With social media, we’ve mastered the art of never being wrong. Our news sources agree with us. Our friends validate us. Our social media feeds confirm everything we already believe. ChatGPT even affirms us. We call it “curating our space” or “protecting our peace”. But what if we’ve accidentally built a prison of our own making? What if our self-care has become intellectual isolation?
1 Thessalonians 5:21 says to “test everything”—but how can we test what we never encounter?
What happens when “protect your peace” becomes an echo chamber of self-confirming biases?
How Did We Get Here?
The idea of “protect your peace” has valid weight to it. It might start as healthy boundary-setting, standing up for yourself and your beliefs. But when we start isolating ourselves from ideas we don’t believe in, we create a perfect storm of self-confirming bias.
And social media helps to fuel the fire. Social media algorithms have learned to show us content we engage with. How many of us have accidentally liked a hoof cleaning video once, only to find your entire feed full of hoof cleaning videos shortly after? (It can’t just be me, right?) Whether we mean to or not, we inherently engage with content that validates what we already believe. We’re not about to “love” a post that has a completely different opinion as us. But the algorithm interprets this as “show them MORE of this” and gets to work filling our feed with the same types of posts.
The only conflicting opinions we see are now those of our friends. But if we unfriend and unfollow anyone who challenges us? We justify it as shutting out “toxic people” and protecting our peace.
But we help create the perfect storm of intellectual isolation, stuck in a box of our own ideas and everyone affirming them.
I saw this happen in real time last week. I posted about Alex Pretti’s murder and found myself agreeing with some perspectives from voices I don’t usually align with. I liked a few posts. Within DAYS, my feed completely shifted. The algorithm categorized me into a totally different box based on agreeing with ONE thing.
Here’s the uncomfortable truth: I could immediately tell my feed had changed because it was showing me content that challenged my beliefs. Which means… I already had an echo chamber. I just didn’t realize it until the algorithm accidentally broke me out of it for a hot second.
The Bible even warns about these algorithm-curated feeds. “For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear” (2 Timothy 4:3-4).
What This Actually Looks Like
This isn’t a strictly political issue. This can apply to theology, parenting styles, eating habits, literally anything and everything.
In Social Media
I’d argue that this is where echo chambers form the most. We probably only follow news sources that align with our political views. Maybe we unfriend people at the first disagreement. We might block or mute anyone who posts challenging content, claiming it’s “triggering”. We celebrate how many people we’ve “cut off” and feel proud of our curated feed showing us exactly what we WANT to see.
I’ve hovered over the “unfriend” button more times than I’d like to admit. Sometimes I keep people in my feed not because I’m an enlightened person who loves being challenged, but because I’m scared of becoming exactly what I’m writing about. It’s uncomfortable. I don’t like it. But I’d rather be uncomfortable than ignorant.
In Our Language
We’ve gotten really good at using therapy language to avoid growth. “I don’t allow negativity in my space” is healthy until it becomes code for “I don’t allow anyone to challenge me.” “Toxic people” becomes another word for “anyone who disagrees with me”. We weaponize mental health language to justify intellectual laziness and not look into the “other side” more carefully. Instead, we decide to believe whatever sounds best. We claim we’ve “done our research”, but we really have just watched video after video confirming what we already thought in the first place.
In Our Thought Patterns
I’ve heard people say, “You can’t argue well unless you can argue for the other side.” But most of us can’t do this. We can’t articulate the opposing viewpoint in its strongest form, because we’ve never actually engaged with it. We’ve only seen the most extreme, absurd versions in our curated feeds, making it easy to dismiss anyone who thinks differently. And we assume bad motives for anyone who disagrees. We feel personally attacked by different perspectives.
Our beliefs have become MORE extreme over time, not more nuanced, because they’ve never been tested.
What’s crazy is we call this “mental health” when it’s really mental laziness. We say this is “wisdom” when it’s actually fear. And we defend this with “discernment” when it’s actually just avoidance.
Why This is Dangerous
This might all sound harmless—maybe even wise. We’re just curating our space, right? But the consequences go deeper than we realize.
The Psychological Danger
Confirmation Bias
Our social media algorithms are literally designed to confirm what we already believe. Our feeds are curated to reinforce everything we already believe, so we never encounter any evidence that could challenge our beliefs. If our beliefs are never tested, this creates fragile faith. Not strong. When our beliefs become more important than truth itself, we’ve made an idol out of being right.
The Radicalization Pipeline
Maybe we start out in a moderate position about something. We see both sides and hold an opinion somewhere in the middle. But over time, our algorithms show increasingly extreme versions. Little by little we get desensitized, and the extremes start to feel normal. We find ourselves agreeing with the most radical positions and end up far from where we started. By this point, if we saw what we originally believed, we might laugh before hiding the post altogether.
Loss of Nuance & Dehumanization
When our social media algorithms feed us the same polarizing content all day, everyday, it’s easy to lose sight of the nuances of current issues. Instead of believing that two things can be true simultaneously, it becomes an “us versus them” battle royale. We’ve lost the ability to disagree without hating each other, reducing complex humans to one-dimensional caricatures. Everything is either black or white; grey doesn’t exist. “The other side” is no longer made up of fellow humans but extreme caricatures that dehumanize people who are just like us. Instead of having respectful conversations about why we disagree, we resort to name calling and painting “their side” as ignorant, stupid, or evil. When we encounter any opinions different from ours, we can’t engage in a respectful manner. We throw our assumptions on people and decide they’re the enemy.
But the truth almost always lies somewhere in the middle.
The Biblical Problem
Iron Sharpens Iron (Proverbs 27:17)
Proverbs tells us that “iron sharpens iron”.
But iron can’t sharpen iron without friction.
We need the sparks. We need the grinding. We need people who think differently to refine our thinking, not just affirm it. Comfort doesn’t produce growth; it produces complacency, willful ignorance. We sit on our high horses and look down our noses at everyone who is “wrong” because they don’t think like us.
Test Everything (1 Thessalonians 5:21)
We’re commanded to test everything against the spirits. But we can’t test what we never encounter. If we barricade ourselves in our own little echo chambers, we can’t truly test anything. It’d be like testing a medication against another medication instead of a true saline placebo. How can we truly test something if we won’t entertain another perspective?
Not Tossed by Every Wind (Ephesians 4:14)
Ephesians 4:14 says, “…we may no longer be children tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes.” This verse doesn’t mean we should avoid all other perspectives—it means we should be grounded enough to engage without being destabilized.
The irony? Echo chambers actually make us MORE susceptible to being tossed around, not less, because our beliefs have never been tested.
Untested beliefs are weaker than tested ones.
Wounds of a Friend (Proverbs 27:6)
Proverbs 27:6 says, “Faithful are the wounds of a friend; profuse are the kisses of an enemy.” Sometimes the people who challenge us the most are the ones who love us the most. Sometimes the people who constantly validate and affirm everything we believe enable our blindness.
The friend who wounds you with truth loves you more than the enemy who flatters you with lies. Sometimes the most loving thing someone can do is challenge you.
The Feedback Loop
Picture this: You’re scrolling through Facebook and see a post that resonates with you. You take half a second out of your day to like the post. Later on, you’re scrolling again and you see the same types of posts over and over again. Your beliefs get reinforced by this constant stream of content validating everything you think. You become more confident and slowly become less tolerant of dissent. If a friend posts something opposite of what you believe, you unfriend them. You unfollow pages that you disagree with. The algorithm feeds on this and shows you even more extreme versions. This repeats over and over until you’re radicalized.
People joke that “I saw it on Facebook, so it must be true.” “I did my research” really means “I consumed content that agreed with me”. But this is tricky because the algorithm makes you THINK you’re seeing different perspectives. When really, you’re seeing 50 variations of the same perspective.
The “Protect Your Peace” Disguise
This is where “protect your peace” can become problematic. I wrote about this phrase previously here and how it relates to wrath and holding grudges. But in this case, “protect your peace” can restrict and cause us to avoid growth.
We CAN protect our peace from toxic relationships. This is healthy and encouraged. But we CAN’T grow spiritually and intellectually without encountering challenging perspectives.
A toxic person isn’t anyone who disagrees with you.
A toxic person attacks your dignity, safety, and worth. They constantly tear you down and dismiss your experiences, sometimes even convincing you they didn’t happen.
A challenging person questions your reasoning respectfully. They offer a different perspective and make you think just a little harder about something.
Ask yourself:
- Am I protecting my peace or my ego?
- Am I setting boundaries with harmful people or just avoiding uncomfortable truths?
- Am I discerning toxicity or just labeling everyone who challenges me as “toxic”?
- Is this person actually harming me, or just making me uncomfortable?
- Have I made “discomfort” mean the same as “toxicity”?
What’s ironic in the Christian setting is we should be MOST committed to truth-seeking. In Acts 17:11, the Bereans tested everything, even Paul’s own teachings. Instead, we can be the WORST offenders of close-minded judgment and ignorance. We weaponize “spiritual discernment” to justify intellectual laziness. Sometimes we even call our echo chambers “godly community”—mistaking agreement for unity. We confuse conviction with certainty.
And we’re scared to death that if we’re wrong about one thing, that means we’re wrong about everything.
True spiritual discernment helps us distinguish between God’s voice and our preferences—but echo chambers make us think our opinions ARE God’s voice.
The Difference
The world says: surround yourself with people who validate you.
Jesus says: love your enemies, pray for those who persecute you.
The world says: cut off anyone who challenges you.
But Scripture says: iron sharpens iron.
The world says: trust your feelings.
God says: test everything.
Breaking Out Without Breaking Down
So, how do you know if you’re actually in an echo chamber? Beyond the questions above, here are some tells: does everyone you follow agree with you on most things? Maybe you can’t remember the last time you read something that challenged you.
You might feel personally attacked when encountering different views. Have you ever unfriended or unfollowed someone for “one bad take”?
The truth tends to stay in the logical middle; have you found your beliefs becoming more extreme over time instead of more nuanced? Maybe you assume bad motives for anyone who disagrees or wouldn’t be able to argue the other side if you tried.
All of this can indicate if you’re in an echo chamber.
So, how do we break out?
Intentional Diversity (Not Abandoning Convictions)
Keeping your world intentionally diverse doesn’t mean you have to follow everyone regardless of toxicity or keep toxic people in your life. This doesn’t mean you have to completely abandon your convictions about certain things or give equal weight to all perspectives.
This means you intentionally follow diverse voices, not to be swayed, but to understand the “other side”. You can expose yourself to the strongest version of an opposing view for insight. Read the PRIMARY sources, not just commentaries. And this means you can follow people who argue FAIRLY and RESPECTFULLY but think differently.
The Steelman Exercise
Practice articulating the strongest version of the opposing view. If you can’t do this, you might not understand enough to dismiss it. And we don’t have to “choose a side”. We are allowed to pick things from each “side” and create our own outlooks on things.
Even Paul did this in Acts 17. He engaged with Greek philosophers on their terms and even quoted their own poets to debate civilly. He understood their worldview well enough to bridge from their beliefs to the gospel.
We should be able to do the same—not to compromise truth, but to communicate it effectively.
Practical Habits
Do an algorithm audit:
Take an honest look at who you follow. How diverse are the perspectives in your feed? Notice what gets recommended to you—are you seeing increasingly extreme versions of what you already believe? If you recognize these patterns, it might be time to limit your social media use or intentionally diversify your feed.
Go to primary sources:
When you see inflammatory commentary or reactions, resist the urge to engage with the rage bait. Instead, go straight to the primary source. You might be surprised how often the actual story is more nuanced than the hot take.
Practice real conversations:
Have actual conversations with people who think differently than you. Not to convert them or win an argument, but to understand. Ask yourself, “What if I’m wrong about this?”—not because you necessarily are, but to practice humility.
Boundaries to Keep
We can engage with different perspectives without being completely destabilized. We can listen without adopting the belief. We can understand without agreeing. We can be grounded AND curious.
The goal isn’t to abandon your convictions about certain topics. Instead, we can hold them with humility and curiosity rather than defensiveness and fear. We can be confident in what we believe without being arrogant. We can be teachable without being unstable.
Our beliefs will be strengthened and we may even learn something new along the way.
Sharpened, Not Sheltered
We think surrounding ourselves with people who all think the same keeps us strong. But this couldn’t be further from the truth. We need our beliefs to be challenged to keep us strong. Untested faith is fragile faith.
Gold is refined by fire, not protected from it.
We’re allowed to have firm convictions AND be curious about another perspective. We can be grounded AND open to correction. The phrase, “I didn’t know that, thanks for that perspective” can do wonders. We can protect ourselves from harm AND pursue challenging conversations, no matter how uncomfortable it might be.
The easy way out is to stroll through life with people shouting the same things back to us. But our entire worldview can shatter with one dissenting word. If we’re immersed in dissension and can still hold our convictions strongly?
I’d say that’s sharpened iron.
