none<\/em><\/strong> of the real Dave Armstrong. I was totally unprepared for the real guy. [female]<\/p>\nTed, I met Dave Armstrong and his wife myself last year, and I must say that [Name]\u2019s characterization of him is spot on. The old picture of him in the leather jacket quite macabrely turns him into a grimacing mafioso. He is nothing of the kind; . . . [male]<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
It goes back to apologetics. People think (quite often) that we are mean, stuck-up know-it-alls: must<\/em> be that in order to be apologists. So when they meet us in person and see that these stereotypes aren\u2019t true, then they are \u201cshocked\u201d.\u00a0I think it\u2019s a bum rap. Folks who say this should meet Pat Madrid or Jimmy Akin or Scott Hahn or my local friend and fellow apologist Gary Michuta (\u201cthe gentle giant\u201d).<\/p>\nWe all certainly have our ongoing sins that we struggle with and we can always improve in charity (since the Christian standard is so high: perfection and holiness!). I made that clear in my longer treatment of this on my own page.<\/p>\n
I also acknowledged above the role of body language and the other things that are much less evident or impossible to see online. I just don\u2019t think it is an excuse for, or can justify bad behavior. But you\u2019re right, in person we can read the body language and usually respond accordingly.<\/p>\n
Nor was I talking about the occasional slip-up or loss of temper, but rather, as I clarified in my longer treatment, the \u201cperson [who] *habitually* acts like an ass online . . .\u201d In other words, a vice or character defect . . .<\/p>\n
I say that [habitually<\/em>] bad online behavior comes from the heart, and that it betrays someone who has serious problems. It\u2019ll come out less \u201cin real life\u201d because of social stigma and having more to lose. But it is still there<\/em>\u00a0in their heart (which is a large part of my point); they simply repress it better in person than online, where there are less inhibitions and no face-to-face interaction.<\/p>\nI maintain that it is \u201cone person\u201d who is doing the whole thing, and that they act differently online or offline, due to factors we have been noting. But what is in their heart is there and that\u2019s where everything proceeds from (Sermon on the Mount).<\/p>\n
I don\u2019t deny at all that the medium is a factor, as I have reiterated several times. The Internet is a factor making it relatively more difficult to effectively, \u201cnormally\u201d communicate; but this is not an excuse<\/em>\u00a0for sin.<\/p>\nWe have to get to this bottom line, I think, if we hope to reform discourse online, that is so irritating to so many people (how lousy and stupid it often is). I think it can be reformed, and that venues can be moderated, so that a congenial atmosphere can be obtained. I know for sure that we did that at the Coming Home Network, where I was a moderator for three years. And I\u2019ve tried to apply what I learned there (as a moderator) on my own web pages.\u00a0If people are incorrigible, we must ban them at a certain point, lest they ruin it for everyone else.<\/p>\n
People do indeed \u201cgive into their darker selves\u201d online. In my larger paper I compared what far too many people do online, to the college kid out on spring break, away from family, and seemingly without responsibility. That was my own analogy; therefore, I do<\/em> <\/strong>certainly acknowledge that venues and media affect behavior.<\/p>\nMaybe some of the slight confusion about my view is that I am distinguishing between actual behavior (different, according to venue) and what is in people\u2019s hearts, that causes them to act as they do (which is unified and not \u201csplit\u201d). My paper was primarily about the latter, and doesn\u2019t deny the former (factually different behavior).<\/p>\n
It\u2019s also true that I am always the reformer and the idealist. I believe Internet discourse can potentially be much better, and that there are ways to successfully achieve that, and that it has taken place in many venues, and can, more so.<\/p>\n
So while many are becoming disenchanted and saying \u201cto hell with all discussion online\u201d [or at least, controversial discussion], I am always saying that we can all do better if we realize a few things that are different about online, act as we do in real life (not being anonymous or assuming multiple personas or playing games).<\/p>\n
A person chooses, for example, whether to be anonymous and\/or unaccountable online. That is behavior that (to me) is a sort of game. It\u2019s not like real life at all. And I have always argued that we need to make online as close as possible<\/em>\u00a0to how we act online. Nicks and complete unaccountability don\u2019t further that goal (insofar as folks want to seek it in the first place).<\/p>\nBut despite my hopeless idealism, it\u2019s true that I do reach a point in particulars where I, too, literally give up. Thus, I dissed Internet discussion forums over ten years ago (then, ironically, I worked at one for three years, but I could help moderate it in that case, which was the difference). I gave up trying to dialogue with Anti-Catholics and radical Catholic reactionaries and the hostile, relentlessly insulting sort of atheist that we often see online (not all a<\/em><\/strong>theists; I\u2019ve talked to some very nice ones, too). I have neither the time more patience for any of that, after virtually universal bad experience in the past (after trying for many years).<\/p>\nOthers have reached their breaking point with Facebook, period, or blogs. I understand it, but I still don\u2019t think these media are beyond all redemption. We have to all strive to do better and represent our Lord more fully and faithfully. That is constructive and can help make things better in online discourse. We do it one by one, by God\u2019s grace.<\/p>\n
I see nothing inherently, woefully deficient in the medium of writing. The Bible is in writing, for heaven\u2019s sake.\u00a0People give greeting cards. That\u2019s writing. They write love letters to each other. There are pen pals. People write a script for a movie. It is then portrayed visually, which seems more like \u201creal life\u201d (but actually isn\u2019t at all in that case), but it was written beforehand. People read novels and non-fiction books.<\/p>\n
So we communicate with each other in writing online, too, and it is real (or certainly can be), if<\/strong><\/em> people stop playing games online and trying to manipulate or be rude and insulting to others. I\u2019m saying that these behaviors don\u2019t have to be, and that if we reject them (primarily by blocking incorrigible violators), we can continue to use this medium for much good.<\/p>\nRight now I\u2019m sitting here writing, and it is quite real. I\u2019m writing from my heart, being sincere. It\u2019s not different at all from what I would say in person. If the latter is \u201creal\u201d I don\u2019t see how this is not real, because the essence of what I am communicating is the same.\u00a0So I don\u2019t agree with this \u201creal life vs. the Internet\u201d business (though I refer to it jokingly). This is still real life, too, which is why we are still subject to God\u2019s laws of morality and ethics while we are online.<\/p>\n
Where we would all agree, I think, is in identifying the dangers of a lack of balance and moderation in use of Facebook or other online entities: to the point where we hardly talk to people in person or spend time with them in person, or start neglecting our responsibilities to spouses, children, parents, or friends.<\/p>\n
Now you bring up the question of the relative utility of chat (\u201creal time\u201d) vs. more traditional letter-writing. In my opinion, the latter is vastly superior. For that reason I almost never chat online. It\u2019s very inefficient and too time-consuming.<\/p>\n
This reminds me, too, of the argument I have made for years that written debate is far superior to oral debates. Because in the latter, what we often find is a circus atmosphere, and lots of sophistry and playing to the crowds.<\/p>\n
In written debate, the participants have plenty of time to give the best answer they can give. This is why anti-Catholic James White has avoided a true written debate with me since 1995, while challenging me three times to an oral debate, which I always refuse on principle.\u00a0So at least where debates are concerned, the written medium is vastly superior, and quite real indeed. Lots of substance, and flatulence and fluff can be identified and refuted for what it is.<\/p>\n
Moreover, in this case (strictly talking about debates), the medium that is supposedly less \u201creal\u201d (writing) is way better than the \u201creal life\u201d face-to-face encounter of the oral debate with an audience, where all sorts of games and silliness take place.\u00a0Occasionally, we see a worthy public oral debate (such as Lincoln-Douglass), but that is the rare exception.<\/p>\n
Thus, I conclude that it is not at all obvious that the lack of body language, voice, et al always makes mere writing encounters inferior.<\/p>\n
***<\/p>\n
My Three \u201cLaws\u201d Concerning Online Discourse (actual or mere facsimiles thereof)<\/em> [3-25-15]<\/p>\nArmstrong\u2019s Law #1: It is virtually 100% certain that when anyone (including, sadly, Catholics) starts to vigorously disagree online, some sort of ad hominem<\/em> insults will start flying, and misrepresentations of opposing views will inevitably occur.<\/p>\nArmstrong\u2019s Law #2: If someone personally attacks and lies about another person and\/or his opinions, and the recipient merely defends<\/em>\u00a0himself against false charges and objects to the calumnies, he will inevitably be accused by some or many observers of engaging in exactly the same behavior<\/em>\u00a0as his attacker, as if the two were \u201cimmoral equivalents.\u201d<\/p>\nArmstrong\u2019s Law #3: When there is strong disagreement, inevitably virtually all online discussions about it will immediately be diverted to anything other<\/em> <\/strong>than what the dispute is actually about<\/em>: personalities, or \u201cpsychoanalysis\u201d of the guy who disagrees, or wholesale mockery and silliness (generally, postmodernist subjective mush over against objectively determined facts). Anything and everything that can be thrown (very much like dog poop on a wall) in order to avoid actually dealing with the topic at hand<\/em>\u00a0will be brought into play. The ancients called this sophistry. We may also call it \u201cobfuscation\u201d or \u201cobscurantism.\u201d<\/p>\n[original combox]<\/p>\n
Lately, a Catholic man\u2019s primary foes come from the Catholic household of faith (making Jesus\u2019 words ring true). They\u2019re out there now blasting and lying about me. The anti-Catholics and atheists mostly ignore me.<\/p>\n
***<\/p>\n
Criticizing Public Posts on Facebook (The Latest Ridiculous and Pathetic Dust-Up)<\/em>\u00a0[5-29-15]<\/p>\nI was blocked by a person for making a public criticism on Facebook of a public<\/strong><\/em> post on Facebook, having informed them immediately on said post that I was doing so (with the link to my post). This was deemed as underhanded, sneaky, the height of outrageousness, and \u201cbehind\u201d the person\u2019s \u201cback.\u201d Does this make any sense to anyone?<\/p>\nEveryone can choose on Facebook if their posts are public or for friends only (or an even more restricted \u201cCustom\u201d setting). So if someone wants no public criticism or publicly posted stuff, they have that option. See the little globe icon under my name above? That means all my posts are public, and fair game for anyone to read or comment upon.<\/p>\n
Generally speaking (i.e., beyond merely Facebook), anyone who writes (and this person has a great deal) knows that a public article is fair game to be criticized. I wholeheartedly agree that it is a courtesy<\/em>\u00a0to let someone know<\/em>\u00a0about it, but it is not morally required to ask their permission<\/em>, because it is already a matter of public record, and what\u2019s public is public! A = A.<\/p>\nI am almost never informed when someone is critiquing anything of mine, let alone asked permission. But I like to (and routinely do) let people know when I do a critique. When I informed the outraged person that I had let them know, on their post in question (since they seemed unaware), I was berated because it had been during dinnertime and informed that this was an ethical loophole. Huh<\/em>? [scratching head] More evidence of my sneaky, \u201cunder a rock\u201d nature, I reckon. Everyone knows that about me, right?<\/p>\nI also removed my post as soon as I learned that the person was most (shall we say?) \u201cdispleased\u201d about it. The Bible says, \u201cas much as possible<\/em> [I love the qualifier!] be at peace with all men.\u201d But how much do you wanna bet that I am still being talked about [in a public post] over there now, behind my<\/em> back [having been blocked]?<\/p>\nOf course, a lot of people detest the notion of anyone daring to criticize them about anything in the first place, but that is another matter entirely . . .<\/p>\n
[original combox]<\/p>\n
If it weren\u2019t for my love of farcical humor, I would have long ago been in a rubber room, faced with the asinine nonsense that regularly occurs online. It\u2019s good to see that there are a few souls left who see this garbage for what it is.<\/p>\n
Indeed, as I predicted, I am being massively gossiped about and slandered (by fellow Catholics) over there, as I speak. So now we have a ludicrous nuthouse scenario where I am supposedly outrageously wrong for publicly responding to a public post (having let them know with a link), yet this person is not<\/em><\/strong> wrong for gossiping about me truly behind my back (with a chorus of half-a-dozen back-slapping sycophants), while I am blocked (said person also having stated yesterday that they don\u2019t block people for mere disagreements).<\/p>\nToday we learn that I am supposedly \u201cdesperate for traffic.\u201d My Facebook traffic is very regular, with 6,090 friends and followers. I don\u2019t need traffic. I need book sales. And believe me, I don\u2019t gain popularity (or book sales) when I am involved in one of these stupid conflicts. It doesn\u2019t help me. So this \u201ctheory\u201d doesn\u2019t make any sense. But why would we expect it to, in this circumstance?<\/p>\n
Another person in the thread informs everyone that \u201cDave\u2019s been a loving nurser of grudges for a long time.\u201d I\u2019m \u201cjackass-y\u201d and have an \u201cinquisitorial streak.\u201d<\/p>\n
Another [and this is a person whom I had thought was my friend] states that I am a \u201cLone Ranger\u201d professional Catholic apologist who lacks a basic understanding that Catholicism is a relationship with God and that the goal is salvation of souls and not just \u201csyllogisms.\u201d<\/p>\n
Now a meme has been made: \u201cArmstrong\u2019s About to Ruin This Thread.\u201d That\u2019s tough to do when I\u2019m blocked, ain\u2019t it?<\/p>\n
Another Paragon of Virtue and Oracle of Truth stated that I \u201calready ruined the Internet.\u201d<\/p>\n
So now it\u2019s a wholesale slander- and gossip-fest, with not a single person objecting to it (at least in public on that thread). It\u2019s what I call a \u201cfeeding frenzy.\u201d<\/p>\n
[update: at least one person had the decency, guts, and fair-mindedness to publicly protest in the thread. I also know of one other prominent online person who has defriended the offending party in disgust]<\/p>\n
All because I publicly objected to an atrocious public post that (what else?) attacked Pope Francis. For that, I must be the recipient of all the above ridiculous insults, from the usual suspects. And even this<\/em><\/strong> reply (mark my words) will now be lambasted, because I\u2019m not allowed to ever speak out against such unethical and hypocritical tactics, which are rampant online. I\u2019m just supposed to shut up. If I don\u2019t, it\u2019s because I want traffic, I\u2019m a resentful jackass, and don\u2019t understand that apologetics (which I\u2019ve engaged in for now 34 years) is to save souls.<\/p>\nThis is what passes for intelligent discourse these days. Very edifying<\/em>, isn\u2019t it? I haven\u2019t named any names here, but they are sure naming ME, ain\u2019t they?<\/p>\nAnother person at least refrained from attacking me, but he casually noted that Pope Francis \u201chates traditionalists.\u201d That was enough to earn a block. I don\u2019t have any patience for the idiotic anti-Francis mentalities anymore. Two friends of mine just departed Facebook in the last week. They had had enough; seen enough.<\/p>\n
And on and on it goes.<\/p>\n
I even said before I was blocked, that I removed my public post and requested that the person reciprocate and remove all the insults and hissy-fits about my post that were much ado about nothing.<\/p>\n
But of course they didn\u2019t do that (which would be normal behavior) and instead we get the entirely predictable gossipfest and slanderfest: people who are academics and published writers disgracing themselves in a public display of pharisaical idiocy and sheer hypocrisy.<\/p>\n
The first thing one does when they are in the wrong is to find sycophants who will agree, thus bolstering the illusion that wrong is right, because six loudmouthed people agree<\/strong><\/em>\u00a0that it is right.<\/p>\nI predicted it, and it has come to pass exactly as I said it would.<\/p>\n
I\u2019m not worried about it at all. It\u2019s part of the weekly \u201coccupational hazards\u201d of apologetics. But I passionately condemn and expose it for what it is, as I do anything that is so clearly wrong.<\/p>\n
There are five or six nattering nabobs over there who agree that I am a \u201cjackass\u201d \u2014 so they can\u2019t possibly<\/em> be wrong<\/em>, right? Isn\u2019t truth determined by a head count? They said<\/em> so! How could it not<\/strong> <\/em>be true? Six<\/strong> <\/em>people, after all . . . !!!<\/p>\nAlso, I\u2019m not venting so much as rebuking. I\u2019m sure some vent got into that (being human), but it is primarily a rebuke of sin. If we don\u2019t rebuke garbage, the online experience continues to get worse and worse.<\/p>\n
My action is perfectly defensible, ethically and morally, while the current slander going on over there is both indefensible and utterly hypocritical according to the very objection wrongfully made about me (\u201ctalking behind the back\u201d of someone was condemned, and now that is exactly what some 6-10 people are doing on that very thread, with hundreds watching).<\/p>\n
The problem, though, is that if I ask permission, the person (likely, in light of what has transpired) simply says no. Yet it is an issue that needed to be addressed publicly, and already was public. So even if I get a \u201cno\u201d upon asking, there is nothing wrong with critiquing a public post. Ethically, I don\u2019t need<\/em><\/strong> permission (though it is always nice if you get it, of course). Then they get even more<\/em><\/strong> angry, having denied a \u201cpermission\u201d that they wrongly think is required, regarding public material.<\/p>\nSo one can\u2019t win either way. The obvious bottom-line problem is simply that they don\u2019t like being disagreed<\/em><\/strong>\u00a0with. Hence this person blocked me, after saying that they didn\u2019t block people. I disagreed too much and had to be \u201cshut up\u201d somehow.<\/p>\nI\u2019ve said for years (I have papers about this going back 17-18 years) that the only way we\u00a0reform Internet discourse is to model it ourselves: to provide an example of charitable discourse in the venues that we control. I try to do that here. Obviously, some folks think I have failed, but many more have made kind remarks, including many Protestants, and they seem to think I am doing something right.<\/p>\n
In any event, the fruit continues. I receive reports all the time that my work has influenced folks to become Catholics. There is demonstrable fruit<\/em>\u00a0here, is my point. That\u2019s the bottom line. That\u2019s all that matters. So let the naysayers and the slanderers do all they will. They will not<\/em><\/strong> stop me; never have and never will. Their fruit (at least in the present instance) is bitterness and wrath and slander and calumny.<\/p>\nI have never done the work I do to try to please men in the first place. If I wanted to go that route, I could easily make a lot more money than I do, with a lot less insults coming my way.\u00a0But I do it because God called me to do it, and nothing will stop me from doing it: certainly not a bunch of anal-retentive, idiotic, juvenile name-calling.<\/p>\n
I must say that it is one of the oddest, funniest things I have ever heard in my life, to hear a guy who publicly credited me twice in writing as \u201cinstrumental\u201d in his conversion to Catholicism, now<\/em><\/strong> say that I have only a dim idea that apologetics is about conversion.\u00a0Yep. Knew<\/em> that . . .<\/p>\nIt\u2019s a strange world we live in. Once people get angry with you they are capable of saying the most outlandish, idiotic things, without the slightest relationship to demonstrable reality and facts.<\/p>\n
I know (or did<\/em>\u00a0know at one time) most of these people. There\u2019s a lot of angst here. One, e.g., has compared the entire endeavor of professional Catholic apologetics to prostitution (I kid you not).\u00a0The biggest mouths in this bashing thread have said stupid and slanderous things on many occasions. This is nothing new. When they all get together and decide to slander a particularly wicked person, like me, it\u2019s all the more fun and nuthouse-ish (to coin a phrase).<\/p>\nI\u2019ve experienced just about every conceivable insult and tactic online, Terese. It just never works with me; doesn\u2019t deter me in the slightest. People who do it invariably neither understand 1) me as a person, or 2) what motivates me in my work. They get it wrong every time.\u00a0And so here it is again. It\u2019s a joke and a farce.<\/p>\n
We all have our roles to play that God has given us. Not all can do what I do. And I can\u2019t do a lot<\/em><\/strong> of very important things that many others do. But we all should do what we are called to do, as St. Paul says.<\/p>\n***<\/p>\n
Photo credit:<\/strong> A Country Brawl<\/em> (1610), by\u00a0Pieter Breughel the Younger (1564-1638)<\/span> [public domain \/ Wikimedia Commons<\/a>]<\/p>\n***<\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
This is a compilation of five Facebook posts: originally written between March 2014 and May 2015. I have retained the original title for each, with the date. ***** War-Free and Garbage-Free Facebook Zone (Your Search is Over) [3-5-14] Isn\u2019t it nice to be on a page where you know that the usual online nonsense will […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2331,"featured_media":47221,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[217,3576,3574,632,3573,218,96,94,93,3571,3572,95,10919,10922,3575,3570,3568,216,3569,59],"class_list":["post-47218","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-catholic-apologetics","tag-amiable-dialogue","tag-both-sides-presented","tag-civil-debate","tag-civil-discussion","tag-competing-ideas","tag-constructive-dialogue","tag-constructive-discourse","tag-debate","tag-dialogue","tag-discourse","tag-discussing-ideas","tag-discussion","tag-facebook","tag-facebook-discussion","tag-honest-debate","tag-lectures","tag-mutual-monologue","tag-mutual-respect","tag-one-way-discussion","tag-preaching"],"yoast_head":"\n
War- & Garbage-Free Facebook Zone (Your Search is Over)<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"This is a compilation of five Facebook posts: originally written between March 2014 and May 2015, about the often poor discourse and discussion on Facebook and online, generally.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/05\/war-garbage-free-facebook-zone-your-search-is-over.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"War- & Garbage-Free Facebook Zone (Your Search is Over)\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"This is a compilation of five Facebook posts: originally written between March 2014 and May 2015, about the often poor discourse and discussion on Facebook and online, generally.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/05\/war-garbage-free-facebook-zone-your-search-is-over.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:author\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2020-05-03T15:53:26+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2020\/05\/Brawl2.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"640\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"445\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Dave Armstrong\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Dave Armstrong\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"30 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/05\/war-garbage-free-facebook-zone-your-search-is-over.html\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/05\/war-garbage-free-facebook-zone-your-search-is-over.html\",\"name\":\"War- & Garbage-Free Facebook Zone (Your Search is Over)\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2020-05-03T15:53:26+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2020-05-03T15:53:26+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e\"},\"description\":\"This is a compilation of five Facebook posts: originally written between March 2014 and May 2015, about the often poor discourse and discussion on Facebook and online, generally.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/05\/war-garbage-free-facebook-zone-your-search-is-over.html#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/05\/war-garbage-free-facebook-zone-your-search-is-over.html\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/05\/war-garbage-free-facebook-zone-your-search-is-over.html#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"War- & Garbage-Free Facebook Zone (Your Search is Over)\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/\",\"name\":\"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism\",\"description\":\"Catholic biblical apologetics\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e\",\"name\":\"Dave Armstrong\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Dave Armstrong\"},\"description\":\"Dave Armstrong is a Catholic author and apologist, who has been actively proclaiming and defending Christianity since 1981, and Catholicism in particular since 1991 (full-time since December 2001). Formerly a campus missionary, as a Protestant, Dave was received into the Catholic Church in February 1991, by the late, well-known catechist and theologian, Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave\u2019s articles have appeared in many influential Catholic periodicals, including \\\"This Rock\\\" (now called \\\"Catholic Answers Magazine\\\"), \\\"Envoy Magazine\\\" (Patrick Madrid), \\\"The Catholic Answer,\\\" \\\"The Coming Home Journal,\\\" \\\"Gilbert Magazine\\\" (American Chesterton Society), and \\\"The Latin Mass.\\\" He also writes a featured column for every issue of \\\"The Michigan Catholic\\\": published by the archdiocese of Detroit, and was editor for most of the apologetics tracts published by the St. Paul Street Evangelization apostolate. Dave\u2019s apologetics and writing apostolate was the subject of a feature article in the May 2002 issue of \\\"Envoy Magazine.\\\" He served as the staff moderator at the Internet discussion forum for The Coming Home Network, from 2007-2010. Dave has been interviewed on many nationally syndicated Catholic radio shows, including \\\"Catholic Answers Live\\\" (twice), \\\"Faith and Family Live\\\" (Steve Wood), \\\"Kresta in the Afternoon,\\\" \\\"Son Rise Morning Show,\\\" \\\"Catholic Connection\\\" (Teresa Tomeo), and \\\"The Catholics Next Door.\\\" His large and popular website, \\\"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism,\\\" was online from March 1997 to March 2007, and received the 1998 Catholic Website of the Year award from \\\"Envoy Magazine.\\\" His blog of the same name (now transferred to Patheos), begun in February 2004, contains more than 1,500 papers, at least 500 debates or dialogues, and over 50 distinct \\\"index\\\" web pages. Unsolicited correspondence has indicated many hundreds of conversions (or returns) to the Catholic faith as a result, by God's grace, of these writings. Dave's conversion story was published in the bestselling book \\\"Surprised by Truth\\\" (edited by Patrick Madrid; San Diego: Basilica Press, 1994). Sophia Institute Press has published six of his books: \\\"A Biblical Defense of Catholicism\\\" (Foreword by Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J., 1996 \/ 2003), \\\"The Catholic Verses\\\" (2004), \\\"The One-Minute Apologist\\\" (2007), \\\"Bible Proofs for Catholic Truths\\\" (2009), \\\"The Quotable Newman\\\" (editor: 2012), and \\\"Proving the Catholic Faith is Biblical\\\" (2015). He is co-author (with Dr. Paul Thigpen) of the inserts for \\\"The New Catholic Answer Bible\\\" (Our Sunday Visitor: 2005), and editor for \\\"The Wisdom of Mr. Chesterton: The Very Best Quotes, Quips, and Cracks from the Pen of G. K. Chesterton\\\" (Saint Benedict Press \/ TAN Books: 2009). \\\"100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura\\\" was published by Catholic Answers in May 2012. His \\\"Quotable Wesley\\\" compilation was published by (Protestant \/ Wesleyan publisher) Beacon Hill Press in April 2014. Several of his 49 books are bestsellers in their field. Dave maintains a popular personal Facebook page, a Facebook author page, and has a Twitter account as well. He offers almost all of his books in e-book form on his own Biblical Catholicism site (http:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/), at a permanent deep discount: only $2.99 for ePub, mobi, and AZW, and $1.99 for PDF. His writing has been enthusiastically endorsed or recommended by many leading Catholic apologists, authors, and priests, including Dr. Scott Hahn, Fr. Peter M. J. Stravinskas, Marcus Grodi, Patrick Madrid, Steve Ray, Tim Staples, Devin Rose, Mike Aquilina, Al Kresta, Karl Keating, Fr. Dwight Longenecker, Brandon Vogt, Marcellino D'Ambrosio, and Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave has been happily married to his wife Judy since October 1984. They have three sons and a daughter, and reside in southeast Michigan (metro Detroit).\",\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/\",\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798\",\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/@LuxVeritatisApologetics\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/author\/davearmstrong\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"War- & Garbage-Free Facebook Zone (Your Search is Over)","description":"This is a compilation of five Facebook posts: originally written between March 2014 and May 2015, about the often poor discourse and discussion on Facebook and online, generally.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/05\/war-garbage-free-facebook-zone-your-search-is-over.html","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"War- & Garbage-Free Facebook Zone (Your Search is Over)","og_description":"This is a compilation of five Facebook posts: originally written between March 2014 and May 2015, about the often poor discourse and discussion on Facebook and online, generally.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/05\/war-garbage-free-facebook-zone-your-search-is-over.html","og_site_name":"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism","article_author":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798","article_published_time":"2020-05-03T15:53:26+00:00","og_image":[{"width":640,"height":445,"url":"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2020\/05\/Brawl2.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Dave Armstrong","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Dave Armstrong","Est. reading time":"30 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/05\/war-garbage-free-facebook-zone-your-search-is-over.html","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/05\/war-garbage-free-facebook-zone-your-search-is-over.html","name":"War- & Garbage-Free Facebook Zone (Your Search is Over)","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website"},"datePublished":"2020-05-03T15:53:26+00:00","dateModified":"2020-05-03T15:53:26+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e"},"description":"This is a compilation of five Facebook posts: originally written between March 2014 and May 2015, about the often poor discourse and discussion on Facebook and online, generally.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/05\/war-garbage-free-facebook-zone-your-search-is-over.html#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/05\/war-garbage-free-facebook-zone-your-search-is-over.html"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/05\/war-garbage-free-facebook-zone-your-search-is-over.html#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"War- & Garbage-Free Facebook Zone (Your Search is Over)"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/","name":"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism","description":"Catholic biblical apologetics","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e","name":"Dave Armstrong","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Dave Armstrong"},"description":"Dave Armstrong is a Catholic author and apologist, who has been actively proclaiming and defending Christianity since 1981, and Catholicism in particular since 1991 (full-time since December 2001). Formerly a campus missionary, as a Protestant, Dave was received into the Catholic Church in February 1991, by the late, well-known catechist and theologian, Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave\u2019s articles have appeared in many influential Catholic periodicals, including \"This Rock\" (now called \"Catholic Answers Magazine\"), \"Envoy Magazine\" (Patrick Madrid), \"The Catholic Answer,\" \"The Coming Home Journal,\" \"Gilbert Magazine\" (American Chesterton Society), and \"The Latin Mass.\" He also writes a featured column for every issue of \"The Michigan Catholic\": published by the archdiocese of Detroit, and was editor for most of the apologetics tracts published by the St. Paul Street Evangelization apostolate. Dave\u2019s apologetics and writing apostolate was the subject of a feature article in the May 2002 issue of \"Envoy Magazine.\" He served as the staff moderator at the Internet discussion forum for The Coming Home Network, from 2007-2010. Dave has been interviewed on many nationally syndicated Catholic radio shows, including \"Catholic Answers Live\" (twice), \"Faith and Family Live\" (Steve Wood), \"Kresta in the Afternoon,\" \"Son Rise Morning Show,\" \"Catholic Connection\" (Teresa Tomeo), and \"The Catholics Next Door.\" His large and popular website, \"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism,\" was online from March 1997 to March 2007, and received the 1998 Catholic Website of the Year award from \"Envoy Magazine.\" His blog of the same name (now transferred to Patheos), begun in February 2004, contains more than 1,500 papers, at least 500 debates or dialogues, and over 50 distinct \"index\" web pages. Unsolicited correspondence has indicated many hundreds of conversions (or returns) to the Catholic faith as a result, by God's grace, of these writings. Dave's conversion story was published in the bestselling book \"Surprised by Truth\" (edited by Patrick Madrid; San Diego: Basilica Press, 1994). Sophia Institute Press has published six of his books: \"A Biblical Defense of Catholicism\" (Foreword by Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J., 1996 \/ 2003), \"The Catholic Verses\" (2004), \"The One-Minute Apologist\" (2007), \"Bible Proofs for Catholic Truths\" (2009), \"The Quotable Newman\" (editor: 2012), and \"Proving the Catholic Faith is Biblical\" (2015). He is co-author (with Dr. Paul Thigpen) of the inserts for \"The New Catholic Answer Bible\" (Our Sunday Visitor: 2005), and editor for \"The Wisdom of Mr. Chesterton: The Very Best Quotes, Quips, and Cracks from the Pen of G. K. Chesterton\" (Saint Benedict Press \/ TAN Books: 2009). \"100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura\" was published by Catholic Answers in May 2012. His \"Quotable Wesley\" compilation was published by (Protestant \/ Wesleyan publisher) Beacon Hill Press in April 2014. Several of his 49 books are bestsellers in their field. Dave maintains a popular personal Facebook page, a Facebook author page, and has a Twitter account as well. He offers almost all of his books in e-book form on his own Biblical Catholicism site (http:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/), at a permanent deep discount: only $2.99 for ePub, mobi, and AZW, and $1.99 for PDF. His writing has been enthusiastically endorsed or recommended by many leading Catholic apologists, authors, and priests, including Dr. Scott Hahn, Fr. Peter M. J. Stravinskas, Marcus Grodi, Patrick Madrid, Steve Ray, Tim Staples, Devin Rose, Mike Aquilina, Al Kresta, Karl Keating, Fr. Dwight Longenecker, Brandon Vogt, Marcellino D'Ambrosio, and Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave has been happily married to his wife Judy since October 1984. They have three sons and a daughter, and reside in southeast Michigan (metro Detroit).","sameAs":["https:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/","https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798","https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/@LuxVeritatisApologetics"],"url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/author\/davearmstrong"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/47218","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2331"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=47218"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/47218\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/47221"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=47218"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=47218"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=47218"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2020\/05\/Brawl2.jpg\")
<\/p>\n