In recent years, artificial intelligence (AI) has transformed nearly every aspect of our lives, from automating mundane tasks to engaging in complex problem-solving. As AI continues to advance, its impact on Christian apologetics—the defense of the Christian faith—becomes an increasingly relevant discussion. How can AI assist in spreading the Gospel? Can it strengthen apologetic arguments? Are there ethical concerns that Christians should consider? This blog will explore the intersection of AI and Christian apologetics, highlighting the opportunities and challenges AI presents in defending and sharing the Christian faith.
Understanding AI in Apologetics
AI, particularly in the form of machine learning and natural language processing, has the ability to analyze vast amounts of data, recognize patterns, and generate responses that mimic human reasoning. While AI lacks consciousness or personal belief, it can be an effective tool in research, evangelism, and apologetics.
Christian apologists often rely on philosophical, historical, and scientific arguments to defend the faith. AI can assist by quickly retrieving scholarly sources, cross-referencing biblical texts, and generating logical arguments based on theological principles. Some AI-driven tools are already being used to create apologetic content, debate atheistic perspectives, and even translate Christian literature into multiple languages.
AI as a Tool for Evangelism
One of AI’s greatest strengths is its ability to analyze and process information rapidly. This makes it an invaluable tool for evangelism in the digital age. AI-powered chatbots, for example, can engage in faith-based discussions with seekers online, answering common questions about Christianity. These chatbots, programmed with theological knowledge, can provide real-time responses to individuals exploring faith-related topics.
Additionally, AI can be used in:
Content Generation: AI can help create sermon outlines, Bible study guides, and apologetic materials.
Language Translation: AI-driven translation tools enable missionaries and evangelists to share the Gospel with people who speak different languages, breaking down language barriers.
Social Media Engagement: AI algorithms can optimize Christian content for social media, reaching larger audiences and targeting individuals who may be searching for answers about faith.
Enhancing Apologetic Research
Christian apologetics is deeply rooted in historical and philosophical arguments. AI can assist scholars and laypeople alike by:
Analyzing Biblical Texts: AI can cross-reference Scripture and analyze linguistic patterns to provide deeper insights into biblical teachings.
Comparing Historical Evidence: AI can sift through vast databases of historical documents, assisting in defending the historical reliability of the Bible.
Debate Assistance: AI can be used to analyze past debates, identify key apologetic arguments, and generate counterpoints to atheistic or skeptical claims.
For example, AI-powered tools like Logos Bible Software already assist theologians in studying biblical texts more efficiently, offering cross-referenced commentaries, Greek and Hebrew word studies, and historical context at the click of a button.
Ethical and Theological Considerations
While AI offers many advantages, it also raises ethical and theological questions that Christians must consider.
Can AI Have Religious Beliefs? AI, no matter how advanced, does not possess consciousness, free will, or the ability to experience faith. It can simulate theological discussions, but it cannot have a personal relationship with God. As such, AI should be viewed as a tool rather than a source of ultimate truth.
Bias and Misinterpretation AI learns from data, which means it can inadvertently reflect biases present in the sources it is trained on. If an AI model is trained on secular or anti-Christian perspectives, it may produce responses that misrepresent biblical teachings. Christians must ensure that AI tools used in apologetics are programmed with doctrinal accuracy and biblical integrity.
Over-Reliance on Technology While AI can assist in apologetics, it cannot replace the Holy Spirit’s role in evangelism and spiritual transformation. Christians must be cautious not to rely solely on AI-generated arguments but to remain rooted in Scripture and prayerful discernment.
Moral Responsibility AI is often used to generate persuasive content, and there is potential for misinformation. Christian apologists must ensure they use AI ethically, promoting truth rather than manipulation.
AI and the Future of Apologetics
The future of apologetics in the age of AI is promising but requires careful stewardship. AI will likely become more sophisticated in analyzing theological arguments, engaging in debates, and assisting in evangelism. However, the core principles of apologetics will remain unchanged: defending the faith with logic, evidence, and biblical truth.
Potential future developments include:
AI-Powered Debaters: AI programs capable of engaging in live apologetic debates, responding to atheistic arguments in real time with well-researched theological and philosophical counterpoints.
Virtual Reality (VR) Apologetics: AI-driven VR experiences that immerse individuals in biblical history, strengthening faith through interactive storytelling.
Personalized AI Discipleship: AI tools that guide individuals through personalized apologetics training based on their unique questions and doubts.
Conclusion
AI is a powerful tool that can enhance Christian apologetics by aiding research, facilitating evangelism, and strengthening arguments for the faith. However, Christians must approach AI with discernment, ensuring that it aligns with biblical truth and ethical principles. While AI can support apologetic efforts, it is ultimately God who changes hearts and minds. By wisely integrating AI into Christian apologetics, believers can more effectively share and defend their faith in the digital age, reaching more people with the message of the Gospel than ever before.
First they came for the Communists And I did not speak out Because I was not a Communist
Then they came for the Socialists And I did not speak out Because I was not a Socialist
Then they came for the trade unionists And I did not speak out Because I was not a trade unionist
Then they came for the Jews And I did not speak out Because I was not a Jew
Then they came for me And there was no one left To speak out for me.
Martin Niemoller
There’s a saying I heard a while ago that’s stuck with me. It goes, “It’s far easier to act like a Christian than it is to react like a Christian.” The month of June offers Christians a chance to put this adage to the test. I’m of course speaking of Pride Month, 30 days of celebrating LGBTQ.
Wikipedia defines Pride Month as, “. . .a month, typically June, dedicated to celebration and commemoration of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender pride.” (bold mine).
Dictionary.com offers an expanded definition stating, “Pride Month is a month-long observance in celebration of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer people—and the history, culture, and contributions of these people and their communities. It is not limited to people with these sexualities or gender identities. Pride Month also celebrates and is celebrated by those with a range of other identities considered outside of the cishet [heterosexual] mainstream, including people who are intersex, nonbinary, asexual, pansexual, aromantic, two-spirit, or who identify in other ways or are questioning their sexual or gender identity or expression.” (bold mine).
Sam Won and Akos Baloh offer a historic definition of Pride Month writing, “Pride month is a major cultural event of the LGBTIQ+ community to commemorate cultural ideas and histories that formed them. It is in June to commemorate the historical event of the Stonewall Riots in June 1969, which is seen as the catalyst that galvanised a civil rights movement. Symbolically, Stonewall is seen as the ‘exodus’ that began the liberation of LGBTQ+ people from repression.“
In essence, Pride Month is a time dedicated to commemorating and celebrating LGBTQ identity and ideology. The activities include parades, speeches, the display of flags, media coverage, and targeted business marketing aimed at the LGBTQ community. Notably, there are even “churches” that observe Pride Month. It appears that there are few boundaries defining what is deemed suitable for celebrations during Pride Month.
Reacting Like a Christian
The focus of this essay is not to complain about Pride Month, but instead to offer an answer to the question – How should a Christian react to Pride Month?
The task of the Christian is not to whine about the moment in which he or she lives but to understand its problems and respond appropriately to them.
Carl R. Trueman
To answer the question, I will review what other Christians have suggested as an appropriate response, followed by insights from the Scriptures, and conclude with my opinion.
Where to start?
Where does one even begin delving into any topic of interest? Obviously, the trusty old Google! So, imagine my surprise when I embarked on my initial quest for “ideas on how to protest Pride Month” and ended up submerged in a sea of results on how to embrace and celebrate Pride instead. I mean, come on Google, show a little neutrality, will you? I want to give them the benefit of the doubt, but it seems like when it comes to Pride, Google might have misplaced its sense of inclusion.
Next, after realizing that Google might have some biased search results, I decided to consult the all-knowing artificial intelligence (AI), the trendy guru of the digital age. I’ve come to occasionally use AI for my writing endeavors and for solving all those random questions that pop into my head when exploring topics like this. Now, onto more pressing matters – How should a Christian react to Pride Month? According to ChatGPT. . .
This response seems to prioritize a Christian approach, underscoring the significance of participating in respectful and compassionate dialogues with individuals who have diverse beliefs, making an effort to comprehend LGBTQ+ viewpoints, and integrating prayer. It highlights the lack of a universally applicable Christian reaction. In essence, according to AI, there is no one-size-fits-all approach to Pride Month.
Next, we seek guidance from influential figures within the Christian community on effectively navigating the intricacies of Pride Month, all the while embodying the compassionate love of Christ.
What do other Christians suggest?
There is an abundance of opinions regarding how to respond to Pride Month. As the saying goes, “Opinions are like belly buttons, everyone has one.” Nevertheless, the varied opinions of others provide a foundation for exploring solutions to our inquiries. This process underscores the importance of Christians identifying reliable sources for guidance when confronted with such issues. Three sources that I often turn to, and consider to be trustworthy Christian voices, are as follows:
From GotQuestions.org, “It’s important to stand for biblical ideals. We ought not celebrate what Scripture condemns. Yet the gospel is not served if Christians contribute to false stereotypes (e.g., homophobia) about the faith. When sexuality and gender are filtered through unbiblical cultural views, the best tactic for most Christians is like that of the ‘conscientious objector’: polite, peaceful, firm refusal to actively participate in Pride Month events without demanding others to follow suit.“
What the article suggests is that Christians shouldn’t celebrate Pride Month. Instead, we should be loving, yet resistant to what Pride stands for.
The article continues with, “In short, the best Christian response to Pride Month is polite non-participation. Followers of Jesus should decline to have anything to do with “Pride” events. We should speak truth in love when given an appropriate chance (Ephesians 4:15). It’s good to articulate why we cannot endorse the ideas or assumptions behind the promotion of ‘Pride.’ We should avoid giving worldly culture exactly what it wants: ammunition with which to falsely accuse the gospel of hateful intolerance (1 Peter 3:15–17). Many will be offended by truth spoken in humility and love (1 Peter 4:4)—but that means their conflict is with God, not with us (Galatians 1:10).“
In other words, refrain from being hypocritical by providing Pride advocates with grounds to label you as intolerant and patronizing.
Furthermore, “At the very least, Christians should never actively participate in anything that blatantly defies God (Acts 5:29), even though defiance of worldly expectations concerning Pride Month might mean suffering social and legal consequences. When so led by the Spirit, Christians can and should give a sound explanation for their views (1 Peter 3:15–17) and why others would be wise to follow suit. What we should not do is respond in panic or with fear that we have “lost” somehow when culture turns away from God.“
Sam Wan and Akos Baloh published an article on The Gospel Coalition (TGC) site. They write, “Our descriptions have the potential to shape our responses. How we describe LGBTQ+ people will shape our response and interactions with them.” The authors describe two types of “descriptions” – thin and thick.
Thin descriptions are low level and provide little insight into the people you are seeking to understand. Examples of thin descriptors would be reading someone’s blog, social media post, online articles, and/or word-of-mouth. These tend to be very one dimensional.
Alternatively, thick descriptions offer a much richer understanding. Examples would include actual conversations and face-to-face interactions at events. These provide a far more deeper level of engagement and understanding.
The TGC article goes on to say, “Now Christians should not affirm aspects of Pride that celebrate diverse sexual expression antithetical to biblical sexual ethics. But there’s a difference between not affirming sexual ethics, and not relating to persons. Scripture teaches us again and again that while God does not condone sin, he relates with sinners.“
Summarizing the TGC authors, Christians should engage beyond the typical online mediums and meet with real LGBTQ people and those who identify as “allies” to the community. While we should not affirm the beliefs, ideologies, etc., we should engage in conversation to seek understanding and demonstrate love for others, even if we don’t agree with them.
Tim Barnett (aka Red Pen Logic) writes on the Stand to Reason (STR) blog about confused Christians regarding how we should show love for others, especially those we don’t agree with. He writes, “Unfortunately, most people in our society—including some Christians—are confused about genuine love. They conflate acceptance and affirmation with love. Therefore, the people who do not affirm LGBT values are, by definition, unloving. But this is clearly mistaken. It is possible to truly love someone, but not accept and affirm their ideas or behavior.” This is evident to anyone who is a parent. Your child often does things you don’t approve of, but you still love them.
Tim offers advice on what we should do to show love for the LGBT community. He writes, “We should be the first to defend the LGBT community against mistreatment, abuse, and unjust discrimination. Every member of the LGBT community is made in the image of God. Therefore, each one is intrinsically valuable and should be treated with the utmost dignity and respect. Anything less is wicked.“
However, love doesn’t mean celebrating what God deems as sinful. Barnett states, “True love doesn’t support and celebrate wickedness. Rather, it holds fast to what is good. This is not an easy thing to do. The culture is working hard to pull you away from what is good. And it won’t stop at mere acceptance of evil. No, the culture demands that you celebrate it. And if you don’t, ironically, you will be called unloving and bigoted.“
Finally, Tim provides a practical approach for Christians to take during Pride Month – “This month, while the world celebrates LGBT Pride, choose to love your LGBT neighbor by being a light to the world. As an act of love, do something kind for them. Invite them over for dinner. Treat them to a movie or sports event. Laugh together. Spend time getting to know each other. But don’t compromise your convictions.“
Summarizing the three opinions on how a Christian should react to Pride Month starts by firmly upholding the truth of God’s word, followed by showing gentleness and respect while refusing to participate in Pride activities. Additionally, it involves speaking the truth whenever the opportunity arises. Finally, it entails actively working to cultivate “thick” relationships with people who identify as LGBTQ and/or are allies to the community, seizing opportunities to demonstrate Christ’s love for the lost.
We now turn to the conclusion of this essay with my thoughts on how Christians should react to Pride Month.
The Church is in a Spiral of Silence
According to a report by Gallup, 68% of Americans self-identify as “Christian.” With the current US population estimated at 336 million, this would mean that the number of “Christians” in America surpasses 228 million people. This figure is equivalent to the combined population of the top 16 most populated states!
Envision the entire population of California, Texas, Florida, and New York professing their faith as a disciple of Christ Jesus. Furthermore, the combined population of these four states is still less than 50% of the total number of individuals who identify as “Christians.”
Then Jesus told his disciples, “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me.”
Matthew 16:24
My point in starting here is to pose a thought-provoking question about the current state of affairs in America. With over 200 million followers of Christ Jesus purportedly living in America today, one might wonder if the country would exhibit its present characteristics if this statistic were indeed accurate.
Would Pride Month exist?
Would marriage be defined as a covenant between two people, regardless of sex?
Would ending the life of an unborn child be defined as “healthcare?”
Would children, through the “help” of a “physician,” be allowed to get therapy, drugs, and surgery to permanently change their bodies?
I could keep asking more questions related to the world we live in today, but the answer would still be the same – No, I would like to believe the US would look entirely different if there truly were 200 million plus disciples of Christ in America today.
Perhaps the number is correct, and many are simply ignorant, apathetic, or lack the courage to stand up for the truth and speak out against the madness? As I began writing this essay I was reminded of one of the most impactful and convicting books I’ve read lately. The book is Eric Metaxas’ Letter to the American Church. The overarching message Metaxas writes about is that the Church has failed to take a stand for God’s truth. And, because of this lack of courage, we should not be surprised by what we are now experiencing (e.g., same-sex “marriage,” polyamory, Pride Month, etc.).
The chapter that stands out is titled “12,000 Pastors.” Metaxas writes about the Nazis and the response from the Protestant church in Germany. At the time there were estimated to be 18,000 pastors in Germany. Some of these Christian leaders wrote a document that came to be known as the Barmen Declaration that stated the German state must not interfere with the Church. Those who signed the declaration were identified as the “Confessing Church.”
Unfortunately, the vast majority of pastors were not willing to sign the document. Metaxas argues they didn’t have the courage to sign even though they knew it was true. By 1935 just 3,000 of the 18,000 pastors stood with the Confessing Church. Incredibly, 3,000 stood with Hitler, and roughly 12,000 did nothing – they were silent.
Silence in the face of evil is itself evil. Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act. God will not hold us guiltless.
Author Unknown
Metaxas writes, “If another three thousand or six thousand Protestant pastors had stood with the Confessing Church during this time, the Nazis could never have been able to succeed, which is an extraordinary and heartbreaking thing to consider.” He argues that the church had great cultural power, and it is unlikely Hitler could have taken the action he did if the church would have stood up and spoke out against the violence.
I share this story because, as Metaxas also points out, it mimics what is taking place in the Church today. It’s a concept known as the “spiral of silence,” which is based on the work of German sociologist and political scientist Elisabeth Noell-Neumann. Ironically, she was born in Berlin and lived during the Nazi regime control of Germany. Metaxas also reports that Noell-Neumann was pro-Hitler and had even met him while at university.
The spiral of silence, as Metaxas writes, “Refers to the idea that when people fail to speak, the price of speaking rises. As the price to speak rises, still fewer speak out, which further causes the price to rise, so that fewer people yet will speak out, until a whole culture or nation is silenced.” It’s easy to see how this could be true during the Holocaust where an estimated 6 million Jews and an additional 6 million others were murdered by the Nazis. Surely, many people knew this was wrong (including those doing the killing), but despite the killing, said and did nothing.
I believe a similar situation is occurring in America today. While I may be somewhat facetious in suggesting that not all who claim to be Christians are truly followers of Christ, it is likely that many simply have fallen into a spiral of silence.
They fear losing their job, being labeled a homophobe or bigot, getting shunned by friends and family, etc. I too was once afraid to speak out. However, this is not a “neutral” position – there is no such thing as being neutral.
Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters.
Jesus, Matthew 12:30
Furthermore, as Metaxas points out, “Just as cowardice begets cowardice, courage begets courage. . .Either we help evil, or we fight evil. Either we speak and thereby help others to speak truth, or we cower in silence and thereby lead others to do the same.” Neutrality is not an option for the true disciple of Christ.
Jesus indicated that one of the requirements for becoming his disciple was to take up your cross, a commitment that everyone present understood as a willingness to sacrifice their life. Luke’s gospel intensifies this message from what Matthew wrote, emphasizing that a disciple must be prepared to take up their cross on a daily basis (Luke 9:23).
So, why do so many remain silent? The reasons are not entirely clear. It is possible that many of those who stay silent are not genuinely committed to the Christian faith. Some may be supportive of LGBTQ lifestyles and do not see it as an affront to God’s teachings. Furthermore, there may be a significant number who are indifferent and apathetic, believing that it does not impact them or their loved ones.
Where do we go from here? How should a true follower of Christ Jesus react to Pride Month? Here are four ways I suggest we should react as Christians.
View the world through the eyes of Christ.
Years ago when I encountered LGBTQ people in person, online, on television, in movies, etc. it disgusted me. I found their behavior intolerable and it angered me to see it. Then something happened and I began asking God to help me see the world the way he sees it. Christ doesn’t look at the world with disgust. He sees the world destroyed by sin and it brings him sorrow.
Jesus wept.
John 11:35
I also aim to recognize the detrimental impact of sin within the LGBTQ community. Rather than feeling disgust, I empathize with feelings of sorrow and sadness for those who are lost. It’s important to acknowledge that there is still hope as long as they have breath in their lungs. Christ’s sacrifice allows all who believe and repent, including those who identify as LGBTQ, to attain eternal life.
Educate yourself on what the Scriptures say about sexuality.
I would argue, ignorance is one of the biggest challenges facing the Church today (apathy being the second), and if you want to react properly you have to know the truth of God’s word as it relates to sexuality. This can take some time, but remember, we are commanded in God’s word to be able to make a defense for what we believe.
But in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for the reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect.
1 Peter 3:15
Furthermore, I would suggest reading from both non-affirming and affirming authors. You need to fully understand both sides of any argument to truly know how to respond. Some books to consider include:
Engage with affirming Christians and non-Christians.
It’s easy to become biased when you never expose yourself to other opinions on a topic. Reading some of the aforementioned books that take an affirming view is a starting point. However, to engage with those who affirm the LGBTQ lifestyle and ideology is an even better way to seek understanding from their perspective.
A fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion.
Proverbs 18:2
Even if you do not personally know anyone who is part of the LGBTQ community, it is highly likely that you will encounter numerous individuals online who are. Although online discussions often yield limited results, they can serve as an initial step towards understanding the perspectives of others.
Take action.
Knowing the truth and being able to defend it with gentleness and respect is a great place to start. However, if you do nothing with the truth it serves little to no value. You need to take action. To do nothing is to be complicit with the problem.
So whoever knows the right thing to do and fails to do it, for him it is sin.
James 4:17
The apostle Paul, writing to his protege Timothy, offers a number of stern, action-provoking words still relevant to disciples of Christ Jesus today. First, he reminds Timothy not to be ashamed of the Truth.
For God gave us a spirit not of fear but of power and love and self-control. Therefore do not be ashamed of the testimony about our Lord,
2 Timothy 1:7-8a
Next, Paul instructs Timothy to endeavor to become a disciple who is approved by God, while steering clear of unfruitful debates.
Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth. But avoid irreverent babble, for it will lead people into more and more ungodliness,
2 Timothy 2:15-16
He proceeds with advice that remains highly pertinent even 2,000 years later, particularly in the context of social media. Avoid spending time conversing with individuals who are not genuinely interested in engaging in a meaningful conversation.
Have nothing to do with foolish, ignorant controversies; you know that they breed quarrels. And the Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth, and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, after being captured by him to do his will.
2 Timothy 2:23-26
God has given us all free will. We have a choice to speak out or be silent. As a disciple of Christ Jesus your goal is to become more like him each day of your life. On being a disciple, Philosopher Dallas Willard stated, “As a disciple I am learning from Jesus to live my life as he would live my life if he were I.“
You don’t need to resort to using a bullhorn and delivering fiery sermons on a street corner to initiate action. Begin by engaging in conversations with friends and family, but without adopting a preachy demeanor. Initiate the dialogue with questions. What are your thoughts on Pride Month? How do you believe Christians should respond to Pride Month?
Furthermore, it is important to actively participate in online discussions when it is appropriate. Rather than lecturing, approach the conversation by asking thought-provoking open-ended questions, such as “Why do you believe that is true?” (for example, in response to an affirming position post, meme, image, etc.). In a considerate and respectful manner, inquire about the evidence they have to support their viewpoint or belief.
Finally, consider writing as I’ve done here to share your thoughts with others. I find there’s nothing quite like writing an essay on a topic to help you develop your position, beliefs, etc.
I conclude with some pointed words from Eric Metaxas. He writes, “Are you willing? Are you ready? God has chosen each of us to live now, at this very moment in history, for His eternal purposes. We are not here now by some mistake. God has ordained that we be born when we were born and that we live now, to do the works now that He has prepared for us in advance, to His glory. It is an unimaginable privilege. This is the hour of the American Church. We are charged with pointing our fellow Americans and the whole world to the God who has somehow allowed us the inexpressibly great privilege of representing Him in these dark days. Will we do so? Will you?“
You are not a result of chance. Your existence today is not mere happenstance. You have been deliberately created by God to be alive at this moment, to exemplify the gospel, and to provide the essential influence and illumination that this deteriorating and shadowy world desperately requires. Do not squander this opportunity.
The more I make my life, my well-being, my enlightenment, and my success primary, the farther I step from reality. Thus the hell-bound do not travel downward; they travel inward, cocooning themselves behind a mass of vanity, personal rights, religiosity, and defensiveness. Obsession with self is the defining mark of a disintegrating soul (italics mine).1
Jeff Cook
There’s this moment, you know, when suddenly it hits you that your kids are actually “growing up.” It’s like someone flipped a switch and bam! Your once adorable little munchkin, blissfully oblivious to the craziness and danger in the world, gives you a sneak peek of “maturity.” It’s a mix of thrilling and terrifying.
As for me, picture this: a Christian homeschooling dad, doing his best to raise two little girls into future women of God, embracing a biblical worldview. Well, the day arrived not long ago when my eldest waltzed in for our homeschool session with her mom’s old smartphone snug in her back pocket. Oh, the joys of parenthood!
When did my little girl start acting like a “grownup?”
Where did this come from?
How did this happen?
These were questions racing through my mind as I stared at the phone hanging out of her little pocket. The next thought that surfaced was, I don’t like this!
Some of these feelings were no doubt the result of reading Jonathan Haidt’s recent book, The Anxious Generation, in which he contends a great “rewiring” of childhood that began in 2010 is the primary culprit for the rise in mental illness amongst children.
Who is Jonathan Haidt?
I’ve made it a habit of recent to always do some research on the authors I’m reading. I find it helps me better understand their perspective, bias, beliefs, etc. In his own words, Jonathan Haidt is “a social psychologist at New York University’s Stern School of Business. [His] mission is to use research on moral psychology to help people understand each other and to help important social institutions work better.“2 I also discovered in the reading of his book that he’s an atheist and believes in evolution. He is married to Jayne and has two children, a son and a daughter.
Haidt’s thesis is that “two trends – overprotection in the real world and underprotection in the virtual world – are the major reasons why children born after 1995 became the anxious generation.“3 This essay is a one-part summary of the book and one part about how Christian parents might use the data presented to be proactive in raising little ones who want to become grownups living out a biblical worldview.4 I begin with a detailed summary of the book, followed by what the critics have said regarding Haidt’s research, and finish with what I’ve learned and my advice for Christian parents raising children in the 21st century.
The task of the Christian is not to whine about the moment in which he or she lives but to understand its problems and respond appropriately to them.5
Carl Trueman
Also, note that my essay is quite detailed, with graphs, charts, and illustrations from the book. The text is nearly 400 pages, including over 60 pages of notes and references (not counting additional data available online). I’m presenting my highlights, notes, and comments here so that you don’t have to read the book, but nonetheless, I still highly recommend getting it to read deeper into my overview outlined here. To make it easier to navigate the essay, below is a table of contents:
One of the initial aspects I appreciate about this book is Haidt’s approach of revealing essential pieces of advice early on, as opposed to withholding them until the conclusion, as some authors tend to do. In the opening pages, he presents four recommendations derived from his research. These recommendations encompass:
No smartphones before high school.
No social media before 16.
Phone free schools.
Far more unsupervised play and childhood independence.
The valuable aspect of these recommendations, as indicated by Haidt, is their minimal cost, and their effectiveness regardless of the support from elected officials. As a parent, particularly a homeschool parent, you can implement all four of these suggestions with minimal effort. Even if your children attend government or privately operated schools, 1, 2, and 4 are still “free,” although they may not be as straightforward to execute.
Kids Just Want to Fit In
Think about what nearly all K-12 children desire, especially those attending school outside of the home. As someone who went to both private and public schools growing up in the 70s and 80s all I desired was to “fit in.” Like most kids still to this day, I wanted to “blend in” with the crowd. The desire to fit in shouldn’t be surprising since most forms of education seek to create conformance to a specified standard (i.e., fit in).
Alexis Spence supports this belief as she explained to Haidt why she was so eager to get an Instagram account in sixth grade despite her parents being against the idea.
What made it so addictive was that I just wanted to fit in with my peers. I didn’t want to miss anything, because if I missed anything, then I was out of the loop, and if I was out of the loop, then kids would laugh at me or make fun of me for not understanding what was going on, and I didn’t want to be left out (bold mine).6
Alex Spence in interview with Jonathan Haidt
The excerpt also highlights another challenge faced by parents of the Internet generation. It’s notable how often Alexis refers to herself (e.g., use of “I”). Social media is arguably contributing to the creation of a more narcissistic global population with an obsession with self.
Furthermore, John Taylor Gatto provides some additional insights into the challenges of education in his book, Dumbing us Down. Gatto, a prestigious 26-year public school teacher in New York (honored as the New York City Teacher of the Year in 1989, 1990, and 1991, and New York State Teacher of the Year in 1991), resigned abruptly in 1991 via an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal. Gatto succinctly articulates a challenge Haidt doesn’t address in his book, stating, “Schools are intended to produce, through the application of formulas, formulaic human beings whose behavior can be predicted and controlled.“7 One could argue that most teachers aspire to cultivate classrooms of well-behaved children whose conduct aligns with a predictable standard. Who doesn’t want to teach in a classroom full of obedient children?
I mention this at the onset of my summary because children are being trained to conform – to look like one another – to meet an expectation that isn’t only academic but also social. The training is both deliberate and formal (e.g., in the classroom) and informal and social (e.g., relationships and observation of other children outside the classroom).
Imagine a child, better yet, your child, at school where everyone else has a smartphone and is on social media EXCEPT her. How would this make your child feel? Words that come to mind are isolated, excluded, segregated, removed, and detached (i.e., just like Alex Spence described). I would argue the “solutions” Haidt lobbies for with children that are not homeschooled creates a far greater challenge.
In a way I’m suggesting homeschool is a better approach, but that’s not the point of this essay. I want simply to suggest if your children are not homeschooled expect the smartphone war to be a series of battles you as a parent will be in with your children as they grow older and are surrounded by other kids staring at a screen.
Book Contents
The table of contents below illustrates the layout of the text. The author describes the contents as an explanation for the mental health trends in adolescents since 2010 (part 1); the nature of childhood and how we messed it up (part 2); the harms that result from the smartphone-based childhood (part 3); and what needs to be done to reverse the damage in families, schools, and society (part 4).
Note: Haidt provides all the documents (table of contents, figures, illustrations, etc.), data, helpful guides, chapter supplements, etc. here: https://www.anxiousgeneration.com/research
Part 1 | A Tidal Wave of Despair
Haidt begins by making a case for the connection between the decline in the mental well-being of teenagers coming of age in the 2000s, emphasizing a noticeable change in the data from 2010 onwards. Figure 1.1 demonstrates the increase in cases of major depression among adolescents. A significant shift began in 2010.
However, the above data are “self-reported,” which can be less accurate since teens are assessing themselves. Nevertheless, a similar increase in self-harm by teens, something not as easily misreported or faked, also started to rise in 2009, as shown in Figure 1.4.
Moreover, suicide rates also rose sharply starting in 2007 (see Figure 1.5). I find the data for 10-14 year old children extremely disturbing. These are kids in 4th to 8th grade – middle schoolers. It’s mind blowing to think that a 10 year old child could be in such a state of despair that they believe the only thing they can do is end their life.
Despair begins as a battle in the mind. The struggle can often lead a person to be unable to see beyond the present situation. What I would argue so many children today lack is hope. Hope is the opposite of despair. Hope is about expectation of what is yet to come. How you experience the present is dictated by your belief about the future.
This is often where a deep contrast between a secular and biblical worldview becomes quite evident as it relates to hope about the future. For the atheist (i.e., secular worldview) there is no hope. Life on earth is as good as it gets.
Alternatively, for the follower of Christ, this earthly life is the worst it will be. Everything in the future will be better than it is today. Hope is at the center of a Christian’s life, whereas for the atheist hope lies in the present and a twofold “purpose” (I put this word in quotes because if life ends at death it has no purpose beyond the atheist’s imagination) to minimize personal pain and maximize personal pleasure. As a famous prosperity pastor advised in the title of his best selling book, “Your best life [is] now.”
He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning, nor crying, nor pain anymore, for the former things have passed away.
Revelation 21:4
So, what happened around 2010? Why the sharp increase in these data at this time? Haidt argues, it was the introduction of the smartphone in 2007 that changed the lives of many people, especially those now known as Generation Z (those born 1997-2012).
The Internet had been around for over a decade by 2010, and even social media (Facebook started in 2004), but what really changed was not that teens were online, but that now with a smartphone in their pocket they could be online all the time. Haidt reports that by 2016 79% of teens owned a smartphone and 28% of children 8-12 years old also had one.
Furthermore, Haidt cites Pew Research that found one of every four teens in 2015 were online “almost constantly,” and by 2022 the number had increased to 46%.8 Also worth noting in 2010 Apple’s iPhone 4 introduced us to the self-facing camera, the ultimate self-promoting technology of the 21st century.
Haidt concludes, “. . .I refer to the period from 2010 to 2015 as the Great Rewiring of Childhood. Social patterns, role models, emotions, physical activity, and even sleep patterns were fundamentally reset, for adolescents, over the course of just five years. The daily life, consciousness, and social relationships of 13-year-olds with iPhones in 2013 (who were born in 2000) were profoundly different from those of 13-year-olds with flip phones in 2007 (who were born in 1994).“9 In summary, a significant rewiring began, and we are now reaping the consequences.
Part 2 | The End of Free Play & Discover Mode
Childhood in the 21st century has definitely changed, and as Haidt argues in part two, it has changed for the worse. One of the most significant changes is illustrated in Figure 2.1. Kids are spending less time with other kids. In 1991, around half of children hung out with their friends every day. However, nearly 30 years later, the number is down to a third meeting each day. In a sense, kids are getting less social despite the rise in social media use.
Moreover, when looking at the data in minutes per day (see Figure 5.1), a similar trend occurred, with a dramatic downward shift beginning in 2010. Nearly twenty years ago, 15 – 24-year-olds were spending almost two hours hanging out with friends every day, but in 2019, that time was less than half of what it was in 2003.
Haidt argues that kids are missing out on “free play,” a play that is freely chosen and directed by children with no specific goal. I can remember this type of play being central to my childhood—getting on my bike with no destination in mind, picking up a football and heading to the park, etc. The author suggests that today, parents, teachers, and coaches are too involved in kids’ playing. They can’t stop themselves from taking control and directing the kids.
I’m guilty of this, and you probably are as well if you’ve ever told your children, “Be careful,” “Don’t do that,” “Put that down,” etc. As Haidt suggests, “Experience, not information, is the key to emotional development. It is unsupervised, child-led play where children best learn to tolerate bruises, handle their emotions, read other children’s emotions, take turns, resolve conflicts, and play fair.“10 A simple way to apply this advice is to tell your children to “work it out” the next time they get into a disagreement.
Chronic social comparison is also something Haidt highlights that is adding to the rewiring of childhood. This is even a problem for children who don’t post anything on social media. They are still prone to comparing themselves to other children. Moreover, this plays a part in “social learning,” by copying others whom children follow online.
Again, this is the natural yearning for most children: they just want to conform (i.e., fit in) to the crowd. When I was growing up, we would refer to this as “peer pressure.” Once more, this furthers the argument that children educated in government or privately run schools could face more significant pressure to conform. As a homeschool dad, this perhaps is one of the greatest arguments for teaching at home – you are the greatest “influencer” in their life simply because you spend more time with them than anyone else.
A disciple is not above his teacher, but everyone when he is fully trained will be like his teacher.
Jesus Christ, Luke 6:40
Moreover, as Haidt writes, “Social media platforms are, therefore, the most efficient conformity engines ever invented. They can shape an adolescent’s mental models of acceptable behavior in a matter of hours, whereas parents can struggle unsuccessfully for years to get their children to sit up straight or stop whining. Parents don’t get to use the power of conformity bias, so they are often no match for the socializing power of social media.“11 This, however, assumes that all or most social media influences are negative, which is obviously not always true. It does, however, point out that positive social media influencers could be a good thing for older children (e.g., 16+ years old) who are ready to responsibly handle social media.
Central to Haidt’s argument for not allowing younger children to have smartphones or partake in social media is that their brains are developing. Therefore, “Healthy brain development depends on getting the right experiences at the right age and in the right order.“12 He cites research that suggests the worst years for using social media is 11 to 13 for girls, and 14 to 15 for boys, thus suggesting 13 (the legal age in the US) is too young for creating a social media account.
I resonated with Haidt’s two mindsets children have access to based on how they are parented and treated by leaders in school. The mindset that is prevalent today, according to the author, is the “defend mode” mindset. Figure 3.1 outlines this mindset, something consistent with “helicopter parenting” (i.e., never letting your children do anything on their own).
Haidt argues, and this is one of his four leading suggestions, is that parents and educators need to take a step back and let kids live in “discover mode” more often. This is a possible reason why Gen Z often struggles when facing a difficult situation. Haidt writes, “Children who are routinely exposed to small risks grow up to become adults who can handle much larger risks without panicking. . .small mistakes promote growth and learning.“13 When parents coddle their children too much it can have a negative effect on them in adulthood. This could be one of the reasons why so many college freshman saw an increase in psych disorders since 2010 as illustrated in Figure 3.2.
Section two closes with the author pushing for less “safetyism,” which he argues is an experience blocker. When parents and school leaders are focused on keeping kids safe from every little harm, they could be blocking them from learning experiences. Too many rules (e.g., illustrated by “tag rules” in Figure 3.10 from a public school in Berkley, CA) can lead to less experiences where children have to learn to deal with stress and anxiety. They can also strip away the creative abilities children should be developing. A few guardrails are a good idea, but too many lead to children who become coddled adults not able to handle even the smallest of challenges they will face in the grown-up world.
Haid finishes the section by arguing, “Smartphones are a second kind of experience blocker [safetyism is the first]. Once they enter a child’s life, they push out or reduce all other forms of non-phone-based experience, which is the kind that their experience-expectant brains most need.“14 Between 2010 and 2015, a significant rewiring occurred, and much of it was due to a shift from a discover mode to a defender mode mindset. Haidt argues that the coddling of the American mind had begun, and this was not the children’s fault, but of their parents.
Part 3 | The Rise of a Phone-Based Childhood
Part three centers on evidence of harm from the significant rewiring. Haidt argues there are four foundational harms that have been birthed out of the phone-based childhood. These harms include:
Social deprivation
Sleep deprivation
Attention fragmentation
Addiction
Most people, whether parents or not, can see the truth in these four problems. People, whether children or adults, who spend too much time on social media are going to be deprived socially, sleep less, be less attentive, and in extreme cases, become addicted (this is especially true regarding porn).
Anecdotes can be helpful, but data is still king, and Haidt brings the receipts in this section of the book with plenty of evidence to back up what most of us already know.
In God we trust, all others must bring data.
Source unknown, but often attributed to W. Edwards Deming
In this part of the book, Haidt lays out a series of characteristics that I found helpful in defining social media. They include user profiles, user-generated content, networking (e.g., becoming “friends” with others), and interactivity (e.g., likes, shares, and comments). These descriptors fit platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, X, Snapchat, TikTok, Reddit, and LinkedIn. He also includes Youtube; however, YouTube is seen more as a video library site and less for its social features.
Haidt suggests something changed around 2010 when Facebook introduced the “like” button, and Twitter allowed users to “retweet” posts. He argues, “These innovations quantified the success of every post and incentivized users to craft each post for maximum spread.” The author goes on to write, “At the same time, Facebook began using algorithmically curated news feeds. . .[to] curate content that would most successfully hook users.“15
For example, this is why you’re never likely to see anything positive about President Biden if you like Trump positive posts and vice versa. The algorithm furthers your belief and bias toward what you like and believe to be true. You never get “fed” alternative opinions so your’s remains the same. One could argue this is one reason we are such a polarized nation.
A fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion.
Proverbs 18:2
Suggestion: What Facebook and other social media sites that “feed” your bias need is a “balanced view” feature users can turn on to get alternative opinions on topics, especially controversial topics such as politics, abortion, LGBTQ issuses, religion, etc.
I’m often quick to point out that the most valuable thing God has blessed each of us with is not money or even family. The most valuable thing is time. We all have 24 hours each day, regardless of whether we have wealth and/or family. Time equates to opportunity, and opportunity can be lost if we don’t use it well. Haidt points this out in staggering terms as it relates to social media.
For example, preteens spend around 40 hours a week looking at screens for leisure activities (i.e., non-educational). Teens spend nearly 50 hours. Pew Research reports that a third of teens say they’re on one of the major social media sites “almost constantly.” Doing the math that equates to 16 hours a day – 112 hours per week. That’s what I’d call a major lost opportunity!
The cost of a thing is the amount of. . .life which is required to be exchanged for it, immediately or in the long run.16
Henry David Thoreau
Two words that describe this phenomenon are “social labor.” Haidt discusses why so much time is spent online – FOMO – or fear of missing out. He writes, “The work is often joyless, yet many feel compelled to do it, lest they ‘miss out’ on something or be excluded. Eventually, for many, it becomes a mindless habit, something they turn to dozens of times each day.“17 A mindless habit. This is so true. Children and adults with smartphones are too often caught in a mindless habit – a habit that requires no thinking and frequently leads to little learning.
Additionally, Haidt cites research that states the numbers vary by social class and race, which I found surprising. Lower-income families spend more time online, and Black and Latinos are online more than Asians and White families. This is also true of LGBTQ youth, which could be a reason why over 20% of Gen Z identify as LGBTQ, especially those who identify as transgender – something one prominent author describes as a “social contagion.”
How do we consume as much of your time and conscious attention as possible?18
Sean Parker, first president of Facebook in 2017 interview
What’s the harm? The first harm Haidt points out is something I’ve already discussed above – social deprivation. Kids are spending far less time with other kids. Social media, argues Haidt, is creating more social distance between children. He points to research done by Jean Twenge, which shows that teens who spend time in person with other teens (e.g., playing sports or in religious communities) have better mental health than those spending lots of time on social media.
The second harm is that kids are getting less sleep than they did before smartphones came into existence. Figure 5.2 shows a sharp uptick in teens with less than 7 hours of sleep. This lack of sleep, combined with critical brain development, is a toxic mix that can lead to several problems.
Furthermore, research shows that children (and adults) need adequate sleep to maintain good attention, the third harm social media creates. Haidt writes, “Smartphones are kryptonite for attention.“19
Finally, addiction is the fourth and most serious harm caused by smartphones and social media. Research on animals is conclusive that rewarding them based on a “variable-ratio schedule” (i.e., providing rewards on a schedule that is not predictable) leads to the strongest and most persistent behavior. This behavior can be seen by anyone who posts to social media and constantly checks for “likes” and “shares.” We, children and adults, similar to animals, like (no pun intended) rewards, and will keep checking for them when they’re not automatically coming our way.
Girls, Boys, and Social Media
As the father of two girls, I found chapter six of particular interest. The title of this chapter is, Why Social Media Harms Girls More Than Boys.Haidt writes, “There is a clear, consistent, and sizable link between heavy social media use and mental illness for girls, but that relationship gets buried or minimized in studies and literature reviews that look at all digital activities for all teens.“20 Later I’ll share what the critics say about Haidt’s claim, but for now look at Figure 6.2 that followed 19,000 children born in 2000 as they matured into adolescence.
There is a more significant relationship between time spent on social media and the likelihood of depression for girls. Those girls who spend five plus hours on social media are three times as likely to be depressed than those who reported they spend no time on social media.
Furthermore, girls are more likely to become social media “super-users.” Haidt reports that by 2015, one in seven girls had reached this level of social media usage.
For adolescent girls social standing is often tied to their beauty and sex appeal. As you can see in Figure 6.4, what you see online is not a true representation of reality.
The problems with spending massive amounts of time on social media negatively affect not only girls but also boys. Neither are as satisfied with themselves as they were before the great rewiring in 2010, as illustrated in Figure 6.5.
Furthermore, both boys and girls feel lonely more than they ever have, as shown in Figure 6.7.
This leads to a not-so-surprising conclusion that neither boys nor girls feel they have a chance for a successful life, as displayed in Figure 7.1.
Finally, nearly one in five girls and boys feel that life is meaningless. I’ll discuss this more in the final section of this essay, but in essence it would appear many children see no meaning in life, hence it is meaningless. I will later argue this has much to do with the worldview of most children.
Finally, Before I end this section, I want to share my thoughts on the chapter I was most looking forward to reading. This chapter Haidt titled, Spiritual Elevation and Degradation. The author begins by writing, “The phone-based life produces spiritual degradation, not just in adolescents, but in all of us.“21 This leads to the question – what does “spiritual” mean?
Spiritual is a word that’s been redefined recently, and Haidt suggests spiritual means to live a life of morality. He suggests that Christians should ask, “What would Jesus do?” Secular people should create their own “moral” example. This is where he also points out that he’s an atheist. He writes, “I am an atheist, but I find that I sometimes need words and concepts from religion to understand the experience of life as a human being.“22 I find this statement so telling about the weakness of atheism. What atheists such as Haidt are actually saying is they cannot make sense of the world (this is what a worldview does) without “stealing” words and concepts from other worldviews (e.g., Christianity).
In other words, atheism has nothing to offer in making sense of the world. If atheism is true, then there’s no point in attempting to make sense of the world because life has no meaning, value, or purpose. We’re born, we die and are quickly forgotten. If you don’t believe this take a second to think about your great great great grandfather. What was his name? Where did he live? What did he do for a living? If you’re like most people, myself included, you can’t even answer the first question. In just a few generations we will all mostly be forgotten. All that we do will have little to no impact on those who follow us. As philosopher and apologist William Lane Craig points out, life is just a purposeless rush toward oblivion, if God does not exist.
Moreover, the data suggesting life often feels meaningless (Figure 7.6) didn’t surprise me because more young people are identifying as atheist, and if atheism is true, life IS meaningless.
Barna describes Gen Z as, “The first truly ‘post-Christian’ generation.“23 They report the percentage of Gen Z’ers who identify as atheists is double the US adult population (13% vs. 6%).
Summarizing this chapter, Haidt “draws on wisdom from ancient traditions and modern psychology to try to make sense of how the phone-based life affects people spiritually by blocking or counteracting. . .spiritual practices.”24 His argument points to research suggesting that certain spiritual practices improve well-being and that smartphones and social media interfere with these benefits.
Part 4 | Now what?
The final section of the book is where rubber meets the road with practical ideas to address the problem defined in the first three sections. I noted the four recommendations at the beginning of this essay, but as a reminder here they are once again.
No smartphones before high school.
No social media before 16.
Phone free schools.
Far more unsupervised play and childhood independence.
Before he dives into the recommendations he makes a valid point, especially if your children are educated in government or privately run institutions. Haidt argues for “collective action” as a premise to implementing the four recommendations.
Parents need to work with other parents to reduce the problem with fitting in previously discussed. The only way your child will not feel left out is if the children around them are holding to the recommendations Haidt provides. This, I would argue, will be incredibly difficult, especially in larger schools. If you’ve ever tried to organize anything that involves parents and children doing the same thing you’ll know just how challenging this could be.
Furthermore, Haidt suggests government intervention to raise the age (it’s now 13) to create a social media account. More robust validation systems are also needed to determine whether the person signing up for the account is truly of age. As of now, anyone can say they are old enough, and no real validation is done. Haidt argues the minimum age of “Internet adulthood” should be 16.
Next, he lobbies for phone-free schools, where children lock their phones away during the school day to prevent them from distracting them in the classroom. This, again, would require major intervention by school officials and even overprotective parents who say they want to be in constant contact with their children.
Finally, he recommends kids be given more free play to do as they want (within reason) with minimal supervision. Earlier in the book he suggests this is one of the reasons why we’re facing such a big problem with smartphones and social media. Parents need to take two steps back and allow their children to learn, make mistakes, get a boo-boo or two, and work things out amongst themselves when conflict arises.
The Critics | Correlation is NOT Causation
The more popular you are, the more likely critics will emerge and take aim at your work, and Haidt’s writing is no exception. A recent WSJ article summarizes some of the pushback Haidt has received. Much of the criticism is related to the research Haidt uses to come to his conclusion that smartphones and social media are to blame for the problems. In short, the critics point out that correlation does not mean causation. For you non-statistic types, this simply means just because two or more things go up or down together (e.g., social media use and depression) doesn’t mean one is caused by the other. Check this site out to see some “spurious” correlations.
In a recent podcast discussion, Haidt emphasized the importance of distinguishing between studies that show correlation and those that show causation. Aaron Brown, a former Wall Street trader who currently teaches statistics and math at several universities, disagreed with Haidt during a debate on “The Reason” podcast. Brown pointed out that out of the 476 studies in Haidt’s book, only 22 include data on significant social media use or adolescent mental health issues, and none of them cover both aspects.
Candice L. Odgers, a psychology professor and associate dean for research at the University of California, Irvine, provided a critique of “The Anxious Generation” in the academic journal, Nature. Odgers expressed that the book’s emphasis on digital technologies rewiring children’s brains and causing mental illness is not supported by science. She suggested that the focus on social media as the cause of the mental-health crisis in young people might divert attention from the real underlying factors, such as genetic and environmental influences like gun violence and economic hardship.
I’m an expert in statistical analysis, but not having access to the raw data, it’s hard for me to determine the validity of these claims. However, regardless of the r-squared values, p-values, and correlation coefficients, one can hardly deny that looking at Facebook posts and TikTok videos on a smartphone for 40 – 100 hours a week is not helpful to developing minds.
Parting Thoughts | The Only Influencer to Follow
I conclude this essay with my final thoughts on the book and the problems our children face growing up in the 21st century. Charles Kettering stated, “A problem well stated is half solved.“25 I’ll work to first define what I will argue is the problem before moving on to the causes and solutions; however, first, I need to ask you a question:
What should be the number one goal for parents, especially Christian parents?
Some might say, “Raising good children.” At first glance, I would agree that I want to have “good” children. However, I’d rather have children who become “great” adults. Parents need to start with the end in mind. Children won’t be children forever, so fathers and mothers need to focus on what they can do in the brief time of childhood that will have a lasting impact on adulthood.
Train up a child in the way he should go; even when he is old he will not depart from it.
Proverbs 22:6
However, a few shocking numbers need to be reviewed before we dive into how to do this. Barna research reports less than 1% of 13 – 14 year olds have a biblical worldview (see Footnote 1 for definition of biblical worldview), and by the age of 13 a person’s worldview is mainly set. This statistic leads to another from the Cultural Research Center at Arizona Christian University that reports two out of every three adults under the age of 40 (67%) say they are still trying to figure out the meaning and purpose in their lives. Children who struggle with life’s meaning (see Figure 7.6 above) become adults who also struggle.
Haidt writes about this struggle,26 something he points out is attributed to French philosopher Blaise Pascal who wrote (loosely paraphrased), “There is a God-shaped hole in every human heart.“27 This is another way of saying many people yearn for something beyond themselves; we have a natural desire to seek God, and when we don’t, something in our lives is missing.
Atheist turned Christian apologist C.S. Lewis summarizes this desire quite well: “If we find ourselves with a desire that nothing in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that we were made for another world.“28
Furthermore, I would argue that the older one gets, the more this “hole” becomes apparent if it’s not correctly filled. Haidt writes, “There is a hole, an emptiness in us all, that we strive to fill. If it doesn’t get filled with something noble and elevated, modern society will quickly pump it full of garbage.“29 Moreover, this is ever so true regarding our children. They are going to “follow” and be “influenced” by someone. You, as a parent, play a key role in who these people will be.
So the question is, are you, parent, ready to take action in helping determine who your children are influenced by and whom they follow? This seems like an obvious and easy “yes,” but I would argue many parents are struggling with the same problem their children struggle with – a selfish nature driven by our own desires to put what we want in life ahead of all others.
One of the greatest lessons I’ve learned as a parent is how selfish I am. This becomes apparent early on when your child, especially the first child, can do nothing for themselves. They have to come first or they won’t survive! However, as they get older and can do things for themselves it’s easy to move back into a selfish mode of life.
Don’t get me wrong—some good can come from this in that children begin to learn how to be increasingly self-sufficient. However, all too often, it’s far too easy to shove a screen in your child’s face when you want to do what you want to do. I’ve been there and done that!
As Haidt suggests, “Social media keeps the focus on the self, self-presentation, branding, and social standing. It is almost perfectly designed to prevent self-transcendence [rising above the self and relating to that which is greater than self]”30 This is why social media is such a perfect match for who we naturally are – selfish, ego-driven, conceited beings.
The good news is that once we come to terms with who we truly are, we can take action to change. Furthermore, we can also help our children do the same. Now, going back to my initial question to you regarding our goal as Christian parents, a more complete and accurate answer is that we are to become disciples and make disciples.
Fathers, do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord.
Ephesians 6:4
Christ Jesus may not have been clear on all that he said (e.g., Jesus rarely gave a “yes” or “no” answer to any question—one, if not the only, Christ-like characteristic contemporary politicians possess), but one thing he clearly described for us is what makes one a disciple of his. Each of the synoptic gospels records Christ’s description of a disciple.
Then Jesus told his disciples, “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me.”
Matthew 16:24
And calling the crowd to him with his disciples, he said to them, “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me.”
Mark 8:34
And he said to all, “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me.”
Luke 9:23
Do you see the three criteria to become a disciple in these Scriptures? If Jesus were giving a PowerPoint presentation on becoming a disciple he could sum it up in three bullet points:
Deny yourself
Take up your cross
Follow me
I’ll finish this essay with a quick look at each of these disciple traits and how you can live them out and help your children to do the same. In doing so you will be taking the first step in helping your children move from “me-ology” to “theology.” This is the answer to transforming the Anxious Generation into the Christ-Centered Generation.
Theology is the study of God. It is the examination of his attributes and abilities, his goodness and faithfulness, who he is and what he has done. Theology is substantial, true, and life-giving. Feasting here will allow us to grow stronger and more into the image of him who made us.
Me-ology is frail, precarious, and dependent on you and me who grow tired and weary and make mistakes. Meology is only as good as we are. And we never feel quite smart enough, or disciplined enough, or pretty enough, or energetic enough, or whatever enough.
Me-ology prizes you and me. Theology prizes the God of the universe who holds everything together.31
Jen Oshman
1.Deny Yourself
To deny yourself means you don’t take top priority in your life, Christ does. This is what it means to make Jesus Christ Lordof your life. We naturally want to rule our own lives; do what we want to do; and make our own decisions. The great news is God has given us free will to do all of these. The bad news is we often make mistakes because our sinful natures often want the opposite of what God wants for us until we make a decision to follow Christ and pledge our allegiance toward him and become a new creation (2 Cor. 5:17). To deny yourself means you identify Christ Jesus your first and foremost “Influencer.“
2. Take up Your Cross
When you deny yourself and commit your allegiance to Christ, he knows it will lead to persecution; this is what is meant by taking up your cross. The cross was a torture device, and those who heard Jesus speak about it knew he was telling them they should expect to be persecuted. We have good evidence that many of the apostles died excruciating deaths for taking up their cross. Praise God, we are blessed today in the USA that no crosses are being setup (not yet anyway) to hang Christians from.
However, I can say with near certainty if you take a stand against any of the social ills (e.g., abortion, same-sex “marriage”, LGBTQ topics, etc.) plaguing society and the Church today and bring the name of Christ into the conversation you can expect to be persecuted, if not physically most certainly verbally.
3. Follow Me
There is only one person you need to be “following,” the man Christ Jesus. And if you follow Christ and live out his commands in your daily life, your children will take notice. They will be following you, and this is where the “creating disciples” process begins. As the popular adage goes, “More is caught than taught.“
If you’re looking for a Scripture to remind you of what you need to do to live out following Christ, consider 1 John 2:4-6, “Whoever says ‘I know him’ but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him, but whoever keeps his word, in him truly the love of God is perfected. By this we may know that we are in him: whoever says he abides in him ought to walk in the same way in which he walked.” Walk daily with and like Christ and there is a good chance so too will your children.
One final thought. First, I highly recommend Haidt’s book. His writing is insightful, balanced, and thought provoking. Below I’ve also included some links to helpful documents he’s provided to help parents raising children during these anxious times.
Additionally, I’d suggest reading George Barna’s book, Raising Spiritual Champions that makes for an excellent Christian complementary text to Haidt’s book. I’ll leave you with Barna’s challenging, yet truthful advice for Christian parents in the 21st century.
Backbone required. . .The solution is for you [parents] to step up and take control of the media [social media, TV, etc.] that gets exposure in your house. If you fail to do so, three decades-worth of data persuasively argue that you will fail in your hope of raising a spiritual champion [disciple of Christ]. You will be inviting the reigning culture to raise your child for you.32
George Barna
In other words, if you don’t do it, someone else will.
Some helpful links to additional information from the author.
Jonathan Haidt, The Anxious Generation (New York: Example Press, 2023), 9. ↩︎
I use George Barna’s definition of a biblical worldview as consisting of believing 1) there is one God. He created the world, 2) All of us have sinned and we need to repent, 3) Jesus’ death pays for our sins, 4) The Bible is true, 5) God defines what is true, 6) LIfe’s purpose is to know, love, and serve God, and 7) Success in life is consistent obedience to God. ↩︎
Carl Trueman, The Rise and Triumph of the Modern Self: Cultural Amnesia, Expressive Individualism, and the Road to Sexual Revolution (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2020), 30. ↩︎
John Taylor Gatto, Dumbing Us Down: The Hidden Curriculum of Compulsory Schooling, 25th Anniversary ed. (Gabriola Island, BC: New Society Publishers, 2017), 22. ↩︎
This quote is often attributed to Charles Kettering, who was head of research at General Motors from 1920 to 1947. ↩︎
Although Haidt writes about a “God-shaped hole,” he wrongly attributes the hole to evolution, suggesting that “Natural selection might have carved out [the] hole.” However, he suggests that his “religious” friends attribute the hole to a longing for a Creator. While I disagree with his evolutionary/atheist assessment I do applaud him on his balanced approach to writing on the topic. ↩︎
Blaise Pascal, Pensées, trans. A. J. Krailsheimer (London: Penguin Books, 1995), 75. ↩︎
C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity (New York: HarperOne, 2001), 136. ↩︎