• About Me

Kevin M. Watson

Kevin M. Watson

Author Archives: Kevin M. Watson

Pulling the Plug on Twitter and Facebook

25 Tuesday Aug 2009

Posted by Kevin M. Watson in Life, Technology

≈ 7 Comments

I am going to pull the plug on Twitter and Facebook. I am not going to delete my account on either one, but I am going to stop updating them.

I wrote my first “tweet” on January 28, 2008… and then did not tweet again for more than a year. This May I started tweeting with some consistency. I also began using Facebook when I realized that I could use TweetDeck to update Facebook and Twitter at the same time. To be fair, there have been many things I have enjoyed about using Twitter and Facebook. I have a connection with many people I might not otherwise know. I have also been able to keep up to date on what is happening in the lives of some friends I don’t see as often as I would like to. What felt like the most sophisticated moment in my tweeting life was when I set up a meeting for coffee with a friend while in Tulsa.

Occasionally I would read a tweet that was too sarcastic for my liking, or expressed a total lack of understanding of a position it was uncharitably attacking. However, for the most part I was a convert to the world of tweets and twitpics and ReTweets (though it took me awhile to figure out what RT meant). I know that I was a convert because those words stopped sounding silly to me. I didn’t bat an eye when Derek Webb referred to his followers as “Tweeples” or when someone else referred an in person meeting of “tweeters” as a “Tweet-up.”

But a few nights ago, as I was trying to go to sleep, my mind was bouncing back and forth from one thing to another. I’m not sure exactly how or why, but I began thinking about the frustration I felt the week before in trying to get back into the rhythm of reading and studying after a week of vacation. Throughout the week I felt distracted and struggled to concentrate. (I also during the day almost always had TweetDeck running on my desktop.) Twitter and Facebook began to look like things that were not valuable, or at least neutral tools. They began to look like unhealthy distractions that had contributed to my lack of focus. As I fell asleep, I came to the conclusion that I needed to pull the plug on Twitter and Facebook. Here are a few reasons why:

First, my ability to concentrate for extended periods of time seemed to decrease the more actively I used Twitter and Facebook. This is what bothers me the most and is the main reason I am pulling the plug. Obviously this is a problem for someone who is working on a Ph.D. However, I hope it would bother me if I were still the pastor of a local church. I am convinced that the ability to carefully read and think about the argument of a well written book (like the Bible!) is an important, though underrated, virtue that is worth cultivating. I feel that I have been awakened to the ways that my consumption of technology really is shaping the way my mind works.

Second, in my personal experience, I have not often seen Twitter or Facebook used in ways that advance discussions about the most important or most controversial issues that are facing the church. Instead, I sometimes felt that people were using these media to take cheap shots at their opponents and to set up straw men. These are not conversations that I find it helpful to be a part of.

Third, while I have on many occasions enjoyed being able to read an update from someone I have not spoken to in a while (it is great to see wedding pictures, or a picture of an old friend’s first child), I have not found Twitter or Facebook to be media that lead to forming or sustaining meaningful relationships. In fact at times I have felt that Twitter and Facebook allow me to have the illusion that I am keeping in touch with someone, when in fact I am really just eavesdropping (with their permission) on the highlights of their lives. In other words, I may not feel as strong of a need to actually call up my old friend and find out what has been going on with them, because I feel like I already know. But the things they might most need to talk about could very well be things that they would not write updates about on Facebook.

Here is a quick example that illustrates what I am trying to get at: People write updates and often post pictures when they get married or have a child. However, they hardly ever do the same thing when they get divorced or have a miscarriage. I think Facebook and Twitter can actually lead us to invest less in some friendships. As a result, we fail to support each other when we need it most. It can even be, perhaps unintentionally, a way of insulating ourselves from the pain and suffering in one another’s lives.

Fourth, during the time that I was active in using Twitter and Facebook I was less active and consistent in blogging. I rarely felt like I had something important to tweet about, but I often did it because I hadn’t updated in awhile. For me, blogging cultivates the kind of disciplined focus on one topic that is beneficial to me personally and which I hope has a beneficial contribution to make to those surfing the internet.

So there it is, that is why I am pulling the plug on Twitter and Facebook. I hope that I will be able to blog more regularly as a result. And I hope that you will continue participating in the conversation by commenting here.

Finally, I would like to clarify that I am not writing this to make you feel guilty or like you need to defend your use of Twitter and/or Facebook. I am sure that there are many positives which I have not thought of or experienced. I am sure there are valid reasons to use these media. Yet, as I have written this post the phrase in 1 Corinthians 10 has been repeating itself in my mind: “All things are lawful, but not all things are beneficial.” I am open to the possibility that I will become convinced that the positives do outweigh the negatives, and that as a result I will plug back in. But for now, for me, Twitter and Facebook may be lawful, but they are not beneficial.

Campus Ministry

18 Tuesday Aug 2009

Posted by Kevin M. Watson in Christian Living, links, Ministry

≈ 1 Comment

For those who are not either college students, or campus ministers, campus ministry can sometimes be easier to take for granted than to actively support. Yet, it seems to me that it would be very difficult for a committed Christian to make an argument that campus ministry is irrelevant or unimportant.

Ashlee Alley and Creighton Alexander have given us the opportunity to actively support United Methodist campus ministries through prayer. Yesterday began forty days of prayer for United Methodist campus ministries as they begin a new year of ministry with college students across the country.

You can read Ashlee’s post about it here.

You can find the prayers each day here, or follow them on twitter here.

Will you join me in praying for United Methodist campus ministries?

United Methodist History Readings

07 Friday Aug 2009

Posted by Kevin M. Watson in links, Methodist History, Wesley

≈ 1 Comment

For those of you who may be curious or interested, here are the books I will be using this fall for the United Methodist History course I will be teaching at Perkins School of Theology:

1. Wesley and the People Called Methodists, Richard P. Heitzenrater.

2. John Wesley’s Sermons: An Anthology, edited by Albert Outler and Richard P. Heitzenrater.

3. Taking Heaven by Storm: Methodism and the Rise of Popular Christianity in America, John H. Wigger.

4. The Methodists: Student Edition, edited by James E. Kirby, Russell E. Richey, and Kenneth E. Rowe.

5. The Methodist Experience in America: A Sourcebook, edited by Russell E. Richey, Kenneth E. Rowe, and Jean Miller Schmidt.

6. The United Methodist Hymnal.

There will also be a few other articles and primary source readings that we will read throughout the semester.

Strong Convictions of Sin: Earnestly Inquiring after a Savior

27 Monday Jul 2009

Posted by Kevin M. Watson in Christian Living, Methodist History, Ministry, Wesley

≈ 3 Comments

Saturday was a good mail day. The copies of volumes 2 and 3 of A History of Evangelicalism arrived (The Expansion of Evangelicalism: The Age of Wilberforce, More, Chalmers, and Finney, and The Dominance of Evangelicalism: The Age of Spurgeon and Moody). I was prepared to be let down by volume 2, because I enjoyed volume 1 so much, and volume 2 is not written by the same author (vol 1 is written by Mark Noll and vol 2 is writte by John Wolffe). However, I am really enjoying The Expansion of Evangelicalism. The purpose of this post, however, is not to review the book. It is to point to a thought that I had as I was reading the second chapter which describes revivals which occurred in Britain and the United States from 1790-1820.

Wolffe cites several primary sources that report the ways that folks experienced the revivals that they were a part of. As I was reading a few of these brief quotations, I began to feel as if I had read all of this before. Yet I knew I hadn’t, because Wolffe was writing about revival in a part of Britain (Scotland) that I have not studied much. (As Wolffe notes, the revivals in Scotland “owed nothing to Methodism which… remained a small movement with barely 1,000 members and did not expand at all during the 1790s” (53). Wolffe cites Alexander Stewart’s account of these revivals in Scotland:

“Seldom a week passed in which we did not see or hear of one, two, or three persons, brought under deep concern about their souls, accompanied with strong convictions of sin, and earnest enquiry after a Saviour” (54).

This process of becoming concerned about one’s spiritual state, then becoming convinced of one’s sin, seems to have led to “earnest enquiry after a Saviour.” Part of the reason this sounds familiar to me is because it does seem to be a common refrain for people who were describing the revivals of the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. This was the language that they spoke. John Wesley used similar language in the “General Rules” when he wrote, “There is only one condition previously required in those who desire admission into these societies, ‘a desire to flee from the wrath to come, to be saved from their sins.'”

It seems to me that part of the reason that there were periods of revival in Britain and North America during this period was because there was general agreement on the basics of the Christian message, at least among those who were involved in the revivals. Traveling preachers who could not agree on other things, were able to agree that it was essential to wake people up to the reality of their standing before God and to lead them to sorrow for their present state. All of this was so that these preachers could point people to the hope of salvation, to the one who is both able and willing to save.

In public settings, from field preaching, to camp meetings, and other venues, there seems to have been a broad consensus and a deep passion for the importance of convincing people of the basic truth of this message. Historians have pointed to other factors that contributed to the potency of the evangelical revivals, but this seems, at least, to be one key factor.

Today, there seems to be broad consensus that renewal, even revival, would be a wonderful thing for United Methodism to experience. A difficult question facing United Methodists, however, may be: Are we able to agree on what the basic message is that we should hope to share with those who have not heard the good news? Indeed, it seems that we even sometimes disagree about whether or not we should even try to share our faith.

For those who yearn for renewed vitality in our denomination, we may have something to learn from our spiritual forebearers. They seem to have had passionate and convicted answers to these questions: Why is salvation important? What do I need to be saved from? What do I need to be saved for? How can I be saved? It seems to me that an important initial step to our efforts to find renewal and reverse the recent pattern of decline in our denomination will be to decide what our message to a broken and hurting world is and to share it with excitement, passion, and conviction.

The Rise of Evangelicalism

20 Monday Jul 2009

Posted by Kevin M. Watson in Uncategorized

≈ 2 Comments

A few weeks ago I read The Rise of Evangelicalism: The Age of Edwards, Whitefield, and the Wesleys by Mark A. Noll. I found this to be a very well written introduction to the beginnings and development of evangelicalism in Britain and America in the 18th century. Several times as I was reading the book I thought, “This would be a very good book for someone to read who wants to learn more about how John and Charles Wesley fit into the broader movement that they were a part of.” This was also one of the best written and enjoyable books I have read in awhile. This book is the first in a projected five volume series “A History of Evangelicalism: People, Movements and Ideas in the English Speaking World.” Volume 2, “The Expansion of Evangelicalism: The Age of More, Wilberforce, Chalmers, and Finney” by John R. Wolffe and Volume 3, “The Dominance of Evangelicalism: The Age of Spurgeon and Moody” by David W. Bebbington have both been published. Volume 4, “The Disruption of Evangelicalism: The Age of Mott, Machen and McPherson” by Geoff Treloar and volume 5, “The Global Diffusion of Evangelicalism: The Age of Graham and Stott” by Brian Stanley have not yet been published. Today I ordered volumes 2 and 3 simply on the strength of the first volume. For what it is worth, I would highly recommend “The Rise of Evangelicalism” to anyone generally interested in the history of evangelicalism, or who is interested in the relationship of John and Charles Wesley to other key eighteenth century evangelical leaders (most notably Jonathan Edwards and George Whitefield).

Fellowship

14 Tuesday Jul 2009

Posted by Kevin M. Watson in Accountability, Life

≈ 4 Comments

Last night I was blessed to experience the kind of fellowship that my soul yearns for and rejoices in when I experience it.

A good friend from seminary sent me an unexpected text message yesterday morning letting me know that he would be coming through Dallas on his way back from a mission trip to Shreveport, LA. The group he was traveling with would be in the Galleria (a mall) for an hour and a half. We had not had an in-depth conversation in a few years, as far as I can recall. But within a few moments, I was reminded that there are some friends with whom you just pick up where you left off. The passage of time does not seem to harm the strength of the friendship.

Last night I experienced the best of Christian fellowship. I was a participant in a conversation where we shared our deepest dreams and hopes, where we questioned and encouraged each other, and where we exhorted one another to seek God through the peaks and valleys of life. As I was driving home last night, I was aware of how blessed I am to have these kinds of friendships and how important they are to my growth as a follower of Christ.

So thank you Andrew for the gift of friendship and fellowship. Thank you for being a means of grace to me. I pray that God will bring us together again sooner, rather than later.

Oklahoma Conference Constitutional Amendments Results

23 Tuesday Jun 2009

Posted by Kevin M. Watson in links

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Constitutional Amendments, UMC

Today the Oklahoma Conference published the results of the vote on the proposed amendments to the United Methodist denomination. The results can be viewed by clicking here.

It looks like the two issues which generated the most controversy failed to receive the number of votes needed in order to change the constitution.

Interestingly, the amendment which received the most overwhelmingly negative vote was the amendment relating to the committee on investigation. I think this was solely due to Grayson Lucky’s very convincing speech against the amendment, where he argued that the amendment would introduce fundamental inconsistencies into the Book of Discipline.

Birthday Books

23 Tuesday Jun 2009

Posted by Kevin M. Watson in Life, links, Methodist History

≈ 5 Comments

Last week was my birthday and I received several books that I am really looking forward to reading. (And one that I couldn’t put down until I ran out of pages.) Here are the books I will be reading in my 28th year:

1. The Rise of Evangelicalism: The Age of Edwards, Whitefield, and the Wesleys, Mark A. Noll. This is the first volume in IVP’s series The History of Evangelicalism

2. The Divine Dramatist: George Whitefield and the Rise of Modern Evangelicalism, Harry S. Stout

3. Knowing Christ Today: Why We Can Trust Spiritual Knowledge, Dallas Willard

4. Awash in a Sea of Faith: Christianizing the American People, Jon Butler

5. Reluctant Saint?: A Theological Biography of Fletcher of Madeley, Patrick Strieff

6. Unexampled Labours: Letters of the Revd John Fletcher to Leaders in the Evangelical Revival, ed. Peter S. Forsaith. My friend and colleague in the Ph.D. program at SMU also wrote several footnotes for this volume.

7. Real Church? Does it Exist? Can I Find it? Larry Crabb

What are you reading?

Flickering Pixels – Using or Being Used by Technology?

22 Monday Jun 2009

Posted by Kevin M. Watson in Book Review, links, Ministry, Technology

≈ 3 Comments

The ironies were swirling in my head as I read Flickering Pixels: How Technology Shapes Your Faith by Shane Hipps. Flickering Pixels is a book about the impact that technology has on the way that the message we communicate is received. In many ways this book is a sustained argument in favor of the slogan “the medium is the message.” Or, to make it more distinct, it is the first book I have read that is about technology that is written by a young pastor with an endorsement by a hip pastor like Rob Bell that primarily critiques, or at least cautions, the way that younger pastors so often use technology.

Here comes irony #1: The only reason I read this book is because I saw Blake Huggins send out a tweet about entering to win a free copy of the book. I like free books, so I entered myself. I won.

Irony #2: Since being made aware of the existence of this book, I have noticed that many people are talking about it in the blogosphere and many people seem to love the book… but I haven’t noticed anyone (there are probably examples of this that I just haven’t noticed) interacting with the ways that the book might inform or challenge the fact that they are blogging in the first place.

Irony #3: I am now writing a blog post about the book. And, while it has made me think about the limitations of blogging, I will not address that in this post beyond what I have already said.

Flickering Pixels is a quick read, and because of its subject matter, I would highly recommend it to anyone who spends a significant amount of time writing blogs, reading blogs, using facebook or twitter, surfing the internet, watching tv… if you don’t fit into any of these catagories you are not reading this, so I will stop there. Hipps argues that though we are not often aware of it, technology shapes us. It impacts the way that we think and see the world.

Quotation #1: “When we fail to perceive that the things we create are extension of ourselves, the created things take on god-like characteristics and we become their servants” (35).

Have you ever been around someone who has become a slave to their cell phone? They are unable (so it seems) to not answer it, even when answering it is incredibly rude. Cell phones, from my perspective, were originally created to be a means of convenience to the person who had a cell phone. Now it usually seems like they are a means of convenience to the person calling the cell phone. Hipps’ insight, however, has implications for every area of technology. I try not to answer my cell phone if I am with someone else. Yet, I am sometimes a slave to my email. The point is not that technology is evil. But we should be aware of its ability to become addicting.

Quotation #2: “The Internet has a natural bias toward exhibitionism and thus the erosion of real intimacy. There is nothing exclusive about it, yet it creates, paradoxically, a kind of illusion of intimacy with people we’ve never met in person” (113).

I immediately thought of facebook when re-reading this quote. But since I am not a huge fan of facebook, it is probably more relevant to me for blogging. I can often feel the temptation on this blog to get on my soapbox and blast away at something (I guess I just did that with the way that some people use their cell phones). And it does seem to me that there is a very fine line between the openness and transparency that facilitates an interesting and edifying blog on the one hand and an inappropriate intimacy and exhibitionism on the other hand. The hard part is that while some boundaries are clear in my mind, you may different boundaries than I do.

Quotation #3: “Virtual community is infinitely more virtual than it is communal. It’s a bit like cotton candy: It goes down easy and satiates our immediate hunger, but it doesn’t provide much in the way of sustainable nutrition. Not only that, but our appetite is spoiled. We no longer feel the need to participate in authentic community. Authentic community involves high degrees of intimacy, permanence, and proximity. While relative intimacy can be gained in virtual settings, the experiences of permanence and proximity have all but vanished.

I’m not morally opposed to cotton candy or virtual community. However, I am concerned that virtual community is slowly becoming our preferred way of relating. I don’t think the results will be any better than if we started eating spun sugar for breakfast, lunch, and dinner” (114).

Irony #4: I am going to attempt to form virtual community by inviting your response.

What do you think about Hipps critique of virtual community? Do you find it convincing? Unconvincing? I was particularly interested as I read this book in how people would respond who are starting internet campuses. If the medium is the message it would seem to me that watching a worship service on the internet could communicate the ultimate form of individualism and privatization of Christianity. Do you know of ways in which internet campuses try to offset this potential shortcoming? Or does you not see this as an inevitability?

The Explosive Growth of Methodism from 1776 to 1850

17 Wednesday Jun 2009

Posted by Kevin M. Watson in Book Review, Methodist History, Wesley

≈ 8 Comments

The numerical growth that occurred in early American Methodism can be found in many different sources. However, in Roger Finke and Rodney Stark’s The Churching of America, 1776-2005: Winners and Losers in Our Religious Economy, they tell the story in a slightly different way. Finke and Stark have a chart (on p. 56) that shows the religious adherents as a percentage of total adherents by denominations in 1776 and again in 1850. In other words, they show the market share of six denominations during this time.

In 1776 Methodists made up 2.5 % of religious adherent in the colonies. In 1850 Methodists made up 34.2 % of religious adherents! In seventy years they had increased from a tiny sect to the largest denomination in the United States. (In other words, in 1776 1 in 40 religious people in America were Methodist. In 1859 1 in 3 were.) And no other denomination was even close to the Methodists at this time. The second largest denomination was the Baptists with 20.5%.

This is significant because in a growing population it is possible to experience numerical growth while declining in relation to the overall population. Finke and Stark point to the Congregationalists as illustrative of this. In 1776 Congregationalists made up 20.4% of religious adherents (the largest denomination in the colonies). In 1850 they made up 4%. During this time they had been passed by the Methodists, Baptists, Catholics, and Presbyterians. Yet, “despite this extraordinary shift in their fortunes, Congregationalist leaders during this era expressed surprisingly little concern” (56).

I have just begun reading Finke and Stark’s book. However, one thing that reading the book has made me think about is that most people don’t go back far enough when discussing the decline of American Methodism. Most people point to, ironically, somewhere around the time of the formation of the United Methodist Church in 1968. But the indicators of decline were in place long before that. Unfortunately, if in 1776 the Congregationalists were the largest denomination and they experienced an unexpected decrease in growth relative to other denominations, the Methodists would experience a similar decrease in growth relative to other denominations in the decades after 1850. The highwater mark, then, of American Methodism was not 1968, but somewhere around 1850.

← Older posts
Newer posts →

Blog at WordPress.com.

  • Subscribe Subscribed
    • Kevin M. Watson
    • Join 368 other subscribers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • Kevin M. Watson
    • Subscribe Subscribed
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar