Tuesday, 14 July 2009

A few thoughts on my previous post.

Well the robust conversation on global warming/climate changes continues elsewhere and my last post generated some comment which has made me think I need to re-visit this to make clear some things that I may not have made clear.
I have to say that I have not read what the President of Conference said on this issue (I await this weeks Recorder)and have only picked up on the debate via the blogs that I visit.
I made some observations yesterday that were to a great extent in a very generalised vein with the hope of putting forward the way I see and understand the range of responses to the issues, and certainly the types of things I hear when I talk to people or when certain topics come up in conversation either in the workplace or at church. I used the word overzealous in respect of some of the people who put forward a view on this and again in very general terms many other topics. I wish to make it abundantly clear that if I had been referring to other bloggers I would have taken the step of saying I believe that blogger X is going over the top. (Sorry if you think you are blogger X)
I try very hard in posts like yesterdays to be a little bit of a peacekeeper, reading all the comments, going away and looking up words and phrases that I may not know or understand and then endeavouring to bring a common sense approach to topics. I thought I had achieved this without actually suggesting that any person or persons fitted into any of the four categories, the reality is that away from the blogosphere I know people that fit all four of the categories that I mentioned yesterday and it may be that fellow bloggers recognise themselves in one or other of the categories.
I have to say again that I do believe this is an important issue and while the readership of the various blogs may be reasonably small, and the robust debate that is taking place may not make the national news, it really does bother me that the whole things seems to have degenerated into the style of a playground argument with name calling and almost the 'if you don't let me play I will take my ball home' mentality. I am concerned too that a casual reader who stumbles across this type of debate on 'Christian' blogs may end up with a view of us that really is not true.
Come on guys (and gals) let's talk about things reasonably and as St Paul urges in Colossians 'Let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts, since as members of one body you were called to peace. And be thankful'.

1 comment:

PamBG said...

I'm sorry, Ian. Your analysis of the different positions was helpful. I'm quite sure that there are many Methodists on the ground who hold the views that you have outlined. I've heard them myself. I do despair of the 'I'll be gone' attitude (except that I expect some people say it in jest) but I would never call people names for the views that they hold.

In my experience, most people have reasons for the views that they hold and often they are good reasons. Where we often don't understand each other is where our presuppositions differ: maybe about the truth of facts or what is going on. It *is* good to understand where people are coming from.