Today I was doing some research regarding online discipleship and came across a past Think Christian discussion. This discussion talks about how our culture is becoming “high touch” in light of its rapid movement toward being “high tech.” It also stated that, for that reason, discipleship can not happen effectively online.
At what point is face to face needed? required? to live a life “in a bubble” called “virtual space” means little if there is not community developed – how can i pick you up and help dust you off if the only way i can speak with you is in a chat room, or in a email? How can you help me with a daily struggle to keep right with God, if all i have is a avatar and text messaging?[Quote from an email by John Naisbitt]First, lets define online discipleship. Christian discipleship is the process of encouraging and facilitating growth toward being more like Christ in your own life or the life of another. So then, online discipleship would be using the tools of the Internet to encourage and facilitate growth toward being more like Christ.I agree with John Naisbitt that as we become more “high tech,” we will crave more “high touch” relationships. That’s why I think “virtual church” is an oxymoron.
I agree that without community, discipleship can not be nearly as effective. But does that community absolutely need to be face-to-face? In today’s world of social networking, online discussions, blogs, Second Life, and online churches, do you think it is possible for true discipleship to happen online?
If so, What are some examples you’ve seen online that are effective at doing this?
Loading ...
December 6, 2007 at 15:13
I believe spiritual growth has been taking place online through McLean Bible Church’s Internet Campus. Not just through meaningful sermon discussions and debates, but also through just the tremendous encouragement it is to see hundreds of peers share their God stories online.
December 6, 2007 at 16:11
One of the cornerstones of Protestant ecclesiology is that the visible church is found where the Word of God is preached and the Sacraments administered. It’s hard to imagine how these things can happen in a virtual sense. This goes especially for the Sacramental part, but I believe that Marshal McLuhan and others could promote the orality of the preaching as essential.
John closes his epistles with words to the effect of, “Though I have much to write to you, I would rather not use paper and ink. Instead I hope to come to you and talk face to face, so that our joy may be complete. (2 John 12, cf 3 John 13).”
There’s something about being the Church that cannot be accomplished only be exchanging of letters (or email, video feeds, etc), but only in the incarnate, face-to-face relationship is that “joy made complete.”
Internet ministries can be of great value, but we have a lot of theology to re-think if we want to find the essence of the Church online.
December 6, 2007 at 16:32
I think it’s important to define our terms. If you equate discipleship with learning the Bible, yeah that can be done. However, if you’re talking about someone providing a Godly example, walking you through difficult times, I doubt it.
Email, chats, etc. give a false sense of relationship. It’s like a two-dimensional picture – no body language, no tone of voice, etc. There’s no way to actually do things together and see people interact in day-to-day settings.
Has the Internet been a blessing to me? Absolutely. I’ve met terrific people. I met my late husband through the Internet, but our relationship only took off when we started seeing each other in person.
Why the emphasis on relationship? It’s how Jesus discipled the twelve. They were together – traveling, eating, ministering, being knit together not just in mind but in heart. Like natural babies, spiritual babies need hands on nurturing.
To summarize, I think the Internet is a good supplement (like a vitamin), but doesn’t cut it as an exclusive spiritual diet.
December 6, 2007 at 20:45
To chime in again, I think that Anna is on the right track. I would push her point further. Email and chat are limited channels that do not convey a lot of more nuanced communication.
But, our communication channels keep getting broader. There are voice chats and we can videoconferencing and YouTube do allow us to see body language. As Internet technology goes on, this will likely get more and more common.
I would say that even if our Internet connections were broad enough to handle this communication fast enough, that it still would never create disciples in a satisfactory manner. To “be more like Christ” is to have exactly the kind of fleshy and face-to-face relationship God willed in the Incarnation. It is physically near, close and vulnerable—enough so to be crucified.
December 7, 2007 at 00:53
the problem with the virtual church is that you can’t reach your hand through the computer and hug someone, shake a hand, and fellowship. I believe that fellowship is a part of discipleship. Chat rooms, IM’s, etc. convey communication but not necessarily fellowship with one another. Hebrews 10:24-25 urges us to not give up meeting with each other because we all need to be encouraged. The end of Acts 2 shows the early church’s discipleship method. They met together daily, ate together, prayed together, etc. and thousands were being saved. I can agree with Anna that some personal discipleship can be done on our own through virtual means. I feel that blogging and commenting on sites like these strengthens what I believe in. I never want it to be the only thing I do though. I use tools to help me study the Bible online. True discipleship as outlined in the Bible is never a solitary thing. It’s about relationships with other disciples.
December 7, 2007 at 10:26
“I believe that fellowship is a part of discipleship.” – Bill, You make the above comment. While I agree that fellowship is related to discipleship, I am curious how you (or anyone else) define “Fellowship”?
Is it just the idea of meeting together or is there more to it than that?
If it is just meeting together, why could that not be done via video phone/conferencing or some other technology that exists or may soon exist?
December 7, 2007 at 10:53
Though I welcome technology and the power of the internet, I have to say that it is a channel of communication that should not replace face to face interaction. By all means, if you can meet together, do so. Like Bill, stated, it is the power of the personal touch (a handshake, hug, kiss, etc.) that makes discipleship special. I have a good friend who moved to Georgia (I’m in NYC) and we interact via the phone, email, IM, etc. It is working fine for now, but there are times when I wish I can see him and go to a Starbucks and share a cup of coffee and talk face to face. I’m actually flying to see him and his family at the end of this month. Online communities are fine, but the power lies in the personal touch. Jesus is the perfect example. He not only thought the scriptures, he would sit and dine with people and that was made him special. No technology can replace washing our brother’s feet. There is a need to get dirty and personal with our own two hands.
December 7, 2007 at 18:17
“Discipleship” is a modern, evangelical cultural term, not a biblical term. We made it up to describe what we thought we should be doing in response to the command in Matt. 18 to “make disciples.” It’s an extra-biblical term of convenience applied mostly to programs and movements. I would like to suggest that we have made more of it than Scripture does. I’ll try to make this understandable for a short blog post.
1. Jesus was a Jewish rabbi. All rabbis had disciples. In Matthew 28, He was speaking to Jewish men who understood the nature of rabbis and followers. He was speaking their language.
2. The term “disciple” appears only in the gospels and in the first half of Acts, and then disappears. It is never used by any of the epistolary writers…ever! They apparently did not consider the language of the Great Commission anywhere near as important as we do.
3. As the church spread into “all the world,” Paul and others would be speaking to gentiles who knew nothing of Hebrew “rabbi-disciple” relationships and language. The command to “make discples” was supplanted by the commands to “love one another,” and to “fellowship,” and grow “in Christ.”
4. It is my humble and under-educated opinion (I have only an MDiv) that “koinonia,” or fellowship/partnership, became Paul’s operative replacement lingo for being a disciple of Christ as the church moved into Gentile lands and people groups. Paul made disciples, although he never used that terminology, but making churches where Christ would be present through the live of those disciples.
5. The great commission sent Christ’s followers out to make disciples of Him, not of themselves. In Paul’s theology, the presence of Christ in the world is in the gathered body of Christ, where Christ is the head and we are his body. The idea of being a Christian apart from a body of believers is foreign to the New Testament.
6. In the body of Christ, we become disciples of Jesus, and relate to him directly as though he were with us. That’s because He is, through His gifted people who make up the parts of His body. We “make followers” (disciple as a verb) of one another within the body as Christ’s people gathered together, not as disembodied agents of the Christian message.
My opinion: True biblical discipleship can happen ONLY in a body of believers. It is ONLY there that one truly encounters Jesus, the eternal Savior and Rabbi, in person. That is where he is present in this world—in his local body. That is good theology. And it makes sense. Otherwise, being a “disciple” is reduced to following a program and learning about Christianity.
Can we learn many things about Christ from the internet? Certainly. Can we grow as a disciple of Jesus from the internet. Undoubtedly. Is it “discipleship”? No, not for me anyway. Not if we define discipleship as the process of being in contact with the living Christ in order to become like him (which was the goal of the follower of a rabbi—Luke 6:40). According to the Scripture, that happens only in the local body of believers, the church. IMHO.
December 7, 2007 at 19:29
Clay said:
The great commission sent Christ’s followers out to make disciples of Him, not of themselves
Right on the nose Clay!
We emphasise and re-emphasise this all the time:
You have got to build up your personal relationship with Jesus. Letting Him live His life through you is THE thing that matters because when you get to that stage you can only please the Father!
The only example I can set before others is to let Jesus live His life through me.
December 7, 2007 at 20:33
Someone asked for a definition of “fellowship.” From what I see in Scripture, it has nothing to do with programs. Certain activities may provide an atmosphere conducive to introducing people. However, merely participating in a religious or social gathering does not guarantee fellowship. So..what is fellowship?
It is being knit together in the Body of Christ, realizing how much we need each other. It is knowing others and being known on a heart level. It is the prayer support, cards, emails, meals, rides to the doctor, and even financial gifts to the family struggling with major illness or some other crisis. It is pouring the gifts God has given us into the lives of others in desperate need whether physical, emotional or spiritual. It is giving of ourselves when it isn’t convenient.
In such an atmosphere, teaching and spiritual growth happen naturally because the new believer feels safe. No amount of Internet contact can duplicate that type of interaction.
December 9, 2007 at 21:05
Very good words Anna,Clay ,Pops, and Moe…I think we are all agreeing that fellowship and discipleship work hand in hand. Dave…I would say that one can’t define fellowship per say due to the fact that there is no “set in stone” thing that causes fellowhip. Fellowship is an action verb not a noun.
December 10, 2007 at 17:12
Online discipleship, as a tool, adds to face-to-face relationships. As a substitution, it stinks.
Also it exponentially expands the number of people a life influences and the physical boundaries of that reach.
For my site, if I have 100 visitors a day …who spend 10 seconds to over 30 minutes on my site… it would take me more than 8 hours per day in cold call evangelism, several 10 to 30 minute conversations, and one or two hour long appointments for counseling sessions. Worse, that time would have to be scheduled at the convenience of the disciple. And I could not afford the expense of traveling across the USA let alone to every inhabited continent.
That said if my web site were the only source of discipleship for a person… in Africa, let’s say… that is less than ideal at best. Or, if I spent all of my time with a computer without human relationships that would be counter-productive if not outright destructive.
December 22, 2007 at 10:40
I find it interesting that Jesus made no comment regarding what the church should look like, He indicated He would be the builder of it and that its role and function should be based around GOING & DISCLIPING. It seems to me that many of our modern churches are more about inviting and being a spectator.