





































Ecclesial Futures
2023 – Volume 4 – Issue 1

18
Ecclesial Futures – DOI: 10.54195/ef13666

A R T I C L E S

DOI: 10.54195/ef13666

The Metaverse as a Digital Missionary Site1

Sung-Hyuk Nam

Abstract
The metaverse attracts considerable attention in politics, economy, society and 
culture. Unfortunately, seminaries and churches are still in their early stages of missi-
ological research and understanding the metaverse. If we understand the metaverse 
as a digital mission field, research on the missiological approach is required. We should 
pay attention to the infinitely expanding and integrating metaverse. Overseas, there 
is already a history of experimental challenges and settlements from decades ago 
on the potential for churches in virtual spaces. While online churches are famous in 
Korea, there is insufficient understanding of ways to meet the younger generation of 
non-believers in the metaverse. Since online churches are analogue enterprises, there 
is a massive gap between them and the digital younger generation. Paul Hiebert’s crit-
ical contextualization is still valid in approaching the metaverse as a digital mission 
field. Heidi Campbell’s study of the relationship between media and religions, “reli-
gious-social shaping approach to technology” reminds Korean churches of the value 
of the metaverse as a new media. Both theories show Korean churches need dialogue 
and patience when approaching the metaverse to contact non-believers. Missiological 
discussions on the metaverse should promote a holistic understanding in which the 
two worlds closely relate rather than a dualistic understanding. The digital living space 
of the MZ generation that emerged with the development of new technology does not 
conflict with the nature of the Christian Church. Therefore, Korean churches need to 
understand the metaverse as a space of mission and coexistence.

Keywords: Metaverse; Contextualization; Analog; Digital; MZ generation

1 This article was originally published in Korean as “Digital sŏn’gyojirosŏ metaverse segyeŭi ganŭsŏng-gwa 
tŭksŏng yŏngu. 디지털 선교지로서 메타버스 세계의 가능성과 특성연구 [The Characteristics of the Metaverse 
and the Possibilities as a Digital Mission Field]” Korean Presbyterian Journal of Theology 54 (2) (2022): 
103–24. Following translation, it was revised and peer reviewed for publication in Ecclesial Futures.



19
Ecclesial Futures – DOI: 10.54195/ef13666

Introduction
Around the world, the next generation is giving explosive attention to the metaverse. 
The metaverse has already grown beyond the initial stage to become a substantial IT 
industry for the future, drawing attention from many investors. Existing IT industries 
are also checking the potential of the metaverse, and companies such as Microsoft, 
Google, Apple, NVIDIA, Facebook, Amazon and Tesla are trying to change the direc-
tion of their business and investment. The metaverse is not just in the limelight from 
the industrial point of view. It is receiving much attention from politicians and artists. 
In the 59th US presidential election, Senator Joe Biden campaigned by creating a 
promotional island called Biden HQ on a metaverse platform called “Animal Crossing 
New Horizons”. In 2016, the Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton used 
“Pokémon Go” in her campaign. On 5 October 2020 Jensen Huang, founder and CEO 
of NVIDIA, a global company in graphics cards and artificial intelligence, delivered a 
keynote speech at the GTC 2020 keynote address, “The Metaverse is Coming” (NVIDIA 
2020). According to metaverse users, Fortnite currently has 350 million users, Roblox 
has 120 million and Naver’s virtual reality platform Zepeto has 200 million. In April 
2020, the famous rapper Travis Scott held his concert on Fortnite, with 12.3 million 
people joining and 27.7 million viewers. Travis Scott’s offline performance revenue 
was 1.8 billion Korean won in 2019, while his performance on Fortnite drew over 
ten times as much revenue at 21.6 billion won. There was also a showcase for BTS, 
the wildly popular K-pop group. Teenagers and children in the United States spend 
2.5 times as much time on Roblox than YouTube and 16 times as much on Netflix. 
Zepeto is collaborating with Korean entertainment companies Big Hit, YG Entertain-
ment and JYP for the next generation with investments of 17 billion won. In addition, 
50 million people flocked to BLACKPINK’s virtual fan signing event in 2020. It is also 
raising sales by collaborating with Gucci and Nike.

In Korea, actual missional cases of the metaverse are rare compared to the explo-
sive growth trend of metaverse users. Related research papers are also quite limited 
in quantity and subject matter. The following results are found when searching 
academic journals through the Academic Research Information Service (RISS). The 
search term “metaverse” has seven academic publications, none in theological jour-
nals. When “virtual reality” or “virtual world” are used as search terms, there are 
1,875 results, with only five published by missionary theological societies. There 
are 1,635 papers on “augmented reality,” but only two in missionary studies. Joo 
Young-Min states, “The virtualization revolution changes the landscape of civilization 
and asks us fundamental questions. Nevertheless, it is not easy to find a philosoph-
ical consideration for this. Today’s discourse on technology is thoroughly organized 
in the language of industry”( Joo 2019: 15). The church treats the metaverse simply as 
an IT industry technology and an economic issue. Kim Sang-Kyun (2020: 264) states, 



20
Ecclesial Futures – DOI: 10.54195/ef13666

“We need to think about whether we can completely break down the boundaries 
between the real world and the virtual world with human technology from various 
perspectives such as philosophy, religion, and law.” However, academic research by 
the Korean church still concerns the real world rather than the virtual world. Kim 
Dohoon (2013) deals with the histological discussion of Douglas Estes’ overseas case 
of Sim Church. Kye Jea-Kwang (2022) defined the metaverse as a digital mission field. 
Hwang Byung-Bae (2020: 447–50) hinted at metaverse missionary work through 
“construction and liberation from the municipal treaty” as one of the eight sugges-
tions for the renewal of the Korean church. Still, academic research on online plat-
forms remains in its early stages, with reviews of previous research rather than 
actual case studies. Nevertheless, it is consistent with the insufficient interests of 
the Korean church in the metaverse.

While Korean churches’ studies focus on online activities for their members, the 
overseas church in the metaverse has attracted unbelievers outside the church. 
Therefore, missiological research on the metaverse is necessary to help the Korean 
church convert its perspective from self-centered to others. However, the scope of 
this research is limited to understanding the metaverse as a missionary sphere. It 
examines the convergence of missionary studies and the metaverse. It raises key 
theological issues to serve as a foundation for further research on specific cases of 
virtual church and missionary contact with nonbelievers on the metaverse.

The metaverse
The metaverse is a combination of “meta” and “universe,” which means transcendence 
of the real world and refers to a three-dimensional virtual world. However, beyond 
the technical scope of the commonly used term “virtual reality,” the metaverse is 
fluid and evolving to include a wide variety of synthetic realities. Still, the technical 
research group Acceleration Studies Foundations (ASF) categorizes four expressions 
of the metaverse: augmented reality, lifelogging, mirror world, and virtual world. 
“Metaverse” was the first used in Neil Stephenson’s science fiction novel Snow Crash 
(1992), to mean a virtual world that can only be entered through an avatar. A good 
visualization of this metaverse is in Steven Spielberg’s 2018 film Ready Player One. 
As can be guessed from the movie’s content, the metaverse platform does not end 
up as a space for entertainment for young people. It includes economic and polit-
ical power. In Netflix’s 2019 earnings announcement, Reed Hastings (Netflix 2019) 
pointed to the virtual game Fortnite, not HBO, in the same streaming industry, as a 
competitor. In the competition to occupy users’ time, the infinitely expanding and 
integrating metaverse has become a competitor for other businesses in the real 
world.



21
Ecclesial Futures – DOI: 10.54195/ef13666

Douglas Estes (2009: 28–31) distinguishes the virtual world, the real world, the 
fictional world, the imaginary world, the augmented world and the virtual world. 
Since the virtual world is in its infancy, there is generally much confusion and no 
simple definition. As a result, there are misunderstandings when people try to 
describe a virtual world using real or imaginary concepts. To explain the virtual 
world, Estes argues that we must contrast the virtual world with other worlds. First, 
the real world is where we are reading this article. The virtual world is as real as the 
real world in its core and essence, though both worlds are different. Second, the 
fictional world is created in the reader’s mind by reading books, watching movies 
or exercising the imagination. The fictional world is the way of possibility, while the 
virtual world is the way of reality. Third, the imaginary world is another kind of world 
cut off from the real world. A virtual world may or may not be an imaginary world. In 
particular, Christians equating the virtual world with the imaginary world may lead 
to inaccurate conclusions about faith and church in the virtual world. Finally, the 
augmented world is a mix of real and virtual worlds developed through technology. 
The virtual world is different from the augmented world because it occurs only in the 
virtual world. On the other hand, the augmented world comes from the real world.

As such, the virtual and augmented worlds belonging to the metaverse can be 
correctly understood when they deviate from the stereotype of disconnection from 
reality or from false worlds, such as fictional and imaginary worlds. We live in the 
real world and can access the metaverse through a digital interface. We can live in 
a composite space and interact with others in the real world. Augmented reality 
allows more contact points with churches in the real world, but the virtual world as a 
synthetic space is not likely to be a form of the natural world.

The metaverse and Korean churches
Compared to the continued increase in people’s interest in the metaverse, the virtual 
church is now germinating among Korean Christians. Although there are many 
examples of online worship due to the Covid-19 pandemic, churches with analog 
sensibilities are still hesitant to access the online world. Reactions and opinions of 
church members to the online church are various and divided. In the church, there 
are the analog, the digital retard and the digital generation. However, even it is still 
lacking in understanding this category. There is a negative and minimal recognition 
of the more technologically advanced metaverse. Kim Seung-Hwan (2021) of the 
Urban Culture Community Research Institute classifies churches into online church 
and church online. Church online is where the existing analog church establishes an 
online presence. It is the type of online ministry that many churches are practising 
during Covid-19. Church online only uses digital platforms as tools while maintaining 



22
Ecclesial Futures – DOI: 10.54195/ef13666

the existing analog system and tends to recognize online ministry as a temporary 
measure for existing believers. Church online receives hardly any attention from 
nonbelievers. The online church refers to a form of church that is not just a part of 
analog churches and independently begins within the metaverse world. This church 
has been entirely digital from the beginning. It is challenging because it does not 
mimic an analog church. It establishes new church theology, that is to say, a digital 
ecclesiology.

For example, finding Korean churches on various metaverse platforms is difficult. 
Roblox has about 150 virtual churches, all founded overseas. Roblox Community 
Church (2022) has 110,000 members, and Faith Church has 27,000 members. Mean-
while, in Korean churches, there is no awareness of the metaverse. Instead, there 
is an understanding of the online church as the extensional device level of the real 
church. Even if some churches promote online ministry earnestly for its members, 
it appears different from the missionary intention of online ministry for the 
unchurched. Many churches transplant analog ecclesiology onto the digital world, 
failing to reach the unchurched digital generation. Instead, only people who attend 
or have attended local churches visit the digital churches (Hutchings 2017: 229). The 
inability to communicate between the younger generation in the metaverse and the 
Korean online church is evident.

It is also statistically proven that the decline of Sunday school membership in Korean 
churches has surpassed the decline in Korean society’s youth and young adult popu-
lation. In Korean churches, Sunday Schools have decreased since the 1990s, with 
more than 50% of churches without Sunday Schools and only 3% of churches with 
Pre-K classes (Nam 2019). As such, the Korean church is becoming super-aged and 
unable to prepare for the younger generation. Yet the Korean church, stuck in the 
analog perspective, regards life in the real world through the paradigm of exclu-
sion resulting in a lack of communication with others in the digital world. Since the 
metaverse is in its early stages, gaming is the first genre through which the next 
generation forms elements of the new society. But the analog generation is resistant 
to the changes and perceives the metaverse as merely a game or entertainment. As 
a result, these traditional churches put off the tensions between the virtual and real 
world as a matter of the distant future rather than a present reality.

In addition to the fact that the Korean church has an analog ecclesiology as opposed 
to the digital generation that utilizes the metaverse, there are various reasons why 
the Korean church is still hesitant to understand and engage with the metaverse as a 
mission field. First, church activities in the metaverse are still very early, so theolog-
ical discussions such as sacraments are lacking. Second, the Korean church member-



23
Ecclesial Futures – DOI: 10.54195/ef13666

ship is aging. They are unwilling to familiarize themselves with the digital worldview 
and utilize the metaverse. Furthermore, senior church leaders are more interested 
in ministering to the old than utilizing the metaverse for the younger generation. 
Third, there is a lack of missional purpose and practice for young metaverse resi-
dents. Fourth, there is mistrust and anxiety about the anonymity of metaverse activ-
ities. By perceiving the metaverse as a virtual space, the understanding that it is fake 
is too strong. It causes the Korean church to reject the metaverse as a mission field. 
In addition, there is a reluctance to leak personal information through online activ-
ities. Lastly, the church’s past experiences with online activities (homepage, online 
cafe) have not been positive.

Nnon-Korean cases of metaverse church
Religious activities in the metaverse world have already been studied for a long time. 
The first virtual church was founded in 1985, before the advent of the World Wide 
Web. The members worshipped together through a text-only interface. Since then, 
other pioneers have gradually founded more churches amid rapid changes in the 
virtual world. According to some estimates, there were about 30 virtual churches by 
2000 (Hutchings 2017: 245).

Then the virtual church underwent a significant change in 2004. The metaverse plat-
form called Second Life was launched in 2003, and in the following year, the British 
Methodist Church started the Church of Fools to experiment with virtual churches in 
the metaverse. The church decided to experiment only for four months. The number 
of people attending its service reached 41,000 at one point. Participants were able to 
attend in the form of 3D avatars. This church is designed to operate independently, 
not to expand the online service of the real church only for its members. Another 
church, St Pixel, officially started in 2006 and survived past the end date of the exper-
iment due to continuous requests from participants. As a parish of the Church of 
England, I-Church started cultivating Benedictine spirituality. Anglicans of Second 
Life (AoSL) was also founded in 2006, and Sunshine Cathedral in 2009. Currently, 
there are about 15 virtual Christian churches in Second Life, and about 70% of the 
category of Spirituality & Beliefs are Christian churches. In these churches, partic-
ipants can worship by typing their prayers and sharing their meditations on blogs 
and forums. In particular, the Second Life Episcopal Church has appealed to Angli-
cans who are already familiar with their traditions by recreating cathedral architec-
ture and using Anglican etiquette. These Anglican virtual churches have grown to 
worship seven times a week.



24
Ecclesial Futures – DOI: 10.54195/ef13666

Life Church (virtualchurches.tv) differs from the previous churches in that it empha-
sizes conversation or communication rather than only broadcasting church activi-
ties to participants. Life Church is a virtual church based in Edmund, Oklahoma, in 
the United States. They purchased real estate on Second Life, hired developers, built 
church buildings, and created seats for avatars to attend church every week. One 
week in 2007, more than 1,400 people attended the online campus of Life Church. It 
measures attendance by the number of logged-on IP addresses. The virtual church 
did not limit itself to meetings within the metaverse but began its first mission trip to 
the real world in 2007. People who previously met only in the virtual world joined to 
establish the kingdom of God in the real world. Recently, new metaverse platforms 
such as Altspace (Altvr.com) and Roblox are evolving to host more sophisticated 3D 
virtual churches. Estes describes the emergence of these virtual churches as follows:

At the beginning of the twenty-first century, the church is beginning to be different not 
in style, venue, feel, or volume but in the world in which it exists. A new gathering of 
believers is emerging, a church not in the real world of bricks and mortar but in the 
virtual world of IP addresses and shared experiences. This type of church is unlike any 
church the world has ever seen. It has the power to break down social barriers, unite 
believers from all over the world, and build the kingdom of God with a widow’s mite of 
financing. It is a completely different type of church from any the world has ever seen 
(Estes 2009: 17–18).

The emergence of the metaverse as new media and 
church
The traditional church’s analog standards will make its future uncertain and helpless, 
and its members’ practices will erode the metaverse world. Leonard Sweet’s EPIC 
theory, which presents a framework for analysing the characteristics of the post-
modern generation, helps to grasp the features of the metaverse (Sweet 2000). First, 
the experience in the metaverse is utterly different from the real world. Suppose 
haptic technology, which may soon enable the sense of touch in addition to the visual 
and the auditory in the virtual world, the metaverse experience will further expand. 
The metaverse will allow experiences that are impossible in reality. Second, the 
metaverse enables infinite creative participation by users producing user-generated 
content (UGC). Users are not just consumers but may simultaneously be producers. 
Since Minecraft and Roblox are sandbox-type platforms, metaverse users can create 
and use virtual worlds as much as they want, just as children make their shapes with 
sand on the beach. This autonomy stimulates participants to be more active and 
creative. Third, the metaverse emphasizes virtual visualization. Users create avatars 
as personas, giving users another identity in the virtual world. The metaverse, full 

http://virtualchurches.tv
http://Altvr.com


25
Ecclesial Futures – DOI: 10.54195/ef13666

of images (image-driven), is especially effective for the younger generation, which 
is more familiar with images than letters. Fourth, the world is connected simulta-
neously online. Tesla uses Neuralink to connect human brains and computers and 
installs small satellites in the earth’s orbit to enable Starlink, aiming for a life that can 
always be connected through autonomous driving and artificial intelligence. Big data 
collected through Google Maps connects everything in human life.

This metaverse is not satisfied with a world separated from reality like the virtual world 
but is evolving into an augmented world connected to the real world. Metaverse-re-
lated companies such as Tesla, NVIDIA, Epic Games, Facebook, Apple, Kakao, Naver, 
and Microsoft face numerous challenges to win this metaverse business competi-
tion. Korean church seldom has leaders interested in or participating in technology 
conferences, annual events, or CES (Consumer Electronics Show), which introduces 
new technologies and products. There is no mention of religion in Kim Sang-Kyun’s 
book (2020), which discusses the metaverse as a digital district. In the secular world, 
the metaverse is very developed and has hundreds of millions of young users, yet 
the church is still only struggling with issues of churches in the physical world.

Throughout Christian history, the church has used various means such as letters, 
print media, TV and radio to reach people and invite them to be Jesus’ followers. 
With the advent of the World Wide Web in the 1990s, the Internet became the foun-
dational platform for relationships in many aspects of society. Many churches also 
began to pay attention to cyberspace as a space to practice faith in prayer, worship, 
and sacrament. In contrast to radio and television ministry, virtual churches in the 
metaverse are the products of two infinite torrents leading to the development of 
humankind in the twenty-first century: the exponential pace of technological growth 
and postmodernism. The confluence of these two massive flows is creating a fertile 
delta for virtual churches to grow. These churches are entirely new, not the shadow 
of the real church recorded and podcast. Radio and television in church ministry are 
non-mutual communicational means. In other words, they are simple unidirectional 
monologues. It is similar to the vertical relationships in traditional churches repro-
ducing tremendous power for churches and pastors. Nevertheless, modern people 
will never confuse the church with TV programmes or radio shows. Modern-day 
people may hear their favorite pastor on TV or the radio more often than attending 
a brick-and-mortar church, but Christians still consider attending a physical church 
as a sign of true faith. However, with the advent of postmodernism, the definition of 
the church is expanding, and its borders are fading. Unlike monologues on radio and 
TV, virtual world experiences are interactive and immersive. Residents of the virtual 
world are not just consumers but participants who worship with pastors in a genu-
inely collaborative experience. The analog generation, which is now the majority of 



26
Ecclesial Futures – DOI: 10.54195/ef13666

real-world church members, may be unfamiliar with the virtual world. Still, virtual 
interactions can be much more authentic and less awkward for the MZ generation 
than real-world relationships. As in-person education became impossible due to 
Covid-19, Soonchunhyang University held the 2021 freshman entrance ceremony on 
the metaverse platform Zepeto operated by Naver. Using virtual reality experience 
tools supported by the university, the first-year students made an avatar of them-
selves and participated in the school event.

As the virtual world becomes more and more of a reality in the coming decade, 
more and more people will turn to the virtual world for everyday interactions and 
meet their spiritual needs. It does not mean that the metaverse church will replace 
the real-world church. The virtual world is an independent operation method from 
reality, but the activities of the real church can further expand by connecting with 
the virtual world through augmented reality. The metaverse receives much attention 
from the younger generation because of its flexibility, transparency, diversity, and 
other innate strengths. The younger generation who had difficulty participating in 
the traditional church prefers to worship in the virtual world. The phenomenon will 
also influence and change churches in the real world.

Still, church members of the analog generation are unfamiliar with and adverse to 
virtual churches. When face-to-face worship has become impossible due to Covid-19, 
most Korean churches gathered through Zoom, Google Chat and Kakao Live. Ten 
years ago, no one expected the Korean church to conduct religious activities in these 
forms. However, technological advances have changed them despite the resistance 
of the analog generation. People first exchanged messages on Kakao Talk. Then they 
sent electronic gift coupons on the same messaging app. They now conduct finan-
cial activities through Kakao Bank. Eventually, the metaverse will become more than 
just an online phenomenon limited to funds and games and into a technology that 
changes our lives.

The metaverse as a digital mission field
The Korean church’s response and research on the metaverse are in an extremely 
early stage. For the next generation of Korean society and the Korean church to 
form a healthy relationship, it is necessary to understand the metaverse as a digital 
mission field and take a missional approach. Using new media such as metaverse 
can initiate dialogue for the unchurched. The metaverse may be beneficial to church 
members, but it may also challenge the authority or control of the church. Encour-
aging openness can boost church community networking and relationships but 
poses a threat if it appears to encourage excessive or prohibited behavior. There-



27
Ecclesial Futures – DOI: 10.54195/ef13666

fore, a critical contextualization approach that enables cultural dialogue between 
the digital mission field and Christian churches is essential (Hiebert 1985: 171–92).

Technological changes have been of great help in the missiological history, while 
the resistance from the existing church’s traditions has also been. In the second 
century, scroll-type scriptures developed into codexes. In the sixteenth century, the 
development of printing supported the Reformation. Since then, oceanography has 
significantly contributed to changing the missionary paradigm for coastal missions, 
communication techniques for inland missions, and computers for the evangelism 
of unreached tribes. The virtual world is not where the analog generations must 
physically move. However, considering the future of the Korean church’s mission 
and evangelism, the church must recognize that the metaverse is where the younger 
generation resides and communicate with its residents in this space.

The metaverse as a missionary field has many advantages. In other words, it can 
overcome various obstacles a real church has faced. First, it breaks down religious 
and cultural barriers. The unchurched who are reluctant to visit a real church can 
have a place to encounter God in the metaverse. Second, it removes the barrier 
of physical distance. It provides opportunities for those who need help to partici-
pate in faith community activities due to foreign missions or long-distance travel. 
It allows the church to provide various church education programmes and theolog-
ical education without needing leaders to visit the mission field physically. Third, it 
can bridge generational barriers. It can overcome the culture of traditional Christian 
adults with limited play and fun in their religious activities and actualize Christian 
education through interest and fun for the next generation. Fourth, religious activi-
ties in the metaverse erase social barriers. It provides opportunities for the margin-
alized to participate in faith activities. For example, disabled or older people with 
limited mobility can participate in activities. People restricted from participating due 
to social rejection, such as ex-offenders and refugees, can become active. Sixth, the 
metaverse eliminates spatial constraints. Especially for small churches with limited 
financial resources, it is possible to provide a space for various small group activities 
at little cost.

The four stages of critical contextualization applied to the metaverse are as follows. 
First, it is necessary to investigate the metaverse as a digital mission field. For the 
church to respond appropriately to the metaverse culture, unbiased information 
on the space is required. Because the church’s online activities have been very 
church-centred, collecting objective data on the digital mission field is necessary. 
In particular, it needs social and scientific explorations in the metaverse character-
ized by anonymity and autonomy. Second, the evangelist and the recipient exegete 



28
Ecclesial Futures – DOI: 10.54195/ef13666

Scripture with the collected information in the first stage. Third, based on the anal-
ysis of the metaverse context, possible church activities may be proposed. Fourth, 
the church needs to re-discuss from the perspective of the digital native. It should 
not uncritically apply the newly proposed church activities to the metaverse. Some 
discussion topics may be the relationship between online and offline activities, the 
validity of online communities, the form and effect of online ceremonies, the design 
of virtual architecture and sacred spaces, and the impact of digital media on reli-
gious authority. The nature, purpose, potential and limitations of virtual churches 
should be investigated, and discussions on the role of avatars, virtual spirituality, 
virtual ministry and the development of virtual church communities are necessary. 
Finally, problems such as virtual identity, individual spirituality and the risks and limi-
tations of niche ministry should not be neglected on a personal level. In this critical 
contextualization process, the Anglican pastor Mark Brown’s response to the ques-
tion of who is in charge of the Anglican Cathedral of Second Life is meaningful. He 
said, “church has only about 3 percent of it figured out; 97 percent is continual trial 
and error. ‘We don’t have the answers’” (Estes 2009: 38). Estes confesses that consid-
ering the long debate over the nature and practices of the church and the differ-
ences between traditional churches in North America, Europe, and Asia, it seems 
almost impossible to create the theology of the virtual church (Estes 2009: 28). Under 
the critical contextualization process, finding new practices for the Korean church to 
understand the metaverse as a digital mission site will take time. Through this, the 
evangelist and the recipient of the gospel may respect each other, and balanced and 
unbiased missionary communication may be possible.

Heidi Campbell, who studied the relationship between media and religion, naturally 
rejects the stereotype that deeply religious people are necessarily anti-technical 
(Campbell 2010). Nevertheless, she argues, many devout people are “constrained 
by many social and faith-based factors that inform and guide their responses to 
the possibilities and challenges that new forms of media offer” (Campbell 2010: 6). 
Campbell’s concept of the ‘religious-social shaping approach to technology’ allows 
religious organizations to systematize the development of media use and prospects 
based on a four-step process. First, it is essential to understand how certain reli-
gious groups have historically dealt with technological innovation and precedents. 
The second step deals with the group’s core beliefs, religious values, and interpreta-
tion in light of the development of new media. Third, the negotiation process on the 
nature of innovation and authority that determines its position within the religious 
framework of the group follows. The process decides the usefulness of specific new 
media devices and their ideological and symbolic components. Finally, the ensuing 
joint discourse helps to examine how the use of new media will cooperate with the 
norms of the group, resulting in problem-solving. Campbell supports a “construc-



29
Ecclesial Futures – DOI: 10.54195/ef13666

tive” approach rather than a “deterministic” approach to studying how religious 
communities respond to the emergence of new communication technologies. Her 
argument refutes the earlier perception of religious groups as passive respond-
ents merely accepting or rejecting new technologies. Heidi Campbell’s constructivist 
approach has similarities with Paul Hiebert’s critical contextualization. Therefore, 
the complementary dialogue between the two theories will require the Christian 
church to naturally settle in the metaverse and seek ways to preach the gospel to its 
digital residents.

Conclusion
The metaverse, a new missionary destination, should not be an object of fear but 
a new opportunity for the gospel. For example, in Roblox, user access time during 
September 2020 was 22.1 billion hours. The Christian church still meets far less than 
one per cent of the population residing in the virtual world. It means that the virtual 
world is the largest unreached group on earth. Simon Jenkins, one of the founders 
of the Stupid Church, said, “Someone has created a new town, and it’s like no one is 
thinking of building a church there. It’s very shameful” (Estes 2009: 39). Real churches 
in Korea tend to understand the online format forced by the Covid-19 pandemic as a 
temporary measure. In this situation, missiological research on the metaverse resi-
dents is urgently needed to inspire the church to see new missional possibilities.

The missional discussion of the metaverse should promote a holistic understanding 
in which the real and the virtual worlds are intimately connected rather than taking 
a dualistic approach where the generation is forced to choose between the two. The 
MZ generation emerged with the development of new technologies, and their digital 
space does not conflict with the nature of the Christian church. With the efforts to 
understand the metaverse as a place of mission and its digital residents, the Korean 
church can coexist with them for the Kingdom of God.

Ed Stetzer, a church futurist, said, “many say they think the church will never be the 
same again. Some wonder, for instance, if the day of the large church is over. I’m more 
concerned the church will be the same again” (Stetzer 2020: 14). It shows concern 
for the church’s future. The Korean IT company Naver has created the metaverse 
platform Zepeto, named after the character who brought life to Pinocchio, a lifeless 
wooden doll. People who do not know God think they have gained a new life in this 
virtual world. God made humans out of clay to steward the created world. So then, 
shouldn’t we be prepared so that the metaverse does not end up as a world of lies? 
This study raises more questions than answers. However, it goes beyond the assess-



30
Ecclesial Futures – DOI: 10.54195/ef13666

ment of the present situation to begin a new conversation about a digital missional 
field called metaverse.

About the author
Sung-Hyuk Nam has been teaching evangelism at Presbyterian University and 
Theological Seminary since 2022. He currently serves as the chairman of the 
department for Church Growth, Mission, and Evangelism of the Korean Society for 
Practical Theology. He is also a staff member of Culture & Theology Society. Contact: 
bokdoen@gmail.com

References
Campbell, Heidi A. 2010. When Religion Meets New Media. New York, NY: Routledge.
Estes, Douglas C. 2009. SimChurch: Being the Church in the Virtual World. Grand Rapids, MI: 

Zondervan.
Hiebert, Paul G. 1985. Anthropological Insights for Missionaries. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book 

House.
Hutchings, Tim. 2017. Creating Church Online: Ritual, Community and New Media. New York, NY: 

Routledge.
Hwang Byung-Bae. 2020. “Advent of the Post-Corona Era and Renewal of the Korean Church: 

From the Perspective of Missional Ecclesiology.” Korean Society of Mission Studies 60: 430–58.
Joo, Young-Min. 2019. Virtuality is Reality. Seoul: Across.
Kim Dohoon. 2013. “Being the Church in the Virtual World: A Study on the Virtual Ecclesiology 

(SimChurch) of Douglas Estes.” Korea Presbyterian Journal of Theology 45 (4): 141–68.
Kim Sang-Kyun. 2020. The Metaverse: Digital Earth, the World of Things that Emerging. Hwa-Sung: 

Plan B Design.
Kim Seung-Hwan. 2021. “Digital Faith, Online Church.” City and Community’s 11th Anniversary: 

18.
Kye Jae-Kwang. 2022. “An Analysis of Digital Mission Fields’ Ministry in ‘With COVID-19’.” 

Theology and Praxis 79: 531–58.
Nam Sung-Hyuk. 2019. “In the Age of Population Cliffs, the Search for a Transition to a 

Missionary Church: Focusing on the Church 3.0 Model.” Theology and Practice 64: 286–87.
Netflix. 2019, January 17. “We compete with and lose to Fortnite more than HBO.” Netflix’s 

Q4 2018 Report.” https://s22.q4cdn.com/959853165/files/doc_financials/quarterly_
reports/2018/q4/FINAL-Q418-Shareholder-Letter.pdf (accessed 18 May 2023).

NVIDIA. 2020. May 15. NVIDIA GTC May 2020 Keynote Pt1: CEO Jensen Huang Introduces Data-
Center-Scale Accelerated Computing[Video]. https://youtu.be/bOf2S7OzFEg (accessed 
18 May 2023).

Roblox Community Church. 2022, March 10. https://www.roblox.com/groups/7109020/
ROBLOX-Community-Church#!/about (accessed 18 May 2023).

Stetzer, Ed. 2020. “Time for a New Normal.” Outreach Magazine July/August.
Sweet, Leonard. 2000. Post-Modern Pilgrims: First Century Passion for the 21st Century World. 

Nashville, TN: B&H Books.

mailto:bokdoen@gmail.com
https://s22.q4cdn.com/959853165/files/doc_financials/quarterly_reports/2018/q4/FINAL-Q418-Shareholder-Letter.pdf
https://s22.q4cdn.com/959853165/files/doc_financials/quarterly_reports/2018/q4/FINAL-Q418-Shareholder-Letter.pdf
https://youtu.be/bOf2S7OzFEg
https://www.roblox.com/groups/7109020/ROBLOX-Community-Church#!/about
https://www.roblox.com/groups/7109020/ROBLOX-Community-Church#!/about

