Better Fiction: The Blog

For the moment, I'm going to believe there are three types of people in the world: Benjamin Franklins, John Adamses, and everyone else.

The John Adamses of this world find fault in everyone but themselves. Arguments are seen as won by being hard, blunt, and brutal. The Benjamin Franklins find common ground and ask Socratic questions to guide their audience to finding the right solution. Franklins are willing to compromise. Adamses are not.

Everyone else falls somewhere in between.

People who share the opinions of a John Adams admire him. People are often not sure where a Franklin stands. John Adamses often insult the opposition to the point that no one will listen to them, other than those who already share their beliefs. People listen to a Franklin and are often swayed by them.

Are you more a Franklin or an Adams?

Which would you more likely vote for?

These are not trite questions. I think there is much value in the Franklin approach, but in looking for a man to represent me, a Franklin might raise too many doubts. The Adams would ruin much with his bluntness, but I would know where he stands.

It's as if I want a man to speak to me as an Adams and to the world as a Franklin.

How about when it comes to witnessing? Should we be more the Adams or the Franklin?

I have seen many Adams insult the world in the name of Christ, thinking they do God a favor by bluntly standing up for His name. I am more a Franklin, and I think God can take care of Himself. He did not send me to protect His honor. He sent me to join in His work of wooing others to Himself.

Which leaves me with the idea of a Teddy Roosevelt witnessing style: speak softly and carry a big cross.

Blessed are the peacemakers.

Wade Ogletree