In a few recent conversations, it was talked about how there was a need to get up new websites, create billboards, and fill other media channels with content so that people can find avenues to Christ. Unfortunately, these were conversations within the Christian household. So when I asked these people tasked with filling these channels if they were addressing mobile, they not only didn’t have an answer, but pointed it to being a technical issue above all else.

Caarlo Longorio (@caaarlo)from the Wireless Industry Partnership (WIP) made an interesting and important observation via Twitter during this year’s SXSW Interactive gathering:

…the walls btw internet/web/mobile/video/whatever are imagined. the tech doesn’t matter, the users do…

You see all of these channels, all of these moments and opportunities, but are you where people are? To a few generations and economic classes, there’s a definite difference towards addressing TV/radio/web/mobile, and in others, that line doesn’t exist at all – its all content. Yes, the method, channels, devices, and everything else except the effect of the communication are seen as the same thing – the end result defines whether the method was successful, not whether the channel was populated with something.

So what happens when a report like the State of the Media 2011 from Pew Internet (@pew_internet) comes forward showing that more people are getting their news from online pipes (“sources”) than newspapers? And if that’s not all, of those using the Internet as their pipe most of them are doing news consumption via mobile devices. If you are in/near some conversations that I’ve been around, you hear things like, “how can we get there,” “what’s are social media strategy,” and “we don’t have the ability to care about those people, we’ll stick with our traditional customers.”

I recall the stories recorded in the Gospel narratives and beyond about Jesus and how his fame spread further than he travelled. And by at least once account, it wasn’t just aware of his fame traveling, but that people wanted him to come along with it. But, that wasn’t his place, he served a specific geographic area and embedded within the lives of others the ability to go to those areas where Jesus’ fame was (and where it would eventually be), and be the proof of redemption that Jesus was sent to be.

That Pew Internet report will be read and instead of asking “how can we teach people in our community how to share the Gospel message,” many ministries and people will go about trying to become or fill yet another channel. They will create mobile sites, language specific websites, close some offices and open others as funding and marketing resources will need to be shifted. And they will be surprised at the results – few people will come to Christ and stay, and others will reject Him because the message was devoid of a person being attached to it. 

Are you where people are? Or, are you just filling a pipe to where you’d hope they’d be?

This week’s topics have been about both the technological aspects of and the social responsibilities towards digital faith. In a very real sense, we are asking if believers (pastor-teachers, lay persons, ministries, developers, and everyone else) are thinking through their use of digital tools as it relates to their faith. And if so, what’s being produced?

What is being produced when you come into a fellowship, and their only means of wanting to connect with you is “on Facebook?”

What is being matured when the pastor-teacher opens the Scriptures, but you are left with dull ears because of constant quotes of modern social ills, Greek/Hebrew terms, or a literal disregard of the text that you just read for another point?

What’s being produced in your visiting of local watering-holes (whether they be coffeeshops, libraries, or your den) to get quiet time to read on your Kindle, Nook, iPad?

Are the digital tools that you have subscribed to contributing to your and your community’s pursuit of maturity? Or, are these just artifacts of our times, pushing us away from the life with Christ and one another we vowed and subscribed to?

LJ and I were recently talking about his potential move to tablets, and how the hold up was for certain Bible applications to appear. In the back of my head, I also had a recent conversation about a person asking me about the NIV Bible for the Rapier open source Bible reader. It hit that while these folks were essentially asking about the same thing (a Bible), they were coming at it from different ends – and both not getting the answers they were looking for.

Both pastor and (I’m assuming) lay person were looking for a Bible. LJ is a pastor-in-training, and so his needs around a Bible application factor not just being able to read the text devotionally, but to also have a library of content that connects to the text, opening up languages and commentaries and the wealth of the tradition of the text to his understanding. The other person’s needs the text as a means of following alongside what’s being discussed in sermons and Bible studies (and mine are somewhere in the middle). Its not that he doesn’t need the other content, but in terms of where he is and how the Scripture is taught, having just the text and access (possibly) to notes makes more sense.

Now LJ was open enough to lend his perspective to this question:

Pastors aren’t special & don’t have special knowledge that the general population shouldn’t be privy to. So, in that regard, it’s my personal belief that all Christians (ALL) should be equipped to adequately study the Scriptures if not at the same level as their pastor, near it or at least know “how”

I share in this belief also. In my early years as a believer, the pastors that discipled me instilled in me this fact and behavior. Therefore, with those that I walk alongside, we always look to study as pastors do, with similar materials. The same methods that the pastor-teacher uses to get to the point, should also be taught alongside the application or theology that the pastor-teacher is giving. This (should) help the mature believer not just mature, but also learn the skills to become apt teachers of the Scriptures themselves.

Yet, it is the case, and not a bad thing, that some people just can’t do with the entire Logos library in/around their mobile device. They need something similar that lowers the barrier to just reading the text (like YouVersion). This isn’t to say that we shouldn’t probably look to mature in our use of Bible apps, but maybe, the key to growth is not so much having a Bible app that you prefer, but one that can grow with you (Olive Tree is a great example here).

There is a different need. And as we talked about earlier with Camp Logos, there’s a need also to be trained to use some of the deeper software packages out there. If you are a pastor-teacher who uses any of this software, are you using it alongside your community? Or, are their uses so different, that you can only keep to the traditional sharing of verses, so that they learn the software of their choice, while you refine yourself spiritually in yours?

Over at Bill’s Bytes, Bill spoke about his experience with Camp Logos, and how its influenced how he now uses Bible software. Here’s a snippet:

…Morris Procter, official trainer (former pastor) of Logos, truly knows how to teach in a way that’s interesting and practical. He knows how to engage his students. I got more out of the first hour than I thought I would’ve gotten from the whole camp! The camp turns the slow clunky Logos software into a indispensible lightening fast Bible Software! I found myself completely blown away by the software and how EASY it is to use once you learn a few things. CAMP LOGOS vastly exceeded my expectations…

Read the rest of Bill’s experience at Camp Logos.

This is a story that we can get around since we are  usually on the side of training people how to use their devices or software. It really does make a difference when someone takes some time with you to go through things, whether that is an hour or a few days.

That difference of training  (could we even refer to it as a form of digital discipleship) has always had the ability to make or break how people use computer software. Bible software is even more influential here. What Logos is doing with Camp Logos fits well into stewarding not only their product, but also helping to alleviate fears about how a product can be used.

We’ve had some similar responses from people once they’ve had some time to learn software or a gadget. There’s something to be said for someone taking a tool, and explaining it to you in a way that’s relevant to how you learn and how you want to use it.

How many of you are doing similar training/discipleship engagements with others? Or, are you in need of a particular kind of training? Let’s hear what might be missing in your or other’s experiences and like Logos, get folks looking at these tools in a better light.

Continued from Part 1
My concentration towards continuing the drawing was broken. I tried starting a new canvas in Adobe Ideas, but that was of no good use. I decided to try and pay attention some more to the high school students and the increasing noise they created. Maybe I was becoming that old man in the corner that I used to laugh at when I was their age.

She looked through the window near where I was sitting. It looked empty enough and so she came in. However the only seat was near me. I was technically taking up four seats, and so she asked if she could have a seat and a table – I didn’t mind. She was there to read and wouldn’t bother me much.

Some time later I went back to that first scene of the cup, mobile, and tablet. There was more work that I could do on that I was sure of, I just needed to get back and concentrate. I was there for that – and ‘C’ gave me the confidence to just go ahead and paint my canvas. She looked aside of her book and asked, “are you an illustrator too? I do graphic design.”

Backstory: before I was in any way considered a techie, I was considered an artist. I drew on everything I could get my hands on, and computers were just becoming my new canvas when I abruptly stopped. I had a very bad experience in a beginning design class in my first semseter in college and that just stripped my love of drawing away for years. Sure, I could design a website, but drawing, playing with form, contour lines, colors, etc., that stuff was pushed way into the back. With the iPad I’d begun experimenting with drawing again. Using the finger was fun, and usually I had the best time drawing when on a plane. This moment in Starbucks was a bit different.

She and I struck up a conversation and then some other persons came in. The woman looked like an older sister (it was her mother who just purchased a Cintiq). She and and her mother run a print graphic company and are doing pretty well. The younger woman explained how she was not long back into the area after a few months out west – she left for there after graduating. She was back home to save and work on her portfolio. She likes art and illustration. So we chatted.

As we talked, it moved from comparing notes (she’s better than me by a country mile), to giving her some tips about how to take her experiences forward. She’d been looking for some steps to take that would help her get into better positions later on. We talked about what web tech to know and how that fits into her print knowledge. We even talked some about programs and what she should expect from self-learning, branding, and portfolios.

It was me doing that mentoring thing again. I’d not figured that such another moment would happen so soon after ‘C’ and the art. But there I was being given a chance to pour into someone else.

We talked some about illustration and how digital can enhance some things that were a bit more of a pain to draw before, but how you had to learn the basics first. She mentioned some of the projects that she’d been working on and how she’s building towards something but not sure of every direction yet. There was a confidence in her voice though, she was going to work each step out as she figured it out. That caused me to open up a bit.

As we talked there was another opening happening. Yes, I was freeing up from the stresses of earlier. But it also hit me why I needed to come out to this place in an off time (to me). I needed to open up a bit more to the world outside of some of my more structured moments, hear and see other people interact with things that I’m probably overly passionate about.

There was this nice and relaxing peace that I felt as she and I closed our conversation. I could see that I was right about certain pieces of this area, and that other aspects that I would have to open up a bit more towards. Not so much even because I’ll be here much longer, but because there are things that I can plant here that would help others see a world that they don’t have to compete for, they don’t have to strive for.

I was here to be open for these moments.

I’ve got this personal pet peeve about carrying cash, that is, I don’t. It creates change, change creates lumpy pockets. So, I prefer to go the debit card route. This isn’t a problem till I come to a show. Not just the small ones either, the big ones where a few artists (indie and signed) have tables but don’t do debit/credit transactions. Sucks, cause I want to purchase then, not in many minutes/hours when browsing iTunes, Amazon, etc.

I know that i am not the only one with this issue. So why aren’t more artists/labels using products like Square to make it easier to do purchases on the fly using your iPhone as the “register?” Less cash counting to worry about, and the rates actually just went down.

Makes sense to me, just wondering, would you (artists) do this? Instead of (or in addition to) having a table, you’d have a street team of folks who’d be able to do this throughout the crowd at certain points. Reduce the friction to purchase and maybe sell a bit more?

*This could also work in other arenas, but had posted this originally at Holy Culture Radio because of the connection to smaller artists and their pains with having a suitable concert solution.

Have had a few conversations recently where me and a few close friends were talking about topics in Scripture. In one case, there was a sermon of a friend that we were taking a look at. In the other case, a bro and I were talking about a passage in a book (print) that he owned and I didn’t. In both cases, sharing our perspectives was exciting and infuritating.

First Sermon Feedback

In the first instance, a friend asked me to take a look and give feedback to her first written sermon. It was short and didn’t need much but to be placed in an email right? Well you see, this was also something being submitted to a professor for a class she was teaching. And at least because I received it inline via email, I understood that the system that she was using to submit the paper wasn’t able to facilitate people outside of that network/school looking at the same digital copy that the professor saw.

So, I got a copy via email, and therefore replied via email. No highlighting, no hyperlinks to other resources, just a plain text reply. Another friend came into the feedback loop and his replies were of course in other emails, some private to her and another shared with us all. But again, the conversation was all out of wack with anyone involved needing to mentally manage different threads of the conversation.

Chafer and Systematic Theology

Another brother and I were on Google Talk talking and he mentioned about a portion of Chafer’s Systematic Theology that he was investigating. The passage was familiar to me from my youth and I asked if there was a snippet available for me to take a look at that would be able to help me see things as he read them – thereby keeping my experiences from being primary in how I’m viewing his points. I asked for him to send me the snippet – surly the Bible software that he was using was able to do that much.

For one, it wasn’t. He sent me the snippet in a Google Doc. This takes the text out of the publisher’s environment, and now we are discussing the text in a manner that neither the publisher, developer of the Bible software company, or even my bro, could easily refer to that later when we resume the discussion. He’ll have to have two apps open (browser and the Bible app) and I’ll be in the browser looking only at the snippet of text.

Exciting and Infuriating

This is a problem. There’s way too much of a strain on people to have to share anything. And the pain we ignore because “this is the only way we know how to do it.”

Don’t get me wrong, it was great to be chatting with two people in two different time zones, and across multiple devices, on the depth of life to be uncovered in Scripture. If anything, this reaffirms that digital and connected spaces are great areas with which to do these kinds of conversations and studies.

But man, to have to slice-and-dice content, to have closed systems or processes that don’t allow authors to be able to re-resource their works to other audiences, that’s painful. Books like Chafer’s Systematic Theology should be operating in an open and easily source-findable environment so that people can access a snippet but not deprive publishers, developers, and authors of their compensation. I think of Amazon’s Kindle or Google Books, where you can send someone directly to a page, or a snippet of text, but they will not get the whole book without paying for it. There is no excuse that some of the larger tomes of knowledge aren’t done this way.

It was also great to be on IM and Google Docs with a brother on this. This makes sense for too many reasons, and why my friend’s school might not have allowed for something like this. We were in the same document, and I could highlight and link to reasons for my comment. They could see the changes, make adjustments, and then just leave it there for other eyes to see, or even for the professor to see how they came to their conculsions after not just sourcing textual references, but real persons that can be “googled.” What about that kind of discussion and learning isn’t where we should be?

But that’s not the case. We deal with attachments, document formats, publisher’s rights on viewing versus sharing, and reader applications which might not be compatible with the book that I’m using. Aren’t we done with striving in a direction that doesn’t take advantage of the tools that are before us? Or, are we not motivated enough to change the behaviors that have somehow ensnared us?

Paper might beat rock, but rocks can be fashioned into scissors.

Often, arguments against the move to digital texts starts with the emotional attachments that we have to paper. Indeed, these attachments aren’t just emotional, they are literally interwoven into our everyday lives. From money exchanges, to recipts, to taxes, to just “jotting things down,” paper has done a marvelous job of covering up our abilities to not be able to move around information.

And yet, in this discourse, we don’t really pay attention to the fact that paper wasn’t all that great of a cover. Sure, it allows us to take oral learnings and place them into a time/listener-independent form with language and medium. But, it never really allows for the freedom of expression outside of its canvas. In a sense, you are limited by paper to expressing something that only can be interpreted by another person in one specific fashion (aka written language).

Given time and ingenuity, we’ve developed forms of media that are a step (or many) beyond paper. Each of these has their own edge, their own simplicity to the original message, and even their own capacity to become portable. There was radio, which took the canvas from wood pulp to radio waves. TV which enhanced the radio’s canvas with pictures. And so on.

And you know, we’ve not done too bad having our box full of these different tools – yet, there’s always this fear that a media format will come along that will make paper not so valuable. And heaven forbid that it would be something made out a rock.

What are mobile phones? Seriously, what makes up the mobile device? We all understand that there are radio transmitters, batteries, screens, and some means of input. Some might have speakers, cameras, and additional wireless transmitters/receivers which can push and prod more data around than we know what to do with. These are the final functions, the canvas that is a mobile device is a combination of all of the canvases of previous media (created from earth-found materials, stitched with electrons) with that paper-like element of containing an individual’s language – their personal brand if you will.

Mobiles have this unique capacity to take existing data and push it into other canvases (people, meters, web, etc.). In a respect, mobiles are like scissors. Really sharp, personal, contextual, and paradigm-shifting scissors.

If a mobile is being used like a pair of scissors, then there’s this capacity to understand that there’s come content that can be cut through and put into more size-relevant samples (mobile applications and mobile websites do this). There’s an ability to poke someone’s eye out (texting to destroy relationships, vote, or gain medical care). There are even different kinds of scissors that work better in some contexts than others (smartphones and feature phones).

In a sense, we’ve gotten to the point of creating something that can be better than paper. We’ve gone from the immobile rock, to the personal and mobile paper, to a more delicately fashioned rock, that also happens to be mobile and personal – the mobile. And if the game holds true, scissors does beat paper. Does then the argument against going mobile instead of paper (for most contexts) also fall to the same rules?

Originally posted at Blog.AntoineRJWright

How have you gone about growing in faith and application using the digital tools and services offered to you? Clearly, the amount of bibles, reading plans, prayer assistants, music, and video items available are beneficial to growth. But, they also present a challenge to some in respect to being a layer in-between what should be a direct relationship we have with God.

Think Christian took a look at the (controversial) Confessions app which was recently certified for use for Roman Catholic adherents (with conditions). Here’s a snippet of that piece, and probably the most important point posed by it:

…It’s hard to object to the idea behind the Confession app. It combines elements of religious education and personal journaling, neither of which is especially controversial. So why did an innocuous iPhone app generate such a nervous reaction?

I don’t believe anybody really thinks that an app on your mobile device can take the place of God. I think it makes us nervous because it reminds us how much of what we consider the “Christian life” could, in theory, be carried out through technology, with almost no face-to-face fellowship at all.

There’s a very delicate line between using technology in the service of your Christian life and letting it become a buffer between you and the people you’re engaging…

Read the rest at Think Christian.

A brother that i fellowship with recently opened up to the fact that he has isolated himself from the world around him to remain holy, but it has had the unintended effect of shutting himself off from interacting more with those around him. I’d argue that mobile and web technology have allowed for this a bit more than other technologies have because of the perceived connectivity to “something” that we do expend some energy towards.

The book Alone Together also considers this happening, and asks if we’ve really thought through the implications of certain concepts and activities online and offline. Can the Confessions app point to an acceptance of this kind of reality, but also point to ropes out of it? Or, is it yet another sign that the idol of technology is more powerful than the maturity of love and fellowship that we prescribe to it?

I went there looking for another moment of quiet. It was my second trip to Starbucks, and I needed this one. I needed to get away from the project, from the pressures of the week – just a bit earlier than normal. It was to be a few moments even away from the social streams and sports. I needed to open up a bit.

I sat with my iPad, the environment was louder than at other times I’d visited this Starbucks. There were more people than usual, and an much higher amount of high school kids. You could see that many of them were just beginning to enjoy moments away from their pressures, structures. And you could also see the challenges, the pressures of a different kind to be different and fit in at the same time. You could see the trends, they were open to parts of the world they’d not seen yet.

Then he came in. Accompanyed by his mother and grandmother. ‘C’ made a b-line from whatever his mother was directing him to towards my table. He looked at what I was doing and asked “what is that?”

You see, some minutes before then (don’t ask me how many), I got the point that God needed my attention elsewhere. So I opened Adobe Ideas on my iPad and looked for subjects. Finding none, I started drawing what was on the table in front of me – my empty Starbucks cup, Nokia N97, and iPad.

‘C’ caught me off guard a bit – I don’t think that I heard him the first time clearly. But he was interested, and so I sat back and told him that I was drawing what was on my table. He had a Nintendo DS in his hand and was clearly very into the game, but this distracted him just enough. So I turned the iPad towards him and asked if he wanted to draw. He looked at me perplexed and so I opened a new canvas and showed him the colors, and how to select a new color. He was engrossed in a new environment.

His grandmother came over first. She cast me a strange eye – I am a bit of a stranger in Danivlle, VA. She watched her grandson like a hawk over her young. And I understood, and so kept myself open and away from the table some. I proceeded to explain to her what he was experiencing and how it just makes sense for him to be on a computer that responds to his touch, rather than a keyboard and mouse. She understood, but was perplexed. Computers (keyboard and mouse toting ones) were still a bit ahead of where she could grasp she admitted.

‘C’s mother came over and apologized a few times thinking that he was distractng me. He wasn’t. I was actually enjoying watching him learn and try his hand (finger) at drawing on my iPad what he had on his DS’s screen. She mentioned that she would like for the iPad to get to the place where she could purchase one for him. He’d seen one, but this was his first time playing with it. I used the word “magic” as that was closest to what he experiences on his DS with the game he was playing. He looked up with those bright eyes that a kid could only have when you say something that hits and they understand that you understand them.

I was there to be open for that moment.

We talked for a few more minutes before they had to leave. The mother was appreciative of giving ‘C’ a chance to play with the iPad. She wanted one too, but was working on making sure she could get to that place of giving her son one first. She knows that it is more his future (and her’s – medical field) and she wants him to be open for it. At least in this moment, he was opened to what life could be like.

Stay tuned for Part 2 of Openness.