Harness is an interesting word. I'm not as paranoid about it. I don't think it should be used in context of harnessing people. There is great potential and energy in the online world...and in the blogosphere. I think harnessing is to find ways to take that energy and use it for ministry purposes. Harness, imo, is a good word for using the tools -- the technology.

Collaboration, conversation, viral, etc (all part of 2.0) I think are ways to tap this energy...this medium of the internet.

Now what I'm not a huge fan of is the "Christian blogosphere". I think it has the potential (and I've seen it) to separate some Christians from other Christians. Instead, I'd rather see more inclusion and partnerships. I'd like to see more ministry applications happening. I see a lot of inner-talking in the sphere. This isn't all bad, but has the setup of another group of Christian activists talking in the pews.

What I want to do is learn new ways for being effective online. How do we encourage believers using these tools? How do we introduce more people to the Kingdom of God? How do we equip others? Can we "harness" or use these technology tools to do so? Yes!

Continuing to learn their limits and advantages is a process. Realizing the trend is more of conversation is the personality of these 2.0 tools.

BTW, I have no idea what "the 'mainstream' of evangelical blogdom" is. I'm not necessarily a fan of Hewitt...and if he has followers (I certainly think he does), I don't want to be a part. But I think the world is big enough for all sorts of groups and purposes. I just hope we all as Christians are more concerned about the witness we have online, offline, relationship with God, and, to borrow an overused phrase, a purpose-driven life.

Good word, Rob. And as for the "mainstream" comment, I don't know what it is either. I don't necessarily agree that such a thing exists, nor should exist. But my sense is that the conservatives who organized GodBlogCon -- the most prominent of which is Hewitt -- seem to consider themselves the "mainstream" and therefor the self-appointed ones to "lead" the charge, so to speak, to catalyze/harness/focus/whatever. Again, they will have a strong voice, but do they speak for me? Do they speak for all evangelical Christians in the blogosphere? No. And that's a concern.

Your point about being more concerned about the witness we have online is well taken. That should be our ultimate concern. I appreciate that reminder.

Peace.

As to whether or not I want to be harnessed by (and please excuse me for being frank) white, primarily conservative, Christians. I would have to say "Thanks, but no thanks." But then again, they probably didn't have me in mind anyway - LOL.

Rod, thanks for popping by, man.

I think your comment and observation touches on a very important point, which is the relatively homogenous voice of many conservative Christian bloggers. There are a few exceptions to that "rule" (e.g. Anthony Bradley and LaShawn Barber come to mind), but by and large conservative Christian bloggers are predominately white and male.

For the "Christian blogosphere" to truly become united and a strong voice in the culture, I think it would need to be more representative of the diverse population that exists in the blogosphere. Is anyone really trying to pull people together? Or is it just split along these ideological/cultural lines? To me it still looks fairly split.

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

URL:
Remember me? YesNo

Comments: