Common threads: Difference in Definition

The common messages I found in the majority of responses to WIHRLJ is that Jesus and religion go hand in hand, Jesus did not come to “abolish” religion or the institution, and the church is important. Overall, most of the responses I could find were those who disagreed with Bethke. Sure, there were some comments in the comment section of the original video that agreed, but the responses I found that were studied and planned were critiques. Actually, the fact that most are critiques is understandable since there’s not a need for a rebuttal when you’re in agreement. 

There are certainly competing messages and ideas about how one is to perform or construct one’s religious beliefs and about religion in general. Bethke claims to be a Christian, but separates himself from the religious institution of the Christian Church. The responses vary, but the video responses I looked at all agree to disagree with Bethke. In all the video responses, it is argued that Jesus is not against religion and is actually for it. The critics reevaluate Bethke’s stance and, from their own study or opinion, state that he is wrong about religion and Jesus being on opposite ends of the spectrum. They argue rather that religion and Jesus go together and cannot be separated. They do, however, have different reasoning behind the argument that Jesus and religion go together and the ways in which they present those reasons vary. The basis for the critiques ranges from biblical reasoning to historical to personal opinion. When I look at these opinions, their similarities and differences, a few questions come to mind: Can one really separate Jesus from religion? How are these Youtube users defining religion and are they defining it differently from one another? If they are defining it differently, is one stance more correct than another? 

In today’s world, universalism is pretty popular. Believe whatever works for you or whatever makes you happy. Does that mean that all religion is subjective? If universalism is true, wouldn’t that mean there is no objective truth? How do people of religion cope with that, especially within Christianity where the doctrine does proclaim objective truth? 

This case study researches Youtube users and the Christian response to the video “Why I Hate Religion, But Love Jesus” and focuses on how these Christian users construct their own views of Christianity as an institution.  I will now be more narrowly focusing on the question: How are these Youtube users defining, constructing, and reinterpreting the meaning of the word “religion” and how are the different personalized interpretations contradicting or agreeing with one another?