Rules of Life: How to Close a Telephone Conversation

If you are anything like me, ending a telephone conversation can be extraordinarily awkward and even confusing. With both people racing to the end of the phone call, either party suddenly can experience an incredible "stalling" effect. Sometimes this manifests itself in multiple "goodbyes" or even variations of it (i.e., "see you later," "talk to you soon," etc.). In order to clarify this consistent debacle, I thought it would be helpful to set up a few ground rules so that everyone can be on the same page when ending a conversation on the phone:

1. When a person gives a Conversation Ending Indicator [CEI] (i.e., "Well it's been good talking to you," "Alright, well I'd better get going," -- or the circumspective "Well, I'd better let you get going,", etc.), it is the responsibility of both parties to adhere to their respective roles to end the conversation. The CEI cannot be ignored by either party so as to extend a conversation beyond its comfortable limit for selfish reasons. Ignoring the CEI is disrespectful and could effect levels of communication (frequency, length, etc.) in the future.
   
2. The person who issues the CEI (henceforth referred to as CEI-1) must wait for the CEI to be acknowledged by the other party with a verbal cue like: "Alright, it's been talking to you," "Yeah, I'd better get going too," etc.
3. The recipient of the CEI (henceforth referred to as Hector), must verbally acknowledge the CEI and then wait for the Goodbye Precursor Interlude [GPI] or the Circumlocutive Precursor Goodbye [CPG]. The reason for the "or" is because the GPI is optional - if not, negotiable - while CPG is a necessary component for an appropriate conclusion. Let me explain. The GPI is the optional insertion of a term of endearment or complimentary statement as a precursor for the final goodbye statements, which include: "Well, its been good talking to you," "I can't wait to see you," "It is always a pleasure," "I love you," etc. The GPI, then, is included only if the proverbial Hector is worthy of such a statement. If they are not worthy of such a statement, the GPI can be ignored all together and replaced with the inevitable CPG, which says goodbye but just in a roundabout way (i.e., "I'll talk to you later," "Have a good one," etc.). If they are worthy of such a statement, this is the place to insert it.
   
4. After the CEI-1 offers the GPI or the CPG (see previous step for explanation), they are to wait for a response from Hector, which both the GPI and the CPG assume.
   
5. After the response from Hector is delivered, it is the CEI-1's responsibility to offer the first "goodbye" or the colloquial "bye". Why is this the case? Since it was the CEI-1's idea to end the conversation (indicated by the CEI), it is their responsibility to conclude it with the first goodbye. The CEI is the one that is leading in this dance, and it would be inappropriate to assume that Hector would not be the woman in the dance (or you can insert a metaphor that makes more since at this point).
6. Hector should then respond to the "goodbye" of CEI-1 with a "goodbye" of their own (variations welcome: see ya, peace out, adios, etc.).
7. CEI-1 is the first to press the "end call" button or to hand up the touch-tone phone on its receiver.

As a result, the whole conclusion of the telephone conversation should take this form:

CEI-1: "Well, I really should be going, but it has been great talking to you." (CEI)
Hector: "Yeah, I probably should go and do something productive as well."
CEI-1: "It was so delightful to hear your voice." (GPI)
Hector: "Same here bro...I always like talking with you."
CEI-1: "Alright, I'll talk to you later." (CPG)
Hector: "Sure thing man, I'll look forward to it."
CEI-1: "Okay...bye."
Hector: "Bye."
CEI-1 - Disconnects
Hector - is disconnected

With this model in place, I am confident our telephone conversations can conclude with the grace and dignity that all of you emulate as you walk in a room.

A Summer Left Behind

Over this past summer, I have dedicated countless hours reading all thirteen books in the Left Behind series by Timothy LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins (excluding the three pre-quels). I decided to take on this reading list for a couple of reasons:

1. These books have sold over 60 million copies worldwide. With this broad of a distribution and influence, it is only fair to critique such a phenomenon to determine both the good and the bad elements it offers for the life of the church. Assuming the best or ignoring the series altogether is only a remedy for disaster in the body of Christ. A fair critique should be offered and welcomed by the body seeking truth in God's Word.
2. Whether preachers, teachers, and writers want to admit it or not, the common person in the church pew is getting more of their theology (specifically, eschatology) from fictional novels than they are from sermons, Sunday School classes or commentaries. As a result, I feel a responsibility as a servant of God dedicated to equipping His church with the truth to read and examine what they are reading and examining.
3. I have dedicated my life to countering the particular view perpetuated in these books (Dispensational Premillennialism), and therefore I thought it only fair that I should read their books and have an educated opinion about their content when critiquing it. While I already had studied their theological position at great length, I had not yet engaged in this fictional representation as such.

Since I have finished the thirteenth book of the series (The Kingdom Come), I am now compiling my over 30 pages of notes into a thorough critique of the series focusing on three perspectives: [1] Literary critique, [2] Theological Critique, and [3] Exegetical Critique. This critique will be completed and posted on my website by September 15th.

So, why post this thread? Simple...I want your perspective. This discussion is for two groups in particular:

1. Those who have not read the Left Behind series, but have had interaction with Dispensational Premillennialism - BOTH GOOD AND BAD! I want to hear your stories, your studies, your thoughts, your concerns, your feelings, your testimonies -- everything related to this particular "end times" position espoused in the Left Behind series (the position offered by: John Hagee, Jack Van Impe, Hal Lindsey, John Walvoord, Pat Robertson, etc.).
2. Those who have read the Left Behind series. While I want the same information from you listed above in the first group, I would also like for you to add your particular perspective about the series of books themselves. What did you like? What did you dislike? What did you think about the characters? What was your favorite part? What could have been improved? Which was your favorite book? etc.

The purpose of this post would be to simply open conversations and questions about this book over the next four weeks, which I will incorporate into the final critique. I look forward to hearing your thoughts and receiving your questions.

Making Him Famous,

Shane J. Wood