Acts 17
10That very night the believers sent Paul and Silas to Berea. When they arrived there, they went to the synagogue. 11And the people of Berea were more open-minded than those in Thessalonica, and they listened eagerly to Paul’s message. They searched the Scriptures day after day to check up on Paul and Silas, to see if they were really teaching the truth. 12As a result, many Jews believed, as did some of the prominent Greek women and many men. (Acts 17:10-12, NLT)
The Daily DAVEotional
The advent of social media has completely changed the landscape of how information is disseminated to the masses. Prior to social media, people relied primarily on what is now known as “legacy media” – national broadcast news networks and major metropolitan newspapers.
But now with social media, anyone and everyone can be a journalist, investigative reporter, podcaster or blogger. Competing ideas and opinions abound, making it increasingly more difficult to separate fact from fiction.
With such an affluence of free-flowing information, two terms have been introduced into the mainstream cultural vernacular in recent years – misinformation and disinformation. These terms have primarily been used by politicians and pundits on both sides of the aisle to label the speech and narratives of their opponents as false. Alarmingly, our own government has cited “misinformation” as a basis for seeking to censor the speech and thus limit the reach of those whose ideas and beliefs are not aligned with the official position of the party in power.
This effort to limit speech has been evident in the last few political cycles, through an increased effort to put pressure on social media platforms to limit and even censor speech that is deemed as “misinformation”.
But who exactly determines what is misinformation?
Social media outlets have employed “fact-checkers” to determine what information is accurate and what should be labeled as “misinformation”.
A fact-checker is someone who evaluates the truthfulness of a statement and then renders a judgment. These fact-checkers are expected to be neutral but the problem, as we’ve seen, is that they’re rarely unbiased. Who then fact-checks the fact-checkers?
In this segment of Acts 17, the Bereans are commended for their ability to fact-check the information that was being promoted.
Paul was a missionary who traveled throughout Asia Minor proclaiming the message of Christ and planting churches among those who believed his message.
But just like today, there was no shortage of ideological grifters and religious charlatans traveling from village to village looking for a market to sell their ideological snake oil.
With so many traveling religious preachers, how does one determine who, if anyone, is telling the truth?
The Bereans were commended because they “fact-checked” Paul’s message by “searching the Scriptures” to determine it’s veracity.
“The Scriptures” in this case refers to the Old Testament. The Bereans listened intently at Paul’s message and “day after day” they checked the message and compared it to what they already knew was true – the Old Testament Scriptures.
Fact-checking is a good thing, as long as the facts are being checked honestly against an objective, truthful standard. As we’ve seen recently, people are often biased, meaning they are rarely objective and often will stretch the truth, or in some cases, even deny the truth in order to fit their own biases.
But God’s word is both objective and true because it is the very word of God, who is by definition, truth.
So if you really want to check your facts, be sure they are not misaligned with what the Scriptures say. If they are, you can be certain that your facts are indeed “misinformation”.
Did you enjoy this post? I’d love to hear your thoughts! Feel free to like, leave a comment below, and share it with your friends or on social media if you found it helpful or interesting. Your support keeps the conversation going!
Reflection
What are some beliefs and ideas that you may tend to hold more because of your own personal bias than the fact that it is true?
What is the standard that you use to determine if a religious statement is true or not?
What examples have you seen in your own experience of fact-checkers who were too biased to be trusted?
How do you think it’s possible that two different people can evaluate the same “facts” and arrive at completely different conclusions?
How can you ensure that you are not being misled and falling for misinformation when it comes to some of the ideological narratives that are being promoted in our culture?
Photo by Samuel Regan-Asante on Unsplash









