Overreaction? Perhaps a bit.

The printing press and the Bible in the hands of the masses caused fear that the common man could not handle information. To have something in print was huge. Martin Luther's little note causes quite a stir. Today, we have a revolution called the internet that is as huge in changing the world. Blogging is simply a product of all this, most might agree.

History proves that the best and worst will be expressed, regardless of the technology available. Bad theology on TV, books and now on the www does not win out against truth, however misguided some have been. Having a place where people can actually dialogue is a good thing, in my opinion.

However, the medium is not the issue--humanity is. Now, we can get close up and personal and the mainstream corporate world--even the Christian biggies--don't have control over it. That, really, is the main problem people have. CNN is not as relavent, and they hate that fact. Christianity Today, might not be as relavent, too. Go figure. Times are indeed changing.

Since this is a blog that you are writing on it is interesting that you would be so critical of them. I think that all you say can be true in the blogging world. I have yet to experience most of the negative though. My blog is a place for me to organize thoughts and share them with others. So far, apart from some spam, it has been very encouraging for me and others tell me that they are encouraged by it as well.

For me blogging is being part of a community of people, if somewhat stilted, that are interested in the same things and keep track of each other despite the differences of location, time, or beliefs. It is a great place to share ideas and know that people can respond without fear of personal confrontation. I guess for those of us who can accept impersonal confrontation, it is OK. Though it is a place where people only reveal things that they choose about themselves and is therefore not completely real, it has been a place of great motivation and community for me.

Yea for blogging!

I said this before (back on the infamous F-bomb blog) in response to Dr. Blomberg's questions, but I'll say it again. I have too often found that my online interactions with others involve posting with great frequency and little thought, no matter what the subject of the blog or forum. I don't feel that it is less harmful when the topic is "What is your favorite band?" vs. "What is your view of baptism?" because the heart attitude behind my comments is often coming from the same place - I'm right, you're wrong - and lacks charity. Not to mention the fact that, 99% of the time, I lack an ability to appreciate a comment in the context of the person who made it. In short, I am quick to speak (and to anger), and slow to seek understanding. That is why one of my resolutions this year is to blog no more, although I must admit that I was waiting for Dr. Blomberg's blog to be published before I began :) All said, I don't think blogging to be inherently bad, as it does have many benefits, for example, when it allows friends to keep track of each other despite long distances. However, as Christians, I think that we are wise to heed the words of James in relation to our "online tongues".....perhaps (just for fun's sake) James decided to take a different tack - "Not many of you should presume to be bloggers, my brothers, because you know that we who blog will be judged more strictly."

Cheers. See you in 2007. Maybe.

Tim

I was forming some opinions about what you've written here, but I wound up wanting to write what Mr. Kirkpatrick already wrote above.

So, what he said.

I agree with Dr. Blomberg in many ways. Blogs seem to encourage debate, and some commenters don't keep their tone in check. Still, the Church can't ignore this new technology simply because it provides new challenges and difficulties for us.

Imagine if the church had ignored the new technology of moveable type. Imagine if Johann Gutenberg had considered the Bible too personal and complicated to make available to the masses. Instead, the Gutenberg Bibles remain a testament to the power of God to glorify himself through any technology.

Blogs provide the Church an opportunity to be a virtual city on a hill. We must show that God can receive glory even in this new technology--through the way we run our blogs, the way we choose which comments to post, and the way other commenters respond to belligerent voices.

For better or worse, Christian blogs present the truth of Christ's church. We are far from perfect here, yet God will be glorified despite our imperfections.

I think that blogging gives us an opportunity to exercise our discernment. We can hide the sin in our lives behind the masks we wear regardless of the medium we use. The Spirit will divide the truth from the lie in what is written, just as He does in the spoken word. The concerns you have are valid but they are not isolated to the community of blogging.

I find it interesting that this medium is viewed negatively because of what may or may not be said on them, the attitudes of those participating in them, or the level of 'expertise' of the author.

As a graduate student who has read a great deal of the most important scholarly work in the biblical arena, I could raise the same concerns for that medium. There is much from academia that is far more damaging to faith than anything the average Christian could write on a blog that has a limited readership, whereas a Ph.D. somehow gives more weight to the voice of the scholar even if that scholar uses his/her voice to tear down the faith of believers rather than builds them up.

"Yellow Journalism" is the media use of extreme, controversial, or sensational issues to attract or influence readers (any good dictionary). This practice has been considered unethical by secular media for some time - although there is no doubt that it is still popularly practiced. It certainly should be "beneath the dignity" of any group that calls itself "Christian." This is an area where "Christian" weblog sponsors must demonstrate genuine Christian virtue. Many tens of millions of Americans are popularly identified as "Christians." Within that vast pool of loosely-defined "Christian" humanity there will inevitably be individuals, congregations, etc., who behave in extreme, controversial, even scandalous, ways. Placing extreme behavior front and center on the table for "Christian" discussion, implying the possibility of its universal acceptance, is to intentionally incite a divisive debate or to promote movement in the direction of the aberrant. Divisiveness is plainly wrong and God wants His people to be steadfast and mature, not "tossed here and there by waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine." The keyboard, like the tongue, can start all sorts of destuctive fires as well as reshape the truth like silly putty. My brief exposure to Christian weblogs powerfully suggests that there is a tremendous need for a genuinely Christian code of ethics for blog sponsors and participants with the obvious goal being to please the Lord Jesus Christ in all respects.

With blogs I truly appreciate the fact that anybody can be published. The media gatekeepers can no longer control the flow of information. All too often the Evangelical viewpoint on anything has been disallowed; now you can find the Evangelical viewpoint on display in many places. Some blogs are better than others but the cream is sure to rise. I say, hooray for the rise of the blogs.

If as Christian's we don't participate in the blogosphere who will? Let's not spend too much time thinking about the medium and spend more time thinking about those that need to hear the message.

Though there are lots of legitimate uses for blogs, I for one see tremendous potential in the blogosphere to be "mutually encouraged by each other's faith" (Rom. 1:12). That's what I look for, and when it works, it works well.

But I've been pretty disappointed by the partisan pride and strife that seems to crop up almost everywhere. The blogosphere offers us an opportunity to exchange views and ideas in a way that the church could actually function more like a body made up of diverse parts. But it seems like we've just moved our mutual suspicions, jealousies and disputes online. We have a long way to go.

Nevertheless, I wonder if the many obstreperous and contentious bloggers out there might just be used of God to wear each other down until the fruit of the Spirit is more evident. In some cases with blogs I've followed, I've seen that process at work already, though admittedly it may take a long time. "Make a tree good and its fruit will be good" (Mt. 12:33).

nice blog! and great to have some criticism against blogging for a change.

ease of publishing access is just one aspect of blogging - one that correlates with magazine publishing, although there are less filters.

but blogging is so much more than that.

as believers "publish glad tidings daily" in a modular format that is findable and permanent, they contribute to the world's largest database. Rather than a few dozen good articles getting published each day, there are millions of discrete posts that will be aggregated all over the world for a long period of time. This scale of bigness allows a level of self-correction previously unattainable by tradional media with only a few people monitoring quality. Researchers of the future will have a great resource in piecing together information for church history records not in spite of the "had a coffee with Dr. ______ today" blog post but because of it.

whole life blogging is far more holistic than essay writing, and allows the context of one's life to add flavor and credibility to one's message.

I am so glad the writers of the gospels chose to include incidentals in the life of our Lord. Not important at the time of writing, perhaps, but invaluable to us today. Same as Luke writing the Acts in "blog-style" rather than an essay of "the birth and growth of the early church'.

anyway - more i could say -

hey - i love the graphic on top!!!!!

A retired minister who has been a precious friend of mine for more than 30 years told me recently (as he had told me many years ago), "Don't put anything in writing that you would not want the world to read."

And so it goes with blogging.

I sense fear and intimidation from a few bloggers, but think positive. Christian bloggers may pull christians together, rather than apart.

It could bring out better people and uninhibited some individuals, if enter into with a pure heart. I personally would enjoy seeing this pull us together, rather than push us apart.

After all is said and done, if we perfect ourselves toward God, it may be the biggest blessing the church has ever seen.

We will be perfecting each other, afterall we will all be in heaven someday. Shouldn't we get to know each other before we reach those gates.

Perhaps I don't take a contentious enough stab at things in my blog posts, perhaps I don't have a wide enough readership to attract contentious commenters, perhaps my audience is unusually peace-loving, or perhaps each blogger has a totally unique experience in this regard. But the comments on my blog post are almost all positive contributions to dialog.

And it's the dialog I enjoy the most. I invite and respond to criticism because I recognize that my handle on Pentecostalism, Evangelicalism, Christianity, and morality is not the only valid point of view. I may, in fact, be wrong. I welcome the dialog.

I view my blog as a place where I am learning what I think, and I get the blessing and benefit of others helping me along the way. In my intellectual journey, I have explored topics and ideas I would not have plumbed without a willing reading audience. My blog is, in this sense, a spiritual discipline.

I also view my weblog as an instrument of change. My writing is already changing me. Further, I hope that my views will change those who read. Maybe they'll agree, maybe they'll disagree. But maybe, just maybe, they'll view things slightly differently now than before.

I see Paul the Apostle as a sort of epistolary proto-blogger. When circumstances warranted a post, he addressed issues head-on in public forum writing with letters that would be read aloud to his audience. We don't have the replies (comments) to enjoy--we can only infer them--but there is no doubt that his audience responded to his posts with disagreement and calls for clarification.

I'm no St. Paul, none of us are. But there is much to commend open dialog and response.

Finally, Out of Ur is not typical of most new blogs. You have the visibility and built-in audience out of the gate that most bloggers do not enjoy. More, your audience is already more variegated than the typical slice of the blogosphere represented at most religious blogs. Birds of a feather blog together, but Leadership and Out of Ur reach a wider spectrum of opinions and ecclesiology than my BlogRodent blog or almost any other Evangelical blog I know of.

And the results are fascinating.

Keep up the good work, Eric.

Rich Tatum

An excellent spectrum of responses--as if to allay every one of my concerns. But then I get a form letter from my church's youth pastor encouraging all parents of teens (like us) to check out myspace.com and then decide if it's appropriate for our teens and if so, what parts, in what ways, etc. So I do. I even create a login and password so I can go all over lots of people's postings. To be sure, there's the occasional objectionable photo of almost nudity or violence that passes their filters, but I guess what struck me the most is the utter inanity of the vast majority of all the comments, some of which were written so poorly as to be barely intelligible. Yes, that is the ultimate democratization of publishing, but is it desirable? To use the ancient phrase, is there anything "socially redeeming" in it? As for historians, how many teens (and others) who currently preserve all this gibberish will be hopelessly embarrassed twenty years from now when someone else (a prospective employer or mate or. . . ?) saves it and dredges it up? My peers' conversation when I was young was no better, but few people ever thought of taping it for posterity, just because the technology made it possible.
I really don't WANT to be an old fogey just because I turned 50 last summer. . . Maybe I shouldn't have ever read about how the Irish (scholars and clerics) saved civilization in the Dark Ages!

I agree w/ mr. kirkpatric also - the medium offers new ways to communicate, and that means new ways to miscommunicate as well.

I am not sure i totally understand or agree w/ "the medium is the message" - in fact, what is probably more true is "the content is the message" - the medium varies in its effectiveness in reaching its target audience.

I for one love blogging, and have learned much from others.

May I suggest that the lack of a "filter" may result in generating more honesty and genuine response than when we filter our words for fear of critique or from sheer cowardice.

Or perhaps the ability to "shoot from the hip" allows us to respond on our instinct? And perhaps it is the instinctual response that is more true to our genuine beliefs, in many cases. Doesn't everyone know of the power and divine nature of God by instinct, but then decides to think better of it (Rom. 1)?

Don't you think this all comes down to what we as ministers should be instilling in people anyway? Just like the Christians out there who don't represent Christ in the work place, there are going to be bloggers who are not good representatives. Just like careless words are spoken at a church function, so there will be careless words typed in a blog entry. I don't think it's necessary to label one as a greater evil because it happens to reach more people. I think the important thing is to get to the heart of the matter...the heart. Just like anything negative within the Body, the only solution is to help to bring people closer in intimacy with Jesus so they better reflect Him...be it in blogs, letters to the editor, or daily conversation with their neighbors. To focus on one medium, just like focus on one sin, would be folly.

I write to think. Often times I find myself writing something, thinking about what I just wrote, and then deciding to revise it and say it another way or say something totally different. In some ways blogging has become a way from me to "grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ"... I think that the content that you find in blogs, both in posts and comments are the overflow of people's hearts. You find what is important to them and even what they worship... granted some people put up a mask but that's no different from the real world...

I'm pretty sure there is no harm being done to the truth. It's not some poor defenseless victim of whomever manages to wrestle his way to the top and lays hold of the mantle of power. As long as my questions and statements are out of a sincere heart of searching for the truth there's no harm done. I do see however, that some are using their blogs to lay hold of that mantle, so that they can accomplish their own desires.

Blogging is an offense to those who feel they have some how come to weild the mantle of power. Their empire is in danger of being undermined. But we need not fear for our kingdom is actually His kingdom and even the gates of hell will not stand up against.

I have found it important to engage in the conversations of others and to find some way to journey with them down the trail, if only for a comment, so that we're farther along together, closer to the end, and more and more convinced from a heart of faith.

So in my humble opinion, put on your Dori voice from "Finding Nemo" and just keep blogging, blogging, blogging...