Theology After Google Wrapup or Where's the Praise? #tag10

Sorry for the delayed wrap-up. I finally scheduled my first licensing exam, so the next two weeks will be extra focused on studying. But no more highly anticipated waiting for my final thoughts on the Theology After Google conference. :)

First of all, the third day was by far the best. It was less focused on convincing everyone to use technology and social media and more of showing people various ways of actually utilizing it. I also appreciated that there was less focus on technology as the end-point in contrast to it being a means to an end.

There were a few points that particularly stood out:

In his presentation, Doug Pagitt (whose writings I very much admire and who I was very excited to meet at the conference) discussed different "Ages" that America has passed through that have affected how the church operates. He noted that we have been in the "Age of Information," which has created a church that is all about teaching. I have discussed before the question of the emphasis on teaching in church, but this really helped pinpoint it, describe it, and put it into perspective, particularly that church (even the organization on Sunday mornings) can and should be much more than teaching.

He also describe a phenomenon that I've noted before about the differences between mainline/progressives and evangelicals. While I have described it as a cognitive/affective split, he named it as open minded and challenging one's own assumptions and theology versus challenging one's aesthetics and mode of presentation. I think we're hitting on the same idea: Mainline/progressives are willing to change their thoughts, but not their mode. Evangelicals are willing to change their modes, but not their thoughts. While there's exceptions to these rules, I find them largely true. The problem is, I still have not found a satisfying answer as to why this is the case.

Further, I'm really sick of this divide. My friend and I both noticed that there was evidence of a very strong divide between evangelical thought and mainline/progressive thought. The conference was sponsored by and dominated by the latter, and there were various comments and such that showed a disdain for evangelicalism. I still want something in between. As I shared in a breakout group, I'm currently going to an evangelical church. I can do the cognitive challenging stuff on my own (I do it anyway). I need the group for the praise element. For some reason, I find that that is something that I cannot do satisfactorily on my own.

In response, Doug Pagitt mentioned how he is out of the mindset of "the God of the gaps," referring to God is only present with what man cannot do. I completely agree with him, as readers of this blog should know. God works incarnationally. However, there is something important about occasionally being explicit and praising God. An analogy I thought of is marriage. I should show my wife how much I love her and live that out. However, I also need to say it out loud. And frequently. I think it's the same with God, for God's sake AND for mine. Probably more for my sake, as I'll forget why I'm doing something.

That's one of my biggest criticisms and complaints from the conference. There was a noticeable lack of praise. I called it "devotion and worship" before, but I realized "praise" is probably a better descriptor. I think that may be an artifact of the mainline/progressive tradition. This is what makes me feel more evangelical than I thought I was. Now interacting with many of the top movers of Emergent Village, I understand why some people, like Dan Kimball have separated and started their own organizations. I don't know or remember the reasons why, but if I were deeply involved, I would consider that on the basis of wanting more explicit praise. Yes, I find it that important.

What do you think? What is the role and importance of praise? What does praise look like to you?

Theology After Google Day 2 or Web 2.0 and Worship #tag10

So Day 2 of Theology After Google is over, and we're about to start the final day. I've had a variety of thoughts and reactions. So here we go, and some of my conclusions will hopefully be helpful to the wider web audience. :)

It's a good conference, and I'm impressed that there have been no bad presentations or presenters. That's rare in a conference. However, yesterday morning I was getting a bit bored, honestly. It was too much repetition and trying to convince us of using social media and Web 2.0 rather than 1.0. My friend and I kind of thought, "We all probably believe that anyway if we're here." After talking with one of the organizers, Phillip Clayton, that does not actually seem to be the case. In fact, it has in some ways been more of a Web 2.0/social media boot camp. That would explain why I'm one of the youngest and one of the few young people there...

If you need or want boot camp, you can also view the conference live or again here. I would recommend the afternoon sessions from yesterday, starting with the video game one. Good stuff there. I like the metaphors, particularly about predestination and free will.

On that note, one of the things I have wanted the most is using Web 2.0 for worship and devotion. That's an element that seems to be noticeably missing. In fact, to me, this conference could go on without God. I'm not sure I've felt God's presence at all. It's more reliant on all of our thoughts and creativity.

The one exception is someone who I have been introduced to in this conference and really like is Callid Keefe-Perry. I'm definitely going to start following his blog. He does a nice job of being incarnational and reminding us that why we do what we do is to connect with God, not just be self-sufficient cognitive beings.

One of the suggestions I thought of last night is using Twitter to share with other people (and remind ourselves) of ways we've seen God in the world around us, using the hashtag #incarnation. That's a long hastag, so if you have other ideas, please share!

What other ways can you see Web 2.0 and social media being used to facilitate worship and devotion?

Finally, both my friend and I have noticed the major divide between mainline/progressives and evangelicals. Both of us feel out of place in both worlds. I personally thought I was closer to the mainline/progressive world. After this conference, I feel closer to the evangelical world, largely because of this issue of devotion and worship. I know mainlines do that, but I'm still puzzled as to why it's been so clearly absent here. It's really sad. These two groups really need to get closer together. I need a way in between...

Theology After Google Day 1 Thoughts #tag10

Last night was the first night of the Theology After Google conference, and I really enjoyed it. It got me thinking about a few things, so like a good blogger, I have to share them with the world, assuming everyone will read them. :)

The conversations my friend and I had after during the TheoPub was focused on social media. Yes, the conference is about the use of social media (i.e. Twitter, Facebook, blogging, etc.), but I don't really think that's the main point. As the speakers said last night, "Google" is really a metaphor for what is changing in the world (primarily America) and theology. In short, the technology revolution and easy accessibility of information, which also allows everyone to contribute to information, is leading to a new democratization of theology. The parallel is the advent of the Gutenberg press and Bible, which paved the way for the first democratization of theology, namely everyone being able to read the Bible.

Social media definitely helps get the information out. That's the way I use it, I realized last night. Social media and technology are more about information and content than really connecting with people. I use the "social" tools, but I realized last night that social media connection feels to me more like a superficial connection. It makes me feel connected, but when I really think about it, I'm not really connected with the others. This may be idiosyncratic to me and part of my introversion, so I'll own some of that, too.

Ultimately, though, I think we need to remember social media is a tool and medium, not the end goal.

As some criticisms (the organizers asked for feedback), I really didn't hear anything new last night. It may have been new to some people, but... That's not necessarily a bad thing. It really was laying the groundwork of the philosophical underpinnings of what will likely be discussed over the next two days.

Additionally, we were encouraged to stay connected online and multitask. I appreciated that, so I tried. However, I found it quite difficult to pay attention to the speaker, read tweets, and tweet myself. I think today I may check tweets and tweet responses occasionally, but focus more on being present in the moment. To me, that's more powerful and something that can be lost in an age of technology and social media (and believe me, I LOVE technology, including my new Android phone :) ).

Finally, my friend and I were both realizing last night that there had not been any prayer. This is a group of Christians. Are we afraid of opening a theology conference in prayer? Or closing it? He also commented that it would be nice to have some musical worship. I have to agree.

Prayer and worship (and yes, discussing theology can be worship) would help us maintain our focus and remind ourselves that this is not all about us, but about God and connecting to God. I realized last night, that night one actually felt more like a celebration of ourselves (i.e. the Academy Awards) than really attempting to worship and connect with God...

It may also be indicative of the fact that most of the organizers come from a more "progressive" background. This just emphasizes what I've observed about mainliners being more cognitive while evangelicals are more affective. Why can't we have both?!

66 Love Letters Lenten Devotions

I have subscribed to Larry Crabb's Lenten devotional from his 66 Love Letters. Some are definitely better than others, but today's (Day 19) is particularly relevant for this blog, I think. You can see the archive of all devotionals here, although Day 19 was not quite posted yet as of this writing (I'm guessing it will be posted soon).

Theology After Google

Sorry I haven't posted much. Life gets in the way sometimes. :)

Anyway, I'll be going to the Theology After Google conference this week. If anyone is going, let me know!!

Friday Roundup

Here's some good articles from the past week.

Plain and simple reading of the Bible

The ways Jesus innovates and engages the lost (hint: not by Christmas musicals)

Genres of Genesis

Checking Your Baggage

5 Myths of Emerging Adult Religion

The Jesus We Do Not Know

Anatomy of Fundamentalism

And some humor on church discipline, particularly in light of the morality focus of this week's posts.

Biblical Art, Culture, & Ethnicity

Many of us today recognize the inaccuracies of biblical art today, particularly representation of Jesus as blonde-haired and blue-eyed. Jokes are made and Christianity is often trivialized and ridiculed due to ethno-centric representations of Jesus.

And these are very fair criticisms. They often do take us out of the reality of recognizing that we are not the center of the world nor of the biblical story.

However, I also think there is something quite beautiful and redeeming about ethno-centric artistic representations. The Mosaic Bible has weekly art pieces. And several have biblical stories from other cultures. It was very interesting to see multiple versions of the nativity scene in vastly different cultures, times, and ethnicities. Last week, there was a piece entitle "The Parable of the Lost Son" from Hong Kong. It looks like a traditional Chinese artwork. Without the biblical title, I would not have thought it was a biblical piece.

My initial reaction was, "That's not at all accurate." That's true. However, I then checked myself, remembering that most art is inaccurate. Then I realized and remembered the beauty in the fact that virtually all cultures and ethnicities have wanted to and been able to accept Jesus and the Bible as their own.

Art is a way to help us engage the stories. It can help us understand and relate to scenes that are frankly unrelatable in many ways today. We do this with modernizing analogies of parables and stories frequently today. Why can we not do this with art? The fact that we can shows the timelessness, applicability, and Truth of the biblical story.

Further, as I discovered while taking a course that included an emphasis on Medieval art, benefactors of art pieces and the artists themselves were often put into the scenes. Sure, it could be a narcissistic move. But it can also be a way of helping oneself feel closer to God.

I personally think that's quite beautiful. So I would like to ask for redemption of ethno-centric art, not as cultural insensitivity, but as cultural engagement and emphasizing that God will meet us exactly where we are.

Psychology research suggests we do relate better to people who look like us. Next time you see a Jesus who looks like you, as yourself if you are better able to relate to Jesus because of that in contrast to the "real" face of Jesus.