Why I Shouldn't Watch Youtube Videos

I can’t help but comment on the sheer volume of responses to the recent video, “Why I Hate Religion, but Love Jesus.” And I have to start with an obvious point made by Chesterton all those years ago that a thing is not all the more serious for being taken seriously. The videographer—Jefferson his name—certainly has good intentions. He demands that a distinction be made between possessing a personal relationship with Jesus and adhering to a series of dogmas reducible to the name ‘religion.’ The video is little else besides the old Evangelical obsession with a personal relationship with Jesus Christ as the element sui generis—God coming down to man—distinguishing Christianity from all other religious systems. The truth, of course, is that all religions claim to have the element sui generis which stands over and against other religious systems. His brand of Christianity is not all the more unique for claiming to be unique; it is only unique if it is right.

That’s not to say that I think he is wrong; nor is it to say that I think he is right. I’m unconcerned at present with the truth of his assertions. What interests me is that we’re talking about this guy’s claims at all. I have watched the video several times bemused and befuddled not at what he means but that so many people are interested in what he means.

Of course, I have two disadvantages. The first is that I have been overly exposed to the vocabulary of Evangelicalism. I find most of it empty of content and the rest worn out from overuse. The other, I confess, is that I get all snooty when the word “poetry” is used loosely. Sorry, but the guy is as much a poet as I am a pillow-case.

But I think when I boil it down, I am mostly frustrated with the quality of our public discourse. Why is there a giant kerfuffle over this particular video, over what is so obviously a semantic quib, over whether the belief in and personal relationship with Jesus is a religious statement? I understand the need to help justify one’s claims with a corresponding sentiment; what I don’t understand is why we’re doing quasi-religious theory in order to generate that sentiment. Why are so many so desperate to correct a small, insignificant error--if it is an error at all? I do not reject the importance of the answer, i reject the importance of the question. If he is right, so be it. If he is not....so what?

It is symptomatic, I think, of an Evangelical tendency to neglect good thinking. To put it less delicately, many people talk most adamantly concerning issues they do not understand. And the best indication that someone does not understand is that they get disproportionately emotional about it. The first markers of bad arguing are overreactions and oversimplifications. In this case, Jefferson is oversimplifying the Jesus/religion dichotomy, and everyone else is overreacting to his oversimplification. The reality of the situation is that he deserves a pat on the head for his efforts, and everyone else deserves a disapproving glance for taking him too seriously. Nothing more, nothing less.

Yet it is this general neglect of sensible discourse, this penchant for all things trite, which does more than irritate me. It worries me. It proves conclusively, I’m afraid, the failure of our church education to inculcate not mere doctrine, but quality of dispute. Really, it is the failure to educate Evangelicals in the principle of epistemological humility. Whatever happened to, “be wise as serpents but gentle as doves”?

The truth is that whatever else Christianity must be over the next century, it must not be this simple minded if it is to fit the needs of a dissonant American people. It must be able to harbor in one bay the multifaceted consciousnesses of millions whose internal lives are infinitely more complex than their forbearers. People used to live in a village, or a city, or, if they were truly experienced, a country. They used to do what they were told and get along. But we, dear friends, live in the world, and the world is fairy-land without the fairies. We have returned to Canaan, and the gods tempt us on all sides. Jesus conquered Olympus, I grant, but he has not yet conquered Absurdism (perhaps his most formidable and long-standing opponent), or the Eastern religions, or tribalism, etc. Baal greets us with smile at the click of a button or the purchase of cheap plane ticket. We will know, and already do know, Philistines whose actions don’t seem all that philistine. Idols are everywhere, and the people who flock to or fight against our Christianity will not be of one mind. This is America for heaven’s sake. This is the world. We had better get used to the idea of being wrong, as well as the idea that others might be right. We must learn the distinction between theory and dogma, and which must be defended (to the death) and when. We must gain that maturity which chooses which battles to indulge and which to ignore. It seems altogether obvious to me that Jefferson’s video does not deserve the attention it has received. It is thoughtful enough for a youth camp; it is not thoughtful enough to be treated as theology.