In many respects, it is very hard to believe that MMM has been a solo endeavor for nearly 6 years. And of those years, there has only been the last 3 months where it has been a primary engagement. Of note, I’ve been asked by a number of people how things have been going. So, in the spirit of transparency, and because it will be good to look back on this later, here’s a bit of a report as to where things are here at MMM.

The Good
In the past three months, MMM has been very much entrenched within the (Charlotte, NC, USA) scene, connecting with several ministries, para-churches, and community organizations. Being able to visit with these organizations has allowed for a chance to get a view of how MMM can be an effective participant into local interactions.

So far, this has led to some better understanding across groups about MMM’s services, Digital Disciples as an answer to some of tech-knowledge needs, and a great chance to connect with several groups for the Lausanne Conference – specifically around IT integration and discipliship after the conference.

We’ve also picked up an additional team member. A person local(-ish) to Charlotte who not only has a love of God, but seeks to better use those gifts in IT towards the Body. I’d rather let him make the rest of his own introductions, and that will surely come soon as he’s getting his technical environment configured.

MMM has also made some interesting inroads in the mobile industry in respect to being a thought-leader in the area of mobiles and ministry. We’ve had conversations with carriers, developers, and various faith and secular organizations towards how to leverage the knowledge gained here with many of the projects and initiatives which are occuring. This is an area where it would be great to have some faster movement towards consulting activities, but since we are motivated by faith and not sight, got to rock with Dad’s timing and prepare accordingly for those engagements.

The Bad
Stepping out to do MMM full-time hasn’t been all roses. There has been the turning down of what should have been a great engagement in the UK due to lack of finances. Other engagements sit in limbo because of similar concerns.

Other difficult areas have been on the side of staying consistent with the business development activities. There’s a lot of time in one’s day devoted to MMM, but that’s one of those areas where its not the best of strengths. As an org, we’ve been blessed to have support from a few marketing and business development folks, but its an area where there’s a need for better discipline, accountability, and (eventually) action.

The Challenging
It would be a very accurate thing to say that MMM has been the most challenging endeavor that I (Antoine) have personally undertaken. It is one thing to have a “day job” and then do MMM on the side, using the lessons learned, financies and relationships gained, and varrying levels of interaction to keep the passion going. These last three months have been a test to see how much of this passion for those things mobile and ministry are really a passion and call from God. I’d be silly to say that everyday is easy. But I am honest enough to say that not everyday has been as productive as hoped.

The other side of that is financial. MMM has always been funded out of pocket and through various resource donations. With it as a full-time endeavor, the challenge the past three months has been to procure income via MMM and other side gigs. I’m thankful ffor being able to do some writing at Brighthand, and will hopefully have a part-time teaching opportunity which would also help. Looking for those means to “keep the lights on” while also being dilligent here is a challenge. It really keeps me prayerful, and on the one day off per week I rest (Saturday), I’m in constant meditation of my success in faithfully living out Matthew 6:25-34.

Personally, I get it. I’m one part teacher, another part missionary, and (if you were to ask some of the folks I’ve been more consistantly been able to disciple) one part pastor. That’s part of the process and race that is doing something like MMM. I’ve been blessed to connect with several people who encourage MMM to be simple and dig deeper at the same time. Encouraged more by another brother who has also been given the cause of doing mobile ministry full-time. This is really new territory, and for every iPad in the pulpit, or ministry conferene, or developer engagement activity, I get it – at the intersection of faith and mobile tech, there’s a story that I’ve been allowed to see, and tell. It is an adventure in every sense of the word.

A Request
According to the site stats, MMM doesn’t get thousands of visitors. It’s a blessing to hit over 50 a day most times. This site was never about the numbers, it was about putting out here a resource that would enable people in visible leadership positions to make definitve decisions conerning mobile technoogy and their faith engagements. Whether you are developer, pastor, or just an advanced user, this resource has been developed to ask the questions and present the answers that sometimes just aren’t found out by another means.

So, if you would, please continue to support MMM in your prayers, emails, comments to posts, and handshakes at conferences. We count on God to keep the lights on here, and do our best to be diligent in all those areas as needed.

Other than that, keep asking the questions that help drive this site and others to find answers, or at least paths to them. Mobile is a big and wild area, and you can bet that MMM isn’t the only site/group looking towards this area. We will present what God gives us, and follow as sound as an understanding as possible towards giving understanding towards the implications of this arena.

Thanks for your continued reading/visiting. Three monts (or 5 3/4 years) in, and this is what we submit to you.

Thursday nights are spent with a group of brothers with food, conversation, and a Bible study. One of the more interesting things coming up lately has been the use of smartphones (and an iPad) during that study. There’s been some cross-pollonating of tech understanding in the midst of that. We’ve talked about Bible versions, Bible applications, and even understanding the right times to pull out print/phone versus conversing from the heart. It has been really decent to see.

The challenge is crafting an understanding of the text without being dependent on the tech. And I think that even with print we have an issue in doing this. So, I wonder, before injecting MMM’s stance on things, do we place too much of a value on the resources, and being able to find the answer via the resources, versus knowing the text in our heart, where the resources supply only the accessory evidence?

Yesterday’s post is just one person’s opinion on how to navigate ebooks and Bibles in today’s technical landscape. What are some ways that you manage eBooks, electronic Bibles, and the print-based resources you might be more used to? Successes, challenges, or things you’d like to see improve?

Some months ago, I made a post about why it wasn’t such a good idea to invest in ebooks. The thinking was – and still is – that investing in ebooks with unresolved questions such as being able to read books across devices, the long-term viability of certain ebooks, and even the various containers that encourage or prohibit ebook reading makes for a tumutilous time if you are wondering if its a good time to go ebook or not.

And the truth is, I am not sure if it is a good time yet. Yet, today, I took the plunge by purchasing my first Kindle book on my iPad. And for the type of reading that this is, I think I can see where ebooks do have a profitable, and actually advanteageous niche.

The book that I purchased is titled Abusing Scripture: the Consequences of Misreading the Bible and is basically an academic, theological, and sociological look at different abuses to handling Scripture that have occured within evangeltical (and to some extent, all) Christian circles. This is a book ripe with footnotes and endnotes and is the kind of read that not only takes time, but is one where I’ve on several times texted friends encouraging them to either purchase the book or to share a quote.

With a print book, this is a simple matter. You see something you like and either type it verbatium or take a picture of a piece of the passage and then share it via MMS or email. There’s nothing illegal about doing this (it falls within fair use for snippets, not entire books). To my friends, they probably have a bit too much information coming their way, and probably would like a better way to triage it.

I had gotten about 90 pages through the paperback when I realized that I didn’t want to pick up or carry the paperback again. It wasn’t that it wasn’t portable enough, nor that it wasn’t intimate enough. I just knew that in the midst of reading that I’d want to do more than highlight or bookmark. I wanted to dig a bit deeper, and here’s where simple paper failed me. For a person that has grown up in increasingly informational times, there are those reads that are just great (immersive) reads, and those reads like this one where it adds considerable value to the reading experience to be able to cross-reference and dig a bit deeper.

So, I pulled out my iPad, downloaded the Kindle app, and purchased Abusing Scripture in less than 5min. It took me a while to find where I left off, as the page numbers for the ebook didn’t equate to the paperback, but once I did, I was just as comfortable reading on the iPad as I had been the paper. A person watching me read (the iPad was on a table in front of me) even asked how I liked the Kindle. Though letting her know that it was just the kindle app for the iPad, it was still readily apparent that I was reading differently and at the same time little changed.

It is a bit of a two-edged sword to go this route. I’ve spent weeks looking at the various ebook formats and ebook stores. I’m even considering selling the iPad for the latest Kindle (seriously). Because of this, I made some choice value judgements: what ebook companies will be around for the forseeable future; what kind of content will I stick to purchasing in print versus digital; what are potential hurdles; and a number of other questions. I really wanted to make sure before I went with any ebook solution that I was choosing right.

But, the choice became easier as I looked at the types of books that I read and those which I am likely to want to recall for reference, versus pass on as library material. For one, books like Abusing Scripture are great books to co-read with another person. It doesn’t make for a good gift-book because of the type of content and the conversations around it. That being said, after reading it, I’d want to reference it for other readings or writings.

Another aspect to ebooks that works in their favor are in those perodicals that I’d like to read. I’m a huge fan still of magazines and much of my time in bookstores is spent in the magazine section looking at covers, trends, and just glazing content (and offline web browsing experience if you will). I’d like to have a similar experience on the iPad (Kindle, iBooks, or any other reader), but be able to choose those more immersive reading apps like Wired or Popular Science if the content dictates. Ebooks are perfect for such a format.

Where ebooks fall down for me is in those more story-like readings. For example, I have the book Boundaries. I really dig that book, but its one of many that the stories presented always adds the kind of layers to conversations where pulling out the book just makes more sense. Those kinds of books are also the kind where you don’t feel so bad letting someone borrow them. The Nook has a great solution here electronically, would be nice to see other books jump at such a method.

Bibles (and their notes) are different. While I do have a Bible app on my iPad, I’m not yet sure of the right Bible format for larger screened mobile devices. On one hand, having a reading experience that’s similar to a paper bible works, but its an ebook, I’d really like to see something more revlutionary take place because the content is so interconnected. Then also there’s the notes, highlighting, bookmarking aspect of reading the Bible. I’m still not yet pleased with solutions there – but some interesting stuff is happening in this space that’s worth waiting for.

All of this being said, yes, there’s now a book on my iPad. And for the kind of book that it is, having it in an electronic manner makes sense. At some point, perhaps in the near future, perhaps in 5 years or so, this won’t be a decision that needs to be made. It may very well be that the point of paper books will be for those very quality, treasured works to where there is a point in retaining them in that manner. For everything else, having access to it, no matter the device you are reading from, makes more sense. There will need to be some considerable innovations on the side of licensing and formatting, but it will come.

Until then, make careful decisions on what goes ebook and what doesn’t. And then read for longevity where possible. If it is something that will become a box of books that will eventually be recycled (not donated), then ebook just might be the better call.

Piggy-backing a bit on yesterday’s post; what are some of the ways that you use mobile and social technologies? For example, what are some things that you do which you feel are unique, and other activities which might seem common between you and those in your group of friends/family?

One of the conversations had earlier this week also noted an aspect of mobility and constant access that speaks into other areas. The the subject in that part of the conversation had to do with the issue of how to verify that the things being read online are true enough to build a stable doctrinal foundation.

Thursday night, this topic came up again as some brothers were talking about 2 Timothy 2, and the impression by Paul on Timothy to not just strive for an understanding in all things (v.7), but to not let that understanding lead you into arguments over vain and profane topics (v.16). As we talked about the characteristics of a conversation what is mature, this sub-topic of exactly “how” to study to become acccurate in doctrine (v.15).

As technologists and students of the Word, it is very easy to get into “I use this application to study because it offers this and that feature.” I’d like to mature that question by asking the very pointed question:

If you have been using digital biblical study aides for an extended amount of time; what have you learned about digital resources and the content offered which enables you to discern those things profitable from those things heretical?

This is a tough question for some, because the challenge isn’t just to say “I know because the Spirit told me so.” The burden of proof is on how you take whatever topic or area of Scripture you are studying and how this relates to the previously held and disputed contentions about that item over the course of Judeao-Christian history. Ideally, the “how you discern” comes from such attention. I’d like to know what that looks like, based on usage of digital resources and the experiences within ministry you’ve had.

And if you’ve not quite figured out the “how” just yet, but looking to do so, comment towards what exactly you are having trouble with, or what specific challenges you might be having relating the availability of information, the expanse of it, and then that undertaking of reading the right things.

Looking forward to your comments on this one.

Some days ago, that day with the conversations, one of the more beautiful points of reflection was pointed this direction:

(paraphrased) When you only know someone over a virtual line (web, phone, etc.), there’s a tendency to create a perception of that person which may or may not closely align itself to reality. This imaginative view gets called into question when those virtual lines are broached in a face-to-face or real-time meeting. Many times, the relationships cannot stand up to the truth of the real person versus the imagination. The challenge in these times, especially in the context of faith and technology, is how to cultivate genuine relational events virtually, while minimizing the impact of our imaginations to create a view of a person or group that’s just not realistic.

To that point, I’ve found the recent conversations around the shutting down of Google Wave to be interesting, and at best revealing.

Google Wave was developed as a different look at modern communications. It asked the question “what would email look like if it were invented today?” OF course, we don’t think too deeply of such a question because of how much email has ingrained itself into our modern lives. And certainly, we see the effects of email in everything from MMS to IM to RSS. It’s held belief (by some) that trying to reinvent email, or the behaviors and contexts around email, is too great to surmount.

We can remark that Google Wave almost seemed destined to fail. It acted like an email inbox on caffinated search, positioned itself as a real-time collaborative wiki engine, had very raw abilities to be customized to users, alert schemes, and workflows, and had a unique ability to be louder than many blogs would like to be. Also, browser requirements, and an unfamiliar back-end made getting up to speed very difficult (mobile or otherwise). In effect, Google Wave reached very far outside of the behaviors and silos that we are used to, asked a different question, and proposed what communication/documents could look like if done differently.

The answer has been pretty clear for but a few unique usages. Google Wave tried to be too many things all at once, and never made itself distinctive enough to some of the core communication issues that still plague most of us inside of email, IM, wikis, and blogging contexts – namely that none of our information connects seamlessly enough given the abilities that our devices, federated services, or social entries do currently espouse. In looking at communication silos differently, Google Wave reached towards asking people to change their perspective on how they use and consume information. And was unsuccessful in getting enough users or specific niches to adjust that viewpoint.

The reality didn’t match the imagination that was sparked when it was announced.

Before Wave could be used by anyone, it went through a long courting process – first some developers, then a series of groups of 1000, and then everyone. During this time bugs were addressed, use cases were explored, and in general, people began asking the question, “what is Wave for?” The last question made it clear, that despite the glamor of discovery and exploration, people still needed a relevant point to stick to in order to see the benefit(s) of Wave.

There’s one side of technical adoption and cultural change which says that “technology is only relevant when it is personal.” And this is certainly true on the side of those creating and marketing these tools. The other side of this is that any innovation worth creating will always cause people to ask themselves personally if they want to see life differently. To create something is by nature an attempt to say that there’s something different here that should be considered. If done right, whether that invention was accepted or not, relevancy and maturity changes the relation of that person to the technology.

So back to this point about perspective and imagination. The communication layers that were primary to communication in relationships have changed significantly in the past 15 years (speaking on a global and socially mainstream level). Mobile devices, websites, social graphs, location-based services, etc., have added to the layers that we’ve traditionally used (phone calls, postcards, hobby groups, etc.). And in some cases, these more digital layers have completely displaced the analog ones that we might have grown up with. Even more to the point, current generations of communities never knew analog communication tools and behaviors, and therefore will only have a digital frame of reference. It’s enough to imagine that communication between groups is profoundly different and can never be reconciled to something more true.

With Wave, Google took on the perspective that its possible that we are missing the benefits of our interactions with one another because of the nature of our communication tools, and the behaviors that we’ve created around them (and even in shutting down Wave there was a parting shot towards technical understanding and advancement). They choose to take an alternate view, and try to convince others that its profitable to them to also see life in a different light. Unfortunately, the different light didn’t look as pleasant as the imagination. And so the service was shut down, with the lessons learned propagated into other Google products.

In these times, imagination will cause us to take steps (of faith) that might not work out. We’d be wrong though to not take on those opportunities towards looking at life differently. For while it may very well be that we’d fail at trying to convince others, the lessons we’d learn would have impact in other areas of our lives (and possibly even the lives of others), creating the grounds for a second kind of wave – the one where genuine relationships walk alongside the technology, and create the winds for a new batch of imaginations and applications.

Today has been a day of conversations; good conversations about technology, relevance, and keeping the threads livable between communities and age groups. It was impressed enough in these conversations that it should be noted that there is a legitimate fear amongst communities and their spiritual leaders that the rise of communication technologies in mobile and web would break not just those relationships, but the conversations between them.

There are only so many ways to allay the fears expressed. And I do so with care. Any change is scary. And specifically change that seems to uproot the very foundations of various institutions.

Picture the arguments for and against books within learning communities after the advent of the printing press. Where rhetoric was the accepted means of displaying what you’ve learned and translating that learning towards other audiences, now you simply needed to be able to write and have a means of distributing. The person or group with the better distribution systems would make the most noise, granting the most eyes, and therefore making their abilities to engage in speaking much easier (the audience was primed for their speaking and character).

The same types of challenges are happening now, but its key to understand that the conversation still has to remain. We are indeed instantly (and constantly) connected with one another in a form that very much mirrors the ability of God to speak to us (we use radio waves, He uses the Spirit). And this is good; we are accessible to one another.

Thing is, we also have to be transparent with one another. A person that I was speaking with today brought up the challenge of perception when it came to the virtual domain. His point was that if we did engage in these virtual relationships too often, or deeply enough, that our perception of the person might be more like our imagination of the person, rather than the reality of whom they are. I referenced the friendship that I have with one brother which has been totally virtual – and the standing question was whether we would think of another differently if the physical barrier (distance) was broached. I was tempted to say yes, but had to agree, despite the honestly of the fellowship that I have with my brother, we haven’t been face to face with one another. That’s a different challenge to communities and relationships today.

Which brings me back to maturity of the conversation. While its easier to accept person on a glance, it is in a conversation that we find the ideals and intents of people. Engaging within a conversation entails that we not just be present, but that we are actively listening to their words and actions. And then we respond in kind, being transparent to the environment that has been set for us.

I’m reminded of when Jesus sent out disciples and told them that there would be places where they would be heard and places where they would not. These places where they’d be able to keep and build a conversation, and therefore a brother; and those places where the people would not have such a fellowship and they were to “remove the dust from their sandals” as a mark against that community.

Now, I don’t think that we are called to be conversational adversaries with one another. Paul expounds on this “go out and converse” point when he says that we should do our best to live at peace with all people. But, to do so, we have to be willing to go to them and create a conversation. And within that conversation we’ll learn a bit about them, a bit more about us, and end up sharing life in such a way that should call into the relationship the Spirit that binds us.

In the conversations today, I hear a fear that the structures that we are used are being challenged, and its uncomfortable. I also heard of the wonderment and amazement of the reach that is literally at our fingertips. The challenge is blending the removal of that fear, with the energy of the opportunity. The opportunity is to create a conversation with another person, such that they see not the institution, but the word of the Spirit that binds us to one another, empowering the hearts for an eternal fellowship with the Father.

A good friend to MMM, Ricky Cadden, had recently posted the question of if we are on the verge of the first computer (PC) free generation? Ignoring for a minute those persons whom their mobile phone is their first (and usually only) PC, this does seem to be a viable question.

One of parts to answering this question hits at the core of MMM’s approach to understanding life at the intersection of faith and mobile technology. It is not enough to use mobile as a part of your maturing spiritual life, but to understand and lead others towards understanding the implications of such a life.

So, with that backdrop, here’s a question to the MMM audience:

What are some of the implications to spiritual growth within faith-based communities when computing and communication have gone completely mobile and portable?