What's wrong with disembodied communication?

What makes technology so dangerous?

Some argue it is because technology leads to disembodied relationships. 

In fact, one Christian author identifies this as one of the most significant challenges facing the church today.

He explains the problem like this:

Disembodied Tendencies. The trajectory of technology is away from incarnational presence and toward disembodied experience. We increasingly live our lives via screens, streams, apps, phones. Our relationships are digital. This exacerbates existing Gnostic tendencies (a cerebral rather than embodied faith) and subtly deemphasizes the crucial physicality of the church, the "body of Christ" in the material and not just theoretical sense. 

(Full disclosure: I read this critique on the author's website, on a screen.)

Here's my question. If disembodied experience is a problem, should we extend the critique to other kinds of disembodied communication?

For instance:

• Postcards

• Letters

• Books

• Magazines

• Phone calls

• Fax machines

• Text messages

• Sermon recordings

• Spotify

• Radio

• Television

If a culture of sending encouraging postcards developed among evangelicals, would we wring our hands in worry? No, I think we'd celebrate how these friendly exchanges were connecting us and building us up together. 

Theologically, what's the difference between a postcard and a text message or a DM on Twitter? The bottom line is, we receive a message from another person when they're not in the room. (Unless you're texting a friend while you sit next to them on the couch). 

Again, I agree that Incarnational presence is essential to Christian theology and living. But so is the reality of fellowship with the Holy Spirit.

The Spirit is not physically embodied, yet he is with us. Perhaps it would be argued, well, the Spirit meets us where our bodies are. While I agree with this counter-point, our friendship with the Spirit is still, at some level, a spiritual one. 

In an attempt to avoid being misunderstand, let me emphasize something: I'm in favor of meeting in person with brothers and sisters in Christ. I believe it is wise to encourage Christians to physically go to church on Sunday and meet with their church family, in person, throughout the week. I don't want to replace this activity with a metaverse (virtual reality) church service.

At the same time, if believers also meet up for a Bible study in the metaverse, I don't see how that's different, in principle, from praying with a friend on the phone. One of these examples is newer and perhaps stranger to us, but that doesn’t mean it is theologically suspect.

(And Facebook, aka Meta, can still be ethically suspect! But that doesn’t mean all virtual reality interactions are theologically off-limits).

Let me give you another example: the Bible. 

What's better? To read a Bible by yourself or hear a person in the same room recite the Scriptures from memory? One of those experiences involves a disembodied transfer of information; the other is embodied. But as Christians, we can say they are both excellent activities. 

I'm grateful for the emphasis we find in 3 John 13, "I had much to write to you, but I would rather not write with pen and ink. I hope to see you soon, and we will talk face to face."

John's preference is to talk face to face. But in the meantime, that wasn't possible, so he wrote a letter. Christians believe that his letter is God-breathed truth. As a people who love the Scriptures, we cannot denigrate these disembodied forms of communication.

So whether you read the Bible on the YouVersion app or by opening a paperback, either way, I think you've made a beautiful decision.

Now, if I haven't convinced you, please don't email me, Tweet it, or mention it on Facebook! Perhaps we can meet in person at church this Sunday, and we'll discuss it there.