Mark D. Roberts

Mark D. Roberts


Creation, Incarnation, and Online Church

posted by Mark D. Roberts

Part 8 of series: Is Online Church Really Church?
Permalink for this post / Permalink for this series
Let me say, once again, that I am not opposed to online church if it is an extension of in-the-flesh church. When connected to an actual community, not just a virtual one, online church can be a point of entry for newcomers, a context for deepening relationships among members, and a way for people who are physically separated from the congregation to be connected for worship, prayer, learning, and fellowship.
Perhaps one of the greatest examples of this came in the aftermath of hurricane Katrina in September, 2005. The campus of Canal Street Presbyterian Church in New Orleans was devastated by the hurricane, especially the flood waters. Moreover, immediately following the hurricane, members were almost completely cut off from each other. Cell phones and land-line phones did not work. People could not travel even short distances to check on their friends. For months the members of this church had no ordinary way to communicate, and could not meet together. BUT, shortly before the hurricane hit, they had established an online bulletin board for church communications. All of a sudden, this became the chief means for members to communicate with each other, sharing news, concerns, prayers, etc. For several months, this was the only way for the church as a whole to “meet.” The Internet was, in this case, a true godsend. (Photo: The building of Canal Street Presbyterian Church)
But notice that it was an adjunct to the fellowship of Canal Street Presbyterian Church. To my knowledge, none of the members of this church suggested that their future life could be solely online. In fact, the congregation was thrilled when they were finally able to meet together physically, after so many months of separation.
Their joy in gathering physically points to a deeper theological reality. In fact, it illustrates some of the most central truths of the Christian faith: creation and Incarnation.
When God created the heavens and the earth, he created stuff. When God created human beings, they were a special kind of stuff. But still they were stuff. Human beings are more than just stuff. We have (or perhaps “are”) souls. But the “stuffness” of our existence is not accidental or incidental. We are not spirits trapped in bodies that are either insignificant or evil. This is precisely what the Gnostics believed, and they were rightly identified as heretics for their denial of the value of creation.
Those who advocate the adequacy of virtual church, with any necessary, regular in-the-flesh component, come dangerously close to understanding human beings in the way of the Gnostics. Those who think that people can experience online everything that is essential for human fellowship are overlooking or denying who we are as divinely-created creatures. Thus, I would argue that it’s very difficult, if not impossible, to reconcile online church with the doctrine of creation, unless the virtual experience is an adjunct to the real thing.
Then there’s the doctrine of the Incarnation. In a nutshell, this states that “the Word became flesh and lived among us” (John 1:14). The very Word of God became human in Jesus. This in-the-flesh presence of God was the ultimate revelation of God as well as a prerequisite to the Cross.
The Incarnation dramatically underscores the divine value of physicality. It shows us that the physical world matters to God. Being in-the-flesh is essential to being human and to God’s way of saving the world. If physicality didn’t matter, if bodies were just the insignificant containers of spirit, surely God would not have gone to the bother, not to mention the humiliation, of the Incarnation.
One who takes seriously the theological implications of creation and the Incarnation will not be inclined to argue that online church is enough. Being together in the flesh will always be part of a full experience of Christian community.
This theological truth is reflected in our psychological experience as well. No matter how much we are able to share our souls when we’re not present with each other, through the Internet or other means, there is nothing like being with the people we love. Nothing online can match the power of giving and receiving a hug. Nothing online fosters intimacy in the way that looking deeply into someone’s eyes can do. Through online communication we can share deep parts of ourselves with others. But that kind of sharing will never be complete because it lacks what can only happen through our bodies.
In my next post in this series I want to reflect a bit on the benefits and detriments of livestreamed preaching. These reflections will also touch on the growing excitement for multisite churches that utilize some kind of video preaching, either live or Memorex.



Advertisement
Comments read comments(3)
post a comment
Rodney Reeves

posted October 6, 2009 at 9:12 am


“One who takes seriously the theological implications of creation and the Incarnation will not be inclined to argue that online church is enough.”
I’ve yet to hear any advocate of the virtual church give an answer to this point.
At the risk of sounding whimsical, how would John 1:14 be paraphrased in a virtual church? “And the Word went online and appeared before us, and we have seen the picture, the picture of a father’s only son, full of grace and truth” (The Virtual Bible).
Something to look at–but what do we do?



report abuse
 

Ray

posted October 6, 2009 at 12:25 pm


I love technology and all that new inventions can do to make our lives better. I also love the way technological advances challenge the Church. Virtual, on-line church is an interesting concept to ponder, but I’m not convinced yet. How about this…as soon as I see a man and woman meet, court, marry, have kids, raise a family, and grow old together – all 100% on-line and virtual, without meeting physically – I’ll believe that a completely on-line church is a viable option for serious Christians.



report abuse
 

John

posted October 7, 2009 at 11:00 am


I deeply respect Dr. Roberts’ insights and thoughts. I agree that a church can have a virtual component to their community, but a church exclusively existing in the virtual realm isn’t really church.
Even though social networking is building “community” it still is not replacing face-to-face relationships. How would a completely virtual church work in being the hands and feet, serving together, and effectively affect their community (since their community is virtual). By its nature, the internet is a way to transfer information – text, video, audio – and that’s it. Christianity is definitely more than information, more than knowledge. Didn’t Paul fight strongly against Gnosticism? God just didn’t send His Word, He sent His Word made FLESH.
One other thought -
The two biggest signs that virtual church won’t work I see are the sacraments of Baptism and Communion. How do you do share in those experiences when you’re not face-to-face in the same place? SKYPE? iChat? I don’t think so.



report abuse
 

Post a Comment

By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.



Previous Posts

More blogs to enjoy!!!
Thank you for visiting Mark D. Roberts. This blog is no longer being updated. Please enjoy the archives. Here are some other blogs you may also enjoy: Red Letters with Tom Davis Recent prayer post on Prayables Most Recent Inspiration blog post Happy Reading!  

posted 2:09:11pm Aug. 27, 2012 | read full post »

Why Did Jesus Have to Die? Conclusions
In this series on the death of Jesus, I have presented four different perspectives on why Jesus had to die: Roman, Jewish, Jesus’, and Early Christian. I believe that each of these points of view has merit, and that we cannot fully understand the necessity of Jesus’ death without taking them all

posted 2:47:39am Apr. 11, 2011 | read full post »

Sunday Inspiration from the High Calling
Can We Find God in the City? Psalm 48:1-14 Go, inspect the city of Jerusalem. Walk around and count the many towers. Take note of the fortified walls, and tour all the citadels, that you may describe them to future generations. For that is what God is like. He is our God forever and ever,

posted 2:05:51am Apr. 10, 2011 | read full post »

Why Did Jesus Have to Die? The Perspective of the First Christians, Part 3
An Act and Symbol of Love Perhaps one of the most startling of the early Christian interpretations of the cross was that it was all about love. It’s easy in our day, when crosses are religious symbols, attractive ornaments, and trendy jewelry to associate the cross with love. But, in the first

posted 2:41:47am Apr. 08, 2011 | read full post »

Why Did Jesus Have to Die? The Perspective of the First Christians, Part 2
The Means of Reconciliation In my last post, I examined one of the very earliest Christian statements of the purpose of Jesus’ death. According to the tradition encapsulated in 1 Corinthians 15, Jesus died “for our sins in accordance with the scriptures” (15:3). Yet this text doesn’t expl

posted 2:30:03am Apr. 07, 2011 | read full post »




Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.