My blog just topped over 100,000 views since its inception. I have never maintained a single url long enough in my 8 year blogging career to ever break this threshold. If I had kept the same url for all 8 years I’m sure I would have probably had at least over 500,000 views along time ago.
That said, I have a question for anyone who is still reading me these days; which is few and far between, I must say! Do you think I should keep blogging or not? I have had one interlocutor who has challenged me over the last couple of years (not for some months now though) with my blogging; he believed the the material I was trying to cover and bring up for discussion is too deep for genuine theological discourseβgiven the space limitations and expectations that the blog medium provides. In fact he kind of has gotten on my case about it; although nowadays it seems he is simply ignoring me (he has bigger and better things on the horizon apparently). Anyway, his protestations not withstanding, what do you all think; should I abandon blogging?βif you hadn’t noticed I have slowed down quite a bit in the past few months because of my work schedule. My hits have dropped pretty dramatically over the last few months (for some reason), and from what I’ve noticed theo/biblioblogging has all but dried up and died!
The primary reason I blog thoughβjust for full disclosureβis pretty selfish. It really helps me to learn and maintain what I am reading and researching at whatever given moment; in ways that if I didn’t sit down, slow down, and write down and out my thoughts, I would not retain and process the information I am covering in my readings in the same way that blogging forces me to do (so I write to learn, pace Calvin). Anyway, I am really just curious what you all think; do you think I should keep blogging?
Also, this post is an chance for any of you lurkers to un-lurk and just say hi; I like to know who is reading my blog, and it would be nice if you would just say hi this one time at least.
Keep up the good work!
Hi, Bobby. Yes, keep up the blogging. I really enjoy your writing. Many Blessings
Rev Roger Hart
Hi there,
My name is Greg Liston and I am one of Myk Habets’ Ph.D. students in NZ. I read your blog, but not avidly. I find it interesting and would be keen to see it continue. But only if you find it helpful for your self. I think all blogging is basically self-interested, and gives people a place to process their thoughts.
Cheers,
Greg
If blogging helps you process your thoughts then why stop. And I’d say if you’ve got 100K views then what your writing must also be interesting and helpful to others. I personally think those who write, should blog so that they don’t feel like they need to write a book every time they wanted to get an idea out.
Hey Bobby! I second Nathan’s comment. And while I haven’t commented myself in a while, I do read and appreciate your thoughts very much. You challenge my thinking and you’ve turned me on to some authors I have never heard of before. Keep blogging as you have time!
I say keep going, but I would encourage you to venture into some other areas and topics — let’s say, oh, St. Thomas on the sacraments! That would change things up.
You are right that theo-blogging is not nearly as vibrant as it once was. But, I think the influence is still far greater than people realize and certainly not indicated by the number of people who bother to comment on blogs (which are fewer and fewer nowadays). In the seminary context especially, the influence of blogs is obvious, even beyond the popular ones hosted by Patheos or TGC. The advantage that we had, Bobby, is that we started when theo-blogging was still new, and it was relatively easy to get a blog read and noticed. Now, the “market,” so to speak, is so flooded — new potential readers don’t know where to go and new bloggers are discouraged by an over-flooded market. Yet, blogs influence and shape opinion in our church culture. It is unimaginable that the new Calvinism would have dominated so much, among young people especially, if it were not for bloggers like Tim Challies, Justin Taylor, Kevin DeYoung, et al. And now, if you want a really good example of a blog having widespread influence, look at Rachel Held Evans. She is not my cup of tea, to say the least, but she does demonstrate the continuing power of blogs to shape opinion and initiate dialog. Of course, that might be the problem — she has massive influence because she is, frankly, shallow and bombastic.
I confess that I am a lurker and yet I would like you to continue blogging. Though I only lurk I do value your work on Evangelical Calvinism.
Don’t stop blogging Bobby. Finding your blogs was a huge lift and encouragement for me in my theological journey. Forget about that other dude. I found it a relief to find someone working through Torrance and EC. A breathe of fresh, life giving air! As opposed to all pop trash stuff out there… Keep blogging. The theoblogosphere needs you.
Bobby, you’ve got more reasons going for you than I do at the moment. Please don’t let the selfish reason persuade you to stop. Stay sharp, keep blogging.
Bobby, I am still visiting your blog, although I don’t read everything you write. Don’t let yourself divert from blogging by the number of the visitors of your blog. To be honest, the numbers you give, I could only dream of. Our society is inclined to judge every activity in the light of quantitative criteria. That is, according to me, an enormous pitfall. So, continue blogging just for yourself and for all, who keep reading what you write. Keep sharing your thoughts and while doing that you sharpen them as well. Best wishes! Arjen
I too am a lurker, but one who enjoys reading through your thoughts a couple times a week. As a seminary student and now pastor in the reformed tradition who moved from TULIP to Calvin to Barth I appreciate the way you are thoughtfully working and articulating something in the realm of where I find myself. In seasons when my own studying is nonexistent your blog also helps me at least feel a little better about that. If I’m not on the ball reading Torrance at least I can read about you doing it. Thanks for all your faithful work.
Bobby, As I was reading your blog last night, I was thinking how much I appreciate your work, and your book! By the way, you need to list your book on the TFT fellowship society “Books by members” page. As a matter of fact my sermon today is taken from the Torrance quote you’ve posted above right, with applicable scripture. All things Torrance, All the time! Which must include Barth, and Calvin, and Athanasius, and Bobby Grow! Thank you Bobby, don’t stop now.
Wow! Quite a turnout already Bobby!!! ditti what they said :O)
Bobby,
I just started following you a few weeks ago. I’d encourage you to keep blogging. In my context its not easy to find people to have theological conversations of much depth so following blogs like yours helps. I’d add to that that voices for Evangelical Calvinism seem few and far between (particularly in the blogosphere which is more dominated by voices that lean towards fundamentalism).
Also, though that one dude advised you to be more accessible in terms of weight of material (probably right if you’re goal is to attract a large audience) I’d point out that you are kind of providing for a niche market so I’d encourage you to stay with the heavier stuff.
Also, if you keep blogging here’s one suggestion (if you’ve not already done this): List 5-10 of your favorite TF Torrance reads with a little synopsis of what aspect of his thought we’d get from it and what audience its intended for. This would help me bone up on Torrance.
Okay, nuf said.
Blessings.
Hello Hello Hello I read every word. DON’T STOP
Keep blogging – I enjoy it immensely and may not comment or read every post. But your presence is a needed one in the theo-blogosphere.
Okay, I won’t stop then! Thanks for the encouragement everyone, this has been a great turnout :-).
Fr Kimel, thank you.
Roger Hart, thank you.
Greg Liston, thank you too. And thank you for the work you did on Myk’s and my edited book Evangelical Calvinism! Everyone, Greg is the guy who put together the index at the end of our book; great work, Greg. And blessings on your studies with Myk!
David Cartledge, I’m glad you are present here!
Mike Palithorpe, thank you for all that you do with Intellectus Fidei and how you spread the good word about TFT’s theology, and others like minded!
Steve, thank you brother; we have known each other quite awhile now because of blogging!
Arjen, thank you brother; I agree with you about the numbers thing in our society. By the way, I confess, I am a lurker at your blog … keep up the good work :-)!
Andre, thanks. I got your email, and I will do a post on your question therein in due course. But I’m surprised at your question to be honest.
Andrew Kadzban, thanks for sharing a little about yourself and the encouragement! Great to hear that you are a fan of TFT too!
Nathan, thank you, brother. And I agree; writing a book isn’t always that feasible all the time … good point ;-)!
Jason, thank you brother!
Kevin, you and I do go way back in the blogosphere; as you highlight when it was kind of just starting to pop. I agree with you that there is still a substantial online presence provided by the theoblogosphere–for good or ill—and that people are still reading, but there is definitely a lack of the kind of interaction on blogs that there used to be (like good debates and arguments etc.). Anyway keep up your good work at your blog as well, I appreciate everything you write (even if I don’t always comment). Why do you mention Thomas Aquinas and the sacraments? I do find Aquinas interesting, and have read him in the past, and even written a paper on his view of nature and grace. I think I need to expand the realm of my topics at the blog too; good idea!
Bill Ford, thank you, brother! Great idea about posting the book! Wow, I wouldn’t place me with Athanasius, Barth, or Calvin; but I do appreciate that sentiment, Bill :-)!
Duane, thank you brother!
Mike, welcome to the blog then. That one dude was actually advising me to quit blogging (really), not to simply make it more accessible (he is a PhD student himself, and I think thinks that what I do with my blog actually cheapens the material I am trying to cover because he thinks the blog medium itself does not allow for the kind of space to properly develop theological themes … I don’t agree with his assessment, and think it comes off a little bit snooty). I have a friend, Travis McMaken who has already done what you are asking me to do in re. to TF Torrance’s works. I’ll get that link from his blog and direct you to that post of his. Thanks, man!
Anon., Thank you.
Joey, Thank you brother; glad you enjoy what I am trying to do with the blog here.
Everyone: thanks for the encouragement; this has been good. I always enjoy hearing from you all, and I like to hear from those of you who lurk here too; thanks for unlurking for a moment! π
Keep blogging, your posts are stimulating and informative. The perspective of Evangelical Calvinism needs to be consistently presented, and you’re doing a great job.
Thank you, Peter.
Bobby, your plea for feedback deserves a reply, even from Lurkers! You hang your heart out on the internet so openly to share with us, you deserve some comment.
I don’t read every post but I do receive email messages with each of your posts that I look at briefly. Most of them I don’t read. But then one comes along like the one you just posted about BB Warfield and a comment you made in there about substance metaphysics that catches my attention! You introduced me to the variations in Calvinism back a few years ago when I did an internet search on Federal Theology. I have probably three binders full of your your posts with highlighting and notes. And you introduced me to Dr. Ron Frost (I get all his blog posts via email, too.) I consider your contribution to my personal journey to be significant and valuable!
I agree, too, that there is value FOR YOU personally to record your thoughts, even if nobody else engages with you. Even when I don’t make comments, I take joy and encouragement knowing that you are continuing your pursuit, “faith seeking knowledge”. Occasionally, the paths of our inquiring cross and there is great satisfaction in sharing with you some of my journey.
So, please, consider: how many readers does it take for you to justify your efforts to blog? Even if it is just for YOU, I think the effort will be fruit-bearing!
Thanks for all the thoughts and research you have shared with your readers!
Bobby, I very much enjoy your blog and your passion for Reformed, Trinitarian theology. Keep up the good work!
Blake
David,
Thanks so much brother; that is encouraging and humbling. We have had contact now because of blogging for quite some years now, and it is contact with people like you that really has made blogging worthwhile if nothing else. In fact, I would say that this is one of the most positive things about blogging. Thank you, David. Keep the faith, and I will too; since Jesus already did for us! π Blessings.
Blake,
Thank you so much, that is encouraging and means a lot. Blessings to you!!
For sure, keep up your ‘write to learn’ I’m sure it’s beneficial for more than just you and me :p
Just finished my degree at Carey, and have been exposed to EC by Myk, and am finding that the learning and questions never end. Therefore it’s good to stay in dialogue – even if for the most part it’s just you doing the dialoguing, and me doing the reading…
Anyway, this is my attempt to ‘un-lurk,’ but I’m sure I’ll post again soon.
Josh
Keep blogging, please!
Hi Josh,
Great to hear from you! Thanks.
So what do you think of EC, then?
Hi Jerome,
Okay, thanks!
Hi Bobby,
I want to understand the sovereignty of God in harmony with his plan to redeem and unite humanity to himself in Christ.
I want to understand his sovereignty in harmony with his loving nature, and his intention for communion with humanity.
EC seems to me to be the only way to go – to hold together various tensions.
If you like, it seems to me to be the most promising way forward; and the most hopefull.
Although, I still want to know what Torrance does with passages like Rev 17:8….
For me, double decree seems like a god divided against himself – good and bad, damnation and glory, like a corrupt cop it’s not justice. Yet at the same time libertarian freedom isn’t grace.
So basically, in EC, people’s damnation is not attributed to God’s decree, but to the mystery of evil – yet their salvation is attributed directly to the grace of the Holy Spirit, the seemingly particular grace -some would say irresistible grace –> and how is that different from a fireman saving one child and not another, from a burning house, when he was capable of saving both?….
I think Myk said once that EC just pushes the problem back further. Maybe it’s part of God giving us just enough brains to know that he can’t be comprehended?
Hi Josh,
Sorry I didn’t answer your other points made in your comment I think on my EC Themes page, yet.
I think who God is as Triune Love, as eternally Father, Son, and Holy Spirit in filial communion and thus union must be seen as definitive of the being of God. If this is so, in contrast to classically and philosophically construed of God’s being, then we will understand his sovereignty as shaped by this kind of life; i.e. love. So in the “EC” sense, God has always been Father Son and Holy Spirit, but not always creator; he became Creator because of who he is as love, and thus he desired a counterpoint (I stole this point from Myk) to shower his love on (which is in accord with his nature as other focused); and who in reciprocating way loves him back (with his own love mediated through the priestly humanity of Christ for us see I Jn 4.19). Typical accounts of God’s sovereignty are informed by philosophical reflection that think of God in cold, abstract and impersonal ways. Like Thomas Aquinas; he conceived of God (along with Aristotle) as the Creator by nature, and the reason why God created in his account (and the classical account) was simply because that’s what he does, he’s the Creator after all, and the creator creates. As you can see in this oversimplified sketch there is no deference given to God as triune love, instead creation is just done in determinative fashion; he doesn’t create because he wants someone to share his life of love with, he creates because that’s what he does (arbitrarily so). And so in this classical account, if what I am saying is true, then God will relate to us in accord with who he is as Creator; a set of Stoic like hard deterministic categories will be constructed and God will relate to us in mechanistic and absolute/static ways. This gives some background on how and why I would go with an “EC” account of understanding God’s sovereignty and creative activity (which is something that was new for God, just as the incarnation was) as shaped by his life of love.
Let me answer your points on Revelation 17:8 and “irresistable grace” through a post in the near future.
At some level, yes, God’s ineffable life can only be comprehended so far; and that awful word “mystery” must be appealed to ;-). So we have to be wise and sensitive on how far God’s Self-revelation will let us go; and then just worship after that.
Beauty, I’m right with you. You expanded nicely on my reasons for appreciating EC π
I look forward to future posts. Nice work!