Yes! You take the time to briefly define your concepts. I’m looking forward to reading this series! I would have devoured this series in my college years as I began to grapple with the various texts that caused me pause.
Question: Do you think, given the emphasis I'm putting on "micro," that there's too much here? I'm wondering, particularly, about the Mimetic Theory part. Ha, I've already extracted a bunch out of my summary, but maybe I should just go even more simple there?
Thanks for asking. Actually, I thought you did a remarkable job with Girard here. I read him over 30 years ago in seminary and found his theory quite challenging at the time. Age and exposure to the world has made mimetic theory easier to grasp, I suspect, and I found your summary clear and to the point. I wouldn't change a thing.
Mimetic theory is something one could write volumes about - and I see that you have! The ability to boil it down into the kind of concise, micro-introduction you have here is advanced skill. Given that this is an introduction I would expect to see more on this in individual essays, and that will work very well indeed.
That's powerful. Very engaging. Makes a lot of sense. I definitely look forward to the series.
One tiny quibble: I was a little thrown off (jerked out of focusing on the meaning/intent/significance of what you were saying) when I read, "Even if we had an exact word or phrase that a Paul, a Moses, or a Zerubbabel used 2,000 years ago...". Instead, I started thinking "Wait, Paul was about 2,000 years ago, but Moses wasn't, and who knows when Zerubbabel was...I better Google him or her."
Are you going to both post on Substack and publish as little books each topic?
Ah, good quibbling point ... last thing an author needs is to pull the reader out of focus.
And yes, the idea for the main content that comes after this introduction (i.e., atonement, hell, sexuality, sin, etc ...) is to use substack posts I've already written that have caught some traction. Cuz ...
1-lets me know what people are already responding to,
2-repurposing seems reasonablly intelligent, given that some people will read books who never read substack and vice versa.
Related to your point #2: I am in a lay preacher training with the Episcopal church. (I have grave misgivings about whether I should be, but that's neither here nor there). One of my classmates, who was kind enough to buy 3 copies of my book, when I told her about my misgivings replied, "Well, not very many people I know will read books or read online posts on theological topics. But they will go to church and hear sermons. If you want to reach more people, preach sermons."
My thought when she told me that was, well progressive churches are not exactly overflowing with people clamoring to hear sermons, and no Evangelical church with any sense would let me preach at it!
Yes! You take the time to briefly define your concepts. I’m looking forward to reading this series! I would have devoured this series in my college years as I began to grapple with the various texts that caused me pause.
Thank you.
Really well constructed and articulated! Looking forward to reading the series.
Thank you, Dr Beth.
Question: Do you think, given the emphasis I'm putting on "micro," that there's too much here? I'm wondering, particularly, about the Mimetic Theory part. Ha, I've already extracted a bunch out of my summary, but maybe I should just go even more simple there?
Thanks for asking. Actually, I thought you did a remarkable job with Girard here. I read him over 30 years ago in seminary and found his theory quite challenging at the time. Age and exposure to the world has made mimetic theory easier to grasp, I suspect, and I found your summary clear and to the point. I wouldn't change a thing.
ha, well, easier to grasp or I just left some stuff out!.
thank you. helpful feedback!
Mimetic theory is something one could write volumes about - and I see that you have! The ability to boil it down into the kind of concise, micro-introduction you have here is advanced skill. Given that this is an introduction I would expect to see more on this in individual essays, and that will work very well indeed.
That's powerful. Very engaging. Makes a lot of sense. I definitely look forward to the series.
One tiny quibble: I was a little thrown off (jerked out of focusing on the meaning/intent/significance of what you were saying) when I read, "Even if we had an exact word or phrase that a Paul, a Moses, or a Zerubbabel used 2,000 years ago...". Instead, I started thinking "Wait, Paul was about 2,000 years ago, but Moses wasn't, and who knows when Zerubbabel was...I better Google him or her."
Are you going to both post on Substack and publish as little books each topic?
Ah, good quibbling point ... last thing an author needs is to pull the reader out of focus.
And yes, the idea for the main content that comes after this introduction (i.e., atonement, hell, sexuality, sin, etc ...) is to use substack posts I've already written that have caught some traction. Cuz ...
1-lets me know what people are already responding to,
2-repurposing seems reasonablly intelligent, given that some people will read books who never read substack and vice versa.
Related to your point #2: I am in a lay preacher training with the Episcopal church. (I have grave misgivings about whether I should be, but that's neither here nor there). One of my classmates, who was kind enough to buy 3 copies of my book, when I told her about my misgivings replied, "Well, not very many people I know will read books or read online posts on theological topics. But they will go to church and hear sermons. If you want to reach more people, preach sermons."
hmm, interesting ... well, truth be told, these posts that turn into books will be (and already have been) given in public settings. haha.
btw, i have misgivings about whether i should be doing any of this!
My thought when she told me that was, well progressive churches are not exactly overflowing with people clamoring to hear sermons, and no Evangelical church with any sense would let me preach at it!
😂 exactly