One week ago we posted a short warning Word entitled: “Beware The Demons of Facebook and Social Media!”
We are pleased to post here (with permission) a measured reply we have received:
Dear Sir/ Madam,
Regarding the short passage on your web site describing the perils of using social media.
I am not a man of faith, but I do believe that everybody should have the right to practise their spirituality as they see fit – as long as this is not detrimental to others.
However, I find your comments regarding the use of social media to be both pragmatic and valid for all, faith or no faith.
Now, I do not claim to have sensed the devil on my Twitter page (or anything similar), but I have already encountered one individual who tweets a great deal regarding matters of faith.
This, I would expect, will attract many users who may be influenced by his words. Yet, on closer inspection, his feeds/ history also contain tweets of blind hatred.
More so, when questioned regarding these tweets, he refuses to answer, especially when it is pointed out that his hate is not in keeping with his faith.
But still, he refuses to concede the issue in any way and, after a while, simply deleted the texts.
But again, when it was pointed out that simply deleting the material doesn’t mean it didn’t happen or that his idle chatter was appropriate after all, no response was forthcoming.
Now I refuse to name and shame the individual but I did post a warning that all is not what it seems in topics such as #faith and #God.
The way I see it, no-one should be taken in by the words of a man who, in reality, finds it acceptable to promote blind hatred to those who have done him no harm (his words).
And, as for his silence – as if he never made the postings – if he this is how he acts over a few onerous texts, what else is he being deceitful about?
Furthermore, I suspect he is not alone and that there will be plenty others, some much worse in terms of what they write (this I know to be true having read some of Twitter’s more sensitive threads, in which the narrative is repulsive to an extreme, its hatred designed to hurt, upset and confuse).
To sum up, I think we have encountered the same issue, although from completely different viewpoints.
I therefore applaud you for protecting those who read spiritual topics expecting, quite rightly, truth and only truth regarding matters of #faith, #scripture, the #Bible and #God.
Or have I got this all wrong – is being deceitful acceptable when preaching theological matters? – surely not.
Similarly, although I firmly believe in freedom of speech and detest matters of censorship, there are topics that, although they are of value to those with an interest in theological subjects, are simply not appropriate – perhaps even evil or demonic.
I have no idea how many of these there are but “the holocaust” is one example.
Of course, this is a subject that needs to be treated with great care at the best of times, but the comments to be found there are beyond any bounds of common decency.
They are, in fact, revolting to an extreme, even to me, and I can stomach quite a lot.
However, I would seriously suggest that these pages are considered “off limits” to all as they will only hurt, upset and bewilder the reader – particularly those of a younger, less experienced demeanour.
I’m not sure as to the best way to do this but it should be addressed – there pages are vile.
I hope this makes sense and is of some use.
With kind regards
Dr. Robert John Irvine (PhD, MSc, MBA, BSc)
Materials used by kind permission of the original author.