“When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me.” (1 Cor 13:11)

Wheat and weeds

Those were the apostle Paul’s words. To put them into mine: when I was a child, I saw things in black and white. I picked up on my parents’ preferences, and the opinions of those around me, and took them out of context. Thus, Catholics and Methodists weren’t true Christians, due to Mary worship and liberalism, respectively; Labour members were bullies; “Thatcher, the milk snatcher”, was evil (I grew up in the Northeast, in amongst the mine closures.)

Now that I’m a bit more mature in years, life – together with a willingness to confront my prejudices by seeking a fuller understanding – has had an effect on these preconceptions. My best friend is a Catholic, and a true Christian. I ended up joining the Methodist Church. I voted Labour at least three or four times. I can now see that Margaret Thatcher did a lot of good, in amongst some mistakes.

The fact is that often movements, groups, ideas, and even individual people, are a mix of good and bad, positive and negative.

In a recent Prophecy Today Zoom gathering, we were told of a meeting many years ago, when a preacher placed a vase of flowers in front of those gathered. He asked them to identify which flowers were real, and which were fake – no-one could do so.

That forms a picture of what is often the reality in many of our situations – we have the good and the bad, the real and the fake, mixed together. Jesus used a similar metaphor, as He spoke of the wheat and the weeds (or tares), in Matthew 13:24-29.

Milk or meat

Nor is theology as black and white as we sometimes like to think it – though life would be so much easier if it were. Evangelicals are all too good at establishing fixed positions on a whole host of issues, going to great pains to find biblical texts that support their precise viewpoints – often significantly out of context – and completely ignoring, or simplistically explaining away, any texts that contradict their views.

Of course, there are some very clear-cut, unequivocal biblical principles – the ten commandments are a good start. Yet Christians can, and often do, adopt monochrome views on a whole host of other issues – viewing situations from one unambiguous and clear-cut perspective. We see it happening with issues as wide-ranging as Israel/Palestine, the End times, physical healing, the New Apostolic Reformation, speaking in tongues and male leadership, to name just a few.

But simplistic explanations are for the young in faith.

But simplistic explanations are for the young in faith. As we mature, we move from milk to solid food (Heb 5:12-14), as we chew on and reflect on our faith, seeing its outworking in a complex world, dialoguing with others and questioning our own interpretations and prejudices.

Even the Godhead cannot always be described in unequivocal terminology. God is at the same time both judge and the one who saves us from judgement. He is both lion and lamb. He is both one, and three.

Echo environments

Yet many people seem to have reverted to viewing the world in simplistic terms. This has been massively amplified by social media, where people are able to connect more easily with others of like mind, forming so-called echo-chambers – environments (usually online) where we only encounter information or opinions that reflect and reinforce our own – and where we’re able to ignore or reject those who think differently.

With new technologies and the widespread dispersal of ideas, black and white thinking is now ironically a bigger danger than ever.

To a certain extent, it’s always been the natural human condition to attach oneself to homogenous groups, who flatter our ideological perceptions. We’ve witnessed the same thing occurring in the Church for centuries – just think of all the different denominations that have sprung up. Even now, Church groups and Christian organisations, ministries and movements are widely regarded by other believers as either ‘of God’ or ‘not of God’, depending on some very specific frame of reference.

Simplistic solutions on steroids

With new technologies and the widespread dispersal of ideas, black and white thinking is now ironically a bigger danger than ever, both in secular and religious circles, as the last few years have highlighted:

We saw it with lockdown, highlighted again by the recent leak of government Whatsapp messages, when the idea that the only way to control disease was to keep people apart from each other suddenly became the only acceptable way to think. Those who raised objections to this were carefully silenced and monitored – even by spy agencies; others were considered dangerous, even by their own friends and family.

We see it with the net zero approach to climate control, where the only ‘acceptable’ way to reverse climate change is by drastically cutting our release of the life-giving gas that is carbon dioxide. This is promoted as ‘settled science’; the voices of scores of environmentalists and scientists with differing views getting little to no airtime on mainstream media.

We saw it with the promotion of the Covid vaccines, where those who exercised their legal right to refuse uptake, or who expressed reservations about the jabs, were tarnished as being dangerous (and even far-right extremists).

Ironically, we see it still, in those who (understandably) became highly suspicious of the ‘official’ narrative, such as that promoted in the above accounts. Naturally, they tended to surround themselves with other sceptics, and in their opposition to the ‘established’ line, became prone to disbelieve everything that contradicts their strict counter-narrative – often alienating everyone who can’t ‘see’ their ‘truth’.

We see it in those who have become so wary of ‘the establishment’ that they refuse to believe anything printed in mainstream media outlets, (whether The Guardian, The Telegraph or anything else) and who particularly despise the BBC, which they feel cannot be trusted on any matter whatsoever.

Dangerous disbelief

That way of thinking is just as dangerous as an unquestioning acceptance of all we hear. For as soon as someone instinctively disbelieves (rather than considers or questions) ‘official’ narratives, they can become open to believing almost anything (often from spurious internet sources) that confirms their new, dystopian worldview. This is particularly dangerous, as it has the potential to open us up to alternative views from those who would seek to destabilise society. For years, the most pernicious anti-West comments have come from hard-Left idealogues, frequently infused with anti-semitism. Now often the same ideas are coming from those (many of whom are Christians) who no longer trust Western governments, who then unintentionally share misleading information, with ideas that may have originated in anti-semitic or anti-Christian neo-Marxism.

As soon as someone instinctively disbelieves (rather than considers or questions) ‘official’ narratives, they can become open to believing almost anything (often from spurious internet sources) that confirms their new, dystopian worldview.

It also makes us more likely to believe ill-thought-through theories, if only because they confirm our bias. For example, the Daily Sceptic (normally thorough in its approach) ran a story last week which pointed out a significant increase in people taking hormone medication. The writer correlated it to the vaccine rollout, since he noted that the NHS had not done a campaign to promote HRT. However, being male, it seems he was clearly unaware of the significant impact of the recent, 2021 Channel 4 documentary and subsequent book on the menopause by Davina McCall, who has made it her personal mission to raise awareness of these issues. Yet people commenting on the article immediately all concurred with the author’s view, as it confirmed their vaccine-sceptical perspective. 

Discernment desired

We need to be aware that it can be notoriously difficult to distinguish truth from error, whatever the source. Indeed, we cannot do so except by Holy Spirit discernment – which comes mostly through the whole Word of God, not the internet. Truth and error so often come wrapped in the same package. Sometimes this can happen intentionally, in order to deceive; but mostly, it occurs through basic human frailties and inconsistencies. This is why it’s important that we fully defend free speech, promoting a cautious, intelligent, questioning approach. Without it, black and white thinking will prevail, to the detriment of everyone.

We need to be aware that it can be notoriously difficult to distinguish truth from error, whatever the source.

“For we know in part”, as the apostle Paul says, and this will remain the case until God’s kingdom comes in all its completeness.

For now, let us keep our eyes fixed on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith (Heb 12:1-2). Our focus on Jesus is key to challenging our black and white thinking. This is because fear causes us to narrow our focus – and perfect love casts out fear. I will develop further on this soon.