What’s Your Reaction to This Reaction?

I just came across a slew of articles I’m reviewing on the future of the “virtual church.” Needless to say, people are talking and reactions are mixed.

A recent poll from the Leadership Journal shows, in fact, that people aren’t sure what to make of the idea of having church online. Here’s a poll I participate in recently at the Journal:

Honestly, these results surprised me. I realize two things:

  1. This poll is unscientific.
  2. This poll is anecdotal.

Most of the people engaging in this poll either love the idea of an online church or they hate it. Where do you stand?

I’d love to re-create this poll on BeDeviant. So, in the comments, note your selection and perhaps a few words on why.

The question: What’s your reaction to the virtual church trend?

The answers:

  1. Excitement. Anything to reach the lost.
  2. Optimism. Finally, an affordable way to grow.
  3. Caution. Let’s see what happens.
  4. Confusion. Is it really church?
  5. Repulsion. How low can we go?
  6. None of the above. You don’t like pre-determined answers and want to come up with your own.

So … What do you think?

Other Posts You May Enjoy:

Have you enjoyed today's post? Would you kindly consider subscribing to our feed through RSS or email? That way, you're never out of the loop! BeDeviant.com comes to you, how brilliant.

Contributor: Justin Wise

I am a religious deviant who enjoys coffee, collared shirts, spending time with my wife and son, learning about quantum physics and creatively exploring the riches of the Spirit of Christ. Find more here: JustinWise.me
  • Justa Givner
    Excitement. (But not "Anything to reach the lost."

    Rather, anything to get away from Christians!)

    ;-)

    Praise the Lord!
  • Justa ... You just became a favorite commenter. Congrats :)
  • 2.5 Cautiously optimistic.

    Pros: More people can be reached almost effortlessly.
    Elderly, handicapped, those with social anxiety, etc. can join in without inconvenience.
    A very large community could be built rapidly.
    If simply viewing a sermon or teaching, it could be done when convenient.
    Non-threatening for non-believers.

    Cons: Anonymity could cause problems with authenticity. (but not necessarily)
    No physical interaction, which some people need.
    If it became a huge movement, many people could end up treating it like another thing they
    do on a daily basis and could take it or leave it on a whim because of the convenience
    factor, but not something that really changes their life, again because of no real
    community interaction.

    Overall, though, this could be a great thing for believers and non believers alike. Still in early stages, it will have to develop over time like everything else. So many think that we have to meet at a church building still. Why pay for a building and maintenance, etc. if we can change lives for just the cost of a website?

    Just my 37cents.
  • 37? Awesome. That's like, a phone call's more than the two we normally require!
  • laurajacobsen
    Caution. I think there is a place for it. The live streaming of the Christmas Eve service was great for those of us who couldn't get enough - and for those who may not have been able to get out. That could be me someday. Caution because I believe people need to be physically connected to a church and emotionally connected to the members to realize the whole experience of worship and wonder.
  • Excitement. Anything to reach the lost
  • ImDavidMiller
    I'm stoked! If I had to choose I'd be #1.
    It's been very effective for our Church
  • Did you happen to see this article today by the Baptist Messenger?

    http://baptistmessenger.com/the-rise-of-social-...

    The article is entitled The Rise of Social Media By Douglas Baker and Casey Shutt.

    I like what this quote has to say, which I agree with...

    "Ed Stetzer, President of Lifeway Research, is no stranger to blogging, Facebook, Twitter or any other of the myriad of communication tools employed in his work. Yet, Stetzer believes “there is no such thing as an internet church.” Those who regard the church in this manner and participate only by the live streaming of the worship service and “conversing on message boards are short circuiting the fellowship of the saints and their own spiritual growth.”"

    "The classic text which Stetzer uses to underscore the required gathering of Christians together in worship is Hebrews 10:25—“not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near.” He states “gathering together requires feet and faces, not just electrons and avatars.”"
  • amandasims
    In just about any church, the point is (or hopefully SHOULD be) to reach out to others, inviting them to encounter the love of Christ, and let Him change their lives, first through salvation itself and then through growing in their faith. Believers are encouraged to reach out and serve others around them while spreading the news of the Gospel.

    This all happens every week through Church Online at LifeChurch.tv, and I am on the 5-person team to which duregger referred. People from 180 countries around the world hear the message and are encouraged to begin (or grow in) their relationship with Jesus.

    There are over 200 volunteers who serve at 37 online experiences per week, and more experiences are planned. There is a sense of community among those volunteers as well as the regular attenders. In fact, this week an online volunteer was asked to come and speak at the funeral of a regular online attender, even though they had never met in person. It was a powerful experience.

    So is it a church? I believe so, yes. And I'm very excited about it.
  • dannyjbixby
    Awesome
blog comments powered by Disqus