I remember how, when the internet began, some Christians defined Christian websites as "online churches." Similarly, the cloud gatherings due to the coronavirus crisis are also being called "online churches".
This time the name is closer to the substance of "church," but the new model is neither a challenge to traditional churches nor a change. Rather, it should be considered as a natural product under a special circumstance, a combination of church and fast-growing high technology and information.
The model is destined to be recorded in the history of the Chinese church, and the significance will be unprecedented in transcending and changing traditional worship models.
The model is being carried out as a long-distance gathering using networks, computers, cellphones, and software. through which believers are engaged in worship through Bible reading, praise, prayers, and sermons. In contrast with physical churches, "online churches" are innovative and effective.
It may be too early to determine whether the new model can replace the traditional one, but we have to admit that the "iceberg" influence probably implies tremendous effects.
As history evolves based, it often goes against our own designs or imagination. However much humans contribute to it, the model will probably develop into a form different than we wish because everything is in the hands of God.
The "church" we often talk about actually refers to "church buildings." In fact, the concepts and meaning of "church" and "church building" are different. A "church building" is a physical place of worship, while a "church" is a spiritual gathering of believers who meet and worship together. If Christians have God in their hearts, their gathering in the church building becomes spiritual, at which point we can call a "church building" a "church".
From this perspective, the growth of the "online church" is a gift from God during this special period and is indeed a "church." The objection to "online churches" may result from the bondage of a thousand years of tradition or habit. Traditions tend to become unchanging or even rigid, isolated from the outer world. They may deviate from their original spirit and vigor, becoming "self-sufficient" ivory towers.
The value of tradition mainly lies in whether it helps us to follow Christ as the way, truth and life. Tradition must not become a moldly antique or shrine that we worship as the way, truth, and life instead of Christ. Nor should tradition leadus to merely regard God as an idol or a tag of faith. Rather, authentic traditions are rich heritage helping us move toward life. We don't need to reject "online churches," argue about what to call them, or abandon them when traditional church gatherings resume. We can learn important lessons from this experience. When computers and networks first appeared, our churches turned a blind eye. Even though some Christian websites later developed, rarely were they as alive as secular ones.
With the rise of We-Media, we are once again falling behind the secular media. Churches have few official accounts on these platforms and often employ mediocre technology and image-text skills. The coronavirus outbreak also is showing how many churches are unable to use networks. But the place they fail to occupy will be eventually occupied by others. God's tabernacle should cover every corner of the world and not leave any space for cults or the devil.
The church ought to keep pace with the times. Keeping up with the times does not mean following the secular world, but keeping separate from it. It's extremely dangerous to put faith in the world.
Due to the virus crisis, telecommuting, telemedicine, distance education and online schooling have thrived. This will becomethe new normal even after companies resume work. If we continue to remain complacent and conservative, the church will be forever a pool of stagnant water which will be completely marginalized by society, and will fail to carry out its mission of evangelism.
Some mainstream local churches are comprised of mostly middle-aged and elderly members because they don't attract young people. The "online church" belongs to the new generation, which should lead into the future.
Although some prophets argue that "online churches" will replace physical churches, the future is uncertain and waits for God to determine it. In spite of their many shortcomings, "online churches" will change in accordance with the development of information and technology, and also with our operating skills. Perhaps the new model is not suitable for megachurches, but suggests a good way forward for house churches.
- Translated by Karen Luo
网络教会兴起的当下，所谓的“网络教会”能否成为未来趋势？
记得早在网络刚刚兴起时，就有信徒将基督教网站定义为“网络教会”，最后或许因为没有哪个网站宣称自己是网络教会而无声无息了。
这次在抗疫期间催生出的网络聚会模式，也有一些人称其为“网络教会”。可这一次的叫法应该说是贴近“教会”这一内涵实质的，但这一新的模式即不是对传统教会的挑战，也无意于改变传统实体教会的聚会，而是在特殊状态下，教会与高速发展的信息科技发生的一次交融与契合，是自然而然产生的。
这一新的模式，因其规模的广泛以及所取得的巨大果效，注定会被记载在中国教会发展的历史中。而这段历史的显著特征和其意义在于超越和打破了传统教会的聚会模式，是前无古人的。这一模式，是借助互联网、电脑手机和各类软件工具展开的，将信徒从远程聚集在电脑或手机的屏幕下进行敬拜、读经、赞美、祷告、讲道等活动。这与在实体教堂聚会之比，显得新鲜别致，又起到了异曲同工的效果。
当下，各企事业单位复工已开始，疫情渐去渐远，教堂恢复聚会自然也近在咫尺，但因“网络教会”模式取得的巨大成功，以及潜在和深远的影响，势必如同一列正在奔跑的火车，绝不会因其疫情的结束而嘎然而止；其强大的惯性冲力，也不会因着人的意志而改变，甚至会出现不断完善和发展的势头。
这种“网络教会”模式在未来的发展中，能否逐渐取代传统“实体教会”模式，虽是言之过早，但不能不承认，这一模式呈现出的是“小荷才露尖尖角”的喜人态势，一但绽放开来，魅力将是无穷的。并在一定程度上可以说，已经构成了对“实体教会”聚会模式的一种挑战，目前这种挑战并不尖锐，只是一个端倪和萌芽。
如果具体说来，这一模式因为它的某些局限性和不完善，现在只能说是实体教会复制出的“聚会模型”。但历史的发展是有其自身逻辑的，很多时候与我们所设计和想象的逻辑未必相符。不管人的推动也好刺激也罢，都很可能走进我们愿望之外的另一条轨道。因为这一切都掌握在神的手中。就这个角度而言，教会聚会模式的悄然改变和生成，也就不是偶然的了。
现代教会不管是宏伟壮观还是平凡简陋，都是从犹太人的会幕、圣殿和教堂演变沿袭而来的。其实，我们经常挂在嘴上的教会，很多时候是指教堂。但如果严格区分，教会与教堂的概念和含义是极不相同的。
教堂是属物质性的，只是一个聚会的场所；教会是属灵性质的，属神的信徒在一起聚会祈祷敬拜，也就有了教会的意义。
但无论是教堂还是教会，都是来源神的确立。一个信徒心中有教堂，是因为心中有神。心中有神，在教堂聚会就有了属灵的层面，有了教会的内涵的实意，所以，我们把教堂称为教会也没有错。心中无神，教堂就是一种物质，不过是一所房子或者殿堂；心中有神，即使没有教堂的存在，哪怕是几个人在家里聚会祷告，或在哪个地穴、山洞聚会祷告，那这个家这个地穴、山洞就是教会，教会的内涵和意义是超越有形的教堂的。
教堂的确立是神给信祂的人的一个特殊恩典，让信祂的人能够在一个舒适安全的环境中来敬拜祂，也因为人对神的赞美敬拜，教堂才有了其神学和信仰上的伟大象征。教会确立的标准就一个——几个人聚在一起，只要心中有神，敬拜赞美之地就是教会。否则，不过一所空洞的房子而已。
从这个意义看网络教会，完全可以说，这个特殊时期兴起的网络教会也是神给信徒预备的，是名副其实的教会，将其冠以“网络教会”之名也未为不可。我们所以对“网络教会”的说法有那么一点敏感或反对，无非是受千百年来传统教会模式的束缚，囿于长久的习惯，囿于千百年来的沿袭，囿于一种固定不变的程序，囿于既定的安稳，甚至惧怕这一传统的改变，惧怕良莠不齐局面的出现，惧怕异端甚至邪教的侵入。
但传统的东西发展到一定程度往往是凝固的，是一层不变、僵死的，同时又是与外界割裂的，早已悖逆了最初发轫时的精神和内在生命的鲜活气息，成为一个自足自立的“象牙塔”，瞅着瑰丽壮观，却已名不副实。
延续和继承传统，关键在于我们的内在生命、道路和真理是不是属于基督。传统不是散发着霉气的古董，更不是把基督的道路真理和生命供奉起来只顶礼膜拜，将神视为一个偶像、一个信仰上的标签。真正的传统是活泼泼地向前发展，有着复杂的血肉和丰富细节的一个整体。
让基督的真理和生命闪光在我们的身上，融入我们的血液和灵魂深处，并且呈现在世人面前，成为基督的样式——这才是对传统的延续和继承，才是“使徒统续”的延伸和发展。
对于网络教会，我们不要急于去否定它，也没必要在名称上争执不休，更不能因为传统教会聚会模式的恢复而撇弃它。经验和教训并未走远，当电脑和网络兴起时，我们的教会流露出的却是一副熟视无睹的冷漠姿态，虽然后期也出现了一些基督教网站，但真正有特色的实在少的可怜，远不如世俗网站那么鲜活。
自媒体的出现，我们又落后于世俗，各教会的自媒体公号不是没有，只是太少，并在技术操作和文图质量层面上太过平平。这次疫情的突然爆发，就暴露了这个问题，很多教会对网络的运用几乎束手无策。殊不知，你不占领的地方，自有人会去占领。但神的帐幕应该是覆盖整个世界各个角落的，绝不能因此给异端邪说或是魔鬼留下空隙。
教会的发展应该是与时俱进的。当然，这种与时俱进不是与世俗俱进，而是在分别为圣的基础上的俱进，凡是神给以这个世界的恩典，我们就必须全盘接纳，将信仰与世界对立起来的倾向是特别危险的。
科技的迅猛发展和社会的迅速变革，城乡差别的缩小，生产力的大幅提升，各地人员结构的转换，整个世界都在以颠覆性的态势向前发展着。因其疫情的阻拦，社会上各企业兴起的远程办公、远程看病就诊、远程办学授课等等都已经兴盛起来。不用预测，这种情况不用太久，自会成为各企业复工后的一个常态。如果我们继续固步自封不思前行，只局限对哈利路亚的空喊，与飞速发展的社会脱节，那么教会就会永远是一潭死水，无波无澜，最后被社会彻底边缘化，福传的使命也就无从谈起了。
更何况，一些地方教会现在信徒的构成依然是以中老年为主流，这是因为我们没有给青年人有力的感召。而网络教会正是属于青年人的，教会的发展应该是后来居上，所谓后浪推前浪，只有青年人才会真正地与时俱进。
耶稣在安息日行的七个神迹都是耳熟能详的，但按照犹太律法，都属于对律法的蔑视和背叛。如果按照实际效果，耶稣的神迹却使神的荣耀异常的彰显光大出来。所以，我们也要如耶稣基督那样，不可被所谓的传统束缚住前行的脚步。犹太人所以不接受基督，把基督送上十字架，不是犹太人不相信神，而是被铜墙铁壁似的传统固定住了，被律法捆绑住了，所以看不见基督这个神的儿子，反而将耶稣视为神的敌人而将他钉上十字架。这一教训是我们应该永远记取的。
至于网络教会能否取代实体教会，尽管现在有人预言，但未来毕竟遥远，一切只能等待神的安排。但所谓的“网络教会”在福传上确实是前程无量的，虽然现在还存在很多缺陷，有很多不尽理想的地方，但这些都会随着信息技术的发展和我们在操作水平上的提高而逐步改变的。也许，这一模式在当前还不适用于大型教会，但却给家庭教会的聚会开拓了一条极为宽广壮丽的道路。
I remember how, when the internet began, some Christians defined Christian websites as "online churches." Similarly, the cloud gatherings due to the coronavirus crisis are also being called "online churches".
This time the name is closer to the substance of "church," but the new model is neither a challenge to traditional churches nor a change. Rather, it should be considered as a natural product under a special circumstance, a combination of church and fast-growing high technology and information.
The model is destined to be recorded in the history of the Chinese church, and the significance will be unprecedented in transcending and changing traditional worship models.
The model is being carried out as a long-distance gathering using networks, computers, cellphones, and software. through which believers are engaged in worship through Bible reading, praise, prayers, and sermons. In contrast with physical churches, "online churches" are innovative and effective.
It may be too early to determine whether the new model can replace the traditional one, but we have to admit that the "iceberg" influence probably implies tremendous effects.
As history evolves based, it often goes against our own designs or imagination. However much humans contribute to it, the model will probably develop into a form different than we wish because everything is in the hands of God.
The "church" we often talk about actually refers to "church buildings." In fact, the concepts and meaning of "church" and "church building" are different. A "church building" is a physical place of worship, while a "church" is a spiritual gathering of believers who meet and worship together. If Christians have God in their hearts, their gathering in the church building becomes spiritual, at which point we can call a "church building" a "church".
From this perspective, the growth of the "online church" is a gift from God during this special period and is indeed a "church." The objection to "online churches" may result from the bondage of a thousand years of tradition or habit. Traditions tend to become unchanging or even rigid, isolated from the outer world. They may deviate from their original spirit and vigor, becoming "self-sufficient" ivory towers.
The value of tradition mainly lies in whether it helps us to follow Christ as the way, truth and life. Tradition must not become a moldly antique or shrine that we worship as the way, truth, and life instead of Christ. Nor should tradition leadus to merely regard God as an idol or a tag of faith. Rather, authentic traditions are rich heritage helping us move toward life. We don't need to reject "online churches," argue about what to call them, or abandon them when traditional church gatherings resume. We can learn important lessons from this experience. When computers and networks first appeared, our churches turned a blind eye. Even though some Christian websites later developed, rarely were they as alive as secular ones.
With the rise of We-Media, we are once again falling behind the secular media. Churches have few official accounts on these platforms and often employ mediocre technology and image-text skills. The coronavirus outbreak also is showing how many churches are unable to use networks. But the place they fail to occupy will be eventually occupied by others. God's tabernacle should cover every corner of the world and not leave any space for cults or the devil.
The church ought to keep pace with the times. Keeping up with the times does not mean following the secular world, but keeping separate from it. It's extremely dangerous to put faith in the world.
Due to the virus crisis, telecommuting, telemedicine, distance education and online schooling have thrived. This will becomethe new normal even after companies resume work. If we continue to remain complacent and conservative, the church will be forever a pool of stagnant water which will be completely marginalized by society, and will fail to carry out its mission of evangelism.
Some mainstream local churches are comprised of mostly middle-aged and elderly members because they don't attract young people. The "online church" belongs to the new generation, which should lead into the future.
Although some prophets argue that "online churches" will replace physical churches, the future is uncertain and waits for God to determine it. In spite of their many shortcomings, "online churches" will change in accordance with the development of information and technology, and also with our operating skills. Perhaps the new model is not suitable for megachurches, but suggests a good way forward for house churches.
- Translated by Karen Luo
As “Online Church” Thrives, Will It Last as Trend ?
