What I Wish My Pastor Knew About: Responsible Engineering and Technology – from Ministry Theorem

As an engineer, it strikes me as odd sometimes that many Christians I know will expend a great deal of energy and passion arguing about theories of science, while at the same time unquestionably accepting nearly every new technological development that comes along. Perhaps you know Christians to whom mentioning the age of the earth or evolution can trigger heated debates. On the other hand, for these same people, mentioning nuclear power or the need for sustainable energy technologies usually results in blank stares or shrugs.

This seems interesting to me because, while scientific explanations of history can be fascinating (as other essays in this collection have no doubt demonstrated), they rarely impact our daily activities in the way that technology does. After all, technology shapes our lives from the moment we crawl out of bed in the morning (perhaps from our visco-elastic “memory foam” mattress, made from a material revised and adapted for this purpose only within the last 10 years) and step into the shower (where we enjoy an almost immediate flow of water obtained from a massive water treatment plant via a complicated piping system and heated by a water heater powered by natural gas). Consider the impact that ubiquitous electronics technology has each day on how we spend our time (think televisions, computers, digital music players, cell phones, ATM’s).

So, as an engineer, I sometimes wish that my pastor would encourage people to better appreciate the substantial benefits technology (and therefore the exciting work of engineers) provides, while at the same time encouraging people to be more careful about the technologies they buy and use.

Read the rest of What I Wish My Pastor Knew About: Responsible Engineering and Technology (Gayle Ermer) from Ministry Theorem.

This has been sitting in a window/tab to read on my iPad for a few days and (at the time of writing), I’ve still not gotten to reading the entire piece. Still, the subject and initial paragraphs have been intriguing enough to just poke my mind enough in the direction (again) of wondering how technologists can do a better job of relating to non-techincal fields the Godly value of what we do. I mean, we shouldn’t need God to speak on our behalf all the time (ref Exodus 25 as God making out an industry for certain types of engeineers, craftsmen, and tailors), but it sure does feel like that’s the only way that these two groups would come together for the glory of God and benefit of the entire Body.

~ via John Dyer; paragraph breaks inserted into the blockquote for readability

Age and Languages Poke Questions Before Mobile Media

A few recent conversations have me thinking a good bit about age and multiple languages, and how mobile addresses but also adds questions.

The first is that of the iPad and learning. I was approached by an older woman who wanted to ask and observe me on my iPad for a bit. This has been happening more recently as I’ve been drawing in public spaces. Nevertheless, she asked me about the iPad, what I use it for, and then wanted to see me in use with it. One of the things that caught me off guard was when she remarked that in going to the Apple Store, that there was too much noise and activity there for her to concentrate on the product(s) she wanted to know more about.

That leads me to this question: while we are used to a stadium-sermon approach for many aspects of teaching, would it be better to offer bite-sized aspects of content from church/ministry websites instead of entire sermons. Giving folks something more personalized, and maybe even having some kind of small group around that content that allows people to ask questions of that “shortened” content?

The second situation has to do with a friend of a friend who is an evangelist specifically to Spanish-speaking and Latin/South American nations. We were being introduced to one another and he wanted to throw against my mind something that he has been thinking about in respect to making certain types of content available to the thousands of pastors that he’s connected with. Amongst the many questions that I had, I again came back to this thought of concentrating on what people wanted – if you will, not filling the channel with the junk that people go for because its there, but with what they need.

Which led me to thinking about the way that we consume and approach media from different backgrounds. With the first situation, I could reference my context and speak to that woman basked on what I could assume (from a few factors). With the second, I had to ask more questions, many of them which he could not answer because he’s more or less designed to go to where he’s sent, not really to know the specific demographics of whom he effects.

With these, I am usually asked around the technical side of things: “what can we build to get this audience to do ‘something’?” And yet, the question isn’t really a technical one, its really a sociological one – and one where I am balancing what I know and what questions it is that can be answered. Believe it or not, its much easier for me to ask these questions than to solve the technical issues – however its always harder to get answers to those questions which speak to what exactly needs to be addressed.

Framing this into mobile…

Many media engagements are at the point now where they are saying with little to no hesitation, “if we are going to do this, then we need to go mobile.” Which is good. You are making an effort to think about and address the personal nature of some kind of content production. However, in “going mobile” are you asking – and therefore answering – the right questions as it relates to what needs to be addressed? Or, are you merely looking at mobile as the technical answer to your channel-filling needs? Because there’s a lot more to the channel than the type of pipe and faucet. There’s someone on the other end that has a reference and a need to be touched with some aspect of the Gospel. Are you answering that?

The Solo or Siloed Conversations of Faith and Tech

Some time ago on Twitter, I opined:

Just got an email asking about Electronic bibles in multi-languages and for offline use; we can’t forget that is a big need still…

The tweet was answered by John Dyer who said:

@mobileminmag That’s what Digital Bible Society is doing: www.dbsbible.org/ (they are about to explode with languages)

It caused these follow-up tweets:

@johndyer – forgot about these folks; thanks for the poke (challenge to keep abreast of all doings; even in the longer running efforts)…I do wonder, how many groups are doing the same things, and can’t or won’t talk to one another (is the Body one of siloed actions only)

The trek for an answer to this (often to myself) asked question took me to Scripture first. Hearing verses before context, I started looking at a few items:

“Every kingdom divided against itself will be ruined, and every city or household divided against itself will not stand… he is divided against himself. How then can his kingdom stand (Matthew 12:22-36)
The parable of the Rich Fool (Luke 12:13-21)
“Master,” said John, “we saw someone driving out demons in your name and we tried to stop him, because he is not one of us.” “Do not stop him,” Jesus said, “for whoever is not against you is for you.” (Luke 9:44-50)

And while there are verses in those that soften my heart, they don’t address the matter that sits at the core. Another person in a twitter conversation put it nicely:

I can’t think of a theologian who is engaging in the technology space in a meaningful way, yet folks like Lanier & Sterling are asking about the human spirit as it interacts with technology.

Lanier is the author of a book that I’m reading now (You Are Not A Gadget). So far in my reading, I’m impressed on the same line of questioning: where is the Body speaking and engaging the conversation around computer technologies in a way more meaningful than numbers, revenues, and tools? After reading this quote from Lainer’s book, I had to put it down (iPad running Kindle) and reflect, where are our conversations:

…we should not be irreverently usurping His power of creating souls, any more than we are in the procreation of children: rather we are, in either case, instruments of His will providing mansions for the souls that He creates.”

Where do we speak and live into lives? There’s the education of kids, as well as adults who still have much to pass down. There’s an economic system built on secrets and misunderstood histories. Yes, there’s censorship, and there’s also exploitation of the very resources that build communities (people, fresh water, safety). If Christ is the bread that binds, it doesn’t matter if we are on a social network “doing church” if the greater parts of our community can’t even use a computer (mobile or otherwise) to get a job because our computer labs are closed to non-members, understaffed, and/or fronted by leaders who resist the approaches others have done in their own neighborhoods.

Dr. Philip Jenkins (The Lost History of Christianity, The Next Christendom,etc.) recently came to Charlotte to speak. I was able to make the last half of his second (and final talk). One of the points that was intimately clear was that we have no choice about the changing faces and patterns of the Christian faith on the global stage. USAmerican mainstream deonminations either need to adapt to the changed/changing demographics of their communities, or be marganalized into small and mostly echoing relics of a faith that was once relevant. There’s value in what every faith community offers, but none of that can be communicated through solo or siloed efforts, there’s a larger narrative to the implications of faith in these merged communities, and (as I discussed with him afterward) a similar discussion being played out with mobile/web.

Efforts like Digital Disciples and the Digital Bible Society are great, and these are the kinds of efforts that more of the Body should be taking part in. But, we also should be noticably involved projects such as OLPC’s One Laptop Per Child, discussions such as the implications of WikiLeaks on media and content, and working out the theological answers to the social implications of mobile across generations.

So Body, what are you doing? And does the rest of the Body know anything about what you are doing? Is an injection of Jesus into tech culture just something one group does at a time, or is it isolated to certain conversations only? I’m of the persuasion that IT won’t exist much longer (am not alone in this thought) – what will you do when digital isn’t an appended layer to faith, but is an active and integral part of how communities will engage the validity and experience of their faith? Will the conversation about what we do in tech be meaningful or just noise?

S	M	T	W	T	F	S
« May
						1
2	3	4	5	6	7	8
9	10	11	12	13	14	15
16	17	18	19	20	21	22
23	24	25	26	27	28	29
30

Mobile Ministry Magazine

Asking questions, presenting approaches, and experiments at the intersection of faith and mobile

Tag Archives: relevance