing, so you are free to your opinion. If this were a paper on his summer vacation or his favorite hobby, my only critique would be both the verbosity and the lack of brevity. However, understanding the blog and blogger, and enjoying his set-up, I find it to be a wonderfully written blog. He sets up some of the same arguments we have discussed on here, but with a broader context. For example, arguing that Apostolic Identity and claims of full truth are more tied to Ego than they are to anything else is something one can't just claim. He argued it. It's a classic persuasive argument.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

I'm happy you read it.

I will tell you, though you may have good feedback about shortening up the posts, it is sort of the SAL schtick. The blog (not the novel) is broken up into 3-4 main parts, in an argumentation/persuasive-style manner.

I will also tell you that SAL has plenty of followership and readership and has been going at it for a couple years now. It's audience, however, is most likely 20-30-something, single or young married, college-educated Apostolic Pentecostals.

I find it hard college educated would continue to read it. It was like reading a rough draft that had not been proof read yet for mistakes. I suspect the guy just sat down and wrote it like many of us do for a post. I still think it could stand a more professional look like it had gone through a proof read and spell check etc etc.

And still,though there are many readers, even they might appreciate shortening them a bit. Reading stuff on a monitor is hard on the eyes and people are short on time.

Generally long posts on forums like this, I won't read. I might skim it or read the first few lines