I find YouTube absolutely incredible! I'm always impressed by how the algorithm works, and how YouTube manages to offer me exactly what I'm interested in every time I log on. YouTube gives me several suggestions, and I always find not one, but often four, five, or even six interesting videos to watch. And when I watch even one of these videos, YouTube then gives me other suggestions that are just as interesting. It's a real snowball effect. What has fundamentally changed with YouTube is that it is not me who has to adapt to the programme, but the programme that adapts to me!
Who could deny that YouTube, and social networks in general, has changed our lifestyle? And this in just 20 years! Can you imagine a world without YouTube today? It's hard enough for those who knew the time before YouTube, so it's certainly not an exaggeration to say that for Generations Y and Z, it's impossible!
Yes, social media has had a huge impact on the way we live and think. It is not for nothing that YouTubers, TikTokers, Instagrammers, etc., are more generally called "influencers". This is precisely because they have a great influence on those who "follow" them.
What is the impact of these new influences on the Church? Are they positive or negative? How can we deal with these new influences? Does the Bible talk about social networks and influencers? Not really, right? And yet…!
Communication in the 1st century
At the time of the New Testament, in the first century AD, YouTube obviously did not exist, nor any other social networks as we know them today. Communication was done in a very different way. If we look at the example of Paul during his missionary journeys, we see that when he arrived in a new city, he usually went to the synagogue first. Why the synagogue? Simply because it was the place where the Jews of the time gathered. It was the place where the people in society were most likely to be interested in, understand, and accept the Gospel!
Generally speaking, it was the speakers who went to the people, to the place where the people were, where they gathered. Today, the situation is completely different: people stay at home much more often, and they choose who comes home via the screen. It is true that there is so much choice on the Internet that it is very easy to find the speaker who will make me "vibe": the one who finds the words that will touch me, and especially the one who tells what I like.
To come back to the Bible, yes, it does talk about influencers! And in the example I'm going to quote below, the Bible actually raises the problems that influencers have generated in the Church, problems within the community of believers. Yes, we have to admit it: social networks, which look so wonderful, also have their downside.
A biblical influencer
Let's take the example of Apollos, a man about whom the Bible says very little, since his name appears no more than ten times in the entire New Testament, and he is mentioned by only two biblical authors, namely Luke and Paul.
The first text that tells us about Apollos comes from the pen of Luke. We read in Acts 18 that Apollos was 'eloquent and well versed in the Scriptures' (v. 24), that he was 'instructed in the way of the Lord, and being fervent in spirit, he spoke and taught accurately the things concerning Jesus' (v. 25). Luke also writes that Apollos spoke 'with confidence in the synagogue' (v.26) and that, despite his knowledge and confidence, he allowed himself to be taught by Priscilla and Aquila (v.26). Verse 28 tells us that "he vigorously refuted the Jews publicly and proved by the Scriptures that Jesus is the Christ”.
What a character! Apollos has knowledge, humility, temperament, charisma, and energy. What more can we ask for and expect to accomplish the great mission that Christ has given us? Luke portrays Apollos as a great evangelist who did much to spread the Gospel.
Other New Testament texts give us more information about Apollos:
He went on missionary journeys, including to Crete.
Paul was in contact with Apollos, since he writes that he "greatly encouraged" Apollos to go to Corinth.
Paul mentions Apollos as a great influence, just like Peter or himself. Considering the great influence, the "aura", that Peter and Paul had with the early Christians, we understand that Apollos was doing an extraordinary evangelistic work. It should also be noted that although the Bible says little about Apollos, it says more about him than about the twelve apostles! If Apollos is much less well known than Paul, it is certainly due to the fact that he did not leave letters, written messages, as Paul did.
We have enough clues about Apollos to be able to say that he was a "spiritual leader", a "spiritual guide", or an "influencer", just like Paul. On the other hand, I am convinced that if Apollos - or Paul - were alive today, he would have his own YouTube channel and would be multiplying the number of subscribers, of which many of us would most probably be part.
Apollos is not in my church, nor in yours. But he was in the Corinthian community, and if we look at what Paul is writing to the Corinthian church, we can see the problem generated by the influencers of the day, of which Apollos is one.
The Problem of the Church in Corinth
In his first letter to the Corinthians, Paul encourages the Corinthian Christians to cease divisions and keep unity among themselves (1:10). Paul had heard that there were disputes (1:11) within the church, because some said, "I belong to Paul," and others, "I belong to Apollos," "I belong to Cephas," or "I belong to Christ" (1:12).
The church in Corinth was divided because of the influencers of the time. But if we analyse the problem in Corinth in more detail, we can see that the problem is not the influencers. Are they proclaiming the wrong teaching? Are they leading the community down the wrong path because of their influence? Are they spreading a false theology?
No! Paul says none of these things; nowhere in the Bible does Paul reproach them for their theology or for the way they share the gospel. What divides the Corinthians has nothing to do with the accuracy and truthfulness of the influencers' message. In Corinth, then, it seems that all the influencers mentioned by Paul are proclaiming the truth, but perhaps with different sensitivities, with different words, or they are emphasising different aspects or different priorities, without contradicting each other.
The real problem in Corinth is not Apollos, Paul or Peter. The problem was not with the influencers, but with the listeners! The problem was that the listeners apparently identified too much with their favourite influencer, quoting him rather than Christ or the Scriptures. To their credit, they did not have access to the Scriptures as we do today. At that time the New Testament did not exist, and even if it did, only 5% to 10% of the population could read. So they had no choice but to listen to speakers like Apollos, Paul and Peter to enrich their knowledge of Christ.
On the other hand, if there were divisions within the Christian community in Corinth, it is likely that they were not sharing enough among themselves in a spirit of seeking the truth. Yes, it is through prayer, Bible study, and sharing within the community that each person can grow, and the whole community can grow spiritually and in unity. This is what the Bereans did, who were united in their search for the truth. This is also what the pioneers of the Seventh-day Adventist Church were doing, and it allowed them to discover many new or forgotten biblical truths.
Returning to the Corinthian Church and its problems, Paul says in the rest of his letter that the internal divisions show that the Corinthian Christians are still "babes in Christ", not able to bear "solid food". Paul sees this precisely and simply in the fact that each one claims to be exclusively of one or another influence.
Paul thus explicitly makes a connection between (1) spiritual maturity in Christ, on the one hand, and (2) the internal divisions in the church because of the influencers, on the other hand.
To sum up the problem of the Corinthian church, Paul tells us that the Christians had come to listen only to one specific speaker or another, neglecting the others, or considering them less important, less reliable, less interesting, or less worthy of listening to. Each one had chosen who was his or her influencer, his or her spiritual guide, and they did not discuss - or did not discuss sufficiently - with each other, to reflect together and to confront the ideas received from one or the other spiritual guide.
No better than 2000 years ago
What can we learn from the Church of Corinth for us today? What can we learn for our life as a Church faced with an almost infinite number of influencers?
As you can imagine, there are certain realities that show that human beings have not changed much since the time of Paul:
1st reality: we choose our spiritual guides. We decide, often unconsciously, who we want to listen to and who we want to be influenced by.
2nd reality: we have become accustomed, by using social networks, to always hearing the same speakers, or the same styles of messages, those that 'thrill' us, those that speak to us, those that go in the same direction as what we already think! And this is not entirely our fault, it is the algorithms of social networks and our brains that push us to this.
Indeed, Roberto Tiby, a specialist in commercial neuroscience, tells us that "our brain, lazy by nature, constantly seeks to confirm what it already thinks and what it believes”.
3rd reality: we share very little, perhaps not even any, or less and less, of what we learn. It is necessary here to redefine what it means to share. Sharing does not mean simply passing on a link to a video to a friend - that is a misnomer! Sharing means discussing, exchanging, confronting ideas, reflecting together, with someone who may not agree with us, or who will complete and enrich our thinking. And this, of course, around the Bible. It is not a question of focusing and limiting ourselves to what we believe or think. It is true that most human beings do not like confrontation. They would prefer to continue to look at things from their own side, to do good spiritually for themselves, rather than to risk a confrontation of ideas with others. Such an attitude seems preferable and positive, but it has unsuspected perverse effects.
This leads me to make the following observation: we have become so used to choosing what we watch, and to 'zapping' it if we don't like it, that we are no longer used to questioning our own ideas.
Let me take a concrete example to illustrate my point. Over the last two decades, I have noticed a change in members' attitudes to the preaching they hear. Today, if someone likes a sermon because it is in line with their ideas, then we will easily hear them say: "That was a good sermon", whereas if the message offends their ideas, we will hear them say: "I didn't like the sermon", or even worse: "He's a bad preacher". And yet, an effective message must challenge, must offend in some way, must it not? Without challenge, there is no progress! But are we ready to hear something other than just what makes us happy?
You can imagine how difficult it is for a pastor to speak to his church, to his whole church, if half of the members have already "unsubscribed" from him in their minds. They won't even listen to what the pastor is saying, they won't think about what he is saying, they will just look elsewhere. We have learned to function like that. But then, do we still need a pastor if we no longer listen to him, or if we only listen to him when we like what he says? If the answer is "yes", then let us listen to him! And even if he sometimes says things that we don't like, let's not change the speaker as if on YouTube!
We need to be aware that, as already mentioned, the problem is not primarily with the speaker, but with the way we allow ourselves to be influenced by those we choose as spiritual guides, and the way we receive their messages. Yes, I think our social network attitude is a danger to the Church today, as it was in Corinth in Paul's day.
What is the solution for the Church in Corinth?
Let us now see what Paul's response was to the church in Corinth, faced with this problem of internal division.
Paul reminds us in 1 Corinthians 3:5-9 that the spiritual leaders present in Corinth are servants of God, to whom God has given gifts, and through whom the Corinthian Christians have come to know Christ! These spiritual guides are therefore necessary and important for knowing Christ and growing spiritually. Paul adds that everything these spiritual guides do is in the service of Christ, as a contribution to the 'building' of God. God's building is not the individual, but the Church as a community. Indeed, all the spiritual gifts that the Holy Spirit attributes to all the servants of God contribute to "the building up of the body of Christ" (Ephesians 4:12), that is, to the building up of the Church!
Thus, we can summarise Paul's teaching by saying, firstly, that these influencers are in the service of Christ, according to the gifts given to them by the Holy Spirit, and as long as their theology is correct; and, secondly, that individual spiritual development has as its ultimate goal the building up of the Church, the “building” of God! Thus, if the teaching of spiritual guides remains for themselves only, then God's goal is not being achieved. Worse, the reluctance to confront within the community the different ideas transmitted by the influencers, combined with the reluctance to remain critical of these teachings, only reinforces the polarisation of ideas within the Church. This is what Paul wanted to avoid for the church in Corinth and, unfortunately, this is what we see, too, often developing in our churches today, leading - in the worst case - to a split in the community. This is a far cry from the Church God intended: a Church led by the Holy Spirit, growing spiritually and numerically, marked by love and unity in Christ.
Developing one's own opinion
In a very concrete way, I offer you some suggestions for developing your own opinion, without simply repeating the opinion of some influencer:
Return to the Bible, to the love of reading the Bible.
When you have free time, it is easier to watch YouTube than to open your Bible. And one spends hours on YouTube, and so little time with the Bible.
It is no longer enough to check that the biblical texts quoted by a speaker are correct. How many times have I heard people talking about the Bible and, theologically, everything was (almost) right, but their message did not correspond to the Bible, i.e. :
They did not convey a message of hope that relieves and lightens the heart, but rather a feeling of oppression, even fear.
They were not conveying the joy, the love of Christ that overflows on you and me.
They did not speak of a change of heart, but focused their message on a change of attitude (works).
They did not convey divine peace and serenity, but rather anguish.
They did not convey freedom in Christ, but rather dependence on certain conditions, which made me doubt my salvation.
They were not conveying a positive, encouraging and empowering message, but one that discouraged me, that made me feel bad and even worthless, because it showed me that I was not good enough.
No, and I am deeply sorry to say this, it is not enough to check that the biblical texts used are correct, one must check that the general message is in harmony with the general message of the Bible! But to do that, we need to study the Bible, without the filter of influencers.
Paul reminds us that we all have gifts, and different gifts, given by the Holy Spirit. On the one hand, this means that Christ needs each of us to use our contribution to His "building", and on the other hand it gives us the necessary humility because no one can say "I have understood, I know, and I don't need others", or else "I have understood, I know, I will explain it to them". Paul clearly shows that the process of growth, both individual spiritual growth and numerical growth of the Church, happens through community. Growth is the goal, indeed the vocation, of the Christ-centred community that unites us.
Our role is to stay focused on God, and to allow Him the opportunity to grow His Church, as Paul mentioned to the church in Corinth.
What the Corinthians had forgotten is that our role as Christians is to stay focused on God, and to allow Him the opportunity to grow His Church. God wants to use us as major players in the growth of His Church. Our minds must remain focused on God, and our mission is to make disciples by reflecting God's love in our hearts and witnessing to the source of that love, namely Christ. The Corinthians forgot this; let us not forget it in our present context of life.
Personal accountability
I would now like to challenge you personally. We are all on social networks, and I am convinced that God uses these means and that they should be used to share the Gospel. But we have seen that there are also hidden risks, not so much from the influencers as from ourselves.
The next time you use social networks, think about some basic questions honestly with yourself:
Why do I use this social network? Why don't I open the Bible instead? What is my purpose?
Is it a substitute for the church for me?
Is it to make myself feel good (what I dare to call spiritual masturbation), or for the edification of the Church?
Is it simply because it is easier than opening the Bible?
Am I aware that I am only looking at what I like? Is this really what I want? Am I naive enough to believe that this is how I will develop spiritually?
All the studies show that social networks contribute to an increasing polarisation of society, on any subject. It divides society deeply, as it did in Corinth. The problem is not new, we just have to realise that it also concerns the Church.
What am I going to do concretely to make this contribute to the building up of the Church?
This is done with the awareness that sharing "I have understood, I know and I will explain" will inevitably result in division.
The stakes are real!
I think the stakes are real: if we abandon the Church in favour of social networks, on the one hand, we are no longer fulfilling God's purpose and the mission that Christ has given us, but on the other hand, the Church is going to lose itself. It is only a matter of time before the Church no longer exists. I would like to remind you that the Church is not the building where Christians gather regularly, but the community of believers. A community is by definition alive. In fact, if everyone stays at home and does not actively participate in making the community live, it does not take long for the community to lose its appeal, which precipitates its fall.
This is a real challenge for the Church today, which means each one of us. God invites us, I would even say He calls us, to make our community live and grow. There are many 'methods' of doing this, but both Paul and Christ himself remind us that, whatever the method and culture, the essential ingredient that we must ask for, seek with all our heart, and cultivate through genuine communion with the Holy Spirit, is love!
*Eric Belloy is Director of the Espoir Médias centre (Federation of Adventist Churches in French-speaking Switzerland and Ticino)
