Technology: Friend or Foe?

Some think technology is out of control, or that it's contributing to social ills, underdevelopment/immaturity, "adult"escence, etc. The National Post carried an editorial some months ago on the subject of "vaguebooking", or posting intentionally vague Facebook status updates in order to bait others into responding. The article's diagnosis?

Perhaps, in this online world where everyone has an immediate voice, a problem has arisen: no one is listening. As a result, people have started to yearn for the dialogue lacking in our one-way communication culture. Maybe people aren’t vaguebooking for attention, but are simply doing it to elicit a response. Maybe Facebook, Twitter, and all the other social sites have in fact painted us into a lonely corner and this is the social butterfly’s way of inducing good old fashioned conversation in a new world format.

Or maybe we’re just a bunch of egomaniacs. (Read more)

On the other hand, another article I recently posted on the "Death of the Phone Call", puts a different spin on social networking technology:

The telephone, in other words, doesn’t provide any information about status, so we are constantly interrupting one another. The other tools at our disposal are more polite. Instant messaging lets us detect whether our friends are busy without our bugging them, and texting lets us ping one another asynchronously. (Plus, we can spend more time thinking about what we want to say.) For all the hue and cry about becoming an “always on” society, we’re actually moving away from the demand that everyone be available immediately.

In fact, the newfangled media that’s currently supplanting the phone call might be the only thing that helps preserve it. Most people I know coordinate important calls in advance using email, text messaging, or chat (r u busy?). An unscheduled call that rings on my phone fails the conversational Turing test: It’s almost certainly junk, so I ignore it. (Read More)

So, on the one hand status updates can be frustrating to those who just want human contact, it's also helpful for those who only want meaningful contact. I suppose this is really just a introvert/extravert problem: if you just want to be around people, two-way conversation is the ideal and social networking is a "one-way" street which seems unhealthy. For introverted folks like myself, talking to anyone about anything simply for its own sake is equally disconcerting - I only want to talk to certain people about certain things; it is barely hyperbole to say that small-talk is the bane of the introvert's existence.

Anyway, all this is to make the wider point that technology is neither inherently good nor bad; how it's used determines its value. Technological advances are not the result of sin; in fact, they are part of God's original purpose for humanity - that we "fill the earth and subdue it" (Gen. 1:28). Granted, sinful humans do not do this is a way that honours God. For example the Tower of Babel (Gen. 11:1-9):

Then they said, “Come, let us build ourselves a city and a tower with its top in the heavens, and let us make a name for ourselves, lest we be dispersed over the face of the whole earth.” (Gen. 11:4)

The tower of Babel was a technological advance; the problem was not that mankind was advancing in technology, but their underlying motivation for doing so: "Let us building...a tower with its top in the heavens, and let us make a name for ourselves, lest we be dispersed over the face of the whole earth." There were two problems:

1. "Top in the Heavens...make a name for ourselves" - they committed the sin of Lucifer by trying to assume God's place, and steal God's glory.
2. "Lest we be dispersed over the face of the whole earth" - they decided to rebel against God's command to "fill the earth". Rather than be dispersed, they would rather stay in one place and become gods unto themselves, rather than obey God and fill the earth. 

The end of the story runs thus:

And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of man had built. And the Lord said, “Behold, they are one people, and they have all one language, and this is only the beginning of what they will do. And nothing that they propose to do will now be impossible for them. Come, let us go down and there confuse their language, so that they may not understand one another's speech.” So the Lord dispersed them from there over the face of all the earth, and they left off building the city. Therefore its name was called Babel, because there the Lord confused the language of all the earth. And from there the Lord dispersed them over the face of all the earth. (Gen. 11:5-9)

So many points of interest here:

• there is a link between technological advance and communication problems like the ones we are discovering in social media: God confused the language while mankind was in the midst of their greatest technological advance at the time, because they were using their technology both to rebel against God and to take the place of God. Communication problems which stem from technology, when understood this way, exist a) because of our sin, b) to restrain us from becoming puffed up over our technological advances and daring to usurp the place of God. 
• there is a contrast between the confused language of man which resulted in disagreement and, ultimately, unfinished work, and the clear language between the members of the Godhead - God says "Come, let us go down" (I take this to be a reference to the Trinity), and the rest of the story suggests that whoever God was talking to agreed, and the work they decided on (confusing language) was finished. No unclarity, no confusion, no disagreement. Man's communication was befuddled because of their pride, and their story ended with the tower being left unfinished; God's communication is perfectly clear and ended with the result He had initially intended. 
• The key to understanding the story, I believe, is the use of the word "disperse": "Lest we be dispersed....the Lord dispersed them....the Lord dispersed them." Man wanted to not be dispersed (i.e. to rebel against God's command to "fill the earth"); the Lord came down and confused their language in order to fulfill His original purpose for mankind - hence why I say that it is how technology is used that determines its value. 

Some practical conclusions:

1. We should realize that technology doesn't create communication problems - sin does. As such, they are part of the curse that God place on mankind and on the creation, and will persist until God creates the New Heaven and the New Earth. Technology is not the problem; sin is. To solve communication problems in social media, we must solve the sin problem with the gospel. 
2. Christians should not fear technology, but neither should they make it into an idol. Technology is good only insomuch as it fulfills the command to "fill the earth and subdue it" while at the same time keeps humans under the authority of God. If we try to challenge God's authority, then He may very well thwart our technological advances, as in Genesis 11. So, while we must beware of evil uses of technology which usurp God's authority, we also must not run from technology, lest we force God to scatter us where we are trying to remain in one place. 
3.  Churches should view technology as a chance to spread the gospel in fresh ways. Just as Gütenberg's printing press enabled the mass-production of the Scriptures, today's technology offers myriads of opportunities to get the gospel "out there". Specifically:

• There is little excuse for modern churches to not have a working website, even just a basic site which gives physical directions to the church and service times. The internet is where we get a large portion of the information we need - if churches don't put their information in the place where most people are going to look, it is small wonder if they aren't well-known. A working knowledge of Facebook gives you most everything you need to know to maintain a website powered by, for example, Wordpress. When I'm trying to find a church to go to in a new place, it's downright annoying if I can't find in on the web. 
• There is great value in Pastors starting blogs, or at least posting their weekly sermon audio/video. Abraham Piper has reflected on this in this article. My church's associate pastor does that very thing, posting thoughts based on his lessons at youth group on his own blog. I personally subscribe to many blogs of pastors, seminary teachers, and other ministry leaders which greatly enhance my own understanding of the Scriptures and current theological and social issues. 

Social media are simply that: mediums, ways of communicating. They are not messages - they are ways of communicating messages. How do we redeem technology? By conveying a good message. Paradoxically, it is for that reason that I don't value the use of video, powerpoint or clever illustration in sermons - they are means of communication as well, but I find them superfluous in helping me understand the words of Scripture through the words of a sermon. They don't help convey the message. If you can't explain what you mean in words, how is video going to help?

But that's another post altogether...