article in the ever illustrious New York Times....
Which continues with our theme of from last week about the difficulties/advantages of church oriented activities happening online and more specifically on Facebook (Last week we had an evangelist "Type in tongues" on her Facebook posts),,,
At the surface the article is about the popularity of a "Jesus page" on Facebook which is more popular than Justin Bieber's Facebook page (I don't understand why the New York Times would think that would be such a shocking fact)....
But the more interesting issue which the article seems to be really getting at is the validity of church communities that not only interact with members online, but also exist as a church community through online alone.
The most open to such a viable "online-only" community was a rabbi...
"There are some people who will always prefer the
in-person, face-to-face experience, who love being in a room with other Jews
and smelling the freshly baked challah. And some people will prefer being
online,” said Rabbi Baum, 31, who is one of the leaders of OurJewishCommunity.org.
“There are those people who prefer to check out our tweets on their phone or
listen to our podcast. I don’t think the use of technology needs to be for
everybody. But we have found a community online. Many of them have never felt a
connection to Judaism before."
The Rabbi gets to a very important question.... It's not about real or virtual in terms of church. Rather, it's simply about what about those who would never go to real church in the first place? Do we draw the line of where Christianity is active/inactive and just choose to not reach out to those who will only go to church online?