The Danger of The Christian Social Media Star

We Christians can be an interesting lot. As much as we see ourselves as not being a part of this world, far too often we think, look, and act just like it. It wasn’t long ago that I made the strategic error of entering into a Twitter discussion between professing Christians. Wisdom should have taught me better by now, but sometimes I just don’t listen to those klaxon warning sirens going off in my skull. I’ll spare you the details of the discussion, but suffice it to say that I simply attempted to defend a professing Christian who still had an old post on their Twitter page that was, shall we say, less than Christian. The person in question claimed it was from a time when they were not a Christian. I simply defended that, given their statement, I was willing to give benefit of the doubt and not see it as reflective of their current profession.

Now, you’d think a person would appreciate being defended. You would think. However, this person not only did not show gratitude, but accused me of pride because I used the phrase “I am willing,” stating that somehow, in some sort of warped perception, I was taking the place of God in His judgment seat. Given their irrational response, I attempted to heed the warning sirens in my skull and bow out. Sadly, I ended up blocking the person I was trying to defend because they simply showed a lack of wisdom and maturity. Yet, the issue did not end there. Another professing Christian, who apparently was a fan of the less than mature, and now blocked, Twitterite, decided to lecture me and defend his social media darling. Once again, the block button became rather useful.

The point of this trip down memory lane isn’t to regale you with less that logical behavior of immature Christians, far from it. When I walked away from that conversation, I realized that this was not the first I had watched a professing Christian act in less than a charitable manner. Nor was it the first time I had watched an irrational defense of someone simply because the defender could not fathom their “star” as having done anything wrong.

If truth be told, we Christians all have certain people we hold in high regard. There are certainly those teachers and preachers we admire, respect, and listen to due to their steadfast commitment to the Word of God. We listen to their sermons, watch their videos, and read their books. We follow them on social media and share their blog articles for others to be blessed by. Our understanding of Scripture and our walk with God is enhanced by listening to them and putting into practice what they preach.

Thanks to the internet, we have been able to meet and befriend like minded brethren who follow our preferred theological stances. As we begin to interact with one another, as we do with biblically solid preachers, we begin to congregate with our favorite social media Christians. They may not have the notoriety of the preachers and teachers we listen to, but they are known through their online ministries, podcasts, blogs, conferences, and so forth. We may or may not get to know them face to face, but will build relationships and even online friendships with these Christians. And like those whose sermons and writings we share, we distribute their postings for others to see.

In theory, this is quite beneficial to us and our Christian brethren. The more solidly biblical teaching we can obtain, the stronger we can become in our common faith. Therefore, exposing one another to Christian teachers, either well known or lesser known, can help by edifying us through what they teach. However, putting the matter in to practice can often prove less than ideal.

As we begin to follow and interact with Christians who subscribe to our doctrinal distinctives, it can become far too easy to believe that those who ascribe to those doctrines are correct in everything they teach. Too put it simply, we begin to think of them as being able to do no wrong. We become star struck as it were, enamored with the celebrity status of those whom we have elevated to a position to which they do not belong. This is not exactly intentional. We do not seek to find theological idols to bow down and worship. However, as we begin to spend more and more time interacting with our favorite teachers online, we can easily forget that they are sinners just as we are. They are still going through the process of sanctification and are just as prone to error and failure as any other follower of Christ. We certainly should give respect and honor to those godly men who have devoted time and energy to the study and worship of our Savior so that they might teach the brethren. But never should we assume that simply because they have taught something that it is without error.

In the online encounter I exampled above, a Twitter exchange prompted a follower to immediately assume that, because the person I defended accused me of pride, that there was no question I was attempting to assume the role of God. Nothing could have been further from the truth. If this person took time to examine the posts I made, that would have been evident. However, the assumption that the account he followed must have clearly been in the right lead him to make erroneous assumptions and false accusations. In the same vein, we can make the mistake that, based upon the often correct teachings of our favored Christians, if they make a statement or comment about an issue or a professing Christian, they must be right without any need to examine the claim they make. This can result in erroneous assumptions and false accusations.

Perhaps one of the most common examples of this are arguments that can erupt online regarding issues of soteriology, eschatology, ecclesiology, evangelism, discipleship, etc. As we congregate around our online teachers, podcasters, bloggers, and so forth, we create a virtual commune of theological clones. We tend to gravitate to those with whom we agree, and where a crowd develops, leaders are found. So in one online camp, you will find Calvinists, another Arminians, some with be Amillenial, Post-Millenial, or Pre-Millenial. One commune may favor street evangelism, while some argue for a form of discipleship. One group believes in local church government, but some believe in house churches. These comparisons can continue infinitely, but the point is made. Charismatic and bold personalities can be found in each group, and those following can err by believing nothing but the absolute best of their elevated “leaders.”

As we gravitate to the virtual communes, we begin to be a bit suspicious of those who do not share our preferred view. After all, the person whom we are following has made these doctrinal teachings so absolutely clear, how can no one else understand it? And when we have seen the clear problems that have been created in evangelicalism by rejecting the need for sound doctrine (as seen in the seeker-friendly movement among others), we understand that there really are no unimportant doctrines. So if all doctrine is important, can we really relegate these matters to secondary or tertiary issues? If we did that, then where is the line drawn? Before long, we’ll be as guilty as the liberal church which throws out doctrine all together and believes that even false religions are acceptable to God, right?

With that thinking in mind, it becomes far too easy draw our circles much too tightly. Rather than see those with whom we have disagreement on doctrinal matters as brethren, we see them as potentially false teachers who are propagating bad theology. When our Christian star teachers begin to lob theological firebombs at other camps, we don’t question it. They recognize the threat bad theology represents, they are standing boldly for truth, and they are willing to risk all to expose the truth. If they are going to make such a stand, then certainly we should be supporting them in everything they do. Before we know it, we are parroting their arguments without any thought as to whether or not their arguments and behavior are even biblical.

Certainly what I have described is a bit simplistic. It is unlikely that all of us are simply mindless drones looking for charismatic theologians to lead us off into virtual, cult-like communes. Yet, if you pay attention, this pattern of our online behavior begins to emerge. One of the benefits of the local church is that is forces us to live and grow along side our brethren with whom we will often have disagreements. We cannot block or unlike them. They are there, face to face with us, and we have to deal with them. This forces us to learn what they have to say and how to interact with them. It grows and refines us, making us more mature, more gracious and more loving, even as we disagree.

But the virtual community doesn’t do that. We don’t have to learn to disagree charitably. We can lay down our theological demands in 140 characters and expect immediate agreement. If others argue, we can brush them off, question their profession of faith, block them from interacting with us, and warn others away. The anonymity of the keyboard gives us prideful bravado we would likely never use with others in face to face discussions. And when Christians are elevated to the position of online leaders, the temptation to succumb to such arrogant behavior is even greater. Bolstered by those of us who have gravitated to their theology and personality, there is not much to hold them back. Thus the cycle of pride grows as we feed into our leaders and their actions embolden us.

Some may read this and think I am arguing that we should not care about theology or doctrinal distinctives. Absolutely not. Doctrine is essential. We cannot live as Christians if we do not know what God demands of us. Theology is the study of God Himself. We must know Him if we are to worship Him. Thus, we cannot live rightly if we do not know Him rightly. It is the duty of every professing Christian to study and know the Word of God so that it moves us to live out what he has called us to. This is what makes doctrine so very important. We must study, learn, and teach others what Scripture says. And we must be willing to defend the Word against false teachings. We need to debate and discuss important doctrinal differences, but recognize those differences can still be considered orthodox. Christians will hold differing views in areas of theology that do not affect their salvation, but possibly affect the way the character and nature of God are represented.

It is necessary for Christians, therefore, to have robust debate and discussion over matters of doctrine. Doing so causes us to dig further into the Word, to learn more about God and His commandments. It refines our thinking and purifies our worship, which in turn leads to more holy living. Just as rubbing a blade against a sharpening stone hones the edge and makes it a formidable weapon, debating theology makes the Christian sharper and better capable to stand against the wiles of the world.

What I am asking the reader to consider is not a cessation of theological discussion. Nor am I suggesting that we stop listening to those who have demonstrated themselves to be faithful servants of our Savior. Rather, I am calling on my brethren to consider all that Scripture teaches us on these issues. We are called to discuss matters in truth and love. While it is indeed loving to correct error, this claim can often be a mask of pride for the arrogant theologian who believes any mistreatment of his brethren is justified if it promotes “sound theology.” True love seeks to correct error and edify the saints in a manner that builds up, not tears down. It remembers that we once held to erroneous ideas of doctrine, yet God in His patience did not strike us from the Book of Life for those errors. He waited and sent us teachers that slowly built us up in the faith. Thus, loving correction takes into account that not everyone learns sound theology at the same pace.

Likewise, a loving servant corrects those whom he respects as teachers, yet have deviated from biblical truth. While we treat those over us with respect and honor due them, we recognize that the sinful flesh we struggle with is also present in them. We examine their words and actions to see if they line up with the word of God. If we would lovingly correct a fellow brother for sinful actions, we should be willing to do so of those whom we follow as teachers on the internet. Yet, such rebuke ought not be drawn in arrogance or pride, as though we have proven them to be unworthy of the work they do. We are not seeking to tear them down. But, as we would approach an elder of the church, or an elder parent or family member, we should lovingly talk to them about their words or deeds, showing them from scripture their error.

The Bereans were commended for not accepting blindly the teachings of Paul, but examined the scripture to see if they were true. Likewise, Paul confronted Peter when he fell prey to the Judaizers, and led believers astray into believing they needed to submit to the Mosaic law. This is not license for us as Christians to suddenly go around accusing every teacher, preacher, podcaster, blogger, and speaker of unbiblical behavior just because we disagree with them. It is a call to think and act biblically toward those we have elevated in our esteem. Just as we should desire to be held accountable by our fellow Christians, we should also be willing to hold accountable those to whom we are listening. If they act uncharitably or unbiblically toward others, or teach things that do not exactly line up with Scripture, we should be willing to speak to them about it. Such accountability keeps us in line with each other and, especially, with the Word of God.

To close, I am asking my brethren to consider that we have often been guilty of building up other Christians without giving due consideration to the struggles they have in the flesh. We esteem them as our virtual leaders and do not see them as capable of error. When the step out of line, we can be guilty of parroting their words and actions without any thought as to if it is sinful. We take offense to anyone who suggests that they have acted wrongly. We take up virtual arms and engage in battle over a personality rather than submit to the Word of God. And if you need evidence of this, I ask you, how many times have you been shocked at someone when they admitted wrongdoing on a matter and told them, “I don’t see how what you did was wrong”? It has happened for more often than we would probably care to admit. Yet, if our social media star confesses it was sin in his eyes, it is more loving to encourage repentance than to build up what they now see as sinful behavior.

It is my sincere hope that this article challenges you to think about who you are following and why. If they truly represent the Word of God, then I praise God for their humble service. But if they are using their knowledge of Scripture as a mask for pride, to use it to beat doctrinal sense into “lesser” Christians, let us not be so quick to support them, at least not without a willingness to confront in a loving and compassionate manner. No person should ever be elevated to a point where what they say and do is not without examination. And all Christians should be willing to be tested by their brethren to see if they are walking in the faith. Such open transparency humbles us and keeps us dependent on the Word of God.