CEJ: Series 3, Yol. 14, No.

2 Copyright 2017

OVERCOMING DIGITAL DISTANCE:

THE CHALLENGE OF DEVELOPING
RELATIONAL DISCIPLES
IN THE INTERNET AGE
%
Chris Shirley
Dallas Baptist University

Abstract: Jesus’ model for discipleship (John 15:1-16) is grounded within a context of human and
divine relationships: abiding in Christ, fellowshipping with other disciples, and ministering to needs
of others in the world and in the church. As the Christian community becomes increasingly reliant
on digital technology and the Internet to provide an environment and resources for disciple-making,
we must also be familiar with the available options and understand the benefits and limitations of
using these methods as we seek to establish and enhance these essential spiritual relationships.

Keywords: discipleship, disciple-making, online, spiritual formation

Introduction

Out of eternity, the Son of God, who was in perfect fellowship with his
Father and the Holy Spirit, came to earth in the form of a man. Although his
entire earthly life was focused on his relationship with the Father, the Son
also spent three years in a relationship with his disciples, preparing them to
carry on his ministry and message. Their preparation was an interplay be-
tween developing an intimate relationship with Jesus, forming a community
of love among the disciples, and ministering to those inside and outside the
fellowship. Within this relational framework, Jesus’ disciple-making tools
included the Scripture (Matt 13:13-15; 24:37-40), his authoritative teach-
ing (Matt 5:21-48), his miracles (Luke 6:30-44), the community of disciples
(Luke 22:7-22), and hands-on ministry experiences (Luke 10:1-15).
Two thousand years later, disciples are made in much the same way. Dis-
ciple-making tools still include the Scripture (the Old and New Testaments),
the community of disciples called the church, and ministry experiences.
However, disciple-making is increasingly mediated through a digital process,
SHIRLEY: Overcoming Digital Distance 377

outside the realm of direct human‫־‬to‫־‬human interaction. The Internet and

other electronic media now play a significant role in the way we make and
equip disciples, as well as how we develop relationships inside and outside
the church.
How does the church apply Jesus’ design for discipleship in the Internet
age? How can disciple-makers practice a relational process in a digital envi-
ronment? This article will attempt to answer those questions by (a) construct-
ing a scriptural paradigm for disciple-making as a relational process; (b) ex-
amining the impact of digital technology on the development of disciples; (c)
exploring the advantages and disadvantages to using digital tools for spiritual
formation; and (d) suggesting ideas in a wireless world for maintaining and
enhancing disciple-making and equipping disciples to serve.

A Relational Paradigm for Discipleship

In John 15:1-17, we find a three-point biblical description of the authen-

tic disciple: to (a) live in Christ, (b) love one another, and (c) labor for the
kingdom.1 These characteristics are built on a foundation of relationships
with Jesus Christ, with the body of Christ, and with the world. Therefore, the
implication is that disciple-making is a relational process, involving an ongo-
ing and abiding relationship with the Lord, a face-to-face commitment to our
brothers and sisters in Christ, and a passionate ministry with those who need
to hear the gospel and/or experience the support of the Christian community.

Living in Christ
In John 15:4, Jesus calls his disciples to abide in him. A simple under-
standing of the word abide is to live, dwell, or stay in a particular location; the
Greek term meno is also associated with continuing perseverance and con-
sistency (Borchert, 2002, p. 142-143). Additionally, in this occurrence there
is a sense of “harmonious intimacy and reciprocal exchange‫( ״‬Adams, 2006,
p. 291) that Jesus had previously described as a prerequisite for abiding in
him in John 6:45 (“He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me
and I in him”; [NASB] ) and John 6:35 (“I am the bread of life”). Just as Jesus
lived in a dependent relationship with Father (John 6:57), so he called his
disciples to abide or live in dependence upon him (Hutchison, 2011). The
disciples’ relationship with Jesus is what sustained their spiritual health and
vitality (Burge, 2000). According to Jesus, abiding is the most significant pri-
ority for a disciple, affirmed by John’s use of meno 10 times in John 15:4-10
(Hutchison, 2011, p. 64). The disciples’ spiritual formation and effectiveness
378 Christian Education Journal

would be contingent upon this sustaining relationship: one in which the dis-
ciple receives a constant flow of spiritual nourishment from the divine source.
Without this sustenance, the disciple is incapable of any growth and devoid of
spiritual power (John 15:5-8).
There are two keys in the text that speak to the relational conditions for
an abiding connection to Christ: obedience and bearing fruit. In John 15:10,
Jesus describes the litmus test for discipleship: “if you keep my command-
ments, you will abide in my love.‫ ״‬He follows this conditional statement by
once again describing their relationship with him as a reflection of his with
the Father. The call to obedience was not issued as a prerequisite for salva-
tion; the Master had settled that question with his assurance that the disciples
were already “clean” on the basis of their response to the gospel (Segovia,
1982, p. 120). Their acceptance of his message justified them before the Fa-
ther; they were pure, innocent, and clean (katharos) because of their relation-
ship with Jesus (Borchert, 2002, pp. 141-142). Nevertheless, the quality of
their continuing connection with him would hinge on their obedience to his
commands as evidence of their relationship with him. While Jesus called the
disciples to express their love through obedience, he promised to listen and
respond to their needs: “Ask whatever you wish and it will be done for you”
(15:7).
Another proof of their affiliation with Jesus, mentioned six times in John
15:1-16, was to “bear fruit.” Jesus draws a logical conclusion for determin-
ing the relationship between the vine (Jesus) and the branches (disciples).
The branches that remain attached to the vine would bear fruit; the branches
that fall away from the vine would wither, die, and become fuel for fire. Once
again, implied within Jesus’ illustration is a dependent relationship or “vital
union” between him and the disciples (Hutchison, 2011, p. 65). As they re-
mained inextricably connected to him, they would receive what they needed
to remain obedient and productive. In turn, their words and actions would
be a reflection of their relationship with him. Jesus once again refers to the
Fathers role in the process—the Father receives glory when the Sons disciples
bear “much fruit”—and promises the disciples that the Father will honor their
fruit-bearing relationship with Jesus by listening and responding to whatever
the disciples asked in Jesus’ name (15:16).

Loving One Another

Twice in John 15, Jesus commands his disciples to love one another (John
15:12,17). However, this was not the first time he had introduced this touch-
stone of discipleship. Previously, Jesus had demonstrated the “full extent of his
love” (John 13:1, NIV) for them by taking on the role of a servant (13:1-17).
His act of humility was an object lesson about the love Jesus desired for his
SHIRLEY: Overcoming Digital Distance 379

disciples to express towards each other. Jesus’ command to love one another
was an appeal to community (Gench, 2004; Wilkins, 1992). As the embryonic
church stood before him, Jesus exhorted these future leaders to express their
love for him through loving relationships with one another. This would be the
greatest witness of their relationship with him (John 13:35).
His issuance of a command—as well as his sacrificial act of washing the
disciples’ feet—implies that Jesus considered love to be more action than
emotion. He would go on to “lay down his life” at the cross for these friends,
and thereby fulfill the symbolism of his servant act in John 13. These two ex-
pressions of love serve as literal and figurative standards of the way in which
Jesus’ disciples should relate to one another. In 13:34-35, he codifies his ex-
ample by issuing a “new” command: love one another. The importance of this
command cannot be denied; Jesus repeats this relational decree three times
and qualifies their commitment to him based on their willingness to obey
(“you must love one another”).
Later that evening, Jesus again commands his followers to express their
commitment to him through their relationships with each other (John 15:12,
17). On this occasion, he plumbs the deeper meaning of love. “As I have loved
you” is Jesus’ initial description of the quality of love to which he is calling
them. For three years the disciples had followed their Master, listening to his
loving words, watching his loving actions, and receiving his loving direction;
even his rebukes were delivered with loving intentions. Having had their feet
washed by their leader and teacher would also be a reminder of the depth
of Jesus’ love for them. Foreshadowing his crucifixion, Jesus shares with
his disciples the deepest meaning of love: “that one lay down his life for his
friends” (15:13). Inherent in this description is the quantity of love required
from those who follow Christ: the willingness to sacrifice anything and every-
thing for another disciple. There is no “greater” expression of love than this
(Borchert, 2002). The authentic disciple builds loving relationships within the
body of Christ and expresses that love through a willingness to deny self-
interest in deference to the needs of fellow disciples.

Laboring for the Kingdom

Although Jesus may have been drawing an illustration from a common
sight in Israel—vineyards were replete in the region and the grapevine was a
symbol of Israel displayed prominently at the temple as well as on their coin-
age—the source of his comparison is likely to have been Isaiah’s prophecy
about Israel’s relationship with God (Hutchison, 2011). In Isaiah 5:1-7, God
describes himself as the vinedresser of Israel, who longed for a fruitful crop,
but was left with “a wasteland, neither pruned nor cultivated, and briers and
thorns will grow there” (Isa 5:6). When Jesus called himself the “true vine”
380 Christian Education Journal

(John 15:1), he was identifying himself—and by extension his followers—as

the true Israel, the fruitful vine (Burge, 2000; Hobbs, 1968; Hutchison, 2011).
Bearing fruit is the purpose of branches on a grapevine. Branches that
bear fruit are pruned for greater produce, while unproductive branches are
detached from the vine and laid aside for fire wood. According to Jesus, the
key to bearing fruit is remaining attached to the vine. Only then can the
branches receive the life-giving nutrients needed to continue producing. By
using this illustration, Jesus describes the outcome of his relationship with the
disciples: to bear fruit that brings glory to God (John 15:8).
In the final reference to spiritual fruit (John 15:16), Jesus explains the
meaning of the fruit that adorns the life of a devoted disciple. Because spiri-
tual fruit is associated with a mission—together with an official appointment
and a directive to “go”—Jesus sends out those he has chosen to accomplish
his kingdom purpose. The appointment, along with the imperative, implies a
specific mission: one for which they were chosen, equipped, empowered, and
deployed. Their fruit would be evidenced internally and externally, actively
and passively (Wilkins, 1992).
The presence of the fruit of his spirit would be the proof of internal
transformation and of their relationship with him. Later, in Galatians 5:22-
23, Paul describes this internal change as the “fruit of the Spirit [which] is
love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, [and]
self-control.” These are the character qualities borne by fruitful disciples who
are in an abiding relationship with Christ (Burge, 2000).
Their external fruit is a byproduct of the internal. Those who live in the
Spirit provide evidence of that relationship by manifesting their internal change
with external fruit. The primary result of fruitfulness is reproduction through
evangelism, teaching, and other ministry activities that draw people to Jesus
Christ and glorify the Father (Borchert, 2002; Wilkins, 1992). This is the work
of the disciple, to labor for the kingdom through the active and ongoing wit-
ness of their faith in Jesus Christ and by using their Spirit-given gifts in service
and ministry to his body. This process closes the gap in a relational triangle
between Christ, his followers, and the world; out of an overflow of love for him,
disciples of Jesus Christ will express their love for one another, which will result
in an overflow of love for those without a relationship with Christ.

Digital Discipleship

The design for discipleship presented in John 15:1-17 focuses on the im-
portance of relationships with Christ, one another, and the world. In increasing
numbers, disciples are bypassing human interaction for their spiritual nourish-
ment, community resources, and ministry tools. Grey Matter Research (2013)
SHIRLEY: Overcoming Digital Distance 381

found that 44% of American adults with online access are using the Internet
for religious purposes: visiting church websites, obtaining religious instruc-
tion, reading religious blogs, participating in social networks, and following
churches and/or religious leaders on Twitter. Not surprisingly, well over half
of these adults were under the age of 35 (Grey Matter, 2013). Young adults are
typically spending over 20 hours a week online (Carr, 2011). The Internet has
become a significant purveyor of spiritual development resources for Chris-
tians of all traditions. The following discussion is a review of a variety of Inter-
net resources having a direct or indirect impact on the formation of Christian
disciples in their relationships with Christ, one another, and the world.

Connecting to the Word

Among the many resources available for ones personal devotion to

Christ, the most significant is the online Bible. A recent survey commissioned
by the American Bible Society (ABS) revealed that over 40% of Americans
used a computer to read an Internet-based Bible; in addition, nearly 30% used
a smartphone to locate Bible verses and approximately 20% read the Bible us-
ing a tablet. Reflecting an overall trend away from traditional bound Bibles,
the same survey reported a “continual shift” to digital content (Bedard, 2013).
Accompanying this shift is a change in terminology; whereas Bible publishers
previously focused on the distribution of Bibles—indicating a quantity of cop-
ies in the marketplace—the byword for the new generation is engagement, a
qualitative term describing the numbers of people who are reading Scripture
in varying formats (Bedard, 2013).
Arguably, the most popular Internet Bible resource is YouVersion (www.
youversion.com). According to their website, YouVersion has been installed
in over 250,000,000 devices. Developed and maintained by a team headed
by Bobby Gruenewald, the YouVersion portal contains 1,396 versions of the
Bible in over 1,027 languages (Crosby, 2012, p. 38). According to Crosby,
Gruenewald expressed an evangelistic vision for the future:

There are more people alive now than at any point in history, and they
are more connected than ever before. We believe that this could become
the most Bible-engaged generation in history. I want to leverage tech-
nology to its fullest to advance the gospel. (Crosby, 2012, p. 38)

In many ways, the Glo Bible is the antithesis of YouVersion, as it pertains

to format and delivery. While the YouVersion portal offers the Scripture in a
basic and uncluttered format, the Glo Bible is “technologically and visually
immersive” (Crosby, 2012, p. 40). Glo is an interactive online Bible that uses
online video, high definition images, maps, virtual tours of biblical sites, and
382 Christian Education Journal

customizable reading plans. Although users can download a free version of

Glo, the premium edition—with access to several additional Bible versions
and other features—is an additional cost. Glo has touted over one million
downloads with users engaged in 30 million minutes of Bible reading (www.
globible.com). Crosby (2012) reports that Glo developer, Brazilian-born Nel-
son Saba, believes Glo is attractive to young adults because of its “interactive
media format in snippets—short learning experiences. It has to be something
that somehow connects with their life” (p. 40).

Connecting to the Body

Facebook has taken the world by storm since its inception in 2004 as
a social media platform for college students. With nearly two billion users
worldwide, Facebook is a worldwide phenomenon (Fiegerman, 2017). Face-
book and other social networking including Twitter, Instagram, YouTube,
and Snapchat are bringing people together to “communicate, collaborate, and
create community” (Galli, 2009).
Churches are now using social media to promote and nurture commu-
nity on the Internet. Some use Facebook as a de facto webpage, with basic
information about the church and its ministries. Others use it to post an-
nouncements, prompt church-wide discussions, post photos and videos, and
elicit congregational feedback (Hembree, 2011). The church Facebook page is
quickly replacing email, cards, phone trees, and word of mouth as means of
communicating and communing with the body.
Twitter is now gaining popularity as a community-building ministry re-
source for churches. As the number of smartphone users increases, Twitter
is the social media platform of choice for those who prefer the simplicity of
concise information (140 characters per “tweet”) rather than lengthy Facebook
entries. Jonathan Howe (2016) suggested a number of innovative ways to use
Twitter to enhance and inform the church community, including the following:

1. Daily Bible reading reminders

2. Sermon Quotes
3. Community Events
4. Sermon podcast audio

Ministering to the World

According to the Apostle Paul, “equipping of the saints for the work of
service” (Eph 4:12) is one of paramount responsibilities for church leaders. To
that end, the Internet is replete with training resources for any level of min­
SHIRLEY: Overcoming Digital Distance 383

istry involvement. Ministry Grid, a product of LifeWay Christian resources,

offers customized ‫״‬Training Pathways [to] provide foundational, advanced,
and expert-level training modules within specific ministry areas,” includ-
ing small group or Sunday school, gender ministry, music and worship, age-
group leadership, church planting, and multi-site development (http://www.
ministrygrid.com).
RightNow Media, self-proclaimed as the ‫״‬Netflix for the church,” delivers
training content through video Bible study, streaming conferences, leader-
ship training, and family ministry resources to support the equipping needs
of over 10,000 churches (http://www.rightnowmedia.org). Web resources
like RightNow Media and Ministry Grid allow churches of any size to access
world-class training from renowned leaders and field experts at a fraction of
the investment of time and money it would take to attend national confer-
enees or denominational training events.
Along with Internet-based conferences and video training, blogs and
podcasts highlight specific ministry topics and provide for on-the-go access
to the expertise of ministry practitioners and scholars. Thom Rainer, presi-
dent and CEO of LifeWay Christian Resources, has a coordinated blog and
podcast—Rainer on Leadership—focusing on church leadership issues and
training for pastors, church staff, and volunteers (http://www.thomrainer.
com). Another example, DóFamily podcast, is a ministry training resource
for parents and church leaders. Ron Hunter, executive director and CEO of
Randall House Publishing, interviews practitioners and other ministry ex-
perts concerning the latest trends and practices in family discipleship (http://
www.D6Family.com).

Digital Discernment

As creative beings formed in the likeness and image of the Creator, we

are continually in search of new ways to use and improve our God-given fac-
ulties; ‫״‬in other words, obedience to God requires that we create technology”
in our quest to demonstrate our stewardship and dominion over the natural
world (Challies, 2011, p. 23). However, the moral implications of our tech-
nological advances are determined in the application. That which is created
to help can also be used to hurt; God-honoring intentions can dissolve into
sinful choices. Yet, our response should not be to become latter-day Luddites
on the one hand, or to worship at the altar of the technology god on the other.
Rather, we should listen to the wisdom of Albert Borgmann: ‫״‬We should nei-
ther try to demolish technology or run away from it. We can restrain it and
must redeem it” (Borgmann, 2003, p. 8).
384 Christian Education Journal

To one degree or another, the debate over using new technologies in

learning has been raging since the time oral communication dominated
learning. The skill of writing was once a new technology that many believed
would be the death of true learning. The story is told of Egyptian king Tha-
muss reaction to the introduction of writing in his country: “It will implant
forgetfulness in their souls: they will cease to exercise their memory because
they rely on that which is written” (Carr, 2011, p. 50). The invention of the
printing press brought with it mixed reactions. While some prominent fig-
ures of the day bemoaned the societal effect of this new technology (Carr,
2011, p. 50), others like Martin Luther foresaw the impact the printing press
would have on God’s kingdom; Luther is purported to have referred to this
new technology as “Gods highest., .act of grace, whereby the business of the
gospel is driven forward” (Postman, 2013, p. 9).
According to Mark Federman (2004), chief strategist at University of To-
rontos McLuhan Center, the test of any technology is “the change in inter-
personal dynamics that the innovation brings with it.” As we consider the
influence of digital technology in the disciple-making process—particularly
in light of the impact on our relationship with Christ, with one another, and
with the world—we should evaluate both the advantages and disadvantages
of using online resources as we discern the best pathway forward.

Advantages
The Internet has experienced tremendous growth over the last two de-
cades. As the online world has enlarged, so has the variety of tools for spiri-
tual formation, including online Bibles, commentaries, study courses, social
media, and e-books. All of these items are directly accessible to anyone at any
time. Opportunities that may have been possible only for those with special
training, time, and financial means are now available for those with access to
a laptop, smartphone, or tablet.
The Internet is pervasive in most industrialized nations. With the inven-
tion of the smartphone and the tablet, the demand has increased for wireless
technology in restaurants, shopping malls, churches, airplanes, homes, and
any other place where people gather. The advantage of accessing the Internet
is heightened by its ubiquitous presence. Consequently, the Internet has be-
come as necessary for functioning in our society as the car or the telephone.
From a spiritual perspective, the Internet has increased the availability of
the Bible and other related scriptural resources. Like the Gutenberg press, the
Internet has provided the technology for disseminating Gods Word through-
out the world. In John 8:31, Jesus told his followers, “If you hold to my teach-
ing, you are really my disciples.” Similarly, in John 15:10, he said, “If you keep
SHIRLEY: Overcoming Digital Distance 385

My commandments, you will abide in My love.‫ ״‬With pervasive and instan-

taneous access to Scripture, through a variety of devices, Jesus followers can
abide with Christ and hold to his teaching with more constancy.
The Reformation brought with it a degree of democratization of Scrip-
ture and theology. As Christians began to read the Bible, many for the first
time, and practice a “sola scriptura, sola fide” life, the corporate church and its
disciples were transformed. A new reformation has occurred with the advent
of the Internet, where quality scriptural resources are available for anyone
who has the time and the desire to use them. Online publishing has opened
the door for Christian authors to make their work available without the ap-
proval of the editorial gatekeepers in traditional publishing firms. Likewise,
blogging has taken the place of the Reformation tracts; individual voices can
speak out and be heard on the issues of the day through this electronic Wit-
tenberg door.
First-generation Internet technology was a passive experience where
users were primarily “consumers of content,” typically web pages and news
sites. Second-generation Internet technology, otherwise known as Web 2.0,
is a participatory and collaborative experience where users not only contrib-
ute content but collaborate with others in constructing content. Sites like
Facebook, YouTube, and Wikipedia are illustrative of the second-generation
technology (Cormode & Krishnamurthy, 2008). The interactive nature of the
Internet provides the opportunity for collaborating and developing relation-
ships, although from a distance. In addition, the church can benefit from bi-
directional communication tools and resource-sharing capabilities through
social media and other Internet platforms (Anderson, 2011, p. 54).

Disadvantages
The advantages of the Internet are related to its greatest drawbacks.
Shane Hipps (2009) describes this paradox: “Every medium when pushed
to an extreme will reverse on itself, revealing unintended consequences” (p.
315). What began as a tool for efficient communication has turned into a
relatively uncontrolled and ubiquitous force that dominates our lives in un-
intended ways.
Reading on the Internet or an electronic format is now the norm rather
than the rule. The average adult spends between 17 to 20 hours per week
online; most Americans spend over eight hours a day in front of a computer,
television, or smartphone screen (Carr, 2011, p. 83). Online reading has fun-
damentally changed the way we read and access information: “A screen-based
reading behavior is emerging.. .which is characterized by browsing and scan-
ning,· keyword spotting, one-time reading, [and] linear reading. The time
386 Christian Education Journal

spent on in-depth reading and concentrated reading is...falling steadily”

(Liu, 2006, p. 705). Research data also indicates that the weekly amount of
time young adults spend reading each week has fallen over 30% since 2004
(Carr, 2011, pp. 83-84). There is a “crucial link” between the format of a writ-
ten work and the way we process it: “The shift from paper to screen doesn’t
just change the way we navigate a piece of writing. It also influences the de-
gree of attention we devote to it and the depth of our immersion in it” (Carr,
2011, p. 86). Not only are adults reading less, but memorization and recall are
now considered archaic habits. From a practical standpoint, memorization
has become unnecessary as more information is quickly accessed through the
Internet. Carr (2011) shares Donald Tapscott’s dismal prophecy: “Memoriz-
ing long passages or historical facts is obsolete.... Memorization ‘is a waste
of time’” (p. 87). Whitney (1997) points out the essential nature of Scripture
meditation and memorization in providing disciples with spiritual power,
depth, and guidance (pp. 42-43).
We must approach the new democratization of scriptural resources with
discernment. As more people have access to the tools with which to examine
and interpret Scripture, as well as the opportunity to provide unfiltered opin-
ions and resources via social media, blogs, and wiki sites, we must prepare
disciples to evaluate these resources based on their epistemological assump-
tions. Quintín Schultze (2004) used the term “informationism” to describe
the guiding ethos about knowledge on the World Wide Web (p. 26). The In-
ternet is an unending source of information—over 930 billion gigabytes (or
one zettabyte) is a recent estimate (Pappas, 2016). However, there is no judg-
ment as to the worth or value of this knowledge; from an online perspec-
tive, all knowledge is equally valid (Hipps, 2009, p. 71). The only difference
between one idea and another is its relevancy to the individual (as exempli-
fled through search engine protocol). Also problematic is the assumption that
knowledge is somehow more accurate and useful when it is collectively ere-
ated. While this supposition might seem to reflect the spirit of the Protestant
ethic—particularly concerning the priesthood of the believer—in reality, this
idea denies the existence of absolute truth and God’s authority (Anderson,
2011, p. 76). “Knowledge and truth cannot be democratized; they flow from
the God who is truth” (Challies, 2011, p. 169).
When Jesus pressed his followers to obey his teachings as evidence of
their relationship with him, he followed that directive with a promise: “Then
you will know the truth and the truth will set you free” (John 8:32). Knowing
Jesus means knowing the truth; in a later reference, Jesus identified himself
as “the truth” (John 14:6). Our challenge in an era of digital discipleship is to
be wise consumers (and producers) of biblical information we find on the
Internet. Because the Internet makes no claims to the veracity of its content,
SHIRLEY: Overcoming Digital Distance 387

like the Bereans (Acts 17:11), we must use Scripture to evaluate the claims for
truth we find online. Even using online resources for interpreting Scripture
requires that we understand the background and authority of the writer. To
press the point once more, an abiding relationship with Christ depends on
our correct handling of the word of truth as we grow in our understanding of
the source of truth.
The last caution addresses a problem we face in relating as disciples to
one another and the world. Social media has created a smaller world by elec-
ironically connecting people and establishing relationships across natural
boundaries. However, authentic relationships require a “high degree of inti-
macy, permanence, and proximity” (Branson, 2003), something the Internet
cannot provide. We practice an incarnational faith based on the example of
our Lord, who “made himself nothing by taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness, and being found in appearance as a man”
(Phil 2:7-8a). However, the Internet can hinder our ability to relate to one
another in incarnational fashion, which requires physical presence. Pea, et al.
(2012) discovered a negative correlation between the time people spend on-
line and face-to-face communication (p. 327). Predictably, young adults, who
are the most voracious consumers of online time, are “losing their ability to
relate to one another in an offline context” (Challies, 2011, p. 77).
Loving one another, sharing our faith, and making true disciples are
based on optimizing human relationships as a response to our love for Jesus
Christ. Social media is a technological tool we can use alongside our per-
sonal words and actions, but not as a replacement for direct contact. The local
church is composed of people who choose to submit their individuality to
their identity together in Christ. Echoing 1 Corinthians 12:5, Hipps (2009)
says, “The church does not exist only for us, we exist for it—each an essential
part in the incarnated body of Jesus in the world” (p. 177). The Internet can
be used in effective ways in reaching the world for Christ and supplementing
the work of the church in managing communication and resource sharing,
but we still need “skin to skin contact with other people for whom [we] have
become responsible” (Rice, 2009, p. 177).

Recommendations and Conclusion

The substance of our call to discipleship—living in Christ, loving one

another, laboring for the kingdom—has not changed. Our faith is still formed
by our knowledge and application of the Word of God. We continue to be
called together as a body of loving disciples, under the headship of Christ.
The church remains the vehicle through which his Spirit is working to trans­
388 Christian Education Journal

form the world. However, the methodology and technology for accomplish-
ing our mission changes over time. Our responsibility is to stay focused on
the mission and make wise choices about the tools God has given us to ac-
complish it.
In 1 Chronicles 12, we find an interesting reference to a pivotal point
in Davids quest to accomplish Gods will for Israel. He surrounded himself
with men from every tribe to join him in the fight against Saul. One group
in particular provided the future king with a necessary ingredient: “Of the
sons of Issachar, men who understood the times, with knowledge of what
Israel should do, their chiefs were two hundred; and all their kinsmen were
at their command” (1 Chr 12:32, NASB). In order to best navigate the digi-
tal landscape, as individuals and as the church, we must seek to “understand
the times” rather than simply dive aimlessly into the electronic ocean of the
Internet. Awareness of the nature of the Internet, as well as its benefits and
drawbacks, is a first step.
When Paul counseled the Corinthian Christians about their relation-
ships, he reminded them that God had called them to be holy: ‘“Therefore,
come out from their midst and be separate,‫ י‬says the Lord” (1 Cor 6:17a).
The Internet represents a world system, one of which we are part, yet at the
same time, we are distinct from it. We should prayerfully seek Gods wisdom
and listen to his Word to guide our decisions about how we best use Internet
tools. How we access the Scripture—bound Bible, laptop, smartphone, or tab-
let—is a personal choice. But, even though the Internet is challenging the way
we read and learn, God still calls us to read deeply, memorize, and meditate
upon his Word. We have the power to obey and “come out from” the influ-
ence of the world through the Spirit of Christ who lives within us.
One of the struggles we have with the concept of biblical community
is rooted in our culture. We live today in a highly individualistic culture, as
opposed to the strong group orientation in the early church. The Internet
is a perfect illustration of the tension we experience between the ideal and
the reality. Social media highlights the importance of relationships, collab-
oration, and group life, but the personal, private, and distant nature of the
online environment is counterproductive to the goal. Authentic community
demands face-to-face interaction. Therefore, we must challenge ourselves to
be in proximity with one another and make intentional choices to walk away
from the electronic community and spend more time building relationships
inside and outside the church.
Our call from Jesus Christ is still intact: abide in him, love one another,
and bear fruit. Each of these marks of a disciple involves a relationship. As we
consider our spiritual formation in a digital world, the medium can influence
the process. If our development is controlled by the implements and ethos of
the electronic age, these relationships will suffer. However, if we “understand
SHIRLEY: Overcoming Digital Distance 389

the times” in which we live, remain aware of the holistic impact of the Inter-
net on our lives, allow the Spirit to guide our choices, and prioritize personal
contact, we will produce “much fruit and so prove to be My disciples” (John
15:8).

Questions for Reflection and Discussion

1. Are the concerns in this article legitimate or do these arguments

only represent generational differences in adapting to technological
change? Explain.
2. What evidence have you seen of the benefits and drawbacks of using
Internet technology in equipping disciples?
3. How can we encourage and promote greater person-to-person con-
nection in discipling young adults?

REFERENCES
Adams, Μ. M. (2006). Gods friends: John 15:9- Burge G. M. (2000). John. NIV application
17. The Expository Times, 117(7), 291-292. commentary. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

Anderson, M. L. (2011, May). Christianizing Carr, N. G. (2011). The shallows: What the
the social network. Christianity Today, 55(5), internet is doing to our brains. New York, NY:
76. W.W. Norton.

Anderson, M. L, Vogt, B., & Groothuis, D. Challies, T. (2011). The next story: Life and
(2011, December). How to think about social faith after the digital explosion. Grand Rapids,
networking in churches. Christianity Today, MI: Zondervan.
55(12), 54.
Cormode, G., & Krishnamurthy, B. (2008, June
Bedard, R (2013, September 4). Internet Bible 2). Key differences between Web 1.0 and Web
reading surges, now 4 in 10 read Gods words 2.0. First Monday 13(6). Retrieved from http://
digitally. Washington Examiner. Retrieved firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/
fromhttp://washingtonexaminer.com/internet view/2125/1972
-biblereadingsurges-now-4-in-10-read-gods-
words-digitally/article/2535148 Crosby, R. C. (2012, June). The social network
gospel. Christianity Today, 56(6), 36-40.
Bordiert. G. (2002). John 12-21. The new
American commentary. Nashville, TN: Broad- Federman, M. (2004, July 23). What is the
man & Holman. meaning of the medium is the message?
Retrieved from http://individual.utoronto.ca/
Borgmann, Albert. (2003). Power failure: markfederman/article_ mediumisthemessage.
Christianity in the culture of technology. Grand htm
Rapids: Baker.
Fiegerman, Seth (2017, February 1). “Face-
Branson, M. L. (2003, Winter). Forming Gods book is closing in on 2 billion users.”
people. Congregations. Retrieved from https:// CNN Tech. Retrieved from http://money.
alban.org/archive/congregations-magazine- cnn.com/2017/02/01 /technology/facebook-
winter-2003/ earnings/.
390 Christian Education Journal

Galli, M. (2009, June 4). Does Twitter do us http://www.livescience.com/54094-how-big‫־‬

any good? Christianity Today. Retrieved from is-the-internet.html.
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2009/
juneweb-only/ 122.43.0.html Pea, R., Nass, C., Meheula, L, Rance, M.,
Kumar, A., Bamford, H.,...Zhou, M. (2012).
Gench, F. T. (2004). John 15:12-17. Interpreta- Media use, face-to-face communication, me-
tion, 58(2), 181-184. dia multitasking, and social well-being among
8- to 12-year-old girls. Developmental Psychol-
Grey Matter Research Consulting. (2012, May ogy, 48(2), 327-336.
17). Almost half of online Americans use the
Internet for religious purposes. Retrieved Postman, N. (2013) Informing ourselves to
from http://greymatterresearch.com/index_ death. The nature of technology: implications
files/Online_Religion.htm for learning and teaching. New York: Springer
Science & Business Media.
Hembree, L. (2011, July 21). Social me-
dia and the church [Web log post]. Re- Rice, J. (2009). The church of Facebook: How
trieved from http://lawsonhembree. the hyperconnected are redefining community.
wordpress.com/2011/07/21/social-media-and- Colorado Springs, CO: David C. Cook.
the-church/
Schultze, Quintín. (2004). Habits of the high-
Hipps, S. (2009). Flickering pixels: How tech- tech heart: Living virtuously in the information
nology shapes your faith. Grand Rapids, MI: age. Grand Rapids: Baker.
Zondervan.
Segovia, E F. (1982). The theology and prov-
Hobbs, H. H. (1968). An exposition ofthegos- enance of John 15:1-17. Journal of Biblical Lit-
pel ofJohn. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker. erature, 101(1), 115-128 .

Howe, J. (2016). Eight effective uses of Twitter Whitney, D. S. (1997). Spiritual disciplines for
for churches. Thom S. Rainer. Retrieved from the Christian life. Colorado Springs, CO: Nav-
http://thomrainer.com/2016/02/eight-effective- Press.
uses-of-twitter-for-churches/
Wilkins, M. J. (1992). Following the master: A
Hutchison, J. C. (2011). The vine in John 15 biblical theology of discipleship. Grand Rapids,
and Old Testament imagery in the “I AM” MI: Zondervan.
statements. Bibliotheca Sacra, 168 (669), 63-80.

Liu, Ziming. (2006). Reading behavior in the

1A similar model is used by Wilkins (1992,
digital environment: Changes in reading over
pp. 230-234) and Malphurs (2009, p. 80)
the past ten years. Journal of Documentation,
to describe the biblical characteristics of a
61(6), 700-712.
disciple.

Malphurs, A. (2009). Strategic disciple making:

A practical tool for successful ministry. Grand
AUTHOR
Rapids, MI: Baker.
Chris Shirley (Ph.D. Southwestern Baptist
Mounce, R. H. (1995). Romans. The new Theological Seminary) serves as Associate
American commentary. Nashville, TN: Broad- Professor of Discipleship at Dallas Baptist
man & Holman. University. E-mail: [email protected]

Pappas, Stephanie. (2016, March 18). How big

is the internet, really? LiveScience. Retrieved at
 License and Permissible Use Notice

These materials are provided to you by the American Theological Library Association (ATLA) in
accordance with the terms of ATLA's agreements with the copyright holder or authorized distributor of
the materials, as applicable. In some cases, ATLA may be the copyright holder of these materials.

You may download, print, and share these materials for your individual use as may be permitted by the
applicable agreements among the copyright holder, distributors, licensors, licensees, and users of these
materials (including, for example, any agreements entered into by the institution or other organization
from which you obtained these materials) and in accordance with the fair use principles of United States
and international copyright and other applicable laws. You may not, for example, copy or email these
materials to multiple web sites or publicly post, distribute for commercial purposes, modify, or create
derivative works of these materials without the copyright holder's express prior written permission.

Please contact the copyright holder if you would like to request permission to use these materials, or
any part of these materials, in any manner or for any use not permitted by the agreements described
above or the fair use provisions of United States and international copyright and other applicable laws.
For information regarding the identity of the copyright holder, refer to the copyright information in
these materials, if available, or contact ATLA at [email protected].

Except as otherwise specified, Copyright © 2016 American Theological Library Association.