The Reason for Theologica

[Michael Patton]

I started Theologica about four years ago. Can you believe it has been that long?

I started Credo House of Theology three years ago with the coffee house emphasis just over six months old.

Both were started for the same reasons: to have unique, gracious, and serious dialogue about the things that matter the most. Both have flexibility and both need to combine lightheartedness with passion for truth. Grace and truth. Those two together are rarely found. When one is sacrificed in favor of another, we don't have a Christian witness. Though I am a Calvinist, dispensationalist, who believes in inerrancy and does not believe in evolution, my desire is not to create a place where my side always wins. I have always acknowledged the great diversity that the Lord has allowed among those who proclaim his name and love his Gospel. Therefore, both the Credo House and Theologica are "broadly Evangelical" (or as someone has once said "evangelical on the last notch of the belt"). This means that we unite around the essentials: the person and work of Christ, the authority of the Scripture, the necessity of God's grace, and the future hope we have in Christ. "Non-essentials" does not mean "not important" but it does mean that we accept those as brothers and sisters in Christ.

We had a group of Mormons at Credo the other night. It was a wonderful time of discussion with people whom God desires to love him. We did not kick them out and their presence did not redefine our mission and purpose. In fact, I could think of no better place for a group of Mormons to be. I relish the opportunity to tell them about the Christ I know in contrast to the Christ they know. They never caused any trouble and I can't wait to see them again. We also had a group of Roman Catholic apologists here for four weeks, only wanting to debate. They were trolling the Credo House! I had the opportunity to debate them in public for many nights. I gave them the floor and then I took the floor. However, eventually, I had to ask them to cease in their evangelistic endeavors as they were going from table to table trying to be a representative of truth in our home. People will take liberty and take over if you let them. Once my ability to involve myself in their evangelistic attempts was no longer available, I sat down with them and told them that we loved them to be here, but their aggression (not to mention time!) could not be matched by me.

This is the balance that has to be maintained and facilitated. It is not easy. There will always be those who think that kicking someone out of the Credo House was bad or keeping them there was bad. You can't please everyone. But if grace and truth were easy, then this would not be an issue.

It has been my hope that grace and truth are foundational and abiding characteristics of both Theologica and Credo House. Those who don't like grace and truth combined should not find comfort here. If there is not tension, it probably means that we have settled for second best of what we are trying to provide.

Thought I rarely have the opportunity to make it over here, I pray that this site has been and continues to be a blessing for everyone involved in a way that glorifies our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ

[Michael Patton]

True Daniel. 
And to everyone else I say this: I apologize for my lack of involvement here. I don't think that anything will change in the near future. I truly do want this to be a place where good and uremic conversation can happen. I hope we can make moves to that end. In every thing in life, we ofter have to return to our roots. We don't necessarily have to remake ourselves but just renew ourselves. Internet conversations is rarely done well. I hope we can be the exception. 
Quick question: does anyone know a place where you feel as if open Christian theological discussion happens in a way that is consistently edifying? I would like to see how they do it. There may not be, but I thought I would check.

[Ryan]

You should check out the blog Called to Communion. The articles are charitable in and of themselves, but the comments are where it really stands out. I've never seen such consistently fruitful conversation from thoughtful and faithful folks on lots of different sides. Many of the articles have hundreds of comments and you'd be hard pressed to find fault (at least in terms of charity) with any one. I've never seen anything else like it.

http://calledtocommunion.com (Or see link in the sidebar)

[joanne guarnieri]

Ryan, I would think that having a homogeneous readership would help greatly in keeping the discussion from getting too heated, or?  One of the interesting aspects of Theologica is the wide diversity of its contributers

[Marv]

Dude, that's either cryptic or a fascinating and possibly freudian typo. "Uremic" refers to the toxic build up of nitrogenous waste in the blood. Oddly, I have imagined in the Body of Christ my dubious and highly questionable gifting might be likened to a kidney in the body. Among other things that should reduce uremia. Sometimes, conversations around here do get toxic, a lot of excess bile at least, which is chemically different. But given the QWERTY configuration of the US keyboard, I figure you meant to type "irenic."

Michael Patton said:

 I truly do want this to be a place where good and uremic conversation can happen.

[Jason]

Ahhh...yes! I'm good at that.

Now, what were you saying about Genesis last March 28? Let me assure you, it was WRONG!

LOL

Daniel said:

Why it was to hijack every thread and make it about something totally different from the topic title! :)

Jason said:

What was the reason for Theologica, again??? ;-)

[Jason]

I was trying to decipher that, and gout comes to mind.

We've limped along for four years, and no matter what we do it keeps building up. LOL

P-ologica, anyone?

Marv said:

Dude, that's either cryptic or a fascinating and possibly freudian typo. "Uremic" refers to the toxic build up of nitrogenous waste in the blood. Oddly, I have imagined in the Body of Christ my dubious and highly questionable gifting might be likened to a kidney in the body. Among other things that should reduce uremia. Sometimes, conversations around here do get toxic, a lot of excess bile at least, which is chemically different. But given the QWERTY configuration of the US keyboard, I figure you meant to type "irenic."

Michael Patton said:

 I truly do want this to be a place where good and uremic conversation can happen.

[Norrin Radd]

Alex,

Though the current uremic banter is IMO only tenuously "On-topic," I'm going to accede to the recommendations of the mods and not pursue this topic here.  I think my position is clear, but if you want to engage further, please start a discussion Topic on the matter, or address it in the blog - whichever you prefer.  If I know about it, I'll join the discussion.

Alex Guggenheim said:

I take it you believe the others are in error?

Norrin Radd said:

Then I take it you believe those translations are in error which render it, "If you ask ME anything in My name, *I* will do it."

All other places in the same "Last Supper Discourse" context where Jesus talks about asking in His name, He specifically says we ask "the Father" and "he" (the Father) answers (15:16; 16:23-26).  So I infer you believe the "Me" and "I" in 14:14 are erroneous.

Alex Guggenheim said:

Why does the Lord bring the Father in view here if all we are doing is praying to Jesus and Jesus responding? Because it is the Father in view as the one being prayed to in Christ's name which, in turn, Jesus acts on behalf of the Father in answering such prayers, thus glorifying the Father. It is to ignore the construct and elements of the passage to conclude that this is about praying to Jesus.


Norrin Radd said:

Huh.  In light of the way John 14:13-14 are rendered in most English translations, I'd think even the nit-pickiest "by-the-Book" Xian would be unable to dogmatically rule out praying "to" Jesus.

[Ryan]

If CtC can be accused of homogeneity it's because the interlocutors are well read. In that sense it can be a little intimidating for those just dipping their toes in for the first time.  (I count myself as one who rarely comments, but enjoys the rich dialogue)  But it's certainly not homogeneous in terms of perspectives.  Where else can you can get the likes of Horton, TurretinFan, Mathison, White, Geisler, Leithart, Beckwith, and more dialoguing charitably over the issues that unite and divide us?  And avoid the usual smoke screens that distract from the meat?  Probably my favorite part is hearing the strongest arguments from some of the brightest folks on all sides.  Want to hear the strongest arguments against the Papacy from the EO side?  Check the comments.  How about the Reformed Baptists?  Check the comments.  How about the strongest arguments for various soteriological positions?  Check the comments.  They've somehow attracted and curated a brilliant community of informed and lucid communicators and thought leaders (in their respective communities) in a way I've not seen elsewhere.  (though I'm up for hearing about more, because I can't get enough!)

joanne guarnieri said:

Ryan, I would think that having a homogeneous readership would help greatly in keeping the discussion from getting too heated, or?  One of the interesting aspects of Theologica is the wide diversity of its contributers

[joanne guarnieri]

It has interesting potential, Ryan, but it still reads, as do the comments, as a mostly homogeneus site that is attractive to people who have converted to Catholicism, particularly from a Protestant background. Theologica does not have any particular slant to it, apart from it's basic adherence to the bare bones of orthodox Christian thinking.

 

Much wider room for variation there, which, I think, would bring in more heat.

 

But you're right, the comments come across overall as very irenic.

[Michael Patton]

Please let me say that I am sorry for using the linked blog post as an example of bad conduct on the internet. Really, it was my conduct that was at faut, both in the post and for using it here. I did not exemplify the example that I preach about so much. Please forgive me. To any I may have hurt, I am truly sorry.