Comments on: Ministry in a Post-Christian, Digital Age – Part Three http://www.thejakers.com/church/ministry-in-a-post-christian-digital-age-part-three seeing through a glass darkly. Thu, 29 Jul 2010 04:21:07 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc hourly 1 By: peacebringer http://www.thejakers.com/church/ministry-in-a-post-christian-digital-age-part-three/comment-page-1#comment-185 peacebringer Mon, 16 Nov 2009 14:16:01 +0000 http://www.thejakers.com/?p=353#comment-185 Hey, just ran across these articles. You do an excellent job of describing where culture is at and the growing self defined focus. I just started looking at articles related to a forum discussion. I may at some point write some related articles at http://peacebringer7.wordpress.com. Hey, just ran across these articles. You do an excellent job of describing where culture is at and the growing self defined focus. I just started looking at articles related to a forum discussion. I may at some point write some related articles at http://peacebringer7.wordpress.com.

]]> By: BajanPOET http://www.thejakers.com/church/ministry-in-a-post-christian-digital-age-part-three/comment-page-1#comment-92 BajanPOET Mon, 19 Oct 2009 20:12:43 +0000 http://www.thejakers.com/?p=353#comment-92 I like the concept ... I have to read the articles thoroughly first. I just wanted to comment that God has been using the internet for fellowship and ministry. I will read and comment further, but here's my last blog post on a similar topic <a href='http://bajanpoet.wordpress.com/2009/10/15/searching/' rel="nofollow">http://bajanpoet.wordpress.com/2009/10/15/searching/</a> The Lord has used my blog, and Instant Messaging chats, to set his people free from Satanic torment - and, on the converse side - I have seen healings and people filled with the presence of the Lord from our interactions online. So the Internet should not be shied away from! Like I said, I'll be back! I like the concept … I have to read the articles thoroughly first. I just wanted to comment that God has been using the internet for fellowship and ministry.

I will read and comment further, but here’s my last blog post on a similar topic

http://bajanpoet.wordpress.com/2009/10/15/searching/

The Lord has used my blog, and Instant Messaging chats, to set his people free from Satanic torment – and, on the converse side – I have seen healings and people filled with the presence of the Lord from our interactions online. So the Internet should not be shied away from!

Like I said, I’ll be back!

]]> By: daniel zehring http://www.thejakers.com/church/ministry-in-a-post-christian-digital-age-part-three/comment-page-1#comment-88 daniel zehring Fri, 16 Oct 2009 23:02:10 +0000 http://www.thejakers.com/?p=353#comment-88 In wrapping this series up I think you've really honed in a particular focus: "Is a fully digital church viable?" You've made your case well and I agree with your conclusions, but in the process I think you've ended on a distilled and reduced definition of the Church in defining it's bare-bones form and function. Your three-point definition of Church defines it by actions rather than identity. When I look at that definition I see the space for the empty execution of Church without the life and vibrance of Spirit-filled community. Any definition that could allow for nominally practiced institutions without Gospel infused transformation seems lacking. I think this line of thought supports your overall argument that digital Church is not a viable option because the pervasive call of the Gospel demands more connection, action, and life than broadband can supply. I believe there is a certain proximity necessary to really live out the call placed upon the Church through it's continually deepening identity, rather than its institutional practices. In fact, I think that connection might be something we lost culturally along the way as families have grown smaller, walls have grown higher, and we created this inflated idea of a "personal life" in the era of modernism. Digitalism might be a response away from these trends as a way to regain the connection people used to experience in a more communal time (with a lot of extra ego added). This effort is inevitably going to fall short of what, we as Christians, know true community to be. It's like they want to have their cake and eat it too, desiring the benefits of community without the self-sacrifice those benefits demand. Also, in making this particular argument I think you've hinted at, but purposefully staved off, a whole heap of no less urgent, but perhaps more applicable questions about how a flesh and blood Church should interact, and encourage Christians to interact, with this new-fangled inter-web thing. "Digital church" can't the only pitfall that churchmen are going to encounter in attempting to engage a new generation on their own turf. Any intentions of digging through some of those issues in future posts? In wrapping this series up I think you’ve really honed in a particular focus: “Is a fully digital church viable?” You’ve made your case well and I agree with your conclusions, but in the process I think you’ve ended on a distilled and reduced definition of the Church in defining it’s bare-bones form and function. Your three-point definition of Church defines it by actions rather than identity. When I look at that definition I see the space for the empty execution of Church without the life and vibrance of Spirit-filled community. Any definition that could allow for nominally practiced institutions without Gospel infused transformation seems lacking. I think this line of thought supports your overall argument that digital Church is not a viable option because the pervasive call of the Gospel demands more connection, action, and life than broadband can supply. I believe there is a certain proximity necessary to really live out the call placed upon the Church through it’s continually deepening identity, rather than its institutional practices. In fact, I think that connection might be something we lost culturally along the way as families have grown smaller, walls have grown higher, and we created this inflated idea of a “personal life” in the era of modernism. Digitalism might be a response away from these trends as a way to regain the connection people used to experience in a more communal time (with a lot of extra ego added). This effort is inevitably going to fall short of what, we as Christians, know true community to be. It’s like they want to have their cake and eat it too, desiring the benefits of community without the self-sacrifice those benefits demand.

Also, in making this particular argument I think you’ve hinted at, but purposefully staved off, a whole heap of no less urgent, but perhaps more applicable questions about how a flesh and blood Church should interact, and encourage Christians to interact, with this new-fangled inter-web thing. “Digital church” can’t the only pitfall that churchmen are going to encounter in attempting to engage a new generation on their own turf. Any intentions of digging through some of those issues in future posts?

]]>