Erroneous and Skewed

We like categories.  Boxes.  Organization.  I get that and it is clearly necessary for social interactions to work because it lays a bedrock of working assumptions upon which a non-dysfunctional society is based. But it is also very hard to avoid dismissing things you do not like by automatically (miss)categorizing.  I have always tried to avoid labeling people/thoughts/ideas quickly without really thinking about the content.  Doesn't always work, but I try.

This is even more true now, I would like to think.  Since people have read about some research I have done, many avoid really thinking about the content of the research or the content of their own assumptions of how things work by quickly putting a 'yes' or 'no' label on both me and the work.  Me and the research have been put in every camp possible it seems.  An article I wrote for Christianity Today came out recently and I really started to think more about this after those comments.  There are probably a few things going on.  Many quickly react to the title and don't even read the article it seems.  Other read it but what they already think literally drives what they read, and read some of what is written in literally opposite of what is written.  This could be a clarity issue on my part, but still.  There are some really good comments, too, but they are less fun to post.  Here are a few comment-morsels for you:

• [this is a partial - the person goes on and on, but I have no idea why this is talked about - maybe they think I am a universalist?]  Jesus' parable of the wheat and the tares entirely contradicts the universalism of the liberals. So does his injunction not to throw pearls before swine, and his description of the Pharisees as 'offspring of vipers', in other words genetically cursed, and his parable of the 'wicked tenants' or 'wicked husbandmen', describing those who were attempting to usurp the kingdom.- the Edomites, descendants of Esau, described as a people God hates (Malachi 1:2,3), who had been converted to become 'Jews' in about 120BC.
• [I like this one, ha]  Wait wait wait... So you're upset that the author uses statistics to form conclusions? What else would you suggest? And nothing is "proven" in science. What the author is doing is using the facts to support her argument, explaining what they INDICATE. Your discernment is clearly hindered. Might I suggest some Bible reading to boost it? :)
• What an erroneous conclusion from what sounds like a skewed poll.
• [maybe my favorit one]  What a load of baloney. Liberalism is simply encouraging the Government to wrongly assume the role of the church. Keep Jesus out of your socialism.
• [again a partial, but even I am not sure what political viewpoint would be 'evident' and I wrote the thing]  Besides the likely problems inherent in the poll and thus the interpretation that others have pointed out, the political orientation of the author is evident. His criticism of Beck is misplaced, for instance....