Separation marker for new year, 2010, and new approach

+ + + + + + + NEW YEAR + + + + + + +

It's often necessary to be negative, but it has to be admitted that it is easy to be negative too. Being positive opens one up to attack. If you're positive about something that isn't 100% wheat (like only the Bible is) then people will focus on the chaff, no matter how small an amount there may be, and call you a heretic and what not for saying something positive about something that has chaff in it. Caveats don't inoculate either. Neither does anticipating your attackers (who are commonly easy to anticipate). You'll be seen as soft no matter what; and usually the attacker will be consciously unfair in his/her approach. This is why Christians who know the truth tend to mostly be negative in their approach. It's more of a closed fighting stance. Less trouble.

You won't read most reformers back in the day being positive in any way towards, for instance, Quakers, or any of the radical Anabaptists. Even though they could be for one reason or another. Tar baby type of thing. Best not to touch it. (In contemporary usage, "tar baby" refers to any "sticky situation" that is only aggravated by additional contact. The only way to solve such a situation is by separation.)

Also, the legions of wobblies and armies of the lukewarm love to apply the term 'concession' to anyone known to be hardcore and anything but lukewarm. "So you concede that [blah blah blah]..." No, wobbly. No.

The thing with the negative approach is you can get to a point where you become a caricature or you just start trying too hard, or you hammer a theme 83 too many times.

So, new year, new approach, with a separation marker and everything.