Raw Theology, Blog Action Day, Misc.

I was supposed to write a blog about the environment for Blog Action Day.  I was going to write about the scientific reasons that I am currently not only a global warming skeptic, but a believer in the argument that we should not spend money and legislation trying to curb carbon emissions.  Then I was going to follow it up with a theological argument for why it is important to take good care of the environment, proceeded by a brief run-down of the basic ways this might be able to be done.

Um, yeah.

I also told myself and my cousin that I was going to post on here the other day about why I am struggling with what to do with this blog.

I am very certain of very few truth claims.  But certainty is modal, even if the truth of any given single proposition is binary.

This blog started originally as the convergence of three ideas.  I had this idea to start a home page.  And on that home page I was going to have one section dedicated to a mere systematic theology.  By "mere" I mean that it would outline issues with the boundaries I was relatively certain of.

By "systematic" I mean that I would go over each major topical category in turn.  There are several popular ways to organize a systematic theology.  Mine would be logical.  Thus I would start with the framework of a cumulative argument for the existence of God.  Then I would go over His major attributes, communicable and non-communicable.  I would go over Christology, Pneumatology, Bibliology, Ecclesiology, and on and on.  Each section and its subsections would be brief, outlining, and informational, with links to outside resources.  It would be very orthodox, but as personal and as clear as possible; just a catalogue of personal creeds.

The other idea emerged out of a conversation with _____________, my former youth group leader, current mentor of sorts, and overall good friend.  Our idea was to hold mini-conferences on difficult theological topics.  Some of these would be of the academic category "Biblical Theology", while others would be methodological, topical, political, philosophical, etc.  One of us would propose the question, and then each of us, alongside any others who wanted to join in, would propose possible answers and an apologetic for each.  We would analyze each possible answer and try to seek relevant truths.

Finally, when I first launched it, my friend and cousin Chris, hopped on board.  Chris is agnostic and was willing to dialogue about whether God exists.  Needless to say, this is something that everyone should be wondering about, and it is highly relevant to a blog like this.  I wanted interactivity, and whether God exists is a great first topic.

I wanted this blog to be "raw" in several ways.  I wanted each post to be published in an unpolished fashion.  I wanted the informal peer review process to be a part of the writing and thinking processes.  I wanted to do (a)theology in community, without each of us having to go through multiple drafts of a piece of rhetoric before showing it to each other.

I also wanted posts to be unfinished, in the sense of being incomplete.  Why not?  Why not post partial thoughts?

Finally, my dream was to create an online environment where we could all be somewhat vulnerable, and in this way be emotionally "raw".

Many of these projects and notions have been reflected in what has happened.  And I am cool with the way this blog has evolved.

We have spent the majority of the time on philosophical arguments for the existence of God.  Dualism and other philosophical positions of the medieval and modern era Christians have also found prominent spots in our discussions.

As I look back though a lot of these posts, I am sometimes a little embarrassed.  A lot of this stuff has been unpolished and incomplete, and vulnerable (like I thought I wanted).  And it makes me feel weird.  Now I remain a Christian, but I disagree with many of the things I have published on the internet under my own name.   I also hope to significantly improve my thinking and writing abilities over the next few years (well, continuing to my death, hopefully).  And this being the case, I see my writing on this blog to date as low quality compared to where I want to be.  I am painfully aware of some of my own short-comings.

I suppose it would be neat to continue trying to blog, and morphing each successive post to fit with some of my original or my new objectives.  Having archives of my intellectual journey might be valuable, if not for anyone else but myself.

Having said all this, I just don't think I want to blog on here anymore.  I know this disappoints all four of you readers out there.

I just have to think about which projects will most efficiently advance my medium and long-term goals.

The rest of the contributors to this blog are more than welcome to use it for your own designs.  I am sure we will be in touch.