In 2025, theology on YouTube is a primary catechism for millions. Conversions, controversies, and comment threads often form people’s convictions long before they ever read a council document, confession, or church father. If you publish content doctrine or theology online, you are having a direct impact on people’s walk with God and are claiming a degree of leadership. Leadership brings responsibility.

The Spark: Conversions, Debates, and Digital Whiplash

When a prominent apologist publicly shifts traditions, the internet lights up. Some cheer, others bristle, and many feel confused. Well-known commentators may warn that self-platformed personalities have overtaken rightly formed teachers in guiding doctrine online. The anxiety isn’t imaginary: rapid takes often outrun slow reading. Thus, we have every right to be concerned about who is making this content. But, as this article hopes to show, the solution isn’t to muzzle every non-PhD. It’s to build shared standards that match reach with rigour.

Clarifying the Field: What Counts as “Theology” Online?

Not every religious video is doctrinal instruction. We can and should distinguish between:

• Testimony & Devotion: prayer stories, struggles, conversions, how Scripture changed a life. Anyone may share these in good faith.
• Systematic & Historical Theology: discussions on what are the core tenets of belief and what one should believe in. These are the more abstract, yet important, discussions on doctrine which change what we think about the Church, Christ, and salvation.

Mixing these categories without labels confuses audiences and those who can helpfully engage with one may not be qualified to engage in the other.

So Who Should Make YouTube Videos?

Making YouTube videos requires a very different skill set than being an academic. An academic is there to read, write, and publish rigorous research on important topics.

Credentials, Calling, and Competence

Do you need a doctorate to make theology on YouTube? No. But engaging in high-stakes doctrine requires competence—which can come from different vocations:

• Pastors: formation, pastoral prudence, confessional grounding.
• Scholars: languages, methods, literature maps, peer-reviewed habits.
• Creators: communication, visuals, pacing, reach, community building.

The healthiest channels combine these strengths through collaboration and wisdom.

What Scholarly Rigour Looks Like on the Web

• Open primary sources: Scripture; official catechisms/confessions; councils; fathers.
• Cite standard references for disputed claims.
• Steelmanning: present the best version of the opposing view first.
• State limits: “I’m not an expert here, this is my informed opinion.”
• Invite correction: No one gets everything right, it is good to be open to disagreement and discussion.

Communication Is a Skill (and a Ministry)

Good research can land poorly; good delivery can oversell weak claims. Aim for:

• Clarity: define terms on-screen (e.g., “sanctification,” “temporal punishment”).
• Humility cues: “Here are two readings; here’s why I lean X.”
• Pastoral tone: remember you are discussing ideas, not persons. Never target people, only what they are discussing.

Where Things Go Wrong

1. Overconfidence masquerading as clarity.
2. Straw men replacing honest summaries.
3. Echo chambers rewarding applause lines, not accuracy.
4. Hot-take velocity outrunning slow reading.

Avoid letting slogans replace arguments and research.

• “If you affirm baptismal regeneration, you deny sola fide.”
  → Historical reality is complex. Avoid absolutist slogans on contested terrain.
• “If you don’t accept transubstantiation, you don’t love Jesus.”
  → That confuses doctrinal disagreement with measuring personal charity. Unfair and unhelpful.

For the full discussion: