I recently had a disturbing interaction with someone at a social event, during which a casual conversation turned into an uncomfortable theological discussion. In just a moment, the whole atmosphere changed. Instead of having a casual conversation, my acquaintance suddenly came in with an argumentative but excited tone, like a shark sniffing blood in the water.
They didn’t seem to want to learn from me or listen to me. Rather, I felt that their main “gotcha” questions were aimed at proving a point and rhetorically trapping me. They let me talk, but they didn’t want us to share ideas with each other. My words were taken not as an opportunity to think about new perspectives, but as an opportunity to duel verbally with my opponent.
Theological leaders and scholars were mentioned, but not as helpful guides to expert opinion or dialogue in their respective fields. Instead, they were labeled as ideological villains and “heretics” to be avoided. Accusations were thrown at me without first allowing me to explain what I believed. When I tried to ask additional questions, I was met with short-sighted retorts such as “It’s written in the Bible” and “Look at the text!”.
How we approach disagreements is just as important as the content of our disagreements, and how we speak to others is just as important as the beliefs and ideas we hold.
No logical argument is developed. No solid exegetical claims were made. In the end, we found a compromise, but it wasn’t easy. It wasn’t because we didn’t have common ground in our opinions or beliefs, but because this person’s attitude was that they weren’t trying to find it at first. While I tried to listen and be heard in order to start a benevolent conversation from a place of common ground, the other person tried to attack and conquer rhetorically with the end goal of emerging victorious from the back-and-forth conversation with a trophy of “proven” points.
The experience was very disorienting. Not just because of how aggressive my acquaintances became, but because this style of rhetoric felt so familiar. Where have you heard this kind of dialogue before?I asked, only to realize later that YouTube was the source of this type of aggressive and dishonest interaction with others.
In recent years, I have become more aware of how political and theological apologists are using YouTube, Instagram, and TikTok in ways that are harmful to followers of Jesus. Some of the ideas and views promoted by YouTube theologians and social media influencers are deeply worrying, especially considering that their videos receive millions of views and thousands of likes. But equally problematic are the models and methods we promote in our YouTube videos, Instagram Reels, and TikTok clips for interacting and engaging with people with whom we disagree.
Famous online influencers such as Charlie Kirk and Allie Beth Stuckey have influenced thousands of people with their blend of conservative values and a kind of theological apologetics. However, they often rely on logical fallacies and dubious statistics to prove their points. In addition to ideological rivals such as Dean Withers, Kirk, and Stuckey, they share short-form video content that is packaged in a way that intentionally makes it look like they are dominating their opponents in a debate.
I remember when Charlie Kirk came to Cambridge for a debate. In the days that followed, various social media accounts spread short clips of the debate supporting their preferred side. So I took the time to watch most of the nearly two-hour YouTube video to get the full context. A clip circulating on social media was found to have been taken out of context. These short clips, when edited in a certain way, often suggested that there was only one winner in the debate, when in reality it was not all that dramatic or conclusive. But this isn’t just a matter of random social media accounts promoting misleading content. The official digital platforms of these influencers are also guilty of posting attention-seeking, reality-shaping editorials.
Influencers like Ben Shapiro, Candace Owens, and Nick Fuentes use extremist rhetoric, conspiracy theories, and misinformation to share their opinions and ideas with the digital world. Whether it’s the presentation of their own ideas or models of engagement and disagreement with others, these famous influencers promote an alarming method of public discussion, even though the actual content is far removed from academic honesty, intellectual integrity, and virtues of character. Such content can engage millions of people, but it fails to retain the precision, nuance, detail, or context needed for real learning and thoughtful discussion.
How does all this shape us?
in his book digital liturgySamuel D. James is spot on when he classifies the Internet as “an epistemological environment, a spiritual and intellectual habitat, that creates certain ways of thinking, feeling, and beliefs in its members.”1 James goes on to suggest that the nature of the internet—its design, framework, and trends—has the power to shape us through a “digital liturgy.”2
James’ theory describes the digital world as “a disembodied electronic environment that we enter through connected devices to access information, relationships, and media not available in physical form.”3-Can shape our worship. Don’t get me wrong. The digital model for engaging with people with whom we disagree and the positioning of such interactions trains people. But do they lead people closer to the image of Christ? Are they helping Christians more closely follow the teachings of the Rabbis of Nazareth? I fear that it will become increasingly clear that the answer to these questions is “absolutely not.”
How we approach disagreements is just as important as the content of our disagreements, and how we speak to others is just as important as the beliefs and ideas we hold. But looking at this online content, no matter how little truth there may be in your claims, it’s always very important to sound right. In some circles, the demonstration of certainty and performative dogma has become more important than the sincere pursuit of knowledge and truth. Quick reactions and “gotcha” tricks are encouraged more than listening with humility and intellectual curiosity.
James KA Smith makes this observation: Let’s build a home in this bright darknesscommented that digital debates on social media create dualistic thinking. He said social media “has become a forum for discussion, but given the dynamics of performance; screen With what social media entails, being seen as winning an argument is even more important than legitimacy or truth. ”4 He goes on to boldly claim that “nobody dares to go on social media trying to find nuance.”5
What happens to us when sounding right becomes more important than sound doctrine? When looking right becomes more important than truth? The kind of intellectual and theological formations in which we are led are harmful to our souls. Digital thought leaders and content role models who use misleading tactics and logical fallacies do not help our spiritual growth. Statements like theirs are harmful to it. And if truth itself is centered on the Triune God, who is love, how can we separate virtue and love from our learning efforts, as modeled by certain YouTubers?
I have come across many evangelicals who mirror YouTube and social media discussions as their own. But what’s even more concerning is that they’re employing the same tactics seen on YouTube and social media. Some people I’ve talked to admit that their tone, tactics, and demeanor aren’t respectable, and they try to filter and categorize content by argument or tactic. But can it really be subdivided like that? There is a spirit of arrogance in these digital discussions and online disagreements, and that same spirit has great potential to corrupt our own disciples. It is a kind of spiritual one-upmanship that is disrupting our spiritual formation.
These same ideas that so many people listen to and internalize are generated by people who see their ideological opponents as enemies to be defeated. They portray conversations as opportunities to dominate and disagreements as opportunities for verbal conquest. And in all of these interactions, they approach the world through a self-centered lens of individualism, teaching their viewers to lecture and debate rather than listen and learn.
Moreover, when we open our devices and start watching videos of people discussing and debating, we are already having a kind of non-physical conversation through the digital world. We continue to watch people and thought leaders we often don’t know very well and with whom we have no personal connection argue with each other in ways that are manipulative, coercive, and degrading. The concepts and ideas presented (especially from a theological and political perspective) are deeply personal, meaningful and important topics that require detail and context. They are not themes that should be removed from the origins of the peoples and places from which they arose. But the digital world does just that.
The beautiful flow of church history is transformed into consumable digital entertainment. Deep theological topics are twisted into petty arguments to support ideological positions. Pressing political issues that originate from and affect real people are taken out of their context and become sound bites that comfort and soothe religious consumers. Reality is distorted and manipulated into a rhetorical weapon. Intellectual scholars and pastors we don’t know personally are demonized and encouraged for us to judge and condemn. I’m not anti-internet. I am not advocating mass exodus from all digital forms of media and communication. But we would do well to discern broadly who and what guides our intellectual, theological, and political considerations.
In fact, it would be very useful to assess what kind of voices Christians are hearing on social media. Find a voice that is intelligent and honorable, thoughtful and kind, confident yet curious. They’re there, I promise. Additionally, make time to read books and access original sources. AI summaries and YouTube commentary are great tools, but they cannot replace a journey of studying the Bible, learning from history, and being guided theologically by voices from the history of the church. Finally, create space for yourself to think and have real conversations. Don’t always use digital shortcuts. Ask good questions and think about the answers. Instead of immediately relying on clickbait internet personalities to parrot your thoughts, find time to think through the problem, either alone or with a friend.
As disciples living in the digital age, we must be even more discerning. We need to consider how the liturgy of our lives, both digital and tangible, reflects the rhythms of our lives at the individual, communal and societal levels. The question is not, “Am I being affected?” Rather, “Who and what shapes me?” and “Who will I become?”
- James, Samuel D. Digital liturgy: Rediscovering Christian wisdom in the online age. (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2023), 9. ↩︎
- Ibid., 11. ↩︎
- Ibid., 12. ↩︎
- Smith, James KA Build your home in this bright darkness: Mysticism, art, and the path of the unconscious(Yale University Press: London), 63. ↩︎
- Same as above. ↩︎
Source: Christ and Pop Culture – christandpopculture.com
