Why Are There No “Christians” on Twitter?
How Christians try to reveal their identity online without actually using the word.
Feb 21st, 2012 | By Skye Jethani | Category: Church, Culture, FeaturesWhile traveling last week I wasted some time on Twitter. But rather than trolling tweets I started looking at Twitter profiles. I was surprised, and mildly entertained, by how people tried to reveal their identity as a Christian without actually using the word. After two millennia it appears Christian is no longer specific enough. Are you a Christian like Mother Teresa or a Christian like Alice Cooper?
After exploring a few hundred Twitter profiles, I think it’s safe to conclude that “Christ follower” is now the preferred term used by many. (And “follower” certainly seems appropriate for the Twitterverse.)
But there were many other synonyms for “Christian” I discovered. Here are a few of my favorites with my own parenthetical remarks.
Jesus Adventurer (…and the Temple of Doom)
Undershephard of Jesus Christ (Looks great on a church business card)
Happy clappy Jesus lover (Mission strategy- balloon animals)
JesusFreak (The dream of the 90s is alive in Portland)
Advancer of the Kingdom (and Knight of the Communion Table)
Saint and sinner whose only hope is Jesus Christ (In other words, I’m still a jerk)
Jesus loves me (Maybe, but I’m his favorite)
Servant to the Son of Man (Award for most insider lingo in just six words)
Loved, redeemed (and understated)
Navigating the narrow path by God’s grace (But wide is the path that leads to cliches)
I don’t care where you bury me. I’ll be home, and I’ll be free. (And so will we)
Jesus took my wheel (but the NRA has my back)
Child of the King (King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia does have over 35 children you know)
Χριστιανός (English is so unsanctified)
To be fair, there were many Twitter profiles that used more familiar categories to describe one’s faith in Christ. These were often denominational: Methodist, Lutheran, Anabaptist, or Calvinist. Some folks were quite happy to be known as Reformed. Others preferred to identify with their church office: pastor, preacher, church planter.
But here’s what struck me. Very few used the word Christian, and no one used the word Evangelical- not a single profile in my wanderings.
A few decades ago evangelical was a positive term embraced by those who wanted to avoid the cultural baggage associated with fundamentalist and the theological squishiness of liberal. In the mid-20th century the term evangelical or neo-evangelical came into vogue to describe Christians who held to orthodox Christian beliefs and the authority of Scripture (unlike theological liberals), but who also believed in generative cultural engagement (unlike the fundamentalists). Billy Graham, and the magazine he started, Christianity Today, became the standard bearers for this new evangelical center.
How things have changed. It no longer seems evangelical is associated with Graham’s orthodox, progressive/centrist, culturally engaged form of Christianity. Today the media uses the word interchangeably with fundamentalist. Is this a result of the Religious Right, culture wars, and the political engagement of some evangelicals since the 1970s? Probably. But there is more to it.
Like the word Christian, Evangelical is applied so broadly that few seem to believe it holds much meaning. When everyone from Rob Bell to Richard Land, and Joel Osteen to Jim Wallis are labeled evangelical, it’s hard to know exactly what we’re talking about.
The bankruptcy of the word became most obvious to me in 2008 with the release of The Evangelical Manifesto, a document written by a team of brilliant folks that is well worth the time to read. The paper acknowledges that the word Evangelical has become muddled, and then spends the better part of 10 pages clarifying its definition. I take no issue with the document or its definition. But when 10 pages is required to correct the public’s assumed definition of a word, its pretty clear the battle has already been lost.
My unscientific survey of Twitter profiles only confirms that Evangelical is now a word best employed in a church history class. Not even evangelicals call themselves evangelical anymore.
So where does this leave us? Are we all doomed to be rebranded as “Christ followers,” and “Jesus adventurers”? Is there no meaningful term left for historically-orthodox, Bible-believing, culturally-generative Christians?
Popularity: 3% [?]
I may become unpopular for saying this, but I’m starting to think a sign of maturity is learning to embrace the ambiguity. Am I a Christian like Mother Teresa or like Alice Cooper (and I’d toss in Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson, whomever makes one angrier) ? Yes. Who besides God can say anything different about a person? People who know me know the specifics of what’s important to me, including my faith and (hopefully) orthopraxy. I think the reason everything gets so muddled may very well be to remind us we weren’t meant to connect with everyone at once. So I’ll be Christian, or evangelical, or a bible-thumper or whatever else passers-by think they see in the moment, but in the right circles , the one where I know and am known, we’ll speak to the truth. Leave the labeling in high school.
Have you caught Frank Viola’s post featuring an article by Hal Miller titled “The Uneasy Conscience of Modern Evangelicalism”?
Hits very similar notes to your post here. In fact, you and Frank are covering a lot of the same ground from slightly different perspectives.
A very good question and observation. And then there is this: I was watching Morning Joe this morning when they had Franklin Graham on. Now I highly respect Franklin Graham–in particular for the extraordinary work being done through Samaritan’s Purse. But in this morning’s interview he fell headlong into a web of confusion as he was asked whether the President is a Christian. And what about Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, Mitt Romney. The conversation got messier and messier as Mr. Graham tried to split hairs on what “Christian” really means. Santorum- for sure; Gingrich – yes; Romney – no; Obama – if he says so. It was a real mess in which Mr. Graham was charged with spending too much time evaluating other people’s faiths. All that to say, we have a long long way to go on figuring out self-definition of faith. (Story on this: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0212/73110.html )
Mel,
I saw that video too. Mess is the right word.
Skye
As I was reading the opening list I had to check my profile to make sure I didn’t make your list. I think I barely escaped
Saw the video and posted it. Definitely a mess.
To a certain extent, I think many avoid the term “evangelical” out of hypocrisy. They see how the madia likes to caricature typical evangelicals (right-wing close minded bigots), and they think, “Thank you Lord that I’m not like them! You’ve made me a genuine, authentic, humble disciple!” The thing is, most people avoiding the label fit just perfectly within the confines of what makes one an evangelical, despite the difficulty in defining the term with accuracy and consensus. But we are sick of much of the cultural baggage that evangelicalism comes with, and are trying to leave it behind while keeping our faith intact. But evangelicalism is WAY too intwined with its cultural tendencies, it will NOT be parted with them. So instead, many head for the mainlines, Rome, or Orthodoxy in search of a genuine expression of their faith. Others become “emergent” or “post-evangelical.” For me, evangelicalism is merely a movement within Protestantism, but not a necessary component of it. I no longer identify myself as evangelical because I believe it adds nothing to the definition of who I am that the word “Protestant” does not already entail. We’ve had Sola Scriptura long before inerrant biblicism ever arrived on the scene. We’ve had Sola Fide long before the hyper-conversionism of the Wesleyan revivalists. We’ve had Sola Christus long before “Unitarian Jesus” began to dominate fundamentalist rhetoric. We’ve had Soli Deo Gloria long before Evangelism Explosion threatened people to convert on pain of hell. I think the movement has truly run out of steam, and the way forward is to recover our Protestant identity and get back to the issues that make us who we are as Christians, instead of riding the wave of pietistic fervor which breaks on the shore of rational skepticism.
[...] I really enjoyed this from Skye Jethani: Why Are There No “Christians” on Twitter? [...]
This reminded me of a great post I read yesterday:
http://mamamonk.com/2010/08/02/why-i-call-myself-a-christian/
post-evangelical
[...] few weeks ago I wondered why so few Christians identify themselves as “Christian” on their Twitter profiles, and why no one likes the label “Evangelical” anymore. The post got me some attention, [...]