How to Lead Your Church in a Truth-Averse Culture
“I’ve found the most effect by engaging in a personal way. If we build up friendship capital, we can draw on that to ask questions of the conspiracy obsessed. We can pose questions like: Should we be focusing on this? Is this an important focus for a Christian? How does this impact our Christian witness? I’ve even shared with a few friends: I think you’ve gotten a little too deep here. I’m worried about you. You’re scaring me a bit here.” - Dan Darling
This was an encouraging read for me. A lot of good points.
Ultimately, our people need to understand how to see politics and government as important instruments for human flourishing, but not ultimate in the way many replace religious fervor with political fervor.
I think this particular point is a miss though…
Conspiracy theories have always existed, but belief in them rises when trust in leadership falls. And today many people are rightly feeling let down by the leadership they see.
From where I sit, there seems to be too much trust in “leaders.” More specifically, too many seem to have use a faulty process to filter down to a list of truth sources they then trust with very little critical thinking.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
Very well-said Aaron. I couldn’t agree more.
[Aaron Blumer]I think this particular point is a miss though…
Conspiracy theories have always existed, but belief in them rises when trust in leadership falls. And today many people are rightly feeling let down by the leadership they see.
From where I sit, there seems to be too much trust in “leaders.” More specifically, too many seem to have use a faulty process to filter down to a list of truth sources they then trust with very little critical thinking.
If you don’t like the word “leaders,” then substitute “powers that be.” I actually agree with him that when trust in leaders, courts, agencies, processes, etc. is low, then conspiracy theories get stronger. And when people in power ignore the obvious and state things like “trust us” or “nothing to see here,” conspiracy theories are going to come out of the woodwork.
You’re right that people need a better process to come up with a really good list of “truth sources,” although I would argue that most of what passes for a source these days is very strongly biased in one direction or another, meaning you have to read a lot of sources that include garbage and propaganda, and filter out anything that is untrue, biased, or lacks context to get to the truth.
Dave Barnhart
the same people who spent 4 years saying Trump only won in 2016 because he was Putin’s lap dog and the Russians manipulated the 2016 election insisted the very second the polls closed that 2020 was the most fair election in recorded history. Everything was perfect. Nothing wrong. All was right. And people knew that was bull… so they turn to “conspiracy theories” to find reason in the situation.
@Dave: I read “leaders” more broadly as “people that people follow.” But maybe authorities was more the intent. I agree that trust in institutions and authorities is at a low and that belief in conspiracies tends to be inversely proportional to that level of trust.
@Mark
insisted the very second the polls closed that 2020 was the most fair election in recorded history. Everything was perfect. Nothing wrong. All was right.
This is what many voices on the right represented the claims to be, but it’s not what really happened. The “most secure… in history” claim came days later in response to Trump’s stolen election propaganda. Nobody I know of claimed there were no cases of local misconduct, error, or fraud. If “everything was perfect” was a claim at all, it certainly wasn’t mainstream. The actual claim was that there was no “massive fraud” that effected the outcome of the election, and most in middle and middle-right didn’t even make that claim until states did their due diligence and certified…. Which was mostly in November, if memory serves.
So, a sure sign someone is trying to manipulate you is when they erase all the nuance. The Fox, NewsMax and other right wing punditry use this kind of dishonesty extensively. Reflexively. Take what the “not us” people are saying, exaggerate it to the most extreme interpretation possible (and often beyond possible) and then put those words in their mouths. And mock them. It’s cheap, lazy, and dishonest.
It’s as evil when the right does it as when the left does it. Maybe more evil, since the right is supposed to be where we find conservatism. But constant straw-manning—or accidental/lazy nuance-erasing—is actually profoundly unconservative.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
Discussion