Brad East proposes deleting social media; I'd nuance that
Theologian Brad East argues for deleting accounts for good; I believe the Christian goal is stewardship, not disappearing.
In an article in Christianity Today en español, theologian Brad East argues that Christians should delete social media: not deactivate accounts, but eliminate them. His diagnosis convinces me; his prescription, not entirely.
The diagnosis I do share
East maintains that individual willpower can't compete against algorithms, and he's right. Silicon Valley invested billions in capturing our attention, and no New Year's resolution beats it. His comparison to the alcoholic who promises sobriety while sleeping in a bar is harsh and precise.
He also gets it right by bringing Romans 7:15 into the topic without turning it into moralizing. Paul isn't talking about a character flaw: he's talking about the human condition. If you're ashamed to admit how many hours you spend scrolling, that verse removes the mask and gives you company at the same time. You're not broken; you're in line with the ninety-nine.
«Convertir una decisión personal en norma universal es un lujo que no todos pueden pagar.»
Where I start to disagree is in the next step. East cites 1 Corinthians 10:23 —"All things are lawful, but not all things are helpful" (1 Corinthians 10:23, ESV)— to say that the burden of proof falls on the one who uses social media. With the criterion I agree. With what he deduces afterward, I don't.
Deleting the account isn't a badge of maturity
East says he deleted his accounts about five years ago and that since then he recommends that decision. I believe his experience is real, and that for some people deleting is exactly what God asks. What bothers me is the generalization: "you need to get out, and do it forever."
I wonder if disconnection is becoming a new badge of spirituality. A young man in Miami who serves clients via WhatsApp and Instagram, or a girl in Bogotá who studies and also handles orders for the family business, don't have the same freedom as a university professor with a stable job and a church that knows him well. Turning a personal decision into a universal norm is a luxury not everyone can afford.
There's something deeper. If the problem is the network effect —that everyone is there and so no one feels they can leave—, the biblical answer isn't the individual who leaves alone, but a community that shows another way to live. The local church forming habits of attention, not an isolated believer protecting his soul defensively.
Stewardship of time, not exile
I think about stewardship. Time is a received gift, and the platforms where you work, testify, and talk with your family are also a terrain entrusted to you. Using them with limits, with schedules, and with someone who asks you the truth can be as faithful as not having them.
I also believe there's possible missionary presence there. A respectful comment, a message of encouragement to someone who's struggling, a post that doesn't seek applause: that's also Christian life. I'm not saying that compensates for the harm platforms do. I'm saying the harm isn't solved only with exodus.
What I do take from East is his uncomfortable question: why are you still there? If your honest answer is "because I can't stand missing something" or "because it gives me anxiety to leave it," that's called slavery, not reasons. There you have to move, and fast.
Pay attention to the part of the article that bothers you most and least to the part that suits you most. For seven days, leave your phone out of reach in the first two hours of the day and in the last. Tell a friend from your church how it went, without embellishments or defenses.
At the end of the week, decide honestly: maybe you'll delete everything, maybe you'll stay with just one platform and clear rules. Either can be obedience. What can't be obedience is leaving it the same while you repeat to yourself that it's not sin. What would have to change for your online time to stop governing you?
