Scrolling Ourselves to Death?

 

A Challenging Book

On my last break away I read "Scrolling Ourselves to Death" - a series of chapters written by American Christians. We summarised the book and encouraged everyone in the church home groups to go through the findings and warnings of these Christian writers. Here, instead of a review, I have gathered quotes from the book. 

For sure if the findings of these American Christians are true, and true of the situation in the UK, the church has a new threat and challenge before us. I shan't state page numbers. 

Three Summary Quotes

"From the rising of the sun to its going down, we scroll our way through the day. We scroll our way through life. And we are scrolling ourselves to death".

"Today, we're living through the early days of a revolution at least as dramatic as the Protestant Reformation and printing press. And we don't know the outcome." 

"The vast majority of American adults are walking around shooting up digital dope without raising an eyebrow. The best of us are responsible users who can consume media in moderation. But none of us is fully sober." 

The facts

The average UK adult time spent online is 4.5 hours, more for teenagers (ofcom).

"Between TV and digital media, the average American uses screens for 10.85 hours a day." "This is the zombie apocalypse, this is insanity, this is death, and this is death more redundantly” (rather than  “more abundantly.”)  

The Potential and Real Dangers

Mental health issues: "Researchers have made compelling correlations between smartphone (especially social media) usage and rising mental unhealth, especially among teens and young adults."  "We become anxious... angry....  addicted.... numb... lonely... delusional... detached from reality."

· Trivialising issues: "Within a sixty-second scrolling session, the social media "user" may witness chilling scenes of human carnage in Ukraine, corpses in Israel, a groomsman losing his lunch at the altar, and an orange kitten that looks like Donald Trump." "Mindless scrolling, like its near ancestor of mindless channel surfing, perpetuates mass trivialisation." 

Producing distracted minds: "Distraction has become a norm...Consider how frequently and rapidly in the course of any twenty-minute period we shift our attention for one thing to another...we usually have multiple screens on... it's no wonder our capacity to think coherently is severely atrophied." 

Wasting our precious time: "Television (and the internet in general) was designed to keep viewers engaged long enough to sell them soap via commercials." 

Moving us away from thinking to entertainment: "Television's (and all visual media) currency is visual delight rather than thoughtful action, engaging images rather than textual argument."

Discouraging us from thinking about the future or past, focusing on the NOW: "the internet is designed to keep us fixated on the present, rewarding and reinforcing engagement with what is current, new, and seemingly urgent."  "Americans seem to know everything about the last 24 hours but very little of the last six centuries or the last sixty years."

Reducing our attention span & ruining relationships: "If the first victims of our addiction are our time and attention span, the second (and far more important) victims are our families and relationships." "In late 2023, the US surgeon general released a report entitled ‘Our epidemic of loneliness and isolation.’"

Addiction: "Your phone is a digital syringe"  "Your brain is seeking dopamine. It's whispering, "Get out the digital syringe. Take another hit. Then the boredom, stress, irritability and blues will go away." "Digital Dope"

What do the Scriptures say?

1) Technology is surely neutral in itself. It's how we use it that marks it for good or evil. The printing press was neutral and then harnessed for good - it is unlikely that the Reformation would have happened without it. It's helpful therefore to discuss the many benefits of social media. The Amish community discerns what technologies help or hinder community - is that a helpful way to assess the impact of this one? "...the community's strength (Amish) is the primary concern when they evaluate technology." 

2) We should not be addicted to anything, “I have the right to do anything,” you say—but not everything is beneficial. “I have the right to do anything”—but I will not be mastered by anything." (1 Corinthians  6:12) When we wake up, are we "gagging" for digital dope? "Dopamine media is the most powerful, pervasive and engineered form of communication technology in human history, and its not shaping us to love Jesus most."

3) We need to watch how social media affects the way we relate to one another. This is perhaps one of the most crucial things we need to discuss. God made us for community, and as a spiritual family and the body of Christ we need one another.

4) Our teaching ought to come primarily from real-life teachers, elders and pastors in our local church, whose lives are open to scrutiny. Any deceiver can set up a YouTube channel.  "Young believers, or those in periods of doubt, often turn first to online sources rather than to church leaders or communities for guidance."  "The internet - not the local church- has become the primary place where Christians are formed today. Before their leaders ever speak, many church members already know what they believe. After all, they've been reading, listening, and watching their favourite teachers all week. And they expect their leaders to conform,-or else. Preaching, then, is expected to confirm the convictions already developed through the internet. No wonder so many church leaders feel like they've lost their footing this century."

5) We need to disciple young  believers through real-life relationships.  "How would Jesus mediate his relationship to his followers if he were to come back today? My view is that he would communicate in the year 2025 the exact way he did circa 25: live, embodied, in-person.."

6) We should all avoid the itch for publicity and fame.  "Stop trying to reach the 150,000 impressions per video required to be an influencer in the virtual world." (p.187) 

7) We should use paper Bible wherever we can, in home groups and on Sundays, to marginalise the phone "encourage paper Bibles during the services.." (p. 213)

 

The Blinding Nature of Paradigms

A Very Simple Question

A very simple request to Google's AI: "Please (save water, no need to be polite to AI) describe the differences between human and ape hands." 

I expected to find some paper, some book, that would simply lay out the differences line upon line, chapter by chapter. Differences in size, motor sensitivity, etc. 

A very simple request.

But could I find such a paper, such an article, such a book?

No!

Why? Because most of the world's biologists labour under the imprisoning paradigm of evolutionary theory. This means that they're committed to likeness and similarity rather than difference or uniqueness. 

So similarities are played up - because the human hand comes from the ape hand, according to evolutionary dogma - while differences are played down - because humans cannot // are not unique or special.

So, this summer, during my holiday away, I'll be sifting through as many books and articles about the human hand I can find, to tabulate my own information, obscured as it will be by the evolutionary paradigm, and draw up my own list of unique features of the human hand. 

I know I will discover many exclusive features a priori because while animals and mankind share the sixth day of creation, only mankind, not apehood, was made in the image of God. 

I'll write up my findings.

The Danger of All Paradigms

A paradigm is a human perspective through which the world is interpreted. 

On the one hand paradigms are inevitable because unlike God we are perspectival; we can only look at one tiny part of the world through tiny human eyes and brains.

On the other hand, paradigms skew data in one direction and end up blinding in another. 

We find this happens to Bible students too. Charismatic students see some things in Scripture and miss out others; and it's exactly the same with reformed exegetes.

The very glasses intended to bring sight also blind us.

How questioning we must be of all human paradigms, secular and spiritual.

Night Café draw: The uniqueness and wonder o the human hand

Three ways error enters the Church....

The tests of truth

It is sometimes argued that the sole test of a truth-teller is doctrine: do the writings of this man (or woman) match up, for example, with the Apostles' or Nicene Creed? 

We need to add another vital test - the test of life. Is this teacher fully integrated into the life of a local church and thereby accountable to his brothers and sisters? Or is he/she a lone wolf? 

Only from a godly life rooted and accountable to a local church can true doctrine flow. "Watch your life and doctrine closely. Persevere in them, because if you do, you will save both yourself and your hearers." (1 Timothy 4:16)  

Truth never proceeds from a believer isolated from the pillar and foundation of truth. 

So before we examine what someone believes, we must ask their connection to the body of Christ. If he/she pronounces from an ivory palace, if they are disconnected from the church, we should automatically discount their teachings, no matter what hifalutin qualifications they may proffer. 

There are three main sources of error - or better put, three kinds of heretic.

#1 "He's such a clever chappy."

This one catches evangelicals out all the time - especially of the reformed stripe - because they idolise knowledge and education. If a man says he has a DPD, DHL, UPS, Phd, DMin or whatever other strange letters at the end of his name, they're smitten by him. Or if, at the other end of the name, we find "Professor" or some such title, then same thing - clever chappy - we must listen to him. Or if he has written ponderous tomes, however incomprehensible, he must be the real deal. 

This is the only way to explain the inexplicable enchantment of someone like NT Wright among some evangelicals. NT Wright is a gnostic. A gnostic says "there is a secret piece of information outside of Scripture you need in order to really grasp the truth." NT Wright says "you can't understand the New Testament unless you are a first-century historian" (like, guess who?). While it is helpful to have some historical background, the Scriptures interpret the Scriptures, so that a believer with his Bible and the Holy Spirit is far better equipped to understand God's truth than a scholar with the Bodleian libraries at hand. Wright's Gnosticism is conveniently overlooked simply because he is a clever chappy. 

#2 "He's Mr Nice Guy."

False teachers can also masquerade as angels of light. Full of charm, popularity  and charisma - plus perhaps a smattering of good looks - they dazzle and hypnotise their audiences. Someone like Steve Chalke comes to mind. 

#3 "Mr Nasty."

At the other end of the niceness spectrum lies Mr Nasty. These false teachers are well-known to secretly live corrupt lives (in one or more of the following triad's allure - sex, power or money) but their wickedness is completely overlooked by the devoted deluded and sometimes protected by the "touch not my anointed" umbrella. My African friends tell me that this kind abound in their lands. 

In the 70s, 80s and 90s, Christians were warned about the sects and cults. They were few in number, and all easily spotted and defined by name. Today, the internet is awash with a myriad false teachers of whom Jesus warned "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves." (Matthew 7:15)

AI: Draw a heretic

Popularity or Character? The Modern Cult of Personality

Who on earth would want to be a secular leader in today's world?

I watched the emotional resignation of Sir Keir Starmer this morning. I heard a commentor point out the PA guy who had to set up the podium and sound - the commentator knew him well because he's been called out 6 times in a mere 10 years. 

Personally, I don't vote colour, so this blog has nothing to do with "politics." Rather it's a personal reflection on the flighty, fissiparous nature of British politics today.

Here's our tragic record over the last decade:

• David Cameron (May 2010 – July 2016)
• Theresa May (July 2016 – July 2019)
• Boris Johnson (July 2019 – September 2022)
• Liz Truss (September 2022 – October 2022)
• Rishi Sunak (October 2022 – July 2024)
• Sir Keir Starmer (July 2024 – June 2026)

Who on earth would want to be a secular leader in today's world, when the moment you make a mistake (real or perceived, small or large, but always exploded in the media), or the moment a more snazzy personality comes along, you are doomed.

What, I wonder, might common sense or Scripture say to our present crisis?

Long-suffering

Rome wasn't built in a day, and nor is a prime minister or his/her government. What savage impatience marks our day! Two years into a premiership is the blink of an eye. And so much global turbulence to deal with in those two years.... 

Character, always character

When Scripture talks about church leaders (whether deacons or elders) it always lists the characteristics required. Personality is irrelevant. Among the Twelve Jesus chose, can we not discern, a wide range of personalities, from the out-there Peter to the more reserved Thomas and in-the-background John? 

From all I have seen and heard and read about Starmer, he is a man of good character. Even his enemies agree. But character today is not as highly regarded as personality. Along can come someone (anyone) with more charm, dynamism - and perhaps youth - and everyone will flock to him/her. 

Church Leadership Implications

I gather from my American friends that leadership in the American Church is just as flighty as leadership in British politics. There are many reasons for this, no doubt one of which is that in the large American churches, the megapastor is by and large unknown to most of the flock - and hence easily dispensed with. 

Fortunately though the US Church has thus sneezed, we have not yet caught this particular cold. The qualifications for church leaders are very clear, here they are, and not one of them is remotely about personality:

When the church is looking for future leaders, the only quality they should look for is godly character, which Paul explains with a series of 21 characteristics for elders and 7 for deacons / deaconesses.  

Let not this cold wind blow over true Christian churches!

"Expository Preaching" in an age of Distraction

What is "expository preaching?"

Expositional or expository preaching is preaching through a whole book of the Bible, consecutively, week by week.

It has become the accepted norm in many churches, even though it is not found in the Bible. The sermons we find in the book of Acts, for example, rely and refer to multiple verses scattered all over the Scriptures, gathered together. 

For that single Biblical reason alone, no preacher need feel compelled to adopt expository preaching. 

There are times when a church may need a series of sermons about marriage or money or parenting, or other topical themes. There is nothing wrong with the topical method of preaching.

My guess is that the expositional method originates from the academy rather than the Scriptures. So we can imagine students of literature making their way, systematically, chapter by chapter, line by line, through Homer's Iliad or Fitzgerald's The Great Gadsby.

Both Topical and Expositional are Valid

It is argued that the expositional method is superior because the preacher is forced to address issues that he would not otherwise have chosen. This makes human sense. But of course an expositional preacher can decide to expand upon certain verses and skim swiftly over others. It is a fallacy to imagine that expositional preachers preach "the whole counsel of God" merely by virtue of method. The preacher is a fallen biased saint just like everyone else. 

(I once heard an expository preacher make his way through Colossians and completely ignore "I am present with you in spirit." (2:5) Far too spookey for rational minds to grasp, let alone preach on, so passed over). 

On the other hand it is argued that topical preaching puts the subject choice too much in the hands of the preacher. That is true. But a wise preacher would want to preach topics which cover the whole counsel of God.

On balance, a mixture of both methods seems wise, and expositional preaching perhaps has the protective edge.

Stand Alone Sermons

But my concern here is how expositional preaching is done today.

In the "olden days" when folk came to church faithfully week after week with few breaks, the preacher could run from one section of a book to the next seamlessly, assuming that everyone who was there last week will be there next week. "As we were saying last week..." he might begin.  

This is not the case any longer and folks might miss a few weeks and never listen to the sermons they missed. 

One way to respond to these circumstances is to make every sermon a stand-alone Word for that day. That may mean rearranging the material and seeking the main theme.

This approach is also just generally wise because in moving from written communication to verbal communication it is often essential to re-organise the teaching of the text. 

The test for expositional-stand-alone preaching - indeed all expository preaching is  this: when someone reads the Scripture preached on in the afternoon let's say, they can say "The preacher explained everything in those verses." 

AI Image: man in jeans with Bible preaching to small congregation in a school hall

How to Climb the Ecclesiastical Ladder (and why you shouldn't bother)

A Blog someone must write

Readers of this blog will know that some of the pieces I write would be deemed "controversial." I don't want to write them, but just as Jeremiah discovered a fire within his bones to speak out, so do I. 

At root of my sorrow and complaints is a worldliness in the church. We are called to be in the world but not of it, not like it. But today, in so many ways, the church has aped the world, to her great loss and witness, and to the dishonour of her Head. 

No, not in doctrine, of course not, that's far too obvious. We're as orthodox as a prophet from heaven when it comes to doctrine.

But in church practise, we're worldly, by which I mean we do things in the church just as the world does them. We have absorbed the practices and priorities of our surrounding culture.

And one of the ways we've aped the world is to be found in the desire of pastors to climb the ecclesiastical ladder. 

Just as in the work place someone might expect to be promoted as time passes by, so pastors expect to climb an ecclesiological ladder as the years roll by.

Let me explain some of the rungs on this (mythical) ladder and explain why we should do everything in our power to avoid getting near it, let alone climbing it - especially if we are just starting out in ministry. 

The bottom line is that you need to get your name known, you need to become famous. All the steps below will help you out....

Just as in the world, you will receive an automatic leg up the first few rungs if you have letters after your name. If you've studied at prestigious universities, you'll also get automatic promotion. (Neither of these scholastic criteria fits a man for gospel ministry, but it's the way the world works and hence, inevitably these days, the way the evangelical church also functions.)

Next, hob-nob with some of the big wigs in your evangelical circle. Big smiles when you see them at conferences, perhaps try a little flattery here or there?

If you can, get a selfie with them. (But just remember, that in a decade's time when that big shot has fallen - and there's a pretty good chance many of them will fall, since only One Man can handle power and fame - you'll have a lot of photo-editing to do).

Next, try to get on the board of some evangelical parachurch outfit. This is a good feather in your hat and prepares you for the blurb you may need for your next step...

...which is to write a book. This will get your name even further known and when big-shots pat you on the back via their book recommendations, it's all go, go, go.

If you're low on the formal qualifications front, at this point, and it's hindering your opportunities, a MSc here or PhD there might help you out. (Failing that, try writing a "paper" or an article for some religious publication.) The sacrifices you'll have to make in shepherding God's flock by these distractions are well worth the honour coming your way. 

All the while increase your social media profile in any way you can find.

Next, try and get yourself as a conference speaker; now we're talking. However, unless you've pressed the flesh for a decade before this, you'll get nowhere, so make sure you pay attention to all the previous steps.

Finally, you will arrive at the top of the ecclesiological ladder, feted, dined and wined by all your fans. 

Only one day to discover, perhaps not until the Last Day, that tragically...

...the Ecclesiological Ladder was a Mirage

There is no ecclesiological ladder in heaven's view! The only view that counts. The Emperor has no clothes! There is only one Judgement seat that matters, only one Judge whose opinion is of any consequence.  The opinion of any branch of evangelicalism, the opinion of any denomination or grouping mean nothing. 

Only in the world to come when The Books are opened and the secrets of men's hearts are revealed will anyone know the value of any earthly ministry.

And then we shall most likely discover that those the evangelical world most feted today don't even get a mention, ("Dr XYZ? Never heard of him" whisper the angels to one another) while the unknown sister or brother serving incognito in an unknown congregation will take top prize.

(BTW: if there is an ecclesiastical ladder in this world it's invisible because heaven's ladder works upside down (right way up). The greater the Christian, the more unknown, despised and rejected they are. Down is the Jesus way Up.)

The alternative to Ecclesiastical Ambition

The alternative to ministerial ambition is quiet disciplined anonymity. Don't worry a hoot what others think about you. Don't seek fame.  Keep your head down, forget numbers, avoid the itch for publicity, serve the sheep God has given you faithfully, laying down your life for them if necessary.

Remember that the only court that matters is in the future and in heaven: so labour to receive the Great Shepherd's well-done. 

Painting: AI, "draw a male church minister climbing a ladder to heaven" (I am not impressed by the  religious garb AI has dressed the guy in)

Learning to Discern Podcasts

Podcasts of the Christian variety

There is little doubt that many believers listen to podcasts during the week - and there are many good Christian podcasts out there.

Discernment is essential however, especially since the listener does not know the podcasters personally. In the New Testament Christians were instructed by in-house teachers (with the exception of the Apostles, capital A, of which there are none today. And even the Apostles combined life and lip, "You, however, know all about my teaching, my way of life" 2 Timothy 3:10). 

The life of the church teacher was always open to inspection, and since life and lip go together, one could trust the teaching because one could observe the life of the teacher.

The only way to know if a teacher is reliable is to observe his life. The notion that pure orthodoxy or pats on the back by big shots or little shots around them are all we need to trust a teacher is error and disproved multiple times in recent years by one big-shot evangelical expose after another.

The main place to get our teaching is from local pastors whose lives are open to inspection, who invite people into their homes (hospitality), whose lives are open books.

(This of course, is yet one more argument for small churches, where the pastor loves and lives among the sheep, as opposed to big churches where the pastor is basically a high and mighty CEO who must, of necesity, delegate the real work of pastoring to minions beneath him.)

The Rest is History

But this blog is not about Christian podcasts its about non-Christian, secular podcasts, and one popular one "The Rest is History." This is an enormously enjoyable series of podcasts on all sorts of historical subjects, such as a few about the Titanic, which were interesting (and entertaining).

I decided to listen to the series on Martin Luther. It's enormously helpful to have sympathetic but non-evangelical podcasters talk about evangelical superstars like Luther. Many evangelical writers would gloss over the foibles and folly of Luther and so end up writing hagiography rather than biography.

But you need to be discerning, because just at the point where Tom Holland and Dominic Sandbrook are describing the central truth of the reformation, they get it completely wrong, here's the transcript:

 But, as I say, it also comes from reading Paul, and particularly one line. So there's a line in the letter that Paul writes to the Christians in the church, the letter to the Romans. The righteous shall live through faith. And Luther understands this to mean the faith specifically, that God loves you, and that it doesn't matter if you're lost to sin. Everyone is lost to sin. Humanity is so sinful that they can't, through their own agency, obtain the forgiveness of God. But it doesn't matter, because if God loves you, then you exist in a state of grace. And the state of grace is the feeling that you have that Christ is present in you in your secret most heart. And the certainty of that grace, in turn, gives you what Luther calls the peace of conscience, that all your anxiety about whether you're going to be redeemed or not is gone. And so you can have a kind of deep, profound spiritual joy and sense of certitude that essentially cuts the gordian knot of all the purgatory stuff, all the confession stuff, all the. Am I going to go to heaven or not? And it's an incredible.

"The just shall live by faith" does not mean "God loves you and that it doesn't matter if you are lost to sin." It means that God has provided a new way for us to be righteous in the eyes of God, a way that does not come about by human effort but by the righteousness he provides through his Son. 

Yes God loves you, but our sin does matter; so much that God sent his Son to atone for it.

Simple lesson, listen to Christian podcasts with discernment, listen to secular podcasts with even more discernment.