Your take on an interesting article

[Earl Grey]

FOXNews.com - Millennials Increasingly Find Their Religion Online

I read this and it made me wonder
#1 if it's true
#2 Is it right to just "e-fellowship" only?
and if not
#3 How can we reach people like this?Millennials Increasingly Find Their Religion Online


Young people are defining their own spiritual paths, says Rebecca Phillips, vice president of social networking for Beliefnet.com.


Like countless people of her generation, Alexis Iacono goes online for just about everything: Facebook, fashion ... and faith.
"I go to the Internet and when I'm stuck and I'm not sure, and the research is right there, the answers are right there," the Long Island, N.Y., resident says.
She's not alone.
Young people are defining their own spiritual paths, says Rebecca Phillips, vice president of social networking for Beliefnet.com. "Young people are not necessarily doing the same thing religion-wise that their parents did, and they're developing their own unique brands of spirituality," she says.
It seems to affirm a Lifeway Christian Resources study showing that 72 percent of Millennials, the generation between 18 and 30 years old, say they are more spiritual than religious. Fewer of them attend worship services, pray or read sacred scriptures.
And technology is helping fuel that generational faith gap.
"In some ways it's breaking down connections with local churches," says David Kinnaman, president of the research organization The Barna Group. "Their access to peers is increasing, so that influences the way they make moral and ethical decisions."
"They're exposed to a variety of faith perspectives," he says, meaning they can tailor-make their own religion.
But not all agree with Lifeway's research.
Beliefnet.com found that nearly half the teens it polled felt they were more religious than their parents' generation.
"Online, what people are doing is seeking out truth," Phillips says, "and it might not be in the traditional way of a pastor speaking from a pulpit."
It also might be a matter of semantics.
"I think their generation is really turned off by the term religion," LifeChurch.TV's Pastor Bobby Gruenewald says, "They see it as a set of rules or something that represents the past."
Looking to the future is the challenge. Many religious organizations are realizing that to shepherd the millennial flock, you must meet them where they live ... online.
LifeChurch.TV boasts 80,000 congregants through the Web. They log on to hear sermons and chat with other worshippers.
There are countless faith-based phone apps, worship Web pages, online scripture readings, even prayer websites. And tweeting is encouraged.
"It doesn't necessarily mean the old is going away," says Gruenewald. "It just means that this is a way to reach people that maybe otherwise wouldn't be able to be reached."
But others warn that finding religion online has its drawbacks.
Jesse Rice, author of "The Church of Facebook," says "Millennials value authenticity so much, but the irony is they're settling for an inauthentic way to receive it."
"Spirituality becomes a more compartmentalized thing," says Rice, because the user is in the driver's seat. It won't necessarily change who they are.
But the Internet also levels the playing field between young people and the authority of the church, giving them a sense of control that previous generations never had.
"It does allow people to question, to check out a variety of sources when they have questions about what this religion believes ... or what this history is and so forth," says Dr. Brenda Brasher, author of "Give Me That Online Religion." "I would imagine that the best religious leaders see this as a sort of provocative challenge of how do they carry the word of truth that they feel and that enlivens them ... and that they think guides all of existence. How do they carry that word into this kind of generation?"
Young people are not only creating their own religious identities, they may also be changing the future of worship itself.

 

[lilmissmontana]

The very first thing that came to mind after reading your post was these verses.

John 6:44,65
I am the Bread of Life

No man can come to me, except the Father
which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise
him up at the last day.

And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that
no man can come unto me, except it were
given unto him of my Father.

In light of these verses I'm thinking that the Lord will use the internet to draw, just as I'm sure the enemy will use the internet to draw. But the internet won't bring anyone to the Lord without Him calling them first. And the enemy would have found those he would have found anyway. My concerns with the internet isn't on whose going to miss being drawn as much as it is who will be led astray, away and into desolation.

jmo

 

[Earl Grey]

Very good point!

 

[MPaul]

Technology changes things, and religion is a part of it. Why was the Reformation sucessful when it was? It had been tried before. Answer -- technology. Not just the printing press, either. Gunpowder had a lot to do with it. Gunpowder changed economics -- all the money didn't have to go into building castles and training knights, and thus, capitalism grew and distribution of income became more diverse, the Catholic Church had less of the overall wealth, and states wanted more independence. Actually, how technology affected religion then goes on and on.

But did the technology cause the religious changes, or did God let the technology happen then, because that is what he wanted for the time? Right now there is a lot of garbage out on what is the emerging church. Why? -- because the traditional church does not like the changes, just like the RCC did not like the changes that technology brought. So, just like the RCC let out a lot of distorted information on what Protestantism was about, now the traditional church lets out a lot of distorted information on what the emerging church is about. No... the emerging church is not about theology, but new structures and practices brought about because of new technology. However, is it that God does not like change in the church, or is it that people very comfortable with how church has been do not like the changes?

However, like it or not the technology is here, and it is going to affect church practice. It will not be stopped, just like the Reformation could not be stopped. But the traditional church will try....

The changes coming about in the church due to technology are at the center of what is happening with Christianity today. I want to be a part of the center. I am not afraid of it, but I want to find out how I can serve God with new technology in ways I never before dreamed of. Still, I am held back by my old thinking. Last October, I had a very strong witness to do a MySpace page. I thought it was crazy. I could not understand it. Now, in the last few weeks I have the page developed. I'm startled by it, and I know God will use it. But I wonder if it is not just a practice run. Maybe, I should be doing Twitter now or Facebook, or I wonder what Christian social groups there are where I should have a page. And I want all of those I become involved with to have a prayer of salvation.

However, I love how the internet has changed so many things. For instance, a very small group of scholars dominated what people believed about the real text of the Greek New Testament. But were they being honest, or just taking postions that enhanced themselves as an elite group of religious professionals? Now, the information that challenges their postions and even asserts dishonesty is available all over the place -- and I think, in my opinion that is, the truth is coming out, or at least, it has a chance to come out. It's hard now to pull baloney on people in the name of professionalism or scholarship. The people who are capable of refuting lies all have an outlet for expression. (And if someone reading this disagrees that games were being played on my cited example, then change my position to -- the debate has become more extensive and meaningful and forces greater honesty).

I could go on about this subject. I find it interesting.

 

[Earl Grey]

I really enjoyed reading your reply. Things due seem to change, sometimes for the worse, sometimes for the better. When it all started there were no churches, we were the church. I don't have a problem with people using the technology, I just don't want to see people replace face to face fellowship with a conference call!

 

[MPaul]

I don't have a problem with people using the technology, I just don't want to see people replace face to face fellowship with a conference call!

OK -- but I'm in the house church movement, and from that perspective, I'll tell you what I think is going to happen. Let me quote from my MySpace page.

"The Barna Research Group, the leading pollster for studies on the Christian church and culture, has found that the house church is the fastest growing movement in Christianity and will take over the church. After the study, George Barna, the owner of the the research group, joined the movement....

"The house church is often referred to as the non-institutional church. Martin Luther held the house church was the true Biblical model, but he found little interest in it during the Reformation and noted its time would come in the future. When the internet made communication between house church people so easy, the movement took off."

So I think the internet will assist personal meetings between people -- and house churches, small groups, cell groups will take off. However, these people are going to be much better learned, studied, sophisticated due to the broad range of resources and interactions with others on the internet.

 

[Earl Grey]

I see nothing at all wrong with the house church movement. The early church went from house to house breaking bread. That's the only place they had to meet, well, besides Solomon's porch on the temple grounds. But I believe some able bodied people are just saying they fellowship on the internet and see no need to go anywhere else. That's all that really concerns me.

 

[MPaul]

But I believe some able bodied people are just saying they fellowship on the internet and see no need to go anywhere else. That's all that really concerns me.

Well, statistically, the number of people unchurched had been growing and growing, and even those in church were indicating a lack of satisfaction but being there as mere compliance with a norm. The congregational church was becoming increasingly irrelevant in society, and then one wonders why.

Personally, I think the leadership was playing too many games. Like I cannot watch Christian TV. I find it disgusting with all the games.... God is ready to send me a lot of blessings, but I have to send in a donation for them to be released, etc. etc. etc.

For people who couldn't take church anymore, the internet is an important outlet to fill a need of fellowship with others. However, perhaps, it encourages church goers to stop. If that is the case, then the congregational churches really should be addressing why people do not find them relevant, rather than just using the internet as an excuse for why their attendance is dropping.

The house church people argue that the congregational church really isn't biblical, and that alone creates problems -- that the house church structure makes church more relevant. Ah... but the congregational church people would not agree.

Whatever the truth is, I think people should be encouraged to meet in small groups, whether as part of a congregational church or as a house church. However, if someone who is unchurched does start meeting in a small group associated with a congregational church, I hope he/she is not subjected to the usual pressure, which is often degrading, of having to also attend the congregation. The Holy Spirit is patient, and I think Christians should be with each other as well.