![\"\"\/](\"https:\/\/cdn.christianpost.com\/assets\/img\/icon\/chat-rect.svg\")
<\/a>![\"\"\/](\"https:\/\/cdn.christianpost.com\/assets\/img\/icon\/share-outline.svg\")
<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/header>\n![](\"https:\/\/cdn.christianpost.com\/images\/cache\/image\/14\/45\/144549_w_760_570.webp\")
<\/source><\/picture>Cultural commentator Samuel D. James discussed the influential and formative power of the internet in a recent interview.\u00a0James\u2019 newest book, Digital Liturgies<\/em><\/a>, explores the hidden ideology and worldview-shaping nature of internet technology, as well as how Christians can rightly navigate through the digital world in faithfulness to Christ.<\/p>\n James\u00a0is the associate acquisitions editor at Crossway. His Substack newsletter, also entitled Digital Liturgies<\/em>, has thousands of regular subscribers, and he has written for several other publications, including The Wall Street Journal<\/em>, National Review<\/em>, Time<\/em>, First Things<\/em>\u00a0and The Gospel Coalition<\/em>.<\/p>\n The following is an edited transcript of my\u00a0interview with Samuel D. James.<\/p>\n Cap Stewart: Many Christians tend to think the internet is like any other amoral tool: you can use it wisely or poorly. What do you think is wrong with that perspective?<\/strong><\/p>\n Samuel D. James<\/strong>: I think something can be used for good or ill and still not be neutral. And what that means is that even our desire to use this technology well is shaped by the logic of the technology itself.<\/p>\n For example, the internet presents us with certain powers and abilities \u2014 the ability to broadcast ourselves, the ability to turn something that would otherwise be a private moment into what other people can watch or consume. Technology allows us to turn life into a broadcastable moment, and because this technology exists and can do that, it says to us that we should do this, that this is a good thing.<\/p>\n Even as we are purposing to use these technologies for good \u2014 and I think we can \u2014 we need to ask, \u201cHow is this changing our emotions? How is it changing our expectations? How is it changing our view of ourselves, of other people, of God?\u201d Those questions are central to the book.<\/p>\n Really, what I\u2019m trying to do is invite Christians to consider the ways in which these intellectual technologies \u2014 the web and social media in particular \u2014 make plausibility structures that themselves tend to lead us toward thought patterns and feelings and behaviors that are contrary to Christian wisdom.<\/p>\n Stewart: That actually leads directly into our second question. The subtitle of your book is Rediscovering Christian Wisdom in an Online Age<\/em>. What is it about being online that you think causes us to lose our grip on wisdom?<\/strong><\/p>\n James<\/strong>: In the Scriptures, wisdom is connected to this sense of what the world is really like. Some have said that the essence of wisdom in Scripture is to live along the grain of reality rather than against the grain.<\/p>\n In contrast, the web presents us with a vision of ourselves and of other people that is untrue because it is disembodied. God created you and me with physical bodies \u2014 not just with minds, but with hands and feet and eyes. As part of that embodiment, he created us in particular places. He gave us to particular parents that live in particular cities. These are realities you don\u2019t have control over: they exist whether or not you want them to.<\/p>\n This reality is something the internet obscures: the internet is this kind of language, educational, relational \u2014 and even worshipful \u2014 habitat that presents to us as something that is completely in our control. If we want to stop seeing something that makes us uncomfortable, we can simply click away. If we see somebody who is saying something we don\u2019t like, we can mute or block them. The internet offers this entirely controlled way of experiencing the world. And as such, it presents us with a vision of reality that is fundamentally untrue.<\/p>\n Christian wisdom starts with this baseline of reality, and the internet starts with this baseline of unreality. And the question is, what happens when our attention, our emotional energy, and our labor are concentrated in this sphere of \u201creality,\u201d when in fact the Scriptures are calling us to live emotionally and attentively in objective reality.<\/p>\n Stewart: You mentioned this idea of control \u2014 of muting and blocking others. Is there a relationship between internet culture and \u201ccancel culture\u201d?<\/strong><\/p>\n James<\/strong>: Absolutely. And it actually goes back to what I was saying just a second ago. Many have learned to engage the world through these digital controls. They spend more time online, they have likely learned how to work online. The internet has become this package deal for doing life, for experiencing the world.<\/p>\n When you experience reality \u2014 and particularly when you come of age \u2014 online, it\u2019s near impossible to imagine not being able to control what you see. What happens for a lot of folks is that they simply don\u2019t understand why someone should be allowed to do something that makes them uncomfortable. There\u2019s a sense of disempowerment that comes when you\u2019ve learned to engage the world through the computer logic, and then you encounter something in the offline world and you realize you have no power over it. That cognitive dissonance is deeply traumatic (for lack of a better word). You just don\u2019t know how to comprehend it.<\/p>\n This doesn\u2019t explain the whole of cancel culture, but it is, I think, a part of it.<\/p>\n Stewart: How else does digital technology encourage us to be upset or offended by disagreement?<\/strong><\/p>\n James<\/strong>: In his book The Shallows<\/em>, Nicholas Carr uses cognitive research to show that reading online engages our cognitive function at a much shallower \u2014 and more superficial \u2014 level than reading a book. Partly, that\u2019s because the internet is designed to be a kind of multitasking interface. Even if we don\u2019t think we\u2019re being distracted, we really are because this is simply the way the technology works.<\/p>\n I recently wrote two articles on singleness in the church, and last night I got a comment that accused me of believing all these things that are explicitly disowned in the article. Before I read Nicholas Carr, I would have thought, \u201cPeople just don\u2019t know how to read.\u201d But now I realize it\u2019s not an issue of education; it\u2019s literally a cognitive deficiency with the way we\u2019re communicating on this medium.<\/p>\n It\u2019s not necessarily all the reader\u2019s fault (although it can be). But to be carefully reflective on the internet is basically to cease to exist, because the algorithm won\u2019t allow you to rise to the top of the internet\u2019s ecosystem.<\/p>\n Stewart: You have said elsewhere that the internet does not just contain pornography, but that it is pornographically-shaped. What do you mean by that?<\/strong><\/p>\n James<\/strong>: Essentially, pornography takes what is fundamentally a personal experience between two people (in the Christian understanding) and turns it into a product that can be consumed by a third party, who then instrumentalizes that experience. Similarly, the internet is this infrastructure that takes every human experience and turns it into a consumable product.<\/p>\n And if you go into the weeds of social media, you find that the word \u201cporn\u201d has now become suffixed to certain genres to indicate when a lot of images are being created of something. So \u201cearth porn\u201d is beautiful landscapes from all over the world. \u201cFood porn\u201d is delicious looking dishes. People have this pornographic lingo to describe what it\u2019s like to experience these things third-hand \u2014 through the screen. The logic of pornographic consumption is hardwired into many of these technologies.<\/p>\n Stewart: If the internet is inherently pornographically-shaped, should we even be using it at all?<\/strong><\/p>\n James<\/strong>: I understand where that question comes from, but we need to understand a distinction: there\u2019s a difference between the internet being pornographically-shaped and the internet being exclusively pornographic. I\u2019m saying the former, not the latter. And so, it might be better to ask, \u201cIf the internet is pornographically shaped, what does it mean to order our lives so that we\u2019re not going to YouTube for friendship, or that we\u2019re not going to Instagram to experience life? Have we retreated from other people? Have we retreated from healthy practices? Have we retreated from the things that make life difficult but also rewarding \u2014 and that push us toward faithfulness to Jesus?\u201d<\/p>\n One challenge a lot of pastors are facing right now is that people are saying, \u201cWhy can\u2019t I just watch church? Why can\u2019t I stay home and do livestream?\u201d I actually believe pastors should think about responding more in the language we\u2019re using right now: \u201cWell, you are experiencing church as something that only happens to you, something that you are consuming as a product. That\u2019s not what church is. Livestreaming is to church what porn is to sex.\u201d<\/p>\n Stewart: What are some benefits for Christian involvement in the online world?<\/strong><\/p>\n James<\/strong>: There\u2019s no question that the internet has revolutionized how we share information. The access we have to sermons and music and millions of pages of books \u2014 it\u2019s astounding. The relational significance is not to be dismissed either: through texts and emails and video calls we keep up with friends who may be living in the furthest reaches of the world.<\/p>\n And this is an incredible time for the dissemination of the Gospel. There are Gospel messages going into restricted countries \u2014 all over the world \u2014 and getting into the hands of people who would otherwise never receive it.<\/p>\n It\u2019s not a question of whether there\u2019s any good reason to use the internet. It\u2019s a question of how do we put the internet in its proper place? How do we let it be a blessing instead of letting it turn into something else?<\/p>\n Stewart: Who is a good example of a Christian engaging with internet culture in wisdom and prudence? How can we learn from their example?<\/strong><\/p>\n James<\/strong>: One of my really good friends, Nate, is a pastor in North Carolina. On Facebook, he posts encouraging quotes and things he\u2019s studying in Scripture. But he consciously chooses to make the people that God has actually put around him foremost in his attention. There\u2019s an intentional design for him to say, \u201cWhether it\u2019s my wife, my kids, my church, the people in my community \u2014 those people are entitled to the lion\u2019s share of my emotional energy, of my affection.\u201d And he\u2019s living life accordingly.<\/p>\n That\u2019s what I would tell readers: don\u2019t look to a guru, a Christian celebrity, for examples of how to do this. Find people in your life who just seem to be very present, to be devoted to the things that matter, and follow them as they follow Christ.<\/p>\n Stewart: How does the Gospel contradict and\/or fulfill the digital liturgies of our day?<\/strong><\/p>\n James<\/strong>: If we think we\u2019re looking for friendship, the Gospel promises Christ our brother, our friend, who is with us, but who also puts us in a family of other Christians. If we\u2019re looking for significance, the Gospel gives us a kingdom to belong to, and gives us people to serve, with the promise that even if the world doesn\u2019t see us, our Father (who sees in secret) will see and reward us. If we\u2019re looking for intimacy (in obvious or not obvious ways), the Bible presents us with a vision of sexual intimacy, but also of friendship intimacy that is grounded in the Gospel.<\/p>\n So the question is, if all the major web companies were to disappear tomorrow in some cataclysmic cyberattack and we couldn\u2019t be online, would we be OK? Would we still have friends? In the Gospel, the answer is yes.<\/p>\n But there may be some who would say, \u201cIf that happened to me, I would cease to have an identity. I would not know who I was.\u201d To them in particular, I would say go back to the Scriptures. Learn who you are from your Creator \u2014 not from your audience \u2014 and embrace that. Embrace the promises of the Gospel that will sustain you long after your internet self has ceased to win the algorithm.<\/p>\n Digital Liturgies is now available at Crossway<\/a> and everywhere books are sold.\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n Cap Stewart is the author of the curriculum\u00a0Personal Purity Isn\u2019t Enough: The Long-Forgotten Secret to Making Scriptural Entertainment Choices<\/a>. As a cultural commentator, he has contributed to\u00a0Cultural Engagement: A Crash Course in Contemporary Issues<\/a>\u00a0(Zondervan Academic, 2019), among other print and online publications. He writes at\u00a0Unpop Culture<\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n![](\"https:\/\/cdn.christianpost.com\/images\/cache\/image\/15\/01\/150172_w_400_400.webp\")
<\/source><\/picture><\/figure>\n![](\"https:\/\/cdn.christianpost.com\/images\/cache\/image\/15\/01\/150173_w_400_618.webp\")
<\/source><\/picture><\/figure>\n