I’m going to weigh in on what my eyes and instincts are telling me about the GodBlogCon that will be taking place at Biola University in October.
I weighed in when it first came up in March 2005.
Seven entries later, not much is different, even with all these months to prepare.
In spite of what appear to be professional efforts, the initial impressions and images haven’t been erased.
Tagging it at Technorati didn’t yield much.
Just basically the people plugging it, and such a small slice of the whole, it’s sad.
I’m hoping one of the attendees will post here at BDBO and we’ll get a more realistic perspective.
Every Tomorrow has thoughts.
So does Matt Margolis.
I think they are being fair. I think this idea was borne of enthusiasm and got hi- jacked by political and professional ministry people.
It’s been running in Technorati for 204 days.
You aren’t hearing from the online US religious god-blog heavyweights.
The ones that know their way around online, actually blog and know what they are doing have been respectful enough to keep their peace.
With 300 spaces available there have been 60 registrants.
The registration site acknowledges two sponsors.
It appears people that know how to market were brought in some time ago, and there has been an effort by someone to downplay the Republican focus.
It appears the suggestion to read Hugh Hewitt’s blog book is gone.
Hewitt is the key note speaker and a media professional.
Correction: 23/09/05 Hugh Hewitt is not the key note speaker
“GodBlogCon is excited to announce that Hugh Hewitt will be present at GodBlogCon 2005. He will be joined in a panel discussion about the future role of blogging in society by Dr. John Mark Reynolds, Dr. Mark Roberts, and Dr. Tod Bolsinger. The discussion will be Friday, October 14th at 7:00 pm and will be held at Biola University.”
Joshua Claybourn and LaShawn Barber are well known for where they stand.
(John) Mark Roberts is busy blogging at three sites.
Correction: name 23/09/05
Mark Roberts (not John Mark Roberts) posts at three sites (blogs)
John Mark Reynolds writes at three sites.
I believe the correction requested is in name - Mark D. Roberts. I will apologize to the gentleman by email.
Anyone brought in to soften this image has been lost in the shuffle.
I think good intentions took a big step backward.
The site looks like registration for summer camp or a business seminar.
Time is carefully slotted right down to free time and plenary, (sigh) and it appears attendees are going to be talked at a fair bit.
The GodBlogCon blog hasn’t generated much of anything, it is technically adequate, but that’s about all one can say. The ‘prayer’ blog is being updated, it looks like any 2 minute online generic devotional. There is a “winch” factor going on for me on this. Having the appearance of…
Sincere, pious, but not representative of what the god-blogosphere is really about.
Some quick observations that don’t mean much of anything
*60 paid up
*12 states
*2 Catholics
*16 are openly Republican, the rest of the bloggers is anyones guess which is great - this wasn’t supposed to be about politics
* 5 blogs are dead or haven’t been updated in quite awhile
* there were a couple of re-directs that required clicking
* the average age of the bloggers appears to be 30’s+
* 6 are biz-blogs or ministry blogs that are what I call pseudo-blogs (selling)
* 26 are on Blogger, 3 TypePad, 2 hand coded, 4 WordPress and 1 Movable Type
* 24 have blogged 2 - 10 months
* the longest is 3 years
* unaccessible stats, what I did find ranged from 12 visitors per day to a high of 161 visitors a day. The average appears to be 23 visitors day.
Blog Rolls.
One word.
Pathetic.
One Catholic blogger had a wide range of blogs, covering various faith groups and blogs that extended past the US, well laid out and well thought out. What a shame he stood out.
God bless him.
8 had no blog rolls or links
If I said the tribe appeared to be in it’s own bubble, a lot of you would understand that I wasn’t being sarcastic.
What wasn’t surprising was the number of blogs that had no international links, or one reciprocial UK link (Blogdom of God) and/or a link to Canadian Tim Challies who blogs at World Magazine.
Many of the blogs have literally hundreds of links and look like they borrowed the same aggregator.
Design
Too many had so much clutter, buttons and hundreds of links that there was no personality to the blogs.
A design seminar on the effectiveness of white space might be useful.
Part of this is how blog platforms are set up, but there is a lot of me, me, me before one gets to an email or contact, a site search, a blogroll.
There are a lot of bloggers using advertising.
What is with the clutter, it’s like if every inch isn’t filled, it’s like silence or a lack of success?
That stood out starkly in this exercise.
There were a couple of beautifully designed blogs, accessible, readable, clean, they were the exception instead of the other way around.
I wonder if this convention has been over organized, over marketed, over hyped, over done politically?
I wonder if organizers reached their audience, and it was a great deal smaller than they anticipated.
I don’t know.
This should be about blogs and bloggers, and I hope that is what winds up happening.
There is no relational sense, very little to no chatter on the blogs of the attendees.
Not even under the obligatory button.
If you aren’t a protestant, Republican, Hugh Hewitt fan I hope you don’t feel alienated and have an opportunity to enjoy others that enjoy blogging.
Even with that obviously now played down, that is how it reads, because that is what it is.
I get no sense this convention is at all what god-blogs are about at all, the look does not square with the actual blogging experience.
There is no sense of welcome.
The buzz is scripted and hollow.
And I feel embarrassed looking through all this again - I know this isn’t representative of god-blogs.
I don’t get much sense organizers get that though.
I don’t want to believe that was the intent, if this isn’t cancelled because of lack of interest, I want to read bloggers experiences.
If we are going to have GodBlogCons, let’s hope they play better in person then they present online.
PS: Too bad the internet isn’t quite at the place were a virtual GodBlogCon could be held. Where we could pull in the real deal, from the US, Canada, the UK, Australia, New Zealand, the Philippines, Malaysia - participatory. I’ve already got an imaginary lineup in my head. Maybe some day eh?
Until then, blog on!
Search
Subscribe 
You are currently browsing the Bene Diction Blogs On weblog archives.
Related Entries
For blog design, Wordpress or MovableType coding or blog consulting, see cre8d design.
***I think they are being fair. I think this idea was borne of enthusiasm and got hi- jacked by political and professional ministry people.***
Good grief, Bene, can you ever say anything nice about Christian bloggers who just happen to live in America? The way you have misrepresented the GodBlogCon is not only misleading, its un-Christian. If you are trying to stir up controversy you are certainly doing a good job of it. Several of us had an offline discussion of the convention and when someone mentioned the “critics” everyone chimed in unison - Bene.
I’m not sure what you are seeing when you look at the conference but I would suggest being a bit more open-minded. The fact that you can say that the event was “hi- jacked by political and professional ministry people” is so inflamatory that I think you owe the organizers a public apology.
***You aren’t hearing from the online US religious god-blog heavyweights.***
Who are these “US religious god-blog heavyweights” that you’re referring to?
***It appears people that know how to market were brought in some time ago, and there has been an effort by someone to downplay the Republican focus.***
Downplay the Republican focus? Are you serious? I’ve read your blog a long time, Bene, but your persistince in libeling this event is causing you to lose credibility.
***Sincere, pious, but not representative of what the god-blogosphere is really about.***
Please, Bene, enlighten us to what the god-blogoshere is all about. If it is about subtle put-downs of everyone who disagrees with your political point of view — the approach that you have been taking — then I want out.
***If you aren’t a protestant, Republican, Hugh Hewitt fan I hope you don’t feel alienated and have an opportunity to enjoy others that enjoy blogging. Even with that obviously now played down, that is how it reads, because that is what it is.***
No, Bene, it’s not. So please, please, stop lying and slandering the event. If you don’t agree with it then say so. If you think that Christian bloggers should be more concerned about being “inclusive” than being “Christian” then say it plainly. But for you to repeatedly trash the work that has gone into this event by politicizing it is causing many people to question your integrity.
I say this as a loving brother in Christ: please be honest and stop slandering your fellow Christians.
I’m still interested but there’s no way I could afford the $100 price tag. I was kinda hoping it would be like the San Diego Comicon - where one can show up at any time and pay either for that day or for the whole show. Heh, if I would have signed up (i.e., would have had a spare hundred), the oldest blog would’ve been five years
Hm, yeah, you do have a bit of a rep for discounting American bloggers (based, it seems to me, on their ubiquity). I don’t let it bother me though - I always just figured it was your “thing”
Don’t mean to, The Dane, I think I can be kind of rough on just about anyone, but most of the time people don’t notice unless it seems to be about them. I say good things, but that doesn’t get noticed as much, either.:^)
Joe:
Andrew Carrega, Tim Bednar, Jeff Sharlet, RLP, The Monk, Dean Peters, The Dane, The Velveteen Rabbi, Matt M, Mark Shea, Ted Olsen, AKMA,Cassima, Amy Welborn, Alicia Huntley, and those are off the top of my head.
You show me.
Someone put Republican pundit bloggers front and centre.
Somone initially posted that Hewitt’s book was a required read.
Show me.
The issue is philosophy: Can a Christian be Democrat? Can a Christian not be political?
What do you mean by separation of Church and State?
thanks for the compliments! I don’t consider myself a heavy weight, though.
I really wanted to go to the godblogcon. I love Southern California (it’s home).
The reasons that I ultimately decided against it are many.
1) Location - Biola is not a place I particularly like getting lost on the campus of (sorry about the grammar there!). When I was on the board of California Nursing Students Association (mid-1980s) I met quite a few students from Biola. One was later kicked out because of a photo of her dancing at the state convention was passed on to a professor. I understand that Biola may have changed some policies since then, but the incident left me with a sour taste.
2) the outline, frankly, was not of great interest to me. I would have paid good money and probably have ended up spending more time chatting up people in the hallways
3) I’m more interested in godblogging as a god thing, not a political thing. I resent being crowded into a political label because of my religious beliefs. I don’t fit into the stereotypes of conservative or liberal, I am not a progressive nor am I a Luddite. To quote Jack Kerouac, “I am not a beatnik, I am a Catholic”
4) and speaking of Catholic, I am possibly hypersensitive to certain groups of my fellow Christian who have the appalling attitude that Catholic Christian is an oxymoron.
I was a minority of one when I went to the BlogCon in Cambridge a couple of years ago, but at least the sessions were interesting, and the people both precenting and attending were for real bloggers.
Oh, and bene - what about Julie D. (Happy Catholic). She has managed to garner quite an audience in the relatively short time she’s been blogging.
***Andrew Carrega, Tim Bednar, Jeff Sharlet, RLP, The Monk, Dean Peters, The Dane, The Velveteen Rabbi, Matt M, Mark Shea, Ted Olsen, AKMA,Cassima, Amy Welborn, Alicia Huntley, and those are off the top of my head.***
Jeff Sharlet and Ted Olsen are journalists who sometimes blog but I hope that they will hear about the event and join us. The same goes for Tim Bednar, who articles have sparked much of the discussion for the conference. Amy Welborn has joined a group blog hosted by Hugh Hewitt so she may be there (now that she has gone over to the dark side)> And while I’ve heard of Dean Peters (who I respect) and RLP (who I don’t) I haven’t even heard of most of the other bloggers you list. The blogosphere, though, is a big place and just because I haven’t heard of them (and they haven’t heard of me) does not mean that we are intentionally “excluding” anyone.’
***Someone put Republican pundit bloggers front and centre.***
I understand that in your view, someone, somewhere, has to be pulling the strings for something to occur. But that is not really the way the world works. I don’t mind the criticism as much as I do the way you feign ignorance of the process. As you well know, back in January I started discussing the topic of how evangelical Christians can break out of our “ghetto” (a theme I picked up from that flaming right-winger Mark Byron). That post and the blogroll that it started got Andy Jackson to thinking about hosting a conference at his church for Christian bloggers. Andy asked Hugh Hewitt if he would be willing to speak at the event and Hugh — always a man to help other bloggers — helped promote the event.
Later on, when Andy started having logistical problems, Biola University stepped in to save the conference. Since then they have done a wonderful job of planning and putting together an event that was a mere idea at the start of this year.
I’m quite sure you are aware of all this so why you portray it otherwise is rather befuddling.
***Somone initially posted that Hewitt’s book was a required read.***
No they didn’t. Andy suggested reading Hugh’s book as a way to understand where blogging was heading but it was never a “required read.” It’s just silly that you would make such a claim.
***Show me.***
Show you what? That you are once again trying to pick a fight with bloggers as you have with Dean Peters, Josh Claybourn, Adrian Warnock…
***The issue is philosophy: Can a Christian be Democrat?***
Of course you can. I myself was both a Christian and a Democrat for most of my life. The question is not whether a Christian can belong to a particular party but how far they can go with that party and not betray their principles. I personally cannot see how any Christian can support a candidate who actively supports the killing of the unborn. I see that as a matter of Biblical justice and our duty to protect the weak and innocent. But that does not mean that Christians should not work to change a party from within, whether its the Democrats, Republicans, Greens, etc.
***Can a Christian not be political?***
If you are asking whether a Christian can be politicaly neutral I would say “no.” If you are neutral then you are accepting the status quo and I find it difficult to believe that in a fallen world there are things that do not need changing within the political sphere.
***What do you mean by separation of Church and State?***
The church and the state are both authorized by God to have certain spheres of influence and responsibility. The state should not interfere in the church’s sphere unless it has a legitimate reason for doing so and vice versa.
I haven’t followed this closely enough. I’ll do some reading and see if I have something more productive to say. In short, though, I have to say that Biola seems an inappropriate setting. Nothing against Biola, which has some fine scholars on faculty and was obviously generous enough to help. But it’s not a place designed to foster a fully open discussion of religion. That’s not a criticism of Biola, that’s its mission — it’s an evangelical institution.
Likewise, I think making Hewitt the keynoter is a bad choice. It’s fine for conference to include Hewitt, but religion doesn’t seem to be a major part of what he does — he’s mainly a bruiser writing from the right. Again, that’s not a criticism — but such a character is probably not the best person to foster a broad and open discussion.
Would have been more interesting had they invited a non-blogger to read some of the blogs and think about them. Bloggers spend too much time thinking about blogging.
Jeff,
While you make some great points, I think a few of them are based on some misunderstandings of how the convention came together. Whether Biola is the ideal place to hold such a conference is certainly a valid question. But for all practical purposes it was the only venue that was available. Beggars can’t be choosers and those of us who have been organizing and promoting the event are definitely beggars.
Likewise, Hugh may not be the perfect speaker for everyone’s taste but he (a) wrote one of the best-selling books on blogging, (b) influenced a large number of Christians to start blogs, and (c) agreed to travel to the event and speak for free. “C” was one of the main reasons he was chosen (the beggar thing again).
Since you are a journalist who monitors religious news in the mainstream press, I know that most of the bloggers who will be attending would love to hear your take on blogging. Even though it is short notice I’m sure that we could even get you a slot to speak. I’d love to have you there and hope that you’ll consider attending.
I’m not feigning ignorance Joe, it’s real.
I know Dr. Andrew Jackson made the initial posts.
(can’t find archives)
So you are the puppet master then?
A lot of new information here.
3 strong, talented adult bloggers ‘might’ be angry with me.
I can’t please everyone, as much as possible we are at peace.
Biola University is running the event.
Okay. Pros.
The beef:
You are saying that a Christian has a duty to influence law. But, the law must not influence the Church. This is a contradiction that I keep seeing over and over within evangelicalism.
How do you see the government’s sphere of influence as different from the church and how do you abide by this separation?
I hear you saying a Democrat can’t be a Christian without compromising their moral values, ergo you front a GodBlogCon with Republicans. And by extention only Republicans belong under the God-blog banner.
Are we wandering into Manifest Destiny territory?
I believe that there are believers that should be active politically because they have the talents and skills to work for the common good. I do not believe all Christians are called into political activism.
Do you believe it is every Christians duty to influence legislation?
More beef:
Not only must you be a Republican (for the life/moral issues) but you must also believe in the US Constitution, that Communism is bad (especially the atheism), that supply-side economics is the best, that the military must be supported by Christians, that legislation must work to improve evangelization efforts, etc….death penalty, prayer in schools…(insert moral cause here)
You play the moral card and the outrage card and since the US is ruled by Republicans who support these morals - by extension God-bloggers must support the US government because they are the last hope of morality for the rest of the world.
So front the GodblogCon with moral Republican activists, and feign surprise when people feel unwelcome and uncomfortable.
Back to God-blogs and conventions and who is really welcome and who was invited from the get go.
What part did I misunderstand?
I’ve got to stand down for now Joe, still got pneumonia and I’ve spent more than I have.
Carry on.
Alica: I think you’d be a marvelous choice. And you are correct. Julie D is amazing.
You’re right about blogrolls. I find it amazing that so many bloggers lack one and are surprised when they don’t get linkage and traffic.
My 2 cents - I offered to teach one of their seminars on church blogging.
After a polite exchange of email where they asked me what I knew on the topic - and where I replied with links to articles on my website, I was taken off their list of volunteers/speakers and haven’t heard from them since.
So to me, it seems like they didn’t learn the terrain before the began to solicit speakers and such - so instead I’m taking a training course on ‘The Emerging Role of the Process Manager’ somewhere else during that timeframe.
***So you are the puppet master then?***
No, of course not. As everyone knows, Hugh Hewitt is the puppet-master for us U.S. right-wing godbloggers. ; )
***Biola University is running the event. Okay. Pros.***
Pros at what?
***You are saying that a Christian has a duty to influence law. But, the law must not influence the Church. This is a contradiction that I keep seeing over and over within evangelicalism. ***
Um, no, this is not an evangelical ideal it is a **Christian** one. The civil rights movement in America and the ending of the slave trade in the UK and US are prime examples of how Christians exercised their duty by influencing the law. I’m not sure what weird kind of fundamentalism you believe in where the church is not supposed to influence the state, but I assure you that it is outside the mainstream of orthodoxy.
***How do you see the government’s sphere of influence as different from the church and how do you abide by this separation? ***
The state is responsible for, among other things, ensuring order and protecting its citizens. The church is responsible for, among other things, taking care of the poor and defending the economically oppressed.
***I hear you saying a Democrat can’t be a Christian without compromising their moral values, ergo you front a GodBlogCon with Republicans. ***
Good grief. You should at least wait until people can’t read my words before you start twisting them. Perhaps I’m wrong but I don’t think Democrats are required to swear an oath agreeing to uphold abortion. No, I don’t think you can kill the unborn without violating the principles of Christianity. But I see no reason why a person can’t be a Democrat and openly oppose abortion. Are you saying that you are “pro-choice?” If you were an American would you be a Democrat?
Also, the GodBlogCon is not “fronted” by Republicans. You’ve read my blog long enough to know that I don’t even use that label in reference to myself. The fact that you would imply that it is some sort of political cabal of Republican bloggers is shameful The fact that you keep repeating this claim after having been presented with the truth is just dishonest.
***And by extention only Republicans belong under the God-blog banner. ***
Yes, that is exactly what I said, wasn’t it? Goodness, Bene, show a little class. You act all meek and mild while slandering your fellow Christians and then act surprised when people take issue with your ridiculous assertions.
***Are we wandering into Manifest Destiny territory?***
Okay, you’ve lost me there. What the heck are you talking about?
***I believe that there are believers that should be active politically because they have the talents and skills to work for the common good. I do not believe all Christians are called into political activism.***
Nor do I. I never said that all Christians were called to political activism.
***Do you believe it is every Christians duty to influence legislation? ***
Yes, if they live in a democracy, I believe they do have such a duty – its called “voting.”
***Not only must you be a Republican (for the life/moral issues) but you must also believe in the US Constitution, that Communism is bad (especially the atheism), that supply-side economics is the best, that the military must be supported by Christians, that legislation must work to improve evangelization efforts, etc….death penalty, prayer in schools…(insert moral cause here)***
What are you saying? That this is a requirement for attending the GodBlogCon? It’s not even something that all Republicans would agree with.
By the way, are you implying that Communism **isn’t** bad?
***You play the moral card and the outrage card and since the US is ruled by Republicans who support these morals - by extension God-bloggers must support the US government because they are the last hope of morality for the rest of the world.***
I know that it irks you to think that some Christians take the Bible seriously enough that we think it should affect more than our interior lives. But you have it wrong. I know some other countries were willing to look the other way as Saddam raped and murdered his people. But as a Christian I’m thankful that the U.S. stepped in to do something. I know that in Canada you have a live-and-let-live ideal. But as a Christian I’m thankful that some people are exercising their right to speak out against gay marriage. I realize that you would probably prefer to live in a country with a socialist government where people went to church on Sunday and didn’t let their messy religions influence the world – in other words, Europe. But I’m thankful to live in a country where some people actually believe that the Bible is, gasp, the word of God and that it requires us to do some things like feed the hungry and treat the sick rather than pawn such responsibilities off on the government.
***So front the GodblogCon with moral Republican activists, and feign surprise when people feel unwelcome and uncomfortable.***
Yes, Bene, and keep slandering and libeling your fellow Christians and feign hurt and surprise (as you always do) when you are exposed for being a vicious backbiter.
***Back to God-blogs and conventions and who is really welcome and who was invited from the get go. What part did I misunderstand?***
That all orthodox Christians are welcome. That has been clear from the start. If some people – such as yourself — who put their politics before their religious convictions don’t feel welcome, then that is their problem. But for you to repeatedly imply that the bloggers who have organized the event are politically motivated and exclusionary is simply a lie. You know better. But you can’t set your politics aside long enough to see that. We see Christians; you see Republicans.
***I’ve got to stand down for now Joe, still got pneumonia and I’ve spent more than I hav e. Carry on.***
I hope you feel better soon. I also hope that this round of viciousness is due to poor health rather than malice. I’ve always liked and respected you and have given you the benefit of the doubt when people (who I also respect) would tell me that you weren’t the kind, sweet person you try to make people think you are. I still give you the benefit of the doubt and hope that you will prove they are wrong.
Interestingly enough, I feel torn here. I think B has overreacted in response to this particular expression of Christian Blogging, but I think there is actually substance to the kernal of debate here.
Joe, you’re clearly promoting a con with the best kind of intentions. You honestly want everyone who believes to feel welcome and I can respect that. I also think that the political question is a valuable one for God-fearing believers to consider and thoughtful discussion on the matter could be a real benefit.
I think B’s fear is perhaps a little torqued but not unfounded - the fear that such a con could be easily overtaken by a strong and loud Right-Wing Christian contingent. Politics, for one reason or another, is a particularly volatile topic and certain bloggers on the roll have a tendancy toward steamrolling rather than discussing (to be fair, the only one I’ve read firsthand is Barber - the other that I am aware of carry a reputation that I have not tried to verify).
I would be interested in a con that dealt with the issues between differing Christian political perspectives (even though politics only vaguely interests me), but the nature of pundits runs counter this. I’m not saying such discussion couldn’t or won’t take place, but with strong political voices one can be skeptical.
From my own perspective (I being a largely Reformed blogger with a strong theological background and a conservative view of Scripture and its authority), I have a hard time stomaching either the Republican or Democratic parties - and would not vote for either or them. This is my personal conviction, but I can see how some aspect of another perspective might draw someone toward it, or even toward one of the two main parties. I can even see how a Christian rigourous and conservative theology could prefer communism or socialism to capitalism (as much of continental Christianity does). And further, I have biblical grounds for my conviction that government and politics should only be of passing interest for the believer - and so, in my non-liberal way, I disagree with your view that it is inherently Christian to seek to influence the socio-political sphere (in which I include governmental practice and legislation).
Now I’m thick-skinned and not easily alienated, but I know there are plenty more fragile souls out there who might feel unwelcome to the con simply by having read your particular perspective on the Christian and politics in the preceding post. I think it might be from these sorts of things that B is drawing his conclusion.
*shrug* Just some thoughts.
Oh yeah, and I don’t see why Biola’s campus would be a poor place to host the con. Something as minor as some theological differences shouldn’t keep anyone from an event that the school wouldn’t even be moderating. In fact, it seems a good opportunity for disagreeing Christians to practice love and charity and demonstrate that they aren’t petty and grudge-bearing.
Bene…
I’ve read through your posts on this one a couple of times.
I’m afraid I… well… just don’t get it.
I don’t get why this conference is angering you.
Its a convention. Over the past few years I’ve had a chance to attend a number of the things - some academic, some just for fun.
Sometimes they’re run or sponsored by organizations that have specific worldviews. I try to suss out what the bias is going to be before I make the decision to go.
Sometimes, even though I disagree with the bias, I go. Often a good learning experience for me. (And, sometimes, for them, too. *grin*)
So, this GodBlogCon has some specific backers and speakers - probably of a more conservative political and theological stance than my own. Though I consider myself a “godblogger”, I wouldn’t fit in completely. (I think the statement, “Because GodBlogCon is a Christian conference, participation will be also be limited to those who affirm the historical and Biblical Christian faith.” would do me in.
You know me… liberal fringe werdo that I am. )
I do find a number of Joe’s comments above to be challenging. If they are representative of the leadership of the conference, my understanding of Christianity wouldn’t be welcome. Rather than getting ticked about it, I’d far prefer to work with other bloggers who might be interested in a con that would welcome a variety of Christian perspectives - including Joe’s and mine. (As I reread the comment before mine, I think the Dane and I are resonating on a number of points.)
Having said that, I’m sure that there are a whole bunch of bloggers that could get something out ofGodBlogCon - whatever their political or theological stripe.
You *know* that I have a lot of respect for you. I think you’ve pointed out some things that people need to consider before they decide to take part in the conference… but… if I had been on the team who put the conference together, I would have taken umbrage with your post.
So, let me ask you, Bene… from what you’ve seen what are the *positive* possibilities of GodBlogCon2005?
Richard,
***(I think the statement, “Because GodBlogCon is a Christian conference, participation will be also be limited to those who affirm the historical and Biblical Christian faith.” would do me in.
You know me… liberal fringe werdo that I am. )***
I appreciate your thoughtful comments. I’m not sure where you stand theologically but any Christian that holds to the basics of Christianity (i.e., like in the Nicene Creed) would be enthusiastically welcomed at the convention.
That language wasn’t added to seperate out liberal Christians but to make a distiction between orthodox Christians and some other groups such as Mormons or Jehovah Witness. I realize that some people may fault the conference for excluding such groups but the line about what warrants the adjective “Christian” had to be drawn **somewhere**.
You know, in all this discussion of Hewitt, you might want to check out exactly what his role is — he is the draw, but not really the keynoter — He moderating a panel of very respectable pastor bloggers, two of the three of which I have never read a political word on their blogs ever.
As a broadcaster, his strength is interviewing, eliciting what the other guy thinks, which is his role here, it’s not about his ideas, it’s about the panel’s, an overtly Christian and non-political panel.
Richard:
*…if I had been on the team who put the conference together, I would have taken umbrage with your post.*
That’s understandable, that is what is occurring here, and maybe something productive can come out of this.
I have zero skills to run a convention, and admiration for those that do. I didn’t say pros running it is wrong, I said pros took over running it and it’s noticable. I’m sure they’ll be well applauded for their effort, as they should be.
What are the positives? I’ve pointed them out.
Please don’t assign me anger when that is not what I’m feeling and thinking. I feel frustration, and a bit more sadness than yesterday.
I’m tired of repeating this.
I don’t believe some of what I’ve observed has been intentional, not at all.
We aren’t discussing abstracts, it is there, and there are bloggers and believers that would not and do no feel comfortable at this particular table.
God-bloggers.
The Dane.
*…but I know there are plenty more fragile souls out there who might feel unwelcome to the con simply by having read your particular perspective on the Christian and politics in the preceding post. I think it might be from these sorts of things that B is drawing his conclusion.*
Joes words here didn’t occur in a vacuum Richard, he is giving his world view and expectations and this is consistent. His outrage is very real.
Alicia’s words.
*…I really wanted to go to the godblogcon. I love Southern California (it’s home). The reasons that I ultimately decided against it are many.*
Your words.
*…So, this GodBlogCon has some specific backers and speakers - probably of a more conservative political and theological stance than my own. Though I consider myself a “godblogger”, I wouldn’t fit in completely. (I think the statement, “Because GodBlogCon is a Christian conference, participation will be also be limited to those who affirm the historical and Biblical Christian faith.” would do me in.
I hope you decide to go Richard.:^) Your observations would be facinating. I’ve no doubt you would have a terrific time meeting people that share your love and passion for blogging.
Nikkiana.
*Since the polibloggers are so interested in this event, there’s a false assumption that it’s a convention with a strong bent on right-wing politics. If people are assuming that, it makes non-Christian righties feel second rate because they aren’t Christian and can’t participate and it makes Christians who aren’t so keen on poliblogging (like myself) overly wary of the con.*
Joe: I’m not going to further the political discussion here, it puts a bit more weight on my initial point and thats all.
If you have more anger to express or concerns to address, go ahead.
I believe I said this before, I’ll try again.
I hope your GodBlogCon is a success and worth all the hard work by enthusiatic, sacrificial and caring people. I hope the event exceeds your expectations and that of your attendees.
Hoosierboy: Then I stand corrected, and I apologize to all concerned. I was under the understanding that Mr. Hewitt is keynote speaker.
If you’d like to point me to the appropriate link online that indicates otherwise, I’ll correct immediately.
Hoosierboy writes of Hewitt: “As a broadcaster, his strength is interviewing, eliciting what the other guy thinks, which is his role here, it’s not about his ideas, it’s about the panel’s, an overtly Christian and non-political panel.”
Ditto, despite the sponsors dismissal of me as a facilitator on church blogs … albiet polite … had they brought in a heavy-weight like Os Guinness, or even a mid-weight like David Heddle and/or Michael Spencer I might have shown my ugly face.
Then again, that may be my guilt speaking as I owe both those guys a dinner!
I have to admit reading Bene’s anit-GodBlogCon post is better than the conspiracy stuff in the latest Jack Van Impe book, almost.
Unfortunately, Christians leaning left or right have a tendency to piece together conspiracy theories and throw them at each other. Hopefully, we can mature beyond this tendency.
As has been shown, Bene posts some misinformation concerning the origins and organization behind GodBlogCon.
I guess I was closer to the origins of GodBlogCon then anyone, although Matt Anderson from Biola (not Biola itself) did the on-site program organizing, and so I have emailed Bene my home telephone to talk if accuracy is really desired. If done, then maybe Bene can soon offer a more accurate post on GodBlogCon.
I would encourage everyone not to over analyse GodBlogCon. It is simply one small step forward, or backward to some, in the growth and development of the Christian blogosphere. It is nothing more or less.
Those attending will hopefully enjoy it for what it is, with all its weaknesses and short-comings.
Personally, I believe the relational connections will be more productive overall then the content or presentations. In this light, GodBlogCon will be far less successful then I had hoped because many of you have decided not to come.
Maybe next time.
Dean:
For what it is worth, I think you’d have been a excellent choice as a tech presenter. Maybe you’ll be given the opportunity next time.
Thanks BD - so would have Mike Boyink, Tim Bednar, Andrew Careaga and/or the trio of Mike, Tanya and Scott over at God in Tech.
My point is that I don’t know if the sponsors got a good view of the terrain, and who’s doing what in the Christian blogosphere (at least not with regards to techBlogs). So my thought is … maybe I’ll wait till next year until we see how this all plays/pans out.
Which _may_ explain the modest turnout by others, at least in techBlogging circles.
Of course it could also be an issue of geography - it could be that God pundits ‘cluster’ in different regions than God geeks (there are alot of us here on the East Coast).
Then again, it could also be that we’re all just too cheap and/or too busy to make the hike.
From the “Speakers” page at the conference site — your comments won’t allow a link
“GodBlogCon is excited to announce that Hugh Hewitt will be present at GodBlogCon 2005. He will be joined in a panel discussion about the future role of blogging in society by Dr. John Mark Reynolds, Dr. Mark Roberts, and Dr. Tod Bolsinger. The discussion will be Friday, October 14th at 7:00 pm and will be held at Biola University.”
I can appreciate you desire to have the facts presented Dr. Jackson.
This thread is getting a bit full, so I’ll come over to smartchristian.com and listen carefully to anything you wish to say.
I’ll bring your comment.:^)
Any facts you have I’ll be happy to post.
Thank you for your phone number, that is very courteous of you -
a)I can’t afford the call,
b)if I could, I’ve lost my voice with this pneumonia. Talking remains quite difficult.
c)I respectfully request we keep this conversation open to readers.
On my way.
Hoosierboy: Thank you. The correction has been made, dated and linked in the post above.
http://www.godblogcon.com/index.php?id=17
Confirmation link:
http://www.godblogcon.com/index.php?id=12
While we are making corrections you might also want to note that below the correction, you linke to ONETRUEGODBLOG under the name “John Mark Roberts.”
For the record “John Mark Reynolds” - cited in the correction and participating in ONETRUEGODBLOG is the head of the Torrey Honors Institute at Biola, oh yeah, and he is Orthodox — Mark Roberts on the other hand is a Presbyterian (PCUSA) pastor in Irvine California, he is also cited in the correction and participating in ONETRUEGODBLOG.
You know, when you want to slap something this hard, it wouldn’t hurt if you aimed at the right targets.
One more thing — you might want to trying googling it instead of Technorati — Technorati is way behind.
So, according to you I’ve mixed up a John Mark Reynolds and a (John) Mark Roberts. They both participate at onetruegodblog.
What is it I need to correct?
John Mark Reynolds writes at three blogs.
Dr. John Mark Reynolds
WorldMag’s Zeitgeist
and OneTrueGodBlog
http://www.johnmarkreynolds.com/
http://zeitgeist.worldmagblog.com/zeitgeist/
http://www.onetruegodblog.com/contributors.html#reynolds
Mark D. Roberts is not John Mark Roberts.
He also writes at three sites
His own
WorldMag’s Theologica
OneTrueGodBlog
I’ll correct his name immediately. That was an inexcusable typo and inadvertently rude.
The correction has been made and dated.
http://www.markdroberts.com/
http://theologica.worldmagblog.com/theologica/
http://www.onetruegodblog.com/
So John Mark Reynolds and Mark D Roberts both post at a republican blog called OneTrueGodBlog and post at blogs at a republican magazine.
I got Mark D Roberts name wrong, why do you object to the link?
Yeah I know, Technorati is crippled.
What is it you think I need to Google?
Bene -
**Please don’t assign me anger when that is not what I’m feeling and thinking. I feel frustration, and a bit more sadness than yesterday.**
I apologize. I misread the frustration as anger. Thanks for the clarification.
In addition - your response to my comment helped me to “get it”. Clearly laid out, concise… the Bene I’m used to reading.
**We aren’t discussing abstracts, it is there, and there are bloggers and believers that would not and do no feel comfortable at this particular table.
God-bloggers.**
Yep. Absolutely true. But I’m not sure why that needs to be a problem. I’m a minister in the UCCan… that’s because the UCCan is the place where I can best experience and celebrate my faith as a child of God and a disciple of Christ. I can also feel comfortable celebrating with people from other denominations - but wouldn’t be a particularly good member of those groups. There there are Christian communities that I wouldn’t be able to spend much time with, because our understandings of God are in opposition.
The thing is - all of them are Christian, whether or not I can comfortably participate in their exercise of their beliefs.
In a similar fashion, “godbloggers” blog across a huge continuum of belief. Some I read and correspond with, some I read and comment on, some I read… and some I glance at and run.
As best as I can tell, this GodBlogCon isn’t going to be the *definitive* convention/conference for GodBloggers. It may be the first. Others may grow out of it. Still others may grow in response to it. So… we may not all feel welcome at this one. There will be others - some, I’m sure, that bloggers who are going to enjoy this GodBlogCon might not feel welcome to. You pointed out some important things that, hopefully, future con-planners can take into account.
As you said (to Joe, I think), “I hope your GodBlogCon is a success and worth all the hard work by enthusiatic, sacrificial and caring people. I hope the event exceeds your expectations and that of your attendees.” I agree. The planning team and participants have been added to my prayer list.
**I hope you decide to go Richard.:^) Your observations would be facinating. I’ve no doubt you would have a terrific time meeting people that share your love and passion for blogging.**
*grin* If it were closer - say, within a few hours drive or a much less expensive plane flight, I’d go. But I can’t figure out how I could get out there without getting the bank on my case - ok - more on my case.
I’d probably have an argument or two at the con… but, hey… so did the disciples who actually got to live with JC.
Thanks for your response to my comments.
Blessings and peace - Richard B.
Good - the Bene you are used to reading really is sick and picky and fuzzy and off right now and much of the criticism is warrented.
But not all of it.
This is a regional GodBlogCon.
It’s a big name for a little conference.
And I have to accept responsibility for blowing it out of proportion and giving it more attention that it was due.
There will be many more.
Anyone who has emailed me has expressed that message of not being welcome at this table in one way or another.
All I could do it ask them to contact the organizers and give a link.
And I failed with this post to adequately express my concern or a collective concern.
People that wrote and mentioned this the last few months were wondering if they’d get their heads chewed off or their ideas (their blogs)(themselves) rejected. They wondered if their registration would be accepted. Some felt like they didn’t measure up. They want blogging and friendship and faith and fun, not politics and pundits.
I can’t tell them they won’t get the pundits and politics - that is not my job.
They can decide for themselves, there is enough information out.
After this kerfuffle, I personally wouldn’t want to go within miles of this one. (Carter channelling Claybourn really is a bit much) I thought it would be neat to have an opportunity, be the fly on the wall, but that desire is gone after seeing the reaction these comments and weighing them out against concerns.
Maybe the next one, or the next one…
And I’ve offended some bloggers and I am genuinely sorry about that. No one deserves to be put down because they are new, or still wonderfully enthusiastic, or shy, or excited about community, or…(insert human trait here)
I should have glanced and run.
Like that line!
I’ll try to remember it:^)
Giving a god-blogger that put their foot in it a dignified exit is quite the gift…God Bless you Richard.
Merci
ONETRUEGOD BLOG is all of two weeks old and all they have talked about is demons? How is that Republican?
Google “GodBlogCon” — you’ll find a lot more activity than Technorati revelas form a much wider variety of sources.
I’d make a crack about Democrats not believing in demons, but I’m done with people actually getting hurt, and I understand some Thinklings had to get out of Rita’s way, and family has to ride this storm out.
Thanks for the suggestion.
Have a good weekend.
I hope it’s OK for me to post: I’m not attacking or accusing anyone of anything so I might be out-of-place.
My point is a simple one regarding low registration.
When the conference was moved from Phoenix to LA, I decided not to attend. Phoenix was on the fringe of my reach but LA was clearly out of my range. I’m closer to Washington, D.C., than I am LA (not that I’d drive to D.C. either).
Had the conference been more centrally located (Kansas City, Chicago, Memphis - even Dallas) I think the attendance would have been a lot better. As it is, it’s pretty much a left-coast gathering.
Hope I didn’t offend anyone. Or maybe I should hope that I did. I don’t know the rules here. Sorry.
That may have been the funniest comment I’ve read this week
Hey, happy to have you.
KISS rules.
Show self respect, which you did.
Show others respect, which you did.
People take precedent, no name calling because you think your idea is bigger than they are.
Discussion here isn’t about winning.
There are a few more sign ups for this GodBlogCon - ‘negative’ publicity can be a plus, along with probably normal decisions to attend.
I hope they make their goals.
I let Carter go when he popped his cork, he needs to figure out his rage for himself, what it does to him and others - and it’s previously not normal behavior for him. I feel badly for him and can’t work up the anger he seemed to want or need.
Exceptions to every rule.
Once.
Here is the site policy on the side bar if you feel comfortable reading it though.
http://benedictionblogson.com/archives/000001.php
You are most welcome here to speak freely and safely.
I see you are in Rita’s way. Be safe.
I mailed my registration fee August 31 but have not yet been listed as a registrant, so I don’t know how far they are behind in posting registration info.
I’m not going to have any comment on the God Blog Convention until I’ve been there long enough to see how it functions.
There are 74 listed registrants now. That should have brought in $7400 plus they may have received some donations, I believe. I’m not expecting that it will be canceled. Hope not, too. I got a non-refundable $208 round trip air fare.
Joel:
That was persponal speculation based on an observation on my part, for that day, looking at the registration webpage - on that date.
I’m glad more registrations are coming in, I hope you have a great time.
***I let Carter go when he popped his cork, he needs to figure out his rage for himself, what it does to him and others - and it’s previously not normal behavior for him.***
[sigh]
I’m not outraged, just frustrated. I’m just tired of the way that you constantanly attack your fellow godbloggers and then when they respond you act shocked that they would react.
I’m also tired of all the self-pitying, woe-is-me act that you put on. I was fooled by it for about a year but after seeing you say things — such as how you cried over readind a comletely banal post — I realized that it was all just an act.
You’ve lost the respect of a number of people, Bene — including mine. The first, second, even third time I watched you attack someone I thought that it was out of character. Now I see that sort of behavior *is* your character.
You have a distinct pattern: attack a blogger unprovoked, question their motives, apologize for hurting their feelings, move on to the next target.
I’m not outraged or angry or irate or any other strong emotion. I’m just disappointed. I’m dispointed in your behavior and disappointed in myself for spending so long trying to give you the benefit of the doubt.
I deleted my response to the above comment.
Since that is rare, it is worth acknowledging.
I made some observations in my post that haven’t gone down to well.
And no matter how I attempt to dialogue, it will come out sounding defensive.
I have no need to be on the defensive.
They are observations.
People aren’t stupid.
They can go look for themselves, draw their own conclusions, which is the point after all.
Personally I think looking at this comment thread, they have done just that, and done it well.
I disagree with you Bene. See my post at http://brelevant.blogspot.com (which links to you).
Thanks, I didn’t see a comment section at your blog.:^)
*So it has attracted politically minded evangelicals… how is that a problem?!
If Christians sympathetic to the Democratic political agenda want to attend the GodBlogCon, no one will stop them. There has been no “hijacking.” Just like a swarm on the blogosphere, things grow in communities. So it is to be expected that a core constituency for the GodBlogCon would develop.*
I think you are absolutely correct it is political, and my assumption it was hijacked is probably incorrect.
The presenters are Rebpublican pundit groups keen on networking perhaps,, I don’t know, and there is nothing at all wrong with that. Faith appears secondary in this core constituency.
I’ve no doubt a lot of well meaning people sacrificed a lot of volunteer time and effort.
Your disgreement is valid.
If you are attending I hope you have a great time.
Appreciate your post and thank you for the link, BT.
Just a thought, but often I think who “the heavyweights” are is rated and tainted by our own personal opinion and our own personal reading roster or blogroll.
I agree.
I think you are correct that we’d all have our favorites.
One way to do it would be to ask people what they’d like to hear and do, who they’d like to hear it from and put as many bloggers on panels in open sessions as possible.
My concept of an ideal convention would give as many bloggers as possible an opportunity for hands on active participation and learning.
For example instead of just tech talks, have hands on tech workshops.
I’d also want none bloggers, I think they could give a perspective that we all could use.
I’d want how to handle flame wars and conflict resolution, design, different ideas of relational ethics and those sorts of the day to day of blogging.
***Faith appears secondary in this core constituency.***
Example #512 of what I’ve been complaining about…