The Future of Christians in Conflict

In my exploration of Christians in conflict on the internet, I’ve come across a lot of bad examples, portraying Christians as insensitive, narrow-minded, and sometimes aggressive in their disagreement. I started this blog by looking at the Ten Commandments for Christian bloggers, which attempts to set a new, clear standard for Christians in conflict online. Though an undesirable conclusion, the many examples I’ve considered in this blog seem to highlight the need for such a model of what Christian conflict should look like within the newly evolving cyber context.

In my last few posts, I have argued that the Christian teachings from the Bible provide a good basis for a model of Christian conflict online. Perhaps not enough has yet been done by Christians to apply this established model to the new context of the internet. On the other hand, it could be argued that if Christians are unable to maintain such standards in conflict in the real world, how can they be expected to adhere to them in the much more elusive cyber world? I think such a viewpoint is somewhat defeatist, and that Christians individually need to acknowledge the rapidly growing role of the internet in social interaction, and consider how they should extrapolate Christian teachings to behave in a consistent manner online.

Yet the internet has played no small part in enabling conflict, with a notable effect on conflict between Christians. The ability to hide one’s identity on the internet, to exchange messages faster than one can properly consider what one is saying, and to detach from one’s real life identity to take less responsibility for one’s actions are all attributes of the internet which exacerbate the conflict between Christians online. However, the internet is still only a tool for interaction and education, and Christians need to recognise that the internet merely facilitates conflict.

The Ten Commandments for Bloggers suggests hope for such a negative conclusion. Although the internet does appear to bring out the worst in Christians in conflict, this model echoes the intentions of Christians who are trying to apply Biblical teachings to this new online context.

Finally, it is worth noting that I have predominantly considered the negative examples of Christians in conflict online, and that these are off-set by a number of examples of Christians in healthy disagreement, behaving in a loving Christian manner, consistent with scripture. Such examples also reflect the work of some Christians to embrace the developing technology of the internet, to interact in a Christian manner, and to use the new services it provides to their full potential.

What Christians in Conflict should look like (Conclusion)

From the Bible passages I’ve been looking at this week, it seems there is a clear model for what Christians in conflict should look like. Although it could be argued that these teachings were written thousands of years before the internet, many Christians believe the Bible to be God’s word to Christians even in the present day, and that they should therefore interpret its teachings to relate them to life today. Consequently, Christians who wish to use the internet to its full potential, must consider these teachings, and find a way to apply to them to his/her interactions on the internet.

It seems to me that the examples of Christians in conflict on the internet that I’ve been looking at throughout this blog are not consistent with these Christians teachings. For example, in the Todd Bentley and Steve Chalke case studies, Christians were acting in a rude, aggressive manner, hardly reflective of these teachings to be kind and sensitive, and to end conflicts quickly. Moreover, the passage I looked at from 2 Timothy taught that Christians should avoid unnecessary arguments - and I wouldn’t describe the bitter disagreements on youtube as central to Christian interaction…

Furthermore, on the topic of identity, the Bible clearly teaches honesty, encouraging believers to be open with each other, and not to lie. I think this is important when a Christian comes to construct their identity on the internet. The Bible states that Christians should not be ashamed of their identity in Christ, and in light of these teachings it seems Christians should be willing to acknowledge their Christian commitment in their online identities.

Lastly, even for Christians who spend more time on the internet than reading the Bible, there are clear summaries of the Bible teachings on conflict available on the Internet. Perhaps some of these Christians have disconnected from their real-life identities; perhaps others are choosing to ignore these teachings, favouring anonymity and flexibility of morals available on the internet.

What Christians in Conflict should look like (Part 4)

The Bible also advises Christians on how to act when they’re caught in a necessary conflict they can’t easily end. Another teaching from the book of Proverbs states

A gentle answer turns away wrath,
but a harsh word stirs up anger.

Here Christians learn to be kind and gentle, as is stereotypically expected of a Christian. Indeed this teaching stretches to the internet, where Christians should be acting in a gentle and sensitive way, and choosing not to stir up anger with harsh words.

What Christians in Conflict should look like (Part 3)

In a list of blessings known as the Beatitudes found in the gospel of Matthew, Jesus teaches that

Blessed are the peacemakers,
for they will be called sons of God.

This is a clear calling for Christians to be not only pacifists, but proactive in bringing about peace, in order to receive the blessing of being ‘called sons of God’. On the internet, it could be argued that this means Christians should not be simply keeping quiet in times of conflict, but actually acting as mediators, trying to restore the peace.

What Christians in Conflict should look like (Part 2)

Next I thought I’d look at how Christians should act in situations of conflict. From the Bible, Christians are called to stop arguments as quickly as possible. For example, in the book of Proverbs, Christians are taught

Starting a quarrel is like breaching a dam;
so drop the matter before a dispute breaks out.

This can easily be extrapolated to the internet, where Christians are often in a position to pursue quarrels, with the promise of anonymity and the ability to hide their Christian identity. In light of this passage, Christians on the internet should be seeking to end conflict as quickly as possible, and not to initiate arguments where they could be avoided.

What Christians in Conflict should look like (Part 1)

In light of all the bad examples of Christians in conflict, I thought I should consider what Christians in conflict should look like, in accordance with the Bible. I’ll be looking at a few Christian teachings on conflict, and considering what relevance these teachings have in the new context of the internet.

Firstly, the Bible clearly teaches that Christians should avoid unnecessary arguments. For example, Paul writes in the book 2 Timothy,
Don't have anything to do with foolish and stupid arguments, because you know they produce quarrels. And the Lord's servant must not quarrel; instead, he must be kind to everyone, able to teach, not resentful.

Christians aren’t taught to ignore the presence of conflict – there are many Biblical examples of it – but they are taught to avoid arguments they don’t need to be involved in. This instruction is especially relevant on the internet, where Christians are faced with endless conflicts they could be involved in. This passage teaches Christians to be wise in choosing their battles, and not to involve themselves in arguments that will only lead to further quarrelling.

The Importance of Identity

This week I’ve been thinking a bit more about identity and communication on the internet, and how people change the way they interact online. I’ve been reading about the online disinhibition effect, which describes how increased honesty on the internet could be a result of a feeling of disconnection from the real. The paper describes how people can become so involved in online communication that it has a deep psychological effect on them, such that they act in ways that are nothing like their off-line personality, and take less responsibility for their actions because of the ambiguity of their online identity.

John Suler (who wrote the paper) categorises this loss of inhibition as ‘benign’ or ‘toxic’. It is this ‘toxic disinhibition’ that I am interested in as I consider Christians in conflict on the internet, as this seems an appropriate description of the change in some Christian’s behaviour. The internet offers the Christian a way to disconnect from their real-life identity, and to engage in conversations and pursue interests with no accountability. For many this is little or no problem, but for some Christians the opportunity to be flexible on moral standards can prove too tempting. This is especially relevant to the area of Christians in conflict, for those Christians who have to work hard to remain even-tempered and sensitive in real life, the internet provides the opportunity to be less controlled whilst not suffering the consequences.

"Christians" in conflict

After a recent lecture on identity and security online, I began to think about how easy it is to construct a new identity on the internet. This must have ramifications for the issue of Christians in conflict on the internet - as you can never be certain of a person’s identity online, how can you know what it means when they label themselves ‘Christian’?

Firstly, this raises issues of denominationalism, as some branches of the religion are so far separated that they can hardly both be placed under the umbrella heading of Christianity. Secondly, with the complete freedom to create a new identity, people can claim to be Christian, and actually be atheists or even anti-Christians, wishing to cause trouble under the guise of being Christian.

For example, I found a video that described ‘Christians’ acting in terrorising ways towards Muslims. The guy who posted the video explains how ‘When I posted this video 9 months ago I was brainwashed to believe that these people in the video were real Christians but now I know they're just anti Islamic Zionists hiding behind Christianity.’ (accessed through the 'more info' button in the right-hand sidebar)

This is one more thing to consider when Christians appear to be in conflict on the internet. Those who want to create trouble for Christians are given a very easy way to do this; not only can they anonymously criticize them online, but they can also pose as them, to invoke negative responses to Christianity whilst intentionally misrepresenting it. I think this is a really unfortunate situation for Christianity – and indeed for any religious group or otherwise who falls victim to this – but there is very little we can do to resolve the situation, when we simply cannot verify someone’s identity on the internet. All we can do in light of this is to be aware that online identities are highly elusive, and that what appears to be Christians in conflict may actually be a complete hoax.

'Real-life' conflict meets the internet: Steve Chalke

After my last post on Todd Bentley, it was suggested that I consider the controversy surrounding Steve Chalke. Chalke was a prominent Christian leader, founder of the missions organisation Oasis, and involved with UK Christian conferences such as Spring Harvest and Word Alive. However, in 2003 he published a book that sparked a huge reaction in the Christian world, both in real life and on the internet.

In the book, Chalke questioned the Christian doctrine of penal substitution - a core belief of many denominations of Christians, that revolves around the idea that Jesus Christ was the perfect sacrifice to take on the punishment for the sin of the world. As a result, Chalke was removed from his position of authority, heavily criticised by Christian organisations such as the Evangelical Alliance, and became the subject of much heated debate between Christians on weblogs and forums.

Interestingly, the Steve Chalke controversy was contrasted with the Todd Bentley controversy (of my last post) because of the much harsher, more malicious way it was discussed on the internet. Both situations invoked a lot conflict between Christians in reality, and were quickly and fiercely disputed on the internet. Yet the Steve Chalke issues were apparently met with much more ferocious debate. This difference could be related to which characters were attracted to the debate, or could have something to do with the time difference between them. The Todd Bentley controversy occurred approximately 4 years later, and it could be argued that Christians are starting to learn to be more restrained and civil in their disagreement on the internet. I find this hard to believe from the continuous stream of conflict between Christians still occurring on the internet, but it is possible that the Christian internet community as a whole could be making progress in this area.

I actually struggled to find many examples of these more heated debates surrounding Steve Chalke. Perhaps because this is older news, it is less prominent on the internet. Yet since old information on the internet tends to be neglected rather than removed – and is therefore still accessible via google – I wonder whether more than usual has been done to reduce the visible argument. It is quite possible that Christians involved in these debates, with the wisdom that comes with time, have decided to withdraw their comments (a phenomenon made possible by the internet), thus reducing the appearance of conflict. If this is the case, maybe with time the arguments on the internet related to Todd Bentley will begin to disappear, leaving a more peaceful impression of Christian disagreement.

'Real-life' conflict meets the internet: Todd Bentley

This week I’ve been giving more thought to the link between ‘real-life’ conflict and ‘virtual’ conflict. Conflict in the real world is heavily reflected on the internet, and resonates even further as chat rooms and forums provide the opportunity for people to voice their own individual opinion on any given matter.

One recent example of this is the controversy surrounding Todd Bentley. Bentley was involved in the Lakeland Revival – a charismatic Christian movement centred around healings and the revival of faith. Both Bentley and the Revival attracted a lot of media attention, and the movement was criticised by Christians and secular culture alike.

News of the Revival was soon all over the internet, and created a lot of controversy among Christians because it promised unconditional healing, which some Christians argued is inconsistent with the Bible’s teaching. Some of Bentley’s healings were described as unnecessarily violent, and a lot of reports on the internet suggest most of the healings are not medically verified – considerations that fuelled individuals opinions, intensifying the conflict.

This incident is one of many examples of how the internet can exacerbate real-life conflicts. Another more dramatic example is the recent issues between Russia and Georgia, where some people intentionally overloaded Georgian websites, with the intention of crashing the servers. Although these are not cases of conflict as a result of the internet, they do serve to show how the internet facilitates and expands conflict. The Lakeland Revival had people far from Florida expressing their views and involving themselves in the conflict via the internet.

Also, as part of the Lakeland Revival, many people claimed to have been healed via the internet. This phenomenon could be described as inevitable with the progress of technology and other religious practices online, yet it takes the controversy surrounding miraculous healings to a whole new level. I can understand that God may heal someone directly whilst they are looking at internet material surrounding the Lakeland Revival, but I find it hard to believe this healing took place actually via the internet (as some reports imply), as this suggests Todd Bentley and the others involved have some sort of superior power, that God must work through them and the internet in order to heal. However, I’m sure there are many Christians on the internet who would disagree with me.

A more 'Christian' alternative?..

This week I have found a whole new range of Christian responses to the challenge of the internet. Christians have produced alternative websites to youtube.com, myspace.com and facebook.com, to name a few. These sites advocate a clean, pure, family-friendly atmosphere. Godtube.com asserts that ‘some of the content is fun, some of it is serious, and all of it is safe for the whole family.’ – a claim that certainly doesn’t hold true for its non-religious counterpart youtube.com

The creators of these websites certainly have their hearts in the right place, trying to create a safe haven from the dangers of the internet. The internet is dominated by content a parent may not want to expose a child to, or may feel is inconsistent or contradictory to their faith. Yet I wonder whether creating exclusive Christian websites is the best way to achieve these ends.

There is a danger that these websites can invoke a false sense of security for a Christian. Whilst it is true that these sites avoid much of the conflict and negative imagery accessible elsewhere on the internet, they keep their identity of copies of non-religious websites, implying that these websites are representative of the real world. Taking away the elements of conflict and any possible negative influences means Christians do not learn how to handle such things. Consequently, many Christians may face a crisis of faith when they realise that not everyone believes exactly the same as them, and they will have to answer difficult questions that they have never considered for themselves.

I think these websites are a brave attempt on the part of a select few Christians, to offer the amenities of internet in a way more closely linked to the core Christian values. The creators have acknowledged the problems the internet raises for Christians, and yet they have refused to face the problem head on – choosing instead to avoid the conflict with the highly filtered content of these alternative websites.

Youtube and Christians

In beginning to seek out conflict between Christians on the internet, one of the first places I went was www.youtube.com. Youtube is renowned for blunt and abrasive comments, which many put down to the nature of messaging on the internet. If someone watches a video that offends them, they are in a unique position to comment within seconds – instant messaging and high-speed internet makes it possible for them to comment faster than they can even think through what they’re saying.

Christians are not exempt from this for they are still only humans. They are prone to be just as short-tempered as anyone else, and often hold strong beliefs on a wide range of topics. Therefore, they are likely to be offended by the opinions put forward in videos on Youtube.

Consequently, conflict between Christians on Youtube is commonplace. From my experience, this conflict seems to be between Christians of different denominations, or those who simply label themselves ‘Christian’. The Bible doesn’t dictate precisely what a Christian should believe on every single topic, so there is plenty of scope for people to have the same core Christian beliefs, but have completely opposing views on other topics.

Youtube creates an environment very far from ‘real life’ interactions because of the opportunity for instantaneous communication. Most forms of communication allow the speaker/writer to formulate their opinion in a strategic and polite way. Even where instantaneous communication is possible face to face, people are likely to consider the effect of their words much more so than on the internet. This comic provides an interesting observation of this phenomenon, with the tagline ‘its easier to be an asshole to words than to people’.

On a side note, one Youtube video I came across – a good example of the communication described above – also contained an interesting comment from one user (‘CatabolicAvatar’), who suggested

‘Honestly if i were god(not claiming to be!!)if judgement day were close, the fastest way to reach everyone would be through myspace, facebook, and youtube.’

In my opinion, this is not only a controversial idea about the power of God, but a very interesting reflection of the extent and power of the internet. This comment was part of a response to a video entitled ‘What if God had a Myspace?’, which in itself is a poignant remark on the relationship between religion and the internet (although put forward in a very satirical manner).

'Ten Commandments' for Christian bloggers

As a student studying theology, one of my more unique assignments involves exploring the relationship between religion and the internet. I wanted to consider the effect that the internet and progressing technology has on religion and religious people, and was pointed towards this recent article in The Times.

The article describes a new set of commandments for Christian bloggers. The commandments are based on and closely related to the Ten Commandments God gave Moses in the Bible. They were written with the intention of reducing friction and negative criticism between Christian bloggers – or as the Evangelical Alliance (the group behind the conference that created the commands) describes it, to ‘disagree agreeably’.

A lot of the feedback from the readers on The Times website suggests people are unimpressed that such a list of commands is necessary. I guess this is because people view Christians as amicable, well-behaved people, who shouldn’t need such a strict list of commands to direct them to appropriate behaviour on the internet. However, I’m more inclined to agree with one reader, who pointed out that a core Christian belief is that we are all imperfect human beings, and so are prone to mistakes and bad behaviour. Is it better that we have a list of commands designed to guide Christian bloggers towards appropriate Christian behaviour on the internet, or that we trust that as good Christian people they shouldn’t need such commands? Evidently the former is favourable, since there is obviously disagreement and bitterness between Christians on the internet.

As a result of looking at this article, I intend to focus my blog on the conflict between Christians that has arisen as a result of the internet. I will be looking at how the internet has facilitated negative communication and criticism between Christians in a much harsher way than occurs in ‘real life’, and what new issues of conflict have arisen because of this progression in technology – for example, the need for ‘ten commandments’ for Christian bloggers.

Hannah

Ps. I also found the comments of the OAP lady on this video (from the Evangelical Alliance) very interesting, as she describes how she uses her blog for evangelism because she’s too old to be a Church youth group leader!