You are on page 1of 33

Draft Not for Distribution

Theological Blogging
By David Wayne, aka, the Jollyblogger

A paper prepared for the 2005 God Blog Convention October 15, 2005

Draft Not for Distribution

Table of Contents I. Introduction..................................................................................................................................3 II. Presuppositions...........................................................................................................................4 III. What is Theology? A matter of definitions? ............................................................................4 Theologians defining theology....................................................................................................4 Theology as stance, not merely study. ........................................................................................5 Theology as the application of Scripture to life. ........................................................................6 A Working Definition of Theology. .......................................................................................6 We are all theologians..............................................................................................................7 The necessity of theology. ......................................................................................................8 My answer to the preceding question is that theology is indeed necessary for reasons internal and external to Scripture. ............................................................................................................8 The Task of Theology is Never Complete. ..............................................................................10 IV. How do we do theology? .......................................................................................................11 Three Resources for Theology...................................................................................................12 Exegesis.................................................................................................................................12 Community............................................................................................................................14 Christian Experience..............................................................................................................15 Interaction of the Three Resources............................................................................................18 IV. Blogging and Theology..........................................................................................................20 Blogging as a Parallel Universe.................................................................................................20 Exegesis.................................................................................................................................21 Christian Experience..............................................................................................................21 Community............................................................................................................................22 How Blogging May Help...........................................................................................................23 Blogging and Private Judgment.............................................................................................24 Blogging and Present Representatives...................................................................................25 Blogging and Heritage...........................................................................................................27 How Blogging May Harm ........................................................................................................27 V. Conclusion...............................................................................................................................32

Draft Not for Distribution

I. Introduction
This paper is the written version of a presentation given on October 14, 2005 at GodBlogCon2005 the Christian Blogosphere Convention sponsored by the Torrey Honors Institute of Biola University and held on the campus of Biola. The purpose of this presentation and paper is to explore the relationship between blogging and theology. To do so, there will be three main foci: A definition of theology How we do theology. The interaction of blogging and theology.

While the focus is of this presentation is on the last point, an understanding of the first two will lay groundwork that will hopefully enable profitable discussion on the last. Think of the first two foci loosely as a discussion of theological method, and the last as the application and interaction of theological method with the blogging phenomenon. Before delving into the subject I want to point out a couple of my main sources for this material for those who may want to follow up. Most of my thoughts on theological method have been shaped by Richard Pratt (http://www.thirdmill.org) of Reformed Theological Seminary (http://www.rts.edu) in Orlando, FL.. I have taken much of this material from a class he taught at RTS in 1993 called Introduction to Pastoral Theological Studies. This may be the single most influential class I have ever taken. My thoughts on the blogging phenomenon have been culled from my experience in the blogosphere since early 1994, but I am particularly indebted to Tim Bednar for his paper We Know More Than Our Pastors (http://www.e-church.com/Downloads/ We%20Know%20More %20Than%20Our%20Pastors.pdf). Insofar as I rely on Tim I am agreeing with his descriptions of what is actually taking place in the blogosphere, but I am not agreeing that things are as they should be. In fact, Tim himself once commented on my own blog that he is uncomfortable with some of the things he has written. Also, I am preparing this presentation and paper in late September and early October of 2005 and have heard that Tim will be publishing a revision and/or update of his paper sometime this fall. So, I do encourage the reader to keep your eyes open for this. Of course, no speaker or author can control what their hearers or readers do with their material and the reader should keep in mind that I am responsible for what is written here. At the same time the reader should remember that I have an impressionable young mind and if I say anything objectionable, offensive, or heretical it is because these men have led me astray, and should be blamed accordingly.

Draft Not for Distribution

II. Presuppositions
Before delving into the meat of the paper I want to mention that I dont believe anyone comes to any task as a blank slate. You may believe this but I dont. We have all been influenced by numerous sources and bring all kinds of presuppositions to the table. I am no different. Because the audience for this presentation and paper is broader than what is found in my usual circles it will be helpful to understand where I am coming from. I am conservative and evangelical to the core. Of course, having said only that much could open up all manner of discussion and/or argument due to the fact that many different people have many different definitions of conservative and evangelical. For now Ill just mention my ecclesiastical history to give you an idea of where I have come from. I came to know Christ at the age of 16 and spent the first ten to twelve years of my Christian life in very conservative Southern Baptist circles. In the great controversies of the 80s and 90s I was on the side of the inerrantists and the more fundamentalistic groups of the SBC. Over a period of time in the mid 90s I reexamined some of my theological beliefs and ended up aligning with the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA), one of the more conservative Presbyterian denominations. The PCA stood for inerrancy, the Great Commission and a high view of doctrinal integrity, all of which did, and do, appeal to me. Being PCA, I have not only aligned myself with the conservative wing of evangelicalism, but I have also aligned myself with the larger Reformed tradition and I subscribe to the Westminster Confession of Faith. I give you all of that to say that my intention is to speak to a much broader audience than what is accounted for in my own experience. At the same time it is helpful to know that, though I will not be defending or arguing apologetically for a particular theological ideology, it is inevitable that these presuppositions will bleed through in this paper. So I give you all of that not to apologize for my point of view, but hopefully to help you understand where I am coming from.

III. What is Theology? A matter of definitions?


Theology seems like a simple matter to define, and it is, at least until you start reading the many different definitions offered by theologians throughout the years.

Theologians defining theology.


Here is a small sampling of what how some theologians have defined theology. Thomas Aquinas Sacred doctrine (theology) is a unified science in which all things are treated under the aspect of God either because they are God Himself or because they refer to God.

Draft Not for Distribution Charles Hodge The science of the facts of divine revelation so far as those facts govern the nature of God and our relation to Him. Paul Tillich The methodological explanation of the contents of the Christian faith. Emil Brunner The study of the development of dogma. If you wanted to partition these definitions into different aspects of academic encyclopedia it seems that Aquinas, Hodge, and Tillich are defining theology in scientific terms and Brunner is defining it in historical terms. Whether this last paragraph rightly parses the statements of the theologians, one thing seems clear each of these men view theology primarily as study. There is a distinct academic ring to their definitions of theology. This is understandable since each of them were academics. In addition, the very word theology implies study. The word is a compound of two Greek words, theos meaning God, or divinity, and logos meaning study. Hence, theology has traditionally been associated with study. But such a definition has weaknesses. It de-emphasizes our experiential relationship to God and emphasizes conceptual orthodoxy, or as one theologian has put it, notional correctness. To be sure, theology does not have to do this, but it often does. As a reaction to this, some have broadened the definition of theology.

Theology as stance, not merely study.


In response to our tendency to reduce theology to a mere academic discipline, some have broadened their definition of theology to include the idea of stance as well as study. Please notice that I am saying stance in addition to study, not stance instead of study. That is important to add. In some circles there is an anti-intellectual mindset that devalues the academic. Yet, the academic is still important. But, an overemphasis on academics and studies can keep theology locked up in the classroom, never letting out into the highways and fields where it belongs. The old Puritan William Ames got closer to this more well rounded definition of theology when he defined it as: The doctrine or teaching of living to God. The study aspect is present in this definition but the emphasis is that theology has a broader application to all of life. In that respect, in his Intro to Theology class defines theology as not merely study, but as convictional life stance. Such an approach emphasizes that all of life applies to theology and theology applies to all of life. With that, there is a reciprocal relationship between life and study.

Draft Not for Distribution Our lives give us the questions we ask of our study of theology. Theological study then confirms or corrects our lives. At the same, our lives can confirm or correct our studies. One of the key points of this paper will be that theology is done in community. Life in community can correct our studies in that our brothers and sisters in Christ often point out where we have erred in our understanding of Scripture. If I believe the Bible teaches that the world is flat, I might decide to reexamine my understanding of Scripture if I have the life experience of heading west across the ocean from Spain and never fall off the edge.

Theology as the application of Scripture to life.


With the above in mind, it is necessary to point out that what we do with God is so much more than merely study Him.

A Working Definition of Theology.


I adhere to the following definition of theology offered by John Frame: I would suggest that we define theology as the application of the Word of God by persons to all areas of life.1 Frame gives several advantages to this definition which are worth quoting at length: 1). It gives a clear justification for the work of theology. Theology is not needed to remedy formal or material defects in Scripture but to remedy defects in ourselves, the hearers and readers of Scripture. 2). Theology in this sense has a clear Scriptural warrant: Scripture commands us to teach in this way (cf. Matt. 28:19f, and many other passages). 3). Despite its focus on human need, this definition does full justice to the authority and sufficiency of Scripture. Sola Scriptura does not require that human needs be ignored in theology, only that Scripture have the final say about the answers to those needs (and about the propriety of the questions presented). 4). Theology is thus freed from any false intellectualism or academicism. It is able to use scientific methods and academic knowledge where they are helpful, but it can also speak in nonacademic ways, as Scripture itself does exhorting, questioning, telling parables, fashioning allegories and poems and proverbs and songs, expressing love, joy, pateience . . . the list is without limit. 5). This definition enables us to make use of data from natural revelation and from man himself.2
1

John Frame, The Doctrine of the Knowledge of God (Phillipsburg, New Jersey, Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, 1987), p. 81 2 Ibid, pp. 81-82

Draft Not for Distribution Frames definition makes theology no longer the exclusive domain of the theologian or pastor, but extends it into the domains of mechanics and managers, housewives and teenagers, athletes and artists, and ballerinas and surfer dudes.

We are all theologians.


Taking this a bit further, the fact is that everyone is a theologian because everyone applies the Scripture to life. One of the complaints often raised about traditional theology is that it goes beyond the Scripture. In its more formal and academic incarnations, theology culls the data of Scripture and summarizes Scriptural teaching into propositional statements that come to be known as creeds, confessions and statements of faith. Because these creeds, confessions and statements of faith are summaries of Scriptural teaching and not always direct quotes from the Scripture, it is right to point out that they do not carry the same weight or authority as Scripture. We who are the most ardent of inerrantists gladly affirm that it is the Scripture that is authoritative not our theological statements. Yet to say that these statements are not inerrant is not to say they arent useful. Further, what academics and professional theologians do formally is not substantially different from what all Christians do informally. To be sure it is different in degree, but not in substance because all Christians routinely make summary statements of Scripture that are not direct quotes from the Scriptures. All of us routinely go beyond the Scripture in the same way the professional theologians do by summarizing Scriptural teaching instead of merely quoting the Scriptures. We use many simple summary statements of Scripture in casual conversation. For instance, none of the following terms and phrases are found as-is in the Scripture. Second coming of Christ. Assurance of salvation. Believers baptism or infant baptism. Once saved always saved. Inerrancy of Scripture. Substitutionary Atonement. No creed but Christ. Their adherents believed that all of these things are taught in Scripture, though they are not verbatim quotes from Scripture. Each one of these statements is a theological statement, a summary of Scriptural teaching on a particular matter.

Draft Not for Distribution When Frame defines theology as the application of the Word of God by persons to all areas of life, he is, in a very real sense, describing what Christians have always done throughout the ages. Thus, the question is not will I be a theologian? rather it is will I be a good theologian? Before leaving this subject I want to address the necessity of theology. It may be the case that we all do theology whether we know it or not, and it may be equally true that we are all wrong to do so. Is theology necessary?

The necessity of theology.


My answer to the preceding question is that theology is indeed necessary for reasons internal and external to Scripture. a. Internal Necessity. Ill begin with an anecdote from my own life. One time I was teaching a class on the end times and we had come to the book of Revelation and were dealing with the meaning of some of the symbols. I forget the exact subject of study that day, but I believe we may have been talking about locusts. I spent several minutes going through different understandings of the locusts, quoting commentaries from a wide variety of authors and traditions. After boring the class with this for several minutes, one of the students asked why I didnt take the Bible literally and take the locusts literally. To appreciate the way I answered you need to know that this was a 26 week class and we were somewhere around week 20. Over the 20 weeks of this class, the student in question had disagreed audibly with about 90-95% of what I was teaching. So, I may have been a bit testy on this day. When the student asked why I didnt take this symbol literally I replied that I didnt take it literally for the same reason the student didnt take James 2:24 literally. Again, by way of background, were in a very conservative evangelical Presbyterian (i.e. Protestant) in the south and I am asking the student if they take these words literally You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone. 3 I asked them point blank if they believed that we are justified by works and not by faith alone. You can see the deviousness of what I had done. I was giving this good conservative protestant the option of being a Roman Catholic (yes I believe we are saved by works and not by faith alone) or of being a liberal (no I dont take the bible literally). Its a question along the lines of do you prefer to have your right arm broken or your left? I created a false dilemma for my student, but it was in service to another purpose. I explained to this person that I didnt believe the locusts in the book of Revelation were literal
3

The Holy Bible : New International Version. 1996, c1984 . Zondervan: Grand Rapids 8

Draft Not for Distribution locusts because there were other Scriptural teachings which influenced my understanding and interpretation of this passage. In a similar way, this particular students understanding of the doctrine of justification was governed by many more Scriptural teachings than just James 2:24. To understand justification it is necessary to bring the whole Scripture to bear on the subject. In the same way there are many internal tensions in Scripture that must be addressed. The tension between faith and works is one, between divine responsibility and human responsibility is another, and there are many more. Some may address the tensions by simply letting them stand, and others may seek to reconcile them. But the point is that they must be addressed. b. External Necessity. The external necessity of theology comes from the fact that our lives give us questions to ask of the Scripture. Though the Scripture is sufficient for all of belief and practice, the original writers did not have every question that would ever be asked of Scripture in view when they wrote. That is not to say that the Scripture must answer every question any human could dream up. I dont believe the Scripture has the answer to whether or not I should wear the blue shirt or the red shirt tomorrow. At the same time, to paraphrase David Powlison, the Bible is a big book with far more answers to far more questions than we often give it credit for. The Bible speaks about even those matters it doesnt speak about directly. What do you see when you look at your Bible? Do you see a book crammed with relevance? Do you see a book out of which God bursts as He speaks to what matters in daily life? Is your Bible packed with application to the real problems of real people in the real world: inexhaustible, immediate, diverse, flexible? Or is the Bible relatively thin when it comes to addressing human struggles? I see two sorts of contemporary Biblebelieving, evangelical Protestants. One sort has a Bible crammed with relevance to human life. The other sort has a Bible of modest utility.4 The Westminster Confession speaks about how we arrive at theological conclusions in chapter 1, paragraph 6: The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for His own glory, mans salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture: 5 It is through deduction, using the principle of good and necessary consequence that we use the bible to answer questions that were not posed directly to the biblical writers.
4

David Powlision, Do You See? in The Journal of Biblical Counseling, (Volume XI, Number 3, Spring 1993), p. 3

The Westminster confession of faith. 1996 . Logos Research Systems, Inc.: Oak Harbor, WA 9

Draft Not for Distribution

The Task of Theology is Never Complete.


Defining theology as the application of Scripture to life reminds us that the task of theologizing is always incomplete. The last word has yet to be written in theology. Knowledge of the person and work of our Triune God can never be exhausted. We can never exhaust the knowledge the Scriptures reveal to us about God. A few examples may be helpful to illustrate this. None of the standard, historical creeds or confessions has a statement dealing with the charismatic gifts. It is not because Christians have been unaware of passages that spoke of these, it is just that charismatic gifts were not a hot issue in the church until the late 19th and early 20th centuries. To be sure, pockets of believers here and there had used them, but this was not a widespread phenomenon until the Asuza Street Revival of 1906. Since then, those for and against the use of charismatic gifts have been compelled to study the Scriptures, defend and refine their positions accordingly, and make theological statements about them. The Southern Baptist Convention recently revised their Baptist Faith and Message to include a statement about the roles of men and women in the family. Again, men and women have always had roles in the family, but with the rise of feminism, same-sex marriage and other societal changes, they believed the time had come to issue a theological statement on the matter. Whether you agree with their position or not, this illustrates how a new life situation had arisen which called forth the need for theologizing. I have a copy of A. A. Hodges exposition of the Westminster Confession of Faith and if you look in the introduction, it includes an explanation of several changes that have been made to the confession throughout the years. And so, there are always new life situations that call for new studies of the Word of God that will address them. Not only that but there are many existing theological statements that are in constant need of revision. Sometimes the substance of a particular theological statement may need to be revised and sometimes just the wording needs to be revised. A classic example of a change of substance is in the Westminter Confession, chapter 25 where language was removed identifying the pope as the antichrist. An example of a change of terminology is in the way many Calvinists today are revising the way they talk about the five points of Calvinism. It is now common for total depravity to be referred to as radical corruption, for limited atonement to be changed to particular redemption and for irresistible grace to be changed to effectual calling. This is because advocates of the views thought there were better ways to express their beliefs. All of this is to point out that, through the rest of this paper I will be speaking implicitly of the task of theologizing as an ongoing task. The last word on theology is yet to be written and blogging can help advance the study of theology.

10

Draft Not for Distribution

IV. How do we do theology?


If we accept the preceding notions, that we are all theologians and that theologizing is a necessary part of the Christian life, the question arises, how shall we then theologize? For many the answer is simple we just read the bible and say what it says about any particular topic. And, there is a good deal of truth in this simple expression. The goal of theology is to say what the bible says about any given topic. But there are more factors involved in formulating theology than this. Formulating theology is more akin to spinning a spider web than to laying out a rope. I am going to suggest that there are three resources we use in the formulation of theology exegesis, community and Christian experience. The rope analogy sees the theological process in a linear fashion we exegete the Scriptures, then take the results of that exegesis and speak to the communities in which we live and then apply them to Christian experience. The spider web analogy helps us understand that there are all kinds of reciprocal relationships between exegesis, community and Christian experience. An understanding of these things helps us see that the theological task is far more nuanced than we typically think. Having said that, it is necessary to point out that the Scriptures are our ultimate source, our ultimate guide, and ultimate authority for all of theology. Exegesis, community and Christian experience are resources which help us derive what the Scriptures are teach about any given topic. The task of theology is the task of applying the Scriptures to life. So please understand that, in the paradigm I am giving you, exegesis, community and experience are not things distinct from the Scripture. I am not saying that Scripture is one resource, community is another and Christian experience is another. All theology is scripturally based, scripturally driven, and scripturally guided. Exegesis, community and Christian living are avenues for approaching the Scriptures. I point that out in case anyone thinks I am equating exegesis and Scripture and thereby lowering the value and authority of Scripture to the level of community or Christian experience. That is not the case Scripture and Scripture alone is inerrant, infallible, and authoritative. Our exegesis of Scripture, and consequent theologizing, is not. I am arguing that we need to elevate our view of the Bible and be a bit more humble in our view of our own exegetical abilities. In saying that we are to do theology in community and pay attention to what our experience tells us I am affirming the importance of our own exegetical work, while attempting to free us from our own limitations. We simply do not have the capacity

11

Draft Not for Distribution to understand the depth and breadth of Gods Word as individuals, we need others to help us in the task.

Three Resources for Theology


Exegesis
The process of formulating theology begins with exegesis of the Scriptures. One of the things I will assert later is that we must realize that it doesnt end there. But for now, we need to understand that the theological task always must begin with exegesis of the Scriptures. There are three ways we may exegete the Scripture. a. Textual The textual exegesis of Scripture is simply the process of studying individual passages, sections and books of the bible to understand their meaning. Textual exegesis is emphasized in popular how to study the bible books and programs and often involves the use of such tools as word studies, studies on the historic backgrounds of particular passages and sections, genre considerations, and the like. b. Historical A historical approach to exegesis is a big picture approach to the Scripture that seeks to understand the overall story of the Scriptures and then interprets the parts in light of the whole. This is a school of thought associated particularly with theologians like Geerhardus Vos and Herman Ridderbos, and has also been called biblical theology or redemptive-historical theology. Such an approach understands the Scripture to be a story with a central theme. The central story or theme of Scripture is typically understood to be the story of redemption or the kingdom of God. Understanding that grand theme, this approach looks at the individual stories of Scripture in light of what they reveal about the unfolding plan of redemption. c. Topical The topical approach to exegesis is what most people commonly think of when they think of theology or systematic theology. This approach takes a particular topic and seeks to cull together all of the relevant Scriptural data on that topic to formulate a theological statement on said topic. Thus, many of the standard theological terms and phrases that were mentioned before, like inerrancy, substitutionary atonement, second coming, and no creed but Christ are all the products of a topical study of the Scriptures resulting in a particular theological statement or formula. The great creeds and confessions of the church are the products of this topical study of the Scriptures. Having pointed out that there are these three avenues of exegesis it is important to note the reciprocal relationships between the three. Each informs the other.

12

Draft Not for Distribution For example, a topical study of Scripture is dependent on textual exegesis. If a topical study culls together individual passages of Scripture to arrive at a theological statement it is imperative that those individual passages of Scripture be exegeted correctly. At the same time our overall topical understandings can inform our exegesis of individual passages. Take for example the following passages: Galatians 2:16: yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified.6 And, James 2:24:
24

You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone. 7

Obviously the two Scriptures I have picked here are crucial in the centuries long debates between Catholics and Protestants and I wont try to resurrect that debate here. But I offer these two passages to show that these two passages, from different books of the bible, written by different authors, have to be factored into the understanding of each other. Whichever side you come out on in this debate you cant understand James 2:17 without taking Galatians 2:16 into account. But more than that, there are a host of other Scriptures that speak to the same issues, which have been summarized into particular theological statements. And these theological statements, or the fruit of topical study, must inform our exegesis of a particular text. Similarly, when it comes to understanding historical, or big picture issues in the Scriptures we must understand the parts of history to understand the whole of history. But an understanding of the overall plan of redemption in the bible will also inform our exegesis of particular passages of Scripture. Take the story of Samson for instance. Samsons story is told in Judges 13-16. In almost every case where I have heard someone speak of Samson the punchline, or moral of the story, has gone something like this Samson was a man uniquely blessed and gifted of God who wasted the gifts God had given him, except for that one instance at the end of his life now dont be like Samson. In many, if not most cases, Samson serves as a role model for what not to be as a Christian. And yet, the verdict of history is that Samson was to be included as a model of faith, a member of the hall of fame of faith (Hebrews 11:32). Knowing this big picture are we to believe that the moral of the story is dont be like Samson. Hebrews 11:32 clues us in to the fact that the story of Samson is not a mere morality tale, it is an important part of Gods plan of redemption and ought to be interpreted accordingly. So these are just a few examples of the many and varied ways in which exegesis is a resource for theology.
6 7

The Holy Bible : English standard version. 2001 . Standard Bible Society: Wheaton The Holy Bible : English standard version. 2001 . Standard Bible Society: Wheaton 13

Draft Not for Distribution

Community
It may seem odd to suggest that community is a resource for theology. We usually think that the task of theologizing is separate from the community as that which builds and shapes community. This is true to a point, but there is a very real sense in which our community informs our theology. Recognizing community as a resource in the theology task affirms the biblical picture that each individual is a member of a larger body. God is building His church, a connected body, not a group of disconnected individuals. As such, theology shapes our communities, but our communities shape our theology in ways that I will explain. As before I will offer three subsections here, showing three types of community. a. Private Judgment Each individual Christian is a member of the larger community known as the body of Christ, but membership in community does not negate our individuality. We have a duty to submit ourselves to the body, and to consider the needs of others as more important than our own (Philippians 2:1-4). At the same time we have the individual responsibility to search the Scriptures for ourselves and determine what we believe about matters. This ties in with our exegesis of Scripture as mentioned previously. We must do our own study and arrive at our own conclusions. This is what the doctrine of the priesthood of the believer is all about. We have individual access to God. Along with that, we have the privilege and responsibility to study the Scriptures for ourselves and arrive at our own conclusions. But an overemphasis on private judgment can lead to isolation from other Christians. Furthermore it can lead to pride and error. These things can be kept in check as we keep in mind the other aspects of community. b. Present Representatives As members of the body of Christ we are surrounded with present representatives of our community. These present representatives include everyone from the lady who sits next to you in church, to the person you were discussing theology with on the internet or over lunch, to pastors, teachers, popular speakers, authors and contemporary scholars. All of these people can and do study the Scriptures and they can bring their study of the Scriptures to bear on your study of the Scripture. Similarly, you can bring your study to bear on theirs, and thus all members of the community sharpen and encourage one another c. Heritage

14

Draft Not for Distribution However, we need to remember that our community does not just include our present representatives it includes all the believers who have gone before us. G. K. Chesterton refers to this as the democracy of the dead. At every moment of the day we are surrounded by a great cloud of witnesses (Hebrews 12:1). Every Christian is a part of a much bigger story, we have a wonderful heritage made up of Christian heroes of the past, including martyrs, professors, pastors, missionaries, theologians, Christian statesmen and many others. These community members have left records of their study and practice of the Scriptures for us to feast upon and inform us today. They have done so by leaving us biographies, stories, commentaries, theologies, creeds, and confessions. C. S. Lewis reminds us of the importance of knowing our heritage: We need intimate knowledge of the past. Not that the past has any magic about it, but because we cannot study the future, and yet need something to set against the present, to remind us that the basic assumptions have been quite different in different periods and that much which seems certain to the uneducated is merely temporary fashion. A man who has lived in many places is not likely to be deceived by the local errors of his native village: the scholar has lived in many times and is therefore in some degree immune from the great cataract of nonsense that pours from the press and the microphone of his own age. 8 Although no one would state it this way, those who over-emphasize private judgment act as if the Holy Spirit came into existence at the time of their conversion. Keeping in mind that we are part of a much larger heritage reminds us that the Holy Spirit has been speaking to the church for thousands of years. There is nothing new under the sun (Ecclesiastes 1:9) and we need to remember that the temptations of our present age are not unique (I Corinthians 10:13). The theological issues we face today So, doing theology in community corrects our faulty exegesis at the same time our exegesis is correcting our faulty ideas about community. Doing theology in community broadens our perspective it helps us see that we dont know it all; in fact, it reminds us that we havent come up with all of the questions that could be asked of the Scripture. The community supplies us with questions and insights that can deepen our understanding of Scripture and correct our misunderstandings of Scripture.

Christian Experience

C. S. Lewis, The Weight of Glory, Learning in War-Time, (San Francisco, CA, HarperSanFrancisco, 2001), pp. 58-59

15

Draft Not for Distribution If it seems odd to speak of Christian community as a resource for theology, it seems downright dangerous to speak of Christian experience as a resource for theology. After all, the traditional conception of the theological task is that we derive our theology for the purpose of informing our Christian experience. Theology must judge experience, not the other way around. Many believe that if the door is opened to allow experience to shape theology this will inevitably lead to heresy. In one sense this is true. Higher Critical scholars of the last two hundred years have allowed experience to trump theology. Their study of general revelation, coupled with theological presuppositions gleaned from their academic experiences, became a grid through which they interpreted Scripture, thus causing them to abandon much of what is central to the faith. Charles Darwin is another example. His experiences aboard the H.M.S. Beagle compelled him to develop a view of origins which is in opposition to the biblical view. This discussion on the relationship of experience to theology usually rears its head in the areas of science and the charismatic gifts. Christians who do not hold to the literal 24-hour creation view and those who practice the charismatic gifts are often accused of letting their experiences dictate their theology, rather than the other way around. Of course, they do not believe they are doing so, that in fact they are simply living out the implications of a biblical theology. I wont weigh in on those debate except to point out that they are an arena where the issue of experience is frequently brought up. For the most part I take the more conservative view on this and am always anxious to judge every experience by theology. At the same time, this is a place where we can throw the baby out with the bathwater. Whether we like to admit this or not, the truth is that none of us comes to the Scriptures as a tabula rasa a blank slate. We come to the Scriptures with all kinds of presuppositions shaped by our experience. Our understanding of Scripture is shaped by all kinds of experiences, from our parents, teachers, Sunday School teachers, pastors, sufferings, successes, books, television, movies, philosophers, and that kid from the eighth grade who told you about the UFOs in the bible. Granted, some of this may seem silly, but all of these things and many more go into the makeup of our minds and they influence the way we read the Scriptures. When you look at the classical categories of systematic theology the subjects covered are responses to questions people have asked throughout the centuries. The bible wasnt written as a systematic theology textbook. Most of the classical themes of systematic theology textbooks arose in response to questions asked by philosophers and other cultural leaders throughout history. This is a sense in which experience has influenced theology as philosophical questions have shaped our theological categories.

16

Draft Not for Distribution I do want to point out that, just because a particular theological formula arose in response to the question of a particular philosopher, this doesnt mean that the theological formula is inseparably tied to that philosopher so that, when his philosophy is abandoned, the theological formula must also be abandoned. For instance, the fact that ancient philosophers posed the questions that led to the Trinitarian formula doesnt mean that God is not a Trinity, now that those ancient philosophies are not in favor. The questions that were asked were like digging tools that enabled theologians to find buried gold. Just because the tools have rusted and decayed doesnt mean the gold isnt still there. The bible doesnt give us the Nicene Creed or the Chalcedonian formulas as such. Yet, questions were asked that caused theologians to search the Scriptures and answer them with such formulas. So, our experience provides the questions we ask of Scripture which then find their ways into our theological statements creeds, catechisms, confessions and other theological formulas. But beyond that, our experience shapes also shapes our study of Scripture. This is where things get touchy and where conservatives in particular get nervous. I am not saying that our experience determines our theology. I am saying that our experience inevitably influences our theology. We understand, rightly so, that our theology should correct errant experience. But there are times when experience can correct errant theology. Here are a few examples. Lets suppose that, after careful study of the Scripture you had discovered that the earth had four corners (Isaiah 11:12, Revelation 7:1, 20:8) and that there was an end, or ends to the earth (Psalm 22:27, Daniel 4:11, Mark 13:27). Seeing that there were several different verses from several different books and genres of Scripture you might conclude that, since the earth has four corners and an end, or several ends. It would be reasonable for you to deduce from such biblical facts that the earth is a flat plane, of which you might fall off upon reaching the end. But suppose you got into a boat and sailed west, or east for that matter. And suppose you ran into continents, but you continued your westward track upon land and upon sea until one day, much to your surprise, you arrived back at your starting point, only coming from the other direction. Assuming that you believed in the inerrancy and infallibility of Scripture, your experience would tell you that you had misread those Scriptures and then you would need to adjust your theology accordingly. Suppose, after a thorough and exhaustive study of Scripture, you became firmly convinced that Jesus would return on October 22, 1844, as Baptist preacher William Miller thought. If, on October 23, 1844 Jesus had not returned, would you re-evaluate your theology?9

Unfortunately, in this case, William Miller and some of his followers did re-evaluate this theology and instead of abandoning this practice of date-setting, they simply re-calculated and set another date. The results were the same. For more information on this see the Wikipedia article Millerites at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millerites.

17

Draft Not for Distribution On a less outlandish note, one can look at the ebbs and flows of the popularity of postmillennial eschatology over the last century or so. Postmillennialism looks forward to a golden age where, through the preaching of the gospel, the world becomes almost completely Christianized before the return of Christ. Along with believing in the success of the gospel, many postmillennialists of the past believed that the world was getting better. However, in the last century, many abandoned postmillennialism in the wake of two world wars. These wars seemed to quash the notion that the world was getting better, and when this notion was quashed many who held to postmillennialism rethought their eschatology. Another example of how experience shapes theology can be seen in the relationship of evangelicals and politics in our day. In the 1950s and 1960s many evangelicals taught that Christians should have nothing to do with the political realm. As a result of decades long withdrawal from politics Christians saw their influence waning in America to a large degree. Among other things, the Roe vs. Wade decision of 1973 served as a wake-up call to many conservative Christians causing many to rethink their theology of withdrawal and re-enter the political realm. I am not offering value judgments on the above, although I think it is pretty clear that it was a good decision for flat-earthers and Millerites to rethink their theology. One can debate the merits of postmillennialism and Christian political involvement, but my point is to show that these are examples where conservative evangelicals, who hold the highest views of Scripture, have allowed experience to influence their theology.

Interaction of the Three Resources


As I mentioned before the task of theology looks more like the construction of a spider web than the laying out of a nice neat rope. Its because these resources are always pulling on each other. In the task of exegesis, the textual, historical and topical approaches are always pulling on each other and making numerous connections. Our interactions in community are constantly bouncing back and forth between private judgment, present representatives and heritage. I form an opinion about something, then I talk to a friend who points out an error in my thinking and I change my mind. Then I read something from a historical figure who tells me we were both wrong. Or, I talk to my friend and read a theologian from the 1800s and decide they were both wrong and I was right all along. I talk to my friend and read the theologian and using the data from both sources I am able to connect a couple of dots that neither of them connected and advance their own insights. Today I might be exegeting a passage of Scripture, I may have bought together the insights gleaned from textual, historical and topical perspectives, arrived at a well thought out conclusion. Then, I may read a contemporary or ancient theologian and find out I was wrong. I have studied the Scriptures, interacted in community and read the theologians of the past and all are in agreement that the world is flat. But, I find myself on a ship that never falls off the edge of the world and my Christian experience tells me everyone has been wrong all along. 18

Draft Not for Distribution I could go on and on with this web analogy but Ill just make one more point and that is that not only do our theological resources interact with one another in a web-like fashion, but so do the products of our theologizing, the doctrines and beliefs themselves. It is almost the case that every doctrine or teaching we believe has a bearing on every other doctrine. The doctrines themselves are linked in a web-like fashion. You can see this on one level simply through our common understanding that Scripture interprets Scripture. The book of James helps you interpret the book of Galatians and vice versa. The book of Hebrews helps you understand the book of Leviticus and yet the book of Leviticus provides a necessary foundation for understanding the book of Hebrews. If you want to understand the book of Revelation you need to bring the books of Daniel and Ezekiel and the gospels and the prophetic writings of Paul into the mix. Similarly, our doctrine of God influences our view of every other doctrine. Our view of the Trinity affects our view of salvation and justification and many other doctrines. Our view of the relationship of the church and Israel which will largely be influenced by our biblical or redemptive historical studies has a huge bearing on our view of the end times, which usually is a matter of topical study. And so, I bring all of this up to show that the study of theology, though it can be as simple as Jesus loves me this I know, for the Bible tells me so, it is also a beautiful, intricate and richly nuanced thing. To some this will be discouraging because they want theology to stay simple. It was a bit of a bombshell for me when I first studied some of these things because I was of the mind that the task of theologizing was simply a matter of me, my bible and my Jesus getting together and coming up with the truth. But as I began to consider the ramifications of the fact that the Bible is a very rich and complex book; and as I considered the ramifications of the fact that the Holy Spirit is speaking to thousands of brothers and sisters across the world today and that He has been speaking to the church for thousands of years, theology became much richer. I liken those who crave simplicity to those who are satisfied with paint by numbers art. If you were to give me a paint by numbers kit I could produce a painting in a relatively short period of time, and you could call it a painting of sorts. Or, someone like a Michelangelo could spend years of back-breaking work painting the Sistine Chapel and creating a very intricate masterpiece. You can take a very simplistic approach to theology where you just attempt to read a bible verse here and there and voila, youve got a doctrine of something. Youll have the equivalent of a paint by numbers picture, something functional, but not very pretty or memorable. Or you can make use of the many resources God provides, do the hard work and come out with a work of art, full of color and depth and beauty. Ill mention one more thing on the subject of simplicity and the use of these theological resources. There is a difference between simplicism and simplicity. Simplicism always stays on the near side of complexity and never wrestles with different resources and differing points of

19

Draft Not for Distribution view. In fact, simplicism is suspicious when people start talking in complex ways. Simplicists assume you are going liberal on them, trying to confuse them or trying to dissuade them from their views or corrupt them. Simplicists dont need to talk to anybody else, or read what theologians from other times and traditions have said. But for those who will go to the far side of complexity, who will do the hard work of wrestling with complex issues often find a remarkable simplicity on the other side of complexity. This is simplicity, not simplicism. Yes, it is very hard work to paint the Sistine Chapel or the Mona Lisa, but when you are done youve got a thing of beauty. In my office Ive got a print of Rembrandts painting of the Prodigal Son. In one sense it is a simple painting because it is a picture of a man comforting his kneeling son with some bystanders looking on. When I look at that painting its not hard to figure out what its about, but yet there is a depth and beauty to what is there that can never be captured in a paint by numbers approach. Its simple, but it has depth and richness to it. And the reason this simple painting is so rich is because Rembrandt went through complexity to get there. So, using the resources God gives us will enable us to have a much more nuanced, and ultimately richer, theology.

IV. Blogging and Theology.


As we move to discuss the relationship of blogging and theology my fundamental assumption is that blogging doesnt change the way we do theology. For bloggers, theology is still stance and study, and it is still the application of the Scriptures to life. Theology is still a necessity for bloggers and all bloggers, who in any way attempt to apply the Scriptures to life, are theologians. Furthermore, blogging does not provide a new resource for theology, but it does supply a new means of delivery for the three resources mentioned above. But most importantly, it is changing the way we use all of the aforementioned resources as it alters the way we deliver and receive information, and it alters the way we engage in community. Some of these alterations are helpful and some are challenging at best and potentially harmful at worst.

Blogging as a Parallel Universe


There is one sense in which the internet in general and the blogosphere in particular helps create a parallel universe. What I mean is that many, if not most of the things that people do in the real world are duplicated in the cyber-world. Before there was such a thing as a computer, an internet or a blog people were exegeting Scripture, engaging in community and experiencing Christianity in their daily lives.

20

Draft Not for Distribution The internet has created a separate sphere where all of that can take place and is taking place. Here are some examples.

Exegesis
Before there was an internet preachers, Sunday School teachers and zealous laymen were exegeting Scripture as they prepared sermons and lessons or just boned up on a topic of interest. Back then they used these things called books. Now, much of the stuff that was in those books is available on-line. Those of us who have become comfortable on the internet may forget just what a revolutionary thing it is to have access to the resources we now have access to. The Christian Classics Ethereal (http://ccel.org/) Library provides access to hundreds of high quality theological books that few people could have afforded a generation ago. With the Worldwide Study Bible (http://ccel.org/wwsb/) anyone can click on the title of a biblical book or look up a particular passage and it will provide anywhere from a few to dozens of links on that passage in commentaries, dictionaries and the like. As to bloggers, there are noted pastors and scholars who are contributing the fruit of their exegetical labors to their blogs. Mark D. Roberts (http://www.markdroberts.com) a pastor and theologian from Southern California regularly contributes in depth biblical and theological studies to his blog. The Minor Prophet blog (http://www.theminorprophet.com/) is compiling a library with links (http://www.theminorprophet.com/library.asp) to exegetical blog posts.

Christian Experience
Back in 1998, George Barna predicted the rise of the cyber-church, an alternative way of doing church. In the next section Ill speak about how the blogosphere duplicates (or attempts to duplicate) Christian community but for now Ill mention that the cybersphere and/or blogosphere is becoming a sphere where the Christian life is lived out. Here is Andrew Careagas summary of Barnas position: In 1998, Christian pollster and sociologist George Barna predicted the emergence of a "cyberchurch" in the early years of the new century. This cyberchurch will not be anything like the bricks-and-mortar gathering places that pass for churches in our culture today. Rather, Barnas cyberchurch will be an online church one that is entirely on the Internet. Its congregation of millions "will never travel physically to a church, but will instead roam the Internet in search of meaningful spiritual experiences." As the Internet becomes more integrated in our culture, and as traditional church become less relevant in a globalized, consumerist culture, Barna concludes that well see "a majority of Americans ... completely isolated from the traditional church format." Not only will they be surfing the Net for spiritual guidance, but many will also meet in cell groups and home churches, while others will simply have forsaken church altogether.10

10

Andrew Careaga, Embracing the Cyberchurch, (http://www.nextwave.org/dec99/embracing_the_cyberchurch.htm)

21

Draft Not for Distribution To some this is good news and to others it is deeply troubling. But no one can (or no one should) doubt that the internet is providing an alternative sphere for Christian living and the blogosphere is accelerating this.

Community
Just as the internet/blogosphere is providing an alternative sphere for Christian living, it is providing an alternative form of Christian community. In his 2002 article, The Church Internet Disconnection, Andrew Careaga pointed out that there is a disconnect between the way many churches and Christian leaders view and use the internet and the way netizens use the internet. Traditional Christian leaders and churches tend to view the internet (and blogosphere, by extension) as a conduit for information. In other words, they see the internet as a place for sharing information about their churches, or posting their sermons, evangelistic tracts, apologetic materials and the like. Netizens on the other hand, view the internet as a place to build community. As Careaga says: the Internet is radically reshaping lives, perceptions of reality, communication, community, relationships and culture.11 There is a good deal of debate about whether or not real community can take place via the internet. I am one of those who has reservations about this. But whether I, or anyone else, has reservations about this, there are many who perceive and are looking to the internet/ blogosphere for true community. Tim Bednar shares an anecdote about this in his paper We Know More Than Our Pastors: Blogging promotes real world care and concern. To offliners this seems counterintuitive, however, the fact is that blogging is a way to care for others. Jordon Cooper revealed in an Ooze message board: When my wife Wendy had her miscarriage a little over a month ago. I went downstairs and posted it when we got home in the middle of the night. By the next morning, many people who only know me through my weblog had e-mailed, commented on the site and later on made several phone calls to see if we needed anything. At the time, I was on staff of a church of 1500 people who went on and on about being an authentic community. Outside of my son's godparents, not a single phone call from any of the staff and leadership. There is a reason we flock online. There is people, interaction, and community here that in many ways is more real than in the offline world. Blogging is more than an echo chamber, kicking rocks down the street or navelgazing. It often results in real world changes in the form of new relationships, social justice, inner transformation and ecclesiastical reformation. As with the Dean For
11

Andrew Careaga, The Church-Internet (dis)connection, (http://www.next-wave.org/jun02/disconnection.htm)

22

Draft Not for Distribution Amercia campaign, we are only beginning to experience the changes made possible by social networking applications like blogging.12 Of course we may argue that the real moral of this story is the failure of a church to care for its members and I am sure that there are those who might quibble about whether or not the cyber well-wishes that Jordon and Wendy received constitute real community. Wherever you stand on those things, I believe it is undeniable that Jordon and Wendy received true expressions of Christian love and that this was facilitated through the blogosphere. And there are many other stories around the blogosphere. So there is a real sense in which the internet and/or blogosphere has created a parallel Christian universe for us. I have not mentioned that the blogosphere has also become a place to display the fruit of exegesis, community and Christian experience in the theological realm. Much of that which used to be only available in seminaries, conferences and theological books is now available online and in blogs. I am involved in several projects which offer the fruit of theological study using the resources mentioned. I blog largely on theological topics at the Jollyblogger (http://jollyblogger.typepad.com), edit Theologica, a theological blog sponsored by World Magazine (http://theologica.worldmagblog.com/theologica/) and run two blogrolls that are largely devoted to theology. There are many others who blog on theological topics. Phil Johnson of Grace Community Church in Southern California blogs mostly on theological topics at Pyromaniac (http://phillipjohnson.blogspot.com/), Tim Challies (http://challies.com/) and Rebecca Stark from Canada are prominent theological bloggers (http://everydaymusings.blogspot.com/), Adrian Warnock blogs on theology from the UK (http://adrian.warnock.info), and the ladies from Intellectuelle (http://evangelicaloutpost.com/intellectuelle/) do the same. This is just a small sampling of the hundreds, maybe thousands of blogs out there that are devoted to theological topics. But the real significance of the internet in general and the blogosphere in particular is not in its creation of a parallel Christian universe and a parallel delivery system for the three main theological resources. The real significance is in the way it is reshaping the way we use the very resources themselves. In this respect blogging has the potential to help and harm us in the task of doing theology.

How Blogging May Help


12

Tim Bednar, We Know More Than Our Pastors, (http://www.e-church.com/Downloads/ We%20Know%20More %20Than%20Our%20Pastors.pdf), pp. 15-16. Jordon Cooper blogs at http://www.jordoncooper.com/

23

Draft Not for Distribution In my opinion, the biggest way that blogging helps in the theological task is in its community aspect. I will also argue that blogging can foster a kind of community or an understanding of community that can be harmful, but for now Ill focus on the positive. To do this I want to look at the three subcategories of community that were listed before and discuss how they affect the whole of the theological task, with an emphasis on the exegetical aspect.

Blogging and Private Judgment


As mentioned before, the fact that we are members of a larger Christian community does not relieve us of our private responsibilities. As Martin Luther said, my conscience is bound by the Word of God. The doctrine of the priesthood of the believer tells us that we as individuals have access to the throne of God and as a corollary, we have the right and responsibility to make our own theological decisions. As mentioned before, a benefit of blogging is that it can expand the resources we have at our disposal for doing theology. Exegesis, Christian living, present community, and heritage all feed us data that will help us make those private judgments and blogging makes more of these things accessible to us. Several passages in Proverbs talk about the wisdom that is found in having many counselors: 13 Proverbs 11:14: Where there is no guidance, a people falls, but in an abundance of counselors there is safety. Proverbs 15:22: Without counsel plans fail, but with many advisers they succeed. Proverbs 24:6 for by wise guidance you can wage your war, and in abundance of counselors there is victory. By providing access to more and more resources and larger and larger communities blogging provides access to an abundance of counselors who can help promote wisdom in the task of theologizing.

13

The following three Scriptural citations are taken from The Holy Bible : English standard version. 2001 . Standard Bible Society: Wheaton 24

Draft Not for Distribution

Blogging and Present Representatives


This is where I think blogging has its biggest payoff for the modern Christian. The expansion of available resources I have mentioned previously is not a blessing that is peculiar to blogging. Many of these things are available simply on the internet. The particular benefit that blogging brings to us is the increased interaction with the present representatives of our Christian community. It is here that I will spend some extra time and space and Ill begin by sharing a part of my own theological experience. For me, seminary was a great experience. I have heard many criticize seminary education because it is purely academic, it is usually driven by a modernistic model of instruction, it doesnt answer the questions that real people are asking, and that it doesnt truly prepare people for ministry. Although those things are not necessarily true, they can be. But, as I went through seminary I never expected it to be the thing that would prepare me for ministry. I knew that academics were only one aspect of preparation for ministry and I understood that my real preparation for ministry would take place once I was actually on the field of ministry. So I didnt begrudge the emphasis on academics. Also, for me the academics were not just an exercise of the head, I often found my heart strangely warmed through my studies. One of the most important aspects of seminary for me and most of my fellow students was the after class informal discussions with fellow students and professors. Obviously the classroom lectures were of primary importance in the education but it was in those informal, off the cuff discussions and debates outside of class where many things sunk in. It was in these discussions that students who got it could explain things to those who didnt get it. Students could offer other illustrations and insights, they could say yeah but, and talk about things the professor didnt mention, or mention other books they had read which might add to the learning. And it was outside of class where we could often talk to the professors to get clarifications on many points. In short, much of learning took place outside of the formal class time. A good deal of theologizing took place outside the theology class. With its conversational style, blogging is the closest I have come to duplicating this after class aspect of the seminary experience. The feedback allowed for via commenting on blogs and the cross posting that takes place as blogger A interacts with and responds to blogger B has a terrific sharpening effect in our theologizing. When it comes to the theology in community resource, this is present representatives in action at their best. Here are some particular benefits of present representatives in action. a. Quick Feedback Theology is perfected as it is discussed and debated. In the past a scholar might offer his theological insights through a book or an article in a theological journal. Hopefully this scholar

25

Draft Not for Distribution would have interacted with critics before publishing the book or article, but the real feedback came after publishing. Professor A might write a journal article that was responded to by Professor B in another article and many others may have jumped into the fray. Something similar might take place through the writing of books. In this situation, it could be months or years before Professor A got feedback and either defended or altered his position. With the advent of blogging no one need wait long for feedback on their positions. Sometimes feedback can come in a matter of minutes, sometimes hours and frequently not more than a day or two. The feedback loop is quickened with blogging and this has many salutary effects. First of all, errors and misunderstandings can be corrected quickly. Secondly, with blogging it becomes increasingly harder to misrepresent your theological opponents and create straw men. To be sure, a good deal of misrepresentation and straw-manmaking goes on in blogs, but at least these things dont go unchallenged for long. Thirdly, the quickening of the feedback loop can lead to greater clarity and precision as errors, misunderstandings, misrepresentations and straw men are dealt with in a timely fashion. b. Expanded Horizons In my mind, the greatest benefit of blogging is the way it expands your horizons. Most of us have very narrow communities where we only talk to like minded people. I went to a seminary where almost everyone was from the same theological tradition, I pastor a church and work with a group of people who share my convictions. With this, it is easy to become insular as we are only exposed to groups of people within a small geographical and denominational sphere. Blogging expands our communities. Ill use myself as an example. I participate in the PCABlogs blogroll, a blogroll for members of the Presbyterian Church in America. Thus, my denominational community is expanded as I interact with people from across the country and across the world whom I would never have met. I also participate in the League of Reformed Bloggers which puts me in touch with those from different denominations who share a similar tradition. Thus, within my own denominational and traditional communities my horizons have been expanded to enable me to interact with many who share my convictions, yet may come at them from different angles. But blogging goes several steps further (and better) than this in that it exposes all of us to many people from many different communities. In our churches and normal spheres of life we may never come across someone who disagrees with us or sees things differently. Those of us who are pastors usually speak to an audience that is pretty much in lock step with us after all, people wouldnt be coming to our churches if they didnt pretty much agree with us. And its that way for most Christians we tend to hang out with people who are like us.

26

Draft Not for Distribution

Blogging exposes us to a much wider circle of people, denominational affiliations and traditions. Being from the Reformed tradition a good deal of my blogging is devoted to advocating for this tradition. Recently I said something about Arminians and guess what, an Arminian read it, commented and cleared up a misunderstanding I had about their views. This is one of many benefits that come from the interaction in community that blogging provides.

Blogging and Heritage


Along with the above, blogging can enable us to know more of our heritage. It can help us know more of the heritage of our own group but can expose us to the heritage of other groups. There are lots of blogs and bloggers who are fully or partially devoted to making the writings of the past accessible to us today. Rebecca Stark at Rebecca Writes (http://everydaymusings.blogspot.com) will frequently devote a whole month of her blog to the writings of a particular theologian or a particular group from the past. She has even started a blog where she is re-posting entries from David Brainerds Journal at David Brainerds Blog (http://davidbrainerd.blogspot.com/). . Much of George Grants blogging (http://kingsmeadow.com/blogger.html) is devoted to Christian heritage, bringing the thought of great Christians of the past to bear on the issues of today. Blogging helps the theological task in making our Christian heritage available to us today, thereby strengthening and challenging out theological convictions, helping us avoid being deceived by the local errors of our native village, as C. S. Lewis said.

How Blogging May Harm


It is often the case that our greatest strengths are also our greatest weaknesses and blogging is no different. There is a flip side to the freedom and access that blogging provides for us to interact in community. That freedom can be a blessing and it can also be a curse. Along those lines I want offer some thoughts on potential ways that blogging can be harmful to the theological task of applying the Scriptures to life. Several of the things I will mention are variations on the same theme as I think you will see. But I want to issue the caveat that these are potential problems that dont necessarily have to come to pass. Just as blogging, in and of itself, can create situations and environments that can further the theological task, so blogging can create situations and environments that are harmful to the task. The things I will mention as potential problems dont have to become problems. I am suggesting that some of the good things in blogging, if taken too far, can become harmful. And the harm is not so much in the thing itself, but in the habits of mind that can be created in blogging.

27

Draft Not for Distribution 1. Anti-Authoritarianism The biblical picture of preaching is that of authoritative proclamation. A few Scriptures that speak of this are: 14 Romans 16:25 Now to him who is able to strengthen you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ. I Corinthians 1:21: For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe. The word for preaching here is proclamation, and it carries the idea of an authoritative declaration. The blogosphere doesnt easily lend itself to this kind of proclamation. The blogosphere is uniquely able to foster conversation and this is one of its greatest strengths. True, there are those who attempt to deliver authoritative proclamations via the blogosphere but these often dont go over well. Those who seek to proclaim to those who want to converse will often be puzzled at their hearers lack of embrace and response. In one sense this is all to the good. Because the blogosphere is open to anyone with an internet connection, almost anyone can say almost anything to almost anyone about almost everything. So, it is a good idea to have a healthy sense of skepticism when reading blogs because you never know who you are reading. Just because someone else thinks they are an authority on a particular matter doesnt mean they are an authority. My concern though, is that because conversation is the default communication of the blogosphere we may be training ourselves to reject anything that smacks of authoritative proclamation. We may be training ourselves to never submit. In this respect I am not concerned with trying to identify which bloggers we should regard as authorities or what kind of posts we should submit to. In fact we should never blindly submit our minds to anyone We should be Bereans, examining everything to see if it is true to the Scriptures (Acts 17:11). What I am concerned about is that we not develop a habit of mind which views everything as conversation. Taken too far, this mindset will lead us to question and debate everything and we may come to a place where we no longer have the mental and spiritual receivers that can recognize and download authoritative proclamation when it comes. And, our theological statements are authoritative proclamations. For instance, though the bible does not use the word Trinity the doctrine of the Trinity is an authoritative and binding
14

These passages are taken from The Holy Bible : English standard version. 2001 . Standard Bible Society: Wheaton 28

Draft Not for Distribution doctrine on Christians. If we develop a habit of mind that cant receive authoritative proclamation then we will be hard pressed to give any weight to any theological statement. 2. Individualism and Egalitarianism Run Amock Since childhood we have heard the legends about American being a nation of rugged individualists. That individualism is a good thing and a bad thing, and it goes hand in hand with a kind of egalitarianism. This is a good thing in that it resists an unbiblical elitism and honors the dignity of the individual. It can be a bad thing when it resists the communitarian impulse. Nancy Pearcey speaks of this individualism and how it resists the communitarian impulse: Unlike the local pastor ministering to his own covenantal congregation, the revivalist often preached to crowds of people drawn together from across several congregations and denominations. This was a significant change, for it meant the individual was addressed as an individual, apart from his membership in a church. In fact, the revivalists often went further, explicitly urging people to leave their local churches to find ministers who were truly converted - an idea that was shocking in light of Puritan covenant theology. To understand why this message was so unsettling, we have to realize that the seventeenth-century view of social order was highly communal and organic. A person simply did not conceive of himself apart from the family, church, local community and so on. When a pastor was called to a local parish, it was almost like a marriage proposal. He was expected to bond permanently with the congregation and stay there for life. By the same token, members were bound by a covenant to the local parish. Thus it was a radical departure when the revivalists directed their message to individuals, exhorting them to make independent decisions in regard to religion - and to act on those decisions regardless of their effect on the larger society. "Piety was no longer something inextricably bound up with local community and corporate spirituality" explains Stout. "The emphasis shifted to a more individualistic and subjective sense of piety that found its quintessential expression in the internal, highly personal experience of the "New Birth."15 Pearceys comments are helpful here in the sense that extreme individualism can lead to extreme egalitarianism, where one individuals opinion is always as good as anothers, even when they disagree. My concern is that blogging, if bloggers are not careful, can foster this kind of mindset. Andrew Sullivan says of blogging.

15

Nancy Pearcey, Total Truth: Liberating Christianity From Its Cultural Captivity, (Wheaton, IL, Crossway Books), p. 270

29

Draft Not for Distribution And it harnesses the web's real genius - its ability to empower anyone to do what only a few in the past could genuinely pull off. In that sense, blogging is the first journalistic model that actually harnesses rather than merely exploits the true democratic nature of the web."16 That is good news indeed for bloggers. But it is also bad news because, at its heart, the Christian faith is not a purely democratic movement. In keeping with the idea that there is such a thing as authoritative proclamation in the church, there are such people as authoritative proclaimers in the church. Everyones opinion is not as good as everyone elses. Tolerance is a hot topic in our day, but we have lost the true meaning of tolerance. There is a true, biblical tolerance which teaches us that we accept all men as equals, as fellow image bearers. But to accept every person is not the same as accepting every idea and behavior. If we are not careful, the very democratic nature of the web that is being exploited in blogging can lead us down the road of an extreme and unbiblical individualism/egalitarianism. This doesnt mean that the blogosphere needs some kind of priesthood or hierarchy to vet bloggers and their posts. Again, I am arguing against a particular habit of mind which can dominate if bloggers arent careful. This can be seen more clearly in the next point. 3. Flattening of the Gifts In the church God has given many gifts to the people of God. Some of these gifts are related to leadership, and one of these is the gift of teaching. I Cor. 12:27-31:
27

Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it. 28 And God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healing helping, administrating, and various kinds of tongues. 29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? 30 Do all possess gifts of healing? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret? 31 But earrnestly desire the higher gifts.17 I Timothy 3:1-2 says:
1

The saying is trustworthy: If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task. 2 Therefore an overseer must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, soberminded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, . . .18

16

Quoted on by Josh Claybourn at Joshua Claybourns Blog Archives - http://www.joshclaybourn.com/blogger.html

17

The Holy Bible : English standard version. 2001 . Standard Bible Society: Wheaton 18 The Holy Bible : English standard version. 2001 . Standard Bible Society: Wheaton 30

Draft Not for Distribution In mentioning before that blogging can foster an individualism/egalitarianism run amock my point was that bloggers often treat every idea as equal. Theologians distinguish between the ontological and economic Trinity. These are big words which speak of being and function. The ontological Trinity focuses on the idea that all three members are equal in being, or substance. The economic Trinity focuses on the idea that there is a difference in function in the members of the Trinity. Similarly in the body of Christ we are all equal in being. We stand before God as equals. But God has given us different gifts in the body. There is such a thing as right and wrong in theology, there is good and bad theology, and there are those who are uniquely equipped as teachers and theologians and those who are not. My concern is that, in the blogosphere, if we are not careful we will flatten out the gifts and treat the opinions of those who are not gifted in teaching as equal with the opinions of those who are. 4. Sovereign Individualism The final observation I will offer about the potential dangers of blogging has to do with what I call Sovereign Individualism. I have enjoyed dabbling in the writings of James Dale Davidson and Lord William ReesMogg, authors of Blood in the Streets,19 and The Great Reckoning.20 I have only dabbled in their writings but have found that they have made some uncanny predictions in the past. Among other things they forecast the 1987 stock market crash, the collapse of communism, civil war in Yugoslavia, the rise of Islam replacing Marxism as the dominant ideology confronting the west and increased terrorism on American soil, and this before the Oklahoma City bombing and 9/11. Of course not everything they predict will come true does. Though they werent dogmatic about it, they hinted at widespread disruption in the wake of Y2K. So, I dont advocate taking their word for everything, but they have been prescient enough in the past that I listen when they speak. And so, when they wrote their book The Sovereign Individual: Mastering the Transition to the Information Age, 21 I was interested. The title itself speaks volumes this information age in which we are living is creating an era of sovereign individuals. And, computers and the internet are playing a major role in the creation of the sovereign individual. The coming transformation is both good news and bad. The good news is that the Information Revolution will liberate individuals as never before. For the first time, those who can educate and motivate themselves will be almost entirely free to invent their own work and realize the full benefits of their own productivity. Genius will be unleashed, freed from both the oppression of government and the drags of racial and ethnic prejudice. In the Information Society, no one who is truly able will be detained by the ill19

James Dale Davidson and Sir William Rees-Mog, Blood in the Streets: Investment Profits in a World Gone Mad, (Summit Books, 1987) 20 James Dale Davidson and Lord William Rees-Mog, The Great Reckoning: Protecting Yourself in the Coming Depression, (New York, NY, Touchstone books, 1993) 21 James Dale Davidson and Lord William Rees-Mog, The Sovereign Individual: Mastering the Transition to the Information Age (New York, NY, Touchstone books, 1993).

31

Draft Not for Distribution formed opinions of others. It will not matter what most of the people on earth might think of your race, your looks, your age, our sexual proclivities, or the way you wear your hair. In the cybereconomy, they will never see you. The ugly, the fat, the old, the disabled will vie with the young and beautiful on equal terms in utterly color-blind anonymity on the new frontiers of cyber-space.22 This liberation of individuals as never before is a good thing and if all of the authors predictions about the unleashing of genius, freedom from oppression and other things come true we will all benefit. But Davidson and Rees-Mog go further and say that this is creating the Sovereign Individual, one over whom nation states and traditional institutions will lose their power to control. In gaining more control over their lives people will have less and less accountability to traditional institutions. My concern is that the more and more sovereign people perceive themselves to be; the less and less willing they will become to bow the knee to another sovereign. The task of theologizing assumes a posture of submission to the Word of God. I wonder if individuals who perceive themselves to be sovereign will be able to submit themselves sufficiently to the Word of God to do good theology. This would not be as big a concern if I did not believe that Francis Schaeffer was basically right when he said that the dominant worldview of modern man is that the highest good is personal peace and affluence. Couple this worldview with a perceived sovereign individualism and you have a recipe that may lead to theologizing for the comfort and convenience of man rather than for the glory of God. This does not have to happen, but Davidson and Rees-Mog paint a picture where the internet becomes the arena where sovereign individualism is expressed, and they dont see this as a necessarily bad thing. When they wrote the book I dont believe blogging was on their minds. If anything though, blogging has accelerated the process of sovereign individualism and it is something that bloggers need to guard against.

V. Conclusion
The theological task is more nuanced than most of us think, and maybe a bit more complicated, drawing on a few more resources than we ordinarily think. If the theological task is more complex though, it is a complexity that leads to beauty, as more of the richness of Scripture is found and made useful for living. Blogging may provide some unique benefits for us and enable us to move the theological task forward. In particular, blogging may expand our communities and in so doing bring greater
22

Ibid, pp. 17-18

32

Draft Not for Distribution resources to bear on the theological task. Blogging can expose us to more exegetical tools and then enable us to have wider and deeper interaction with present and past representatives of our Christian community. And blogging may create situations that will diminish our ability to do good theology. But even where it may harm, it need not. The potential danger blogging poses to theology is mainly that it may create habits of the mind that militate against habits of the mind that are necessary for good theologizing. But these are things that may be effectively resisted as we live in submission to the Word of God.

33

You might also like