After reading through John Dyer’s From the Garden to the City with the rest of the ChurchMag community, I have begun to realize that I might have a problem with technology. Now, when I start to “slide to unlock,” I think twice about why and whether I should. Am I alone in this? Probably not.
Aside from helping me to identify some of my issues with technology, John’s book—which you should read—has opened my eyes to see how many of us in ministry have begun to serve two gods—Jesus and technology. Technism, as John called it in his book, is reliance upon technology in place of God. If we are honest with ourselves, this is very possible in our technology-saturated world.
Let’s look at two major areas where we can easily identify and should certainly address the false god of technology in the local Church.
Addictions Accepted
Obviously, as Christians, we are to avoid sin. But what is sin? For brevity’s sake, let’s define sin as “anything that pollutes the soul, harms the body, offends the brethren, and/or prevents us from pursuing God and His Kingdom.” If that definition is acceptable to you, let me ask you this: how do we handle an addiction to technology?
Addictions hit every category of our definition. They often fill our hearts and minds with thoughts and feelings that do not honor God, take our lives/bodies out of balance, cause us to withdraw from or hurt others, and distract us from worshipping God. Addictions are sin, and yet we all know of some individuals in our Churches who are addicted to Facebook games or tweeting or texting, etc. How do we handle this? In my church—and in many others, I’m sure—the problem is largely ignored. But how long can that go on in an era when marriages are disposable and children are being raised by YouTube and Facebook? As it is, far too many of us are consumed with our “virtual” lives to the destruction of our “real” lives.
Programs for Power
Technism as we already said is putting our faith in technology in place of God. No one would ever say that they trust their iPhone to save them from their sins, and yet how many pastors and leaders put their faith in programs and processes and three-phase plans that have nothing to do with trusting God?
In my own church, we’re desperately trying to “close the back door,” to stem the tide of newcomers who leave within their first year. While there is nothing wrong with this, most of our attempts at solving this problem involve more programming and more planning. This is where technism can creep up on us, as we put more effort into crafting a solution with our own strength rather than by trusting God for the solution.
Not a Conclusion
Has the Church fallen over the edge and embraced the false faith of technism? No, but just as we are to take stock of our own thought lives and make any rebellious thought obedient to Christ, so should the Church be vigilant about its acceptance of and reliance upon technology. This isn’t much of a conclusion, but then again I’m not concluding my analysis of my church or my own heart. That’s why I truly don’t have any solutions as of yet. But maybe you’re already ahead of me on this? Do you see any other issues that I may have missed or am I over thinking all of this? Do you have an idea of how to stave off and perhaps push back the advance of technism within the Church? Let me know in the comments.
[Image via Quinn Dombrowski]
MGalloway says
One thing that I notice that suffers when too much emphasis is placed on planning/programs is prayer. It’s like people forget to ask God what His view is on the situation or to look in the Bible for guidance. I’ve seen several programs and outreach efforts struggle because of a lack of prayer even though Phillipians 4:6 and James 1:5 counsel us otherwise.
I’ve come to realize over the years that God knows better than anyone else how to build His church.
Phil Schneider says
I completely agree. In essence, that’s a major part of John’s book: we use technology to rebel against and replace God. We don’t pray: we plan and program.
Alex says
yea.
Ive been saying that since 2007.
I am totally against Facebook since 2007. I “disconnected” from every digital devices for about 9 months while I was in Africa 2 years ago. I did not want a computer, and I did not connect to the internet for about 6-9 months. Not once.
I lived for about 9 full months with ONLY 2 tv channels. (just 2 – can you imagine dudes ?).
What do you learn from total disconnect ? You learn that technology is a tool. I use it now because I need to for my work.
Technology is not a passion. It’s not a “we all are Apple Lovers or Batman Lovers” etc
That’s food for dogs and junk for little girls.
That’s why I know that you young people here on “churchmag” are going in the wrong direction, while trying to magnify technology, using all those lousy words as “church technologist” or I dont know what lousy term.
Life and walk with God, and going through life and family, and go trough trials of life, you will learn eventually that rising any other name that the name of Jesus is a corruption of something.
Rising the name of Apple of Mac here is corruption
Rising the name of Marvel here, or Batman or any other foolish “somehting Man” is corruption
Rising the name of Facebook is corruption
etc
and all those names are rised pretty high on here, as well as in a lot of contemporary churches (trying to be tech savvy, and cool to this generation)….
But it’s ok, you guys are youngs, and you eventually will learn it, so no biggie.
Just be sure to stay humble enough to not believe that because you guys try to be “on the verge on technology and computer usage at a time where this generation is consumed by that” – then you guys are right and you got it anytime.
@Phil Schneider this is a very good article.
you might be interested in by this sermon from Albert Mohler (he’s a Baptist leader) http://www.albertmohler.com/2010/06/17/the-hypersocialized-generation-3/
some other material from him can be found here : http://www.albertmohler.com/category/topics/technology-topics/
PS Not a lot christian authors dare to stand up against the general mood and flow, and say the truth : that technology does not save men. Jesus does. And yea. Technology has always been a pitfall for humanity in many aspects in every century. And today still.
Phil Schneider says
Hey, Alex. You’ve clearly been thinking about this issue for a long time. I really appreciate that. I would suggest that you read John Dyer’s book “From the Garden to the City.” You can purchase it from Amazon right here:
http://www.amazon.com/Garden-City-Redeeming-Corrupting-Technology/dp/0825426685/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1322609905&sr=8-1
I wrote this post after reading this book, and it really opened my eyes to a lot of the issues that you have apparently been aware of for a long time.
However, I want to clarify a few things for you: no one here is exalting technology over the name of Jesus. To be sure, Jesus is Lord of all, and it was the idea that we could “out build” or “out design” God that did in the Tower of Babel. And yet, we live in a world that is saturated with technology. To ignore it is to largely ignore those who are going to Hell without Christ. Of course, that doesn’t give us free reign to use technology however we want. We must do so carefully.
Our use of blogs, computers, and cultural (comic book) references are not intended to replace the gospel, but to help bridge a connection between the Lord we serve and those who have no idea who He really is. Read the words of the Apostle John:
I have much to write to you, but I do not want to use paper and ink. Instead, I hope to visit you and talk with you face to face, so that our joy may be complete. 2 John 1:12
Here, John talks about his desire to impart more wisdom to his brothers and sisters in the faith, and yet he wants to do so “face to face.” Clearly, he values a personal experience as opposed to a technology-based or virtual one, and yet he still used technology: writing, paper, ink. None of those three were created by God. Each was developed as man-made technology. In fact, the Bible you likely read is printed on paper, a development that only first appeared a few hundred years ago, thanks to Mr. Gutenberg.
I hope you don’t take my reply as attacking you because you really do have some great points. I’m just concerned that you might be throwing out the baby with the bath water, or at the least, misinterpreting what this site is all about.
Alex says
Thanks for the answer:)
sorry I just realized that my answer was sounding pretty rude in fact. Yes I understand the “bridge” concept, but at the same time i believe that “speaking the same language with the same words” ( that this generation does) does not mean at all liking, loving and doing the same things.
I could in fact talk a handfull bunch of hours about Marvel comics and other pop cultural references, but that does not mean that I like them or I “live and breath” them.
Well regarding technology this is a deep and interesting debate. I heard about the book before, and I want to read it when I get a chance to.
As far as the present technology is concerned, I do believe that tho we can compare iphone, facebook, internet etc with invention of books, pen, railroads or telephone, there is an essential truth : internet is not “book”, facebook is not a pen or a diary, networks are not railroad.
it’s something else. on another level. I never can compare the invention of internet with the invention of books. 2 different worlds, and one we have yet to explore..
There is another interesting point of view. The editor and creator of “wired” magazine wired.com is in fact christian, and as well, he says he does not use technology at all in his home. He seems to struggle between 2 worlds too.
The debate is interesting. It’s good to have this debate open, and I hope more and more people will get into this debate, and come to realize that tho we can use technology as a tool for some things, we need to deeply understand (especially as parents) the negative effect it has indeed on our lives. And especially this “hyper socialized generation”. I worry for kids growing up in front of a screen. Really.
I believe God did not make mankind to communicate through screens. I believe that. I do.
Bless,
interesting debate.
Alex:)
Phil Schneider says
We certainly must keep this debate open. It’s going to be an on-going discussion, I’m sure.
Alex says
Be sure to watch this recent christian movie about that subject (people need to buy a DVD and give it to their church so that their church plays that movie) : http://www.captivatedthemovie.com/
Phil Schneider says
Thanks for the suggestion! It looks very interesting. I’ll have to see about picking that up.
Greg Surrett says
Interesting article. I tend to argue that a better definition of sin is “anything contrary to what God has told his people to do”, however that encompasses many of the things you list in your definition.
However, I don’t understand this concept of “addiction” to technology. I myself am a computer programmer, so perhaps that’s why. I’m not just a consumer–I’m a producer. “Technology”, as it is called, is what I do. It’s my job. It’s how I pay the bills, and much of the time it’s how I spend my “free time”. I use “technology” to read God’s Word–I have that “app” on my phone. I’ll admit that I love building a powerful computing machine myself; where’s the harm or wrongdoing in that?
I guess I can understand that you may be talking about individuals who just want the next shiny thing just because it’s shiny and “OOHH, IT TALKS NOW!” Perhaps my definition of “addiction” gets in the way as well. I see “addiction” as anything that causes one to sin, either by way of sinning to get it, or by neglect of ones responsibilities.
The true definition of “technology” is any application of human knowledge to physical uses. A better term would be “computerism”, I think. In addition, in contrast with some comments above, I don’t see why people *can’t* communicate through screens. I live in NC, and my fiance (whom I have been “dating” for almost two years now and have planned to marry all along) currently lives in PA. I don’t get to be with her often, but I get to talk to her and at least see her face through Skype. I take that as a blessing.
The truest human communication is done in person, and it bothers me when people ONLY communicate by means of the latest tech; however, I would not go so far as to say that it is an “addiction” or “morally wrong” to do so.
Communication through screens isn’t the end goal of technology anyway. It is only currently the way things are done. I’m excited to see what’s in store if God chooses to keep spinning the world for the time being (albeit also a bit pessimistic lol).
In short, I see technology as a gift. We can use it rightly, or we can use it wrongly, just like anything else.
Phil Schneider says
Your definition is fine. I crafted my definition specifically to show what sin is/does in detail. I wanted to make it very clear that addition is a sin, no matter what we’re addicted to.
And I’m completely agree that communication CAN occur through technology, but I agree with what John said in his book that technology serves as a media which does alter—and in some cases, overshadows—the message. That’s why I quoted that verse from 2John. Technology is fine, when used properly, but face-to-face communication is best.
“We can use [technology] rightly, or we can use it wrongly, just like anything else.” This is how most of us see technology, but if you’ll allow me to pose a question from John’s book, “Is technology neutral? Is it only our intentions/use that makes technology good or bad?”
Greg Surrett says
Yes, I believe so. It is a thing, not an act or attitude. Without the intention of human beings, there is no sin in objects.
Phil Schneider says
Not to be contrary, but I’m not so sure I agree. Technology/tools are used to change the world, right? Well, a neutral item would simply transfer the force applied to it to the target it is directed at. Technology doesn’t always do that, if ever.
Think of a shovel. (This is an example from John’s book.) It couldn’t be simpler, right? You use it to dig holes in the earth: you use it to change the earth. But, the more you use it, the more the tool itself will change you. Your hand will blister from gripping the handle while your muscles will slowly learn the best, most comfortable manner in which to hold the shovel.
Think of Twitter. If you read a large volume of tweets, your brain will eventually adapt the skills need to quickly sift and sort small bits of data. Conversely, if you are a graduate student in history, like me (snore), your brain will be forced to adapt to reading long, complex books in such a way that you can synthesize the author’s argument and his subsequent worldview.
Technology may not be evil in a sentient-sense—though we should all watch out for Skynet—but we should be aware that it has the power to change us, and not always in good ways.
Alex says
I am not an expert in media culture, but there is this famous sentence that every college student in the media industry have learnt, from Marshall McLuhan “The medium is the message”.
Honestly, I never really thought deeply about that sentence, and I cannot say that I have forged myslef an strong opinion about that sentence.
But at the first glance, I agree very well with this “The medium is the message”. The medium shapes the message, and more over, the medium shapes us. (Shane Hipps talks a lot about that – and yes I read some Hipps reading about technology, but that’s about it, I stop there with Hipps. I dont feel confortable with the rest of his theological views – at all . but I like his readings about technology).
To sum up, I think that the medium shapes the message and shapes us as well. And I think that if brief communication, once in a while, through screens isnt that bad, the problem is that due to our “time” and society, it’s hard to communicate only “once in a while” through all those new medias. So you dive in it, and our message gets profoundly shaped by these medias, and so are us.
While i’m there, a good book about the subject is “The Shallows – What the Internet Is Doing to Our Brains”, by Nicholas Carr
http://www.theshallowsbook.com/nicholascarr/Nicholas_Carrs_The_Shallows.html
Now, in my opinion, can God bless our usage of new medias ? sure.
The problem is with us. You can close a book pretty easily, and “use” that “media” 1 hours or 2 / day, even if your fond of books. Now if you are fond of computers – or just if you are a 14 yo girl (or boy…) today – you cant just “use your iphone” or your facebook account 1 hour a day, and then close it under the table till tomorrow.
It’s just part of your life.
And now, here is the problem..
Phil Schneider says
If I’m reading you right, Alex, I agree. I think the word your searching for is “immersive.” We are immersed in our technology in ways that few of us have ever been immersed in a book. We are practically surrounded by it and are almost totally unaware of how pervasive technology has become.
Alex says
Good thing to check : http://www.slideshare.net/luketipping/why-social-media-is-shit-10285826?player=js
Interesting stats in these slides.