Column Date 2009-05-09

What would Jesus do: Facebook or Twitter?

It's a tough call.

Each of them has its pros and cons.

For instance, it would be much easier for Peter, John, Matthew and the rest of the Apostles to know what Jesus was up to on Twitter.

He might tweet "Just turned water into wine." Or "Healed a lame man, fifth one today, need some sleep."

And even though you can use only 140 characters on Twitter, that wouldn't present much of a problem: "Walked on water this morning. You should have seen the looks on the Roman soldiers' faces!", for instance, takes only 87 characters.

A tweet, of course, is also the fastest way to get a quick answer from your followers: "Haven't seen Judas around recently. Does anyone know what he's up to?"

On the other hand, it would probably take Jesus all day to type the 'Sermon on the Mount' on Twitter, which would also require hundreds of individual tweets. That, clearly, is a job for Facebook.

Facebook is also the preferred way to share photos – like a "Before" photo (fish), and an "After" photo (loaves of bread).

And it lets your friends see your personal profile ("Son of God,"  "Savior," etc.).

Facebook also has the advantage of constantly suggesting new people who might want to be your friends (which could wind up being millions, in Jesus' case), as well as pointing out groups that might interest you (Jesus has just joined the group 'I Love Organ Music').

All in all, it's fair to say that Jesus would use both Twitter and Facebook to spread the word.

One more thing: being a man who was always for the underdog, Jesus would certainly be using a Mac laptop.

(The Romans, needless to say, would be struggling with Windows Vista.)

©2009 Peter Tannen