- RSS FeedSubscribe
- « Previous PostThe Cross He Bore - The Crown of Thorns
- Next Post »A La Carte (4/7)
Evil as Entertainment
- 04/06/09
- 79
The internet is such a strange phenomenon and one we are really only beginning to understand, at least in terms of its impact on society and faith and family and just about everything else. What passes for entertainment on the internet would, at most other times in history, be regarded as shocking or wasteful or disgusting or maybe just plain absurd. Witness the web sites that offer video after video of people cracking bones doing stupid skateboard tricks. You can search YouTube for videos of people breaking bones and spend hours in senseless entertainment, guffawing at the stupidity and wincing at the pain. Or witness the sites that specialize in the macabre, displaying lineups of dead or dismembered bodies or photographic evidence of brutal accidents. Or witness the almost limitless amounts of pornography which is a contemporary form of entertainment for boys and men (and, increasingly, girls and women) of all ages. So much of the entertainment the internet offers is entertainment at its very worst. Evil has become entertainment.
I want to say a word today about watchblogs or discernment blogs or whatever you want to call them. I am referring to blogs that specialize in sharing bad news. They share stories and videos and anecdotes about Christians and churches and supposed Christians and supposed churches. Day after day they offer examples of all that is wrong in the church. They may vary what they offer a little bit, but what is true of them is that they offer a steady diet of negative content related to the church in general or perhaps related to just one person or one ministry. You know of some of these sites, I am sure.
I was thinking about such blogs a few days ago and arrived at a conclusion about them that actually rather surprised me. This is what I realized: these blogs are really little more than entertainment. And once I had these blogs filed in that way in my mind, their popularity and their draw began to make much more sense to me. They are really just a spiritualized form of YouTube or any other site that entertains by sharing what is gross and base and negative and that does so for the sake of entertainment. There is really no value in watching boys do stupid things on skateboards and laughing when they crack their ankle bones in half; there is really no value in watching the worst pastors in America preach to the worst churches in America. Such sites offer evil as entertainment.
Watchblogs offers what I think is a classic case of what Neil Postman referred to as context-free information. He once asked this: “How often does it occur that information provided you on morning radio or television, or in the morning newspaper, causes you to alter your plans for the day, or to take some action you would not otherwise have taken, or provides some action you would not otherwise have taken, or provides insight into some problem you are required to solve?” It is worth thinking about, isn’t it? How often do you see something on the news and actually do something about it? How often is that even the remotest possibility? “Most of our daily news is inert, consisting of information that gives us something to talk about but cannot lead to any meaningful action. This fact is the principle legacy of the telegraph: By generating an abundance of irrelevant information, it dramatically altered what may be called the ‘information-action ratio.’”
That information-action ratio is what is so out-of-whack in the world of the watchblogs. They provide information about churches and Christians—information that may be important to certain people in certain contexts. After all, if I went to a church where the pastor had been involved in an outrageous scandal, I would want to know about it. But if a pastor of a church in Kalamazoo preaches a sermon in which he says something scandalous, it has no effect on my life and, beyond its draw as entertainment, I can think of few good reasons for me to even know about it. Multiply this by hundreds of new stories a week (or even just tens of stories a week) and I end up with a huge amount of negative information that stays in my head and heart, but which has no bearing on my life.
What is the problem with this? Again, Postman answers, “In both oral and typographic cultures, information derives its importance from the possibilities of action.” Telegraphy, television and other forms of electronic media have made the relationship between information and action both abstract and remote. We hear more news than ever which elicits more opinions than ever, but which leave us increasingly impotent, unable to do anything more than offer opinions and bluster about what we might do if we could. And I am left asking, do I really need to read and to know so much of what passes as news today? Do I really need to read and to know about the seedy underbelly of the church, when such things happen thousands of miles away, among people I will never meet and in places I will never be? Such news is plenty entertaining, but it is useless to me. It does nothing to further my faith or to cause me to grow in godliness. In fact, I suspect just the opposite may well be true. I think of Paul’s words near the close of the book of Romans where he says, “I want you to be wise as to what is good and innocent as to what is evil” (Romans 16:19b). He wants these Christians to invest their time studying not what is evil, but what is good. When they have confidence in all that is good, the evil will become ever-more apparent.
This is not the first or only time Paul has given this exhortation. In 1 Corinthians 14:20 he wrote “Brothers, do not be children in your thinking. Be infants in evil, but in your thinking be mature.” And in saying this he echoes the words of Jesus who exhorted His disciples and warned them of the persecution that would come, saying “Behold, I am sending you out as sheep in the midst of wolves, so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves” (Matthew 10:16).
We are to focus much more on what is good than what is evil. This is one of the lessons I sought to teach in The Discipline of Spiritual Discernment. “Our efforts in discernment should revolve around knowing the truth so that we might see the evil in contrast to what is true. The reason it is better to focus on what is true is simple: error is constantly changing, shifting and morphing into new forms, always seeking to imitate what is true in new and creative ways. Truth, however, is constant. When we know what is true we will more easily be able to identify what is error.”
Filling our minds, our hearts, our computer screens, our blogs with all that is wrong in the church will do little to conform us into the image of the Savior. It can do little. My encouragement to you, whether you are a regular visitor to one of these sites or whether you simply visit them occasionally, is to examine your heart and to examine your motives. Do you visit such sites because they have information that you truly need to know? Or do you visit as a means of entertainment? Are you delighting in what is good and true and pure and lovely, or are you finding a strange, sick delight in all that is evil and ugly?
I am a follower of Jesus Christ, a husband to Aileen and a father to three young children. I worship and serve as a pastor at 
Releasing on April 1, The Next
Published in 2008, this book
This is a guide that calls men,
This review of the bestselling
New to the site? You can get
This is a guide written
Comments (79)
A Pathetic article that speads mis-truths and over generalizes.
One that is wholly subjective based on a person’s own views of what is entertainment and what is not!
The deeply disturbing part of this “article” is it has absolutely zero Biblical support for its views!
Just because in your mind you have made a decision that Watchblogs are “entertainment” does not make it so!
Watchblogs distribute vital information and are doing an unthankful and vital task that the “church” today has completely abandoned.
Mr. Challes your standing as a one who only disseminates Biblical Truth has just been seriously compromised.
You have instead joined the ranks of those who believe their subjective opinions divorced from Biblical Truth are somehow valid!
In other words you have just joined the emergent movement based on subjective “Truthiness”
“Do I really need to read and to know about the seedy underbelly of the church?” -Tim
I would say we should be aware of the many winds of false doctrine blowing subtly through the Body of Christ. We needto become mature, and not children, and so these “winds of doctrines, by the sleight of men, and cunning cleverness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive, these wolves in sheeps clothing as Jesus tells us, and Paul tells us in Romans 16:17 to “mark them who cause divisions and offences contrary to doctrine which we have learned; and avoid them.”
Like a Brian McLaren.
“We are to focus much more on what is good than what is evil. “ -Tim
And a big Amen to this. Perhaps focusing on the truth, for the majority of us in the Body would be a full time effort, and keeping our eyes and ears open for false teachers and teachings as we throw ourselves into the whole counsel of the Lord in His precious Word, and into His Church: Worshipping Christ, and being blessed, praying in faith to our Lord, and so going out to serve the Body of Christ, and shine in a dark world and age of lost sinners.
Some discernment blogs use measured and careful analysis that informs, corrects, and edifies believers. Others use hyperbole, sensationalism, and redundant examples of the extremes in evangelicalism that draw the car wreck watchers.
I prefer the former.
Phil Johson hits the nail on the head, and John Baker says essentially the same thing as Phil, only more concisely, and harsher.
And here come the CRN.info guys smelling blood in the water… what’d I tell ya…
Tim,
Our Church is currently in search of a new pastor and because of a lack of discernment, our old Pastor allowed a lot of false teaching to seep into our Church that the leadership team and new Pastor will have to deal with. The discernment sites have raised my awareness to the false teaching of men like Brian McClairn and Rob Bell so they serve great purpose as we go to interview potential new pastors on thier beliefs and thier preaching mentors. Just thought you might want to think about that a little.
Tim -
While I {think} I understand your point, I’d imagine just about anything can be abused to some extent. The ‘watchblogs’ as we’re calling them most certainly do serve a purpose. The stuff going on in evangelicalism today is indeed affecting just about everyone as this stuff creeps into our own churches regardless of where we’re at. More often than not, those ushering the garbage in have no ill-intent and are simply unaware of what they’re promoting. The question is, who are we relying on to spot it and take care of it?
God willing, of course, I want to keep this nonsense from slithering into my family, Bible studies and church as much as I possibly can and in order to do so, I need to be able to see it coming from a mile away.
AMEN!!!!!!
Thank you, Tim.
Thank you for this insightful, thoughtful, and biblically-based commentary on the sad state of what is happening on the Internet. You might be interested in “DON’T BELIEVE EVERYTHING YOU READ ON THE INTERNET” ( see http://www.crosswalk.com/blogs/abanes/11600278/ ).
The above article includes links to pieces similar to yours, reasonable observations, and godly opinions on this issue that are now being made by doctrinally-sound and thoughtful onlookers.
There is NOTHING wrong with discernment/apologetics. There is EVERYTHING wrong with lies, slander, false information, hate rhetoric, and fear-mongering. And this is exactly what we are seeing from SOME of these so-called “discernment” websites and “apologetic” blogs. In reality, these wells of poison have nothing to do with either apologetics or discernment.
peace in him,
Richard Abanes
“But if a pastor of a church in Kalamazoo preaches a sermon in which he says something scandalous, it has no effect on my life and, beyond its draw as entertainment, I can think of few good reasons for me to even know about it. Multiply this by hundreds of new stories a week (or even just tens of stories a week) and I end up with a huge amount of negative information that stays in my head and heart, but which has no bearing on my life.”
1. I agree with Rhetorical Christian that you need to define the term “watchblog”. Making a general statement such as this impugns any blog, regardless if they are attacking everyone in sight or are genuinely trying to provide examples of what is wrong with the post-modern church today (which is imperative in this current climate for many to understand what a church should and should not do, based on the Word of God).
2. As you say :”Our efforts in discernment should revolve around knowing the truth so that we might see the evil in contrast to what is true.” Unfortunately, many Christians today lack the proper discernment to know how to contrast evil and truth. I agree that a focus on the positives (i.e scripture) would help them do this, unfortunately the present state of the church is not in any way conducive for this to occur. I see many of the truthful blogs such as slice of laodicea, apprising ministries, etc as those that are sounding the alarm as a last ditch effort to warn fellow Christians that the enemy is not at our doorstep but IN OUR HOMES. I think you owe it to your readers to clarify exactly which websites you mean.
3. Unfortunately, the world is full of negatives. While it is our duty to focus on God and his Kingdom, which I am sure you would agree is a positive,The FACT remains that that the world has invaded our churches and we very well may be in the time of the great falling away. If no one speaks up and just tells everyone to “focus on the positives” they do a disservice to the surviving remnant. Perhaps you have heard the saying “do not be so heavenly minded that you are no earthly good.” I think that applies here. This is not our home, but while we live here we have to deal with the truth head on. The discernment blogs help us to do this.
Therefore, I testify to you this day that I am innocent of the blood of all men. For I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole purpose of God. Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood. I know that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; and from among your own selves men will arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them. Therefore be on the alert, remembering that night and day for a period of three years I did not cease to admonish each one with tears. Acts 20:26-31 NASB
Tim - I think the better thought is: “How much more time should I spend on the blogs of legitimate ministries to help me even come close to what I would have had to “endure” if “Pastor” Paul was my Pastor?” Night and Day! For three years! How can this possibly even come close to 15 minutes a day on a blog to help me understand what is going on in the visible church? Wow - I was alert for a whole 15 minutes today!? Do modern day pastors do what Paul did here? I can only think of a few. I am really kind of sorry I had to read your post today and am quite confident you will probably re-evaluate your thoughts. Either that or I just didn’t quite understand.It is true - our ORDER should be - 1. Proclaim 2. Defend 3. ContendBut if very few bother to Defend or Contend - it leaves it in the hands of others to do all of that FOR them since they choose only to believe the gospel and not to SUFFER for the gospel! And that is the real question: In my very heart, before a Holy God and His Holy Word, have I decided that on the day of judgment it will actually be legitimate to have chosen to believe the gospel without suffering for HIS HOLY NAME? I know you agree with me!!! Maybe when we read some of these legitimate blogs we should remember Jesus words. “Blessed are you when people insult you and persecute you, and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of Me.” Matthew 5:11That requires any one of us who actually name the name of Jesus to “suffer with Him outside the gate.”PS - I loved reading your “Discipline of Spiritual Discernment” book! It is absolutely amazing and I would recommend it to anyone.
I hate to admit it, but I have enjoyed many an entertaining chuckle over a few watchblogs. It does seem the more I study scripture, pray, and just generally grow in my faith, the less entertained I am by the dishonest exaggeration and hatefulness on these blogs. I take that as a mark of my growth in Jesus.
One of the biggest problems I found with these sites, making them basically useless for discernment, is that they are all so extremist and radical in their views. They attack ministries made up of normal people teaching and working with normal people because these “watch dogs” are on the fringe. I realize we are to live apart from the world and that we will be persecuted in His name, but it takes more than cultish extremism and alienation to be a good Christian. Being a radical on the fringe of society doesn’t make you one of the saved. Not to mention that it is almost impossible to minister to your community from this position.
this article fails on two points:
1. It has no Biblical support2. Its based on an in valid argument.
Anyone who claims to stand on Biblical Truth, to teach and preach Biblical Truth cannot disseminate opinions that are not based on Biblical truth but actually on relativistic subjective personal opinion and then be taken seriously as a source of Biblical Truth.
Secondly Mr. Challes makes an invalid argument in his article:you cannot say that because you believe in your own opinion that because Discernment “Watch blogs” post negative stories about the current state of Christianity, and because there is in the secular world what is known as negative tabloid Journalism that turns negative stories into entertainment and profits from them , then therefore Discernment “Watch Blogs” are no different than secular negative tabloid journalism!
Do you see what makes this argument invalid?1. No Discernment “Watch Blog” that I know of profits from posting negative stories.2. No Discernment “Watch Blog” that I know of posts negative stories for the purpose of entertainment!3. I will use an example of an invalid argument to show why Mr Challes argument is invalid:
1. Mr. A is a Baseball player. Mr. A cheats2. Mr. B, C, and D are Baseball players.3. Therefore all baseball players are cheats!
The above argument uses the same logic as Mr Challes. And it is invalid because there is no foundation from the two premises (1 & 2) to make the conclusion in No. 3
Mr. Challes it is sad that you have undermined your own beliefs in Absolute Truth and Standing on the Truth of God’s word and instead let fly with relativistic and subjective personal opinions.
this article fails on two points:
1. It has no Biblical support2. Its based on an in valid argument.
Anyone who claims to stand on Biblical Truth, to teach and preach Biblical Truth cannot disseminate opinions that are not based on Biblical truth but actually on relativistic subjective personal opinion and then be taken seriously as a source of Biblical Truth.
Secondly Mr. Challes makes an invalid argument in his article:you cannot say that because you believe in your own opinion that because Discernment “Watch blogs” post negative stories about the current state of Christianity, and because there is in the secular world what is known as negative tabloid Journalism that turns negative stories into entertainment and profits from them , then therefore Discernment “Watch Blogs” are no different than secular negative tabloid journalism!
Do you see what makes this argument invalid?1. No Discernment “Watch Blog” that I know of profits from posting negative stories.2. No Discernment “Watch Blog” that I know of posts negative stories for the purpose of entertainment!3. I will use an example of an invalid argument to show why Mr Challes argument is invalid:
1. Mr. A is a Baseball player. Mr. A cheats2. Mr.’s B, C, and D are Baseball players too.3. Therefore all baseball players are cheats!
The above argument uses the same logic as Mr Challes. And it is invalid because there is no foundation from the two premises (1 & 2) to make the conclusion in No. 3
Mr. Challes it is sad that you have undermined your own beliefs in Absolute Truth and Standing on the Truth of God’s word and instead let fly with relativistic and subjective personal opinions.
Tim,
I agree that the propensity to dwell on the negative content is there, but I don’t know of many brethren who are dwelling there simply for the voyeuristic appeal of which you write.
One step further: I believe that most of the sites you are referring to include the educational aspect you admire and value personally.
Please explain: What place do Apologetics have on the internet? Should we not strive to test false teachings against the light of Scripture?
Chriswww.redpen.org
“There is NOTHING wrong with discernment/apologetics. There is EVERYTHING wrong with lies, slander, false information, hate rhetoric, and fear-mongering. And this is exactly what we are seeing from SOME of these so-called “discernment” websites and “apologetic” blogs. In reality, these wells of poison have nothing to do with either apologetics or discernment.”
Is there anyway you could name these websites? Or would that be the pot calling the kettle black? I think if you know where there is poison, then you let us know. that’s my opinion. Perhpas not here on Tim’s, but on your own would be fine. Thanks. All for the Cross.
Tim,
I’m saddened by your article. I agree with those who have pointed out that the baby need not be thrown out with the bathwater on this issue. I’ve had great benefit from daily reading your site and will continue to recommend it, but I fear that your broad brush treatment of this subject will be used to further the “watered-down, wishy-washy, doctrine-doesn’t-matter, why can’t we all get along, deeds-not-creeds” silliness that dominates so much of today’s evangelical thinking. We do need a reformation, in this day - and while it certainly ought be Biblical in its methodology, a return to Biblical certainty and clarity is certainly desperately needed. It is this reminder and encouragement to prayer that at least some of these sites provide.
By the way, their limited influence is certainly “balanced” by the mainstream Christian media coverage of (and, in some cases, support for) the Olsteens, Bells, McLarens, Warrens, etc. out there. I’m encouraged by the marketplace of ideas… and, by the way, I wonder what Paul’s response to some of the “watchdog-targets” would be? I suspect it might be similar to the tone of Galatians 1:6-8.
1. Blogger A is a discerner. He addresses doctrinal concerns with clarity and a level of respect.2. Bloggers A, B, and C are discerners.3. All discernment bloggers address doctrinal concerns with clarity and a level of respect.
Nope.
As long as we are discussing arguments… I hope we can all agree that
1. I am right2. You are wrong; therefore3. You are a relativist
is not a valid form of argumentation. I’m honestly surprised that some of the responses of those who are defending the “watch-blogs” would take such a line.
If you are accusing Mr. Challies of being a relativist, the only thing you will accomplish is to confirm his point, and undermine your own credibility.
There is something very amiss about the patterns of thinking prevalent amongst those who sympathize with several online discernment ministries. Very amiss.
richard fawning over Tim is a good reason for me to be suspicious. Richard tells us not to believe everything you read on the internet. Again, another useless truism that is weilded in an effort to discredit those who expose a person’s false teaching and bad behavior. After reading this article I was left with the impression Jeremiah and most of what Elijah said, for example (plus many many other passages) ought to have been better left out of the canon.
All in all this thread has been a total waste of time, with the exception of Phil Johnson’s posts and others like his, and Ingrid Schlueter’s if it ever gets approved.
I can hear the partying over at CRN.info from here.
“I can hear the partying over at CRN.info from here.”
I want to make it clear I will not drink the fermented wine over there. :lol”
Just to keep things moving forward here, more blogs should engages Richard Abanes if only for the entertainment value. One of the highlights of the blog year is when someone engages Abanes and he calls his lawyer to prosecute their ISP because he’s so concerned with Biblical truth.
[/pot stirring]
M.G. Said:
is not a valid form of argumentation. I’m honestly surprised that some of the responses of those who are defending the “watch-blogs” would take such a line.
If you are accusing Mr. Challies of being a relativist, the only thing you will accomplish is to confirm his point, and undermine your own credibility.
I say:
Talk about falsely depicting what I said.
So I will clarify again:
I never said I am right and Mr. Challes is wrong. I stated a philisophical Truth. you may want to look into it, Its taught in College level Philosophy Logic 101.
Again Mr. Challes makes an invalid argument according to entry level logic!
Secondly his article Is based on personal opinion devoid of any Biblical support. thats not saying I am right and he is wrong, it is just stating a fact! And when someone does that they are actually confirming the ideology of relativistic subjective truth because they are saying their subjective opinion is a valid truth.
Now if Mr. Challes wants to play to the Blogosphere belief that personal opnion is king! then hey I guess he has proven that point but no other!
Frank - Richard was absolutely unscriptural and wrong for doing what he did in reporting Ken for something which he charcacterized as false. If we cannot discuss, even strongly and sometimes carelessly, what message do we send the spectating world?
That entire back and forth was unfortunate to say the least.
Tim,My question is not about watchblogging but on blogging or the use of internet as a time related subject. I am recently married and have found that time can be sapped up faster on the internet doing good things, bad things, or nothing faster than any TV show or other various forms of entertainment. For instance I have read very nearly all of the comments before to see if some one has commented on this similiar topic. I still missed quite a few, but looking back I now see that I have sunk a half hour into this where I merely came to your sight primarily to suit my new desktop with one of the nice pictures you commonly have posted here. All that to say, my question is where and when do you draw the line on how much we watch on the interenet at all? How necessary is the interenet at all? Yes there is content that can be viewed that will leave us more in awe of God, and e-mail is a great tool and information can be gathered faster and more efficiently, but I can go months without viewing anything on the internet and find my life FILLED with those things but instead of reading or watching them I EXPERIENCE them. It is quite a thing to read and gather information or sit and watch silly videos or sites that pick out silly videos for you to watch or WHATEVER. It is quite another to shake the confines of your chair off our collective tushes and go outside for a time. Life is out there and it beckons without the soft enchanting glow of our computer screens. The computer can be a dangerous pixeled jail cell and chain us to our seats.Do you have any idea how we can judge or balance our time on the internet? On blog sites? Or on this particular subject is it in fact all relative?
getting off now, may check back soon. Maybecheers
John Baker:
It’s people like you which need something better than a dicernment blog’s-eye view of the world of the church.
May Challies be your guiding light.
Rick:
Obviously, Challies’ blog comments do not accept the [/sarcasm] tag. I’ll remember that in future posts.
“discernment” being the correct spell there. Sorry ‘bout that.
I give up. This thread has me so perplexed I can’t even type.
Happy Easter All! Thanks be to our Lord and Savior that you are able to protect us from CHALLIES! WOO!
Frank Turk said:
It’s people like you which need something better than a dicernment blog’s-eye view of the world of the church.
I say:
Well again someone other than Mr. Challes proves the point of the growing and overwhelming influence of relativistic subjective Truth on “Christians” of our time.
Mr. Turk makes a statement of which he has zero factual proof for making. Hence he proves my point as well.
Personal opinions devoid of Biblical support have no place at all in the language of those who say they stand on Biblical Truth!
All that is being put forward by those who are defending Mr. Challes is his right to express a personal opinion that is not Biblically supported. Now tell me again how that does not prove he has succumbed to the idea of subjective truth?
I find it supremely ironic that Mr. Challes is slamming discernment “Watch Blogs” for what he says is succumbing to the secular “evil for Entertainment” genre and then he himself succumbs to the secular blogosphere “subjective personal opinion is Truth” genre!
This is the first time I’ve been able to visit this topic today. And I think this is as good a time as any to close it down. I think it has reached the point of no return.
If I have time tonight I’ll try to post a final comment.