Biola Digital Ministry Conference – Jun 5-7, 2012

What used to be called GodBlogCon, then Christian Web Conference is now “Digital Ministry Conference” signaling it’s move from specifically focusing on blogging to the internet and now to all forms of digital ministry. They have three tracks: technology, theology, and strategy, and several great speakers in each track. They are even hosting a Hack-A-Thon for coders to band together and create something great. I’ll be speaking late Wednesday, and I’d love to connect with anyone who might be coming.

SPU’s The Digital Society – June 22-23, 2012

Dave Stearns, a professor at Seattle Pacific University, has been instrumental in putting together a fantastic set of speakers and breakout sessions through SPU’s Center for Integrity in Business. This conference seeks to build a bridge between the academics thinking about technology with those in business and engineering creating and using technology. I’m speaking Friday evening, and I’ll be around all day Saturday if you can make it.

Earlier this spring, Dr. Mark Hoffman (www.crossmarks.com) of Lutheran Seminary in Gettysburg had me Skype into a class of his in Gettysburg, and I was impressed by the caliber his students and warmed by their kindness toward me.

LTSG then made the exciting announcement that it was adding a new Religion and Media Concentration to its Master or Arts in Religion degree. As part of its launch, two of the programs professors including Dr. Hoffman, are going on a blog tour where they answer questions submitted to them by bloggers. I asked two questions of Dr. Mark Hoffman , and he sent the helpful responses below.

Dr. Hoffman’s Responses

Greetings, John. Your book, From the Garden to the City, has been an important voice as we think about technology and the church, so we were very pleased that you were willing to participate in this Religion and Media blog tour. Thanks! The first question you posed:

I come from the “Bible church” tradition which sees itself as placing a high value on the reading, preaching, and study of the Scriptures. And yet, we’ve been finding that biblical literacy and reflective Bible reading is as much on the decline in our congregations as it is culturally. In light of these changes, how do you see the shift from print to electronic reading influencing the ways Christians interact with the Scriptures both in their personal lives and corporately?

You, John, have already given us a lot to think about in your book, but I can contribute a few of my own thoughts. I addressed a related matter on Sansblogue where the issue was trying to entice more Christians to read the Bible, but your question is focused on the effect the change in medium will have on the m/Message. I can reflect on my own experience. I have about five feet worth of Bibles on my bookshelf. Only three of them show much use. There’s a NOAB RSV Bible that got me through college and seminary a Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament for seminary and grad school, and a NRSV pew Bible I’ve used for preaching. In the mid-1980s, I started using digital editions of the Bible, and around 2000 I got a PalmPilot and OliveTree’s BibleReader program. Since acquiring these resources and their up-to-date heirs, I have very infrequently opened any of those Bible on my bookshelf. Today, I have 14 Bible programs on my computer, and I’m up to an Android smartphone with 5 Bible programs on it, and on top of that are all the web resources.

So, I’ll personalize your question: How has the shift from print to electronic reading influenced my interaction with Scripture? I find that I do still have a sense of “Bible.” When I was serving as a pastor and doing hospital visits, somehow it just didn’t feel right to share some readings from Scripture by pulling out my PalmPilot. (I ended up kind of hiding it in a portfolio.) Or on those occasions when I’m doing expository preaching, I just don’t think I could be comfortable standing in front of a congregation with my Droid X to cite Scripture. (That’s where I use the NRSV pew Bible. In doing so, I’m drawing on ancient Jewish tradition where the person reading Scripture made a point of only looking at the scroll as he read the Hebrew. The translator standing next to him who was rendering in the Aramaic the people understood, was not allowed to be looking at any text. It provided a visible reinforcement for distinguishing the divine Word and the human translation.) I also do miss using my old NOAB RSV, a Bible I with which I was so familiar that I could even picture on which part of the page a certain passage appeared.

On the other hand, I rarely carried my Bible around with me back in the day, and now I have one (many!) with me almost all the time and end up reading it more often. I miss those annotations in my old Bible, but today when I take notes in my digital Bible, it gets synched through the cloud, and I have them available on all the platforms I use. That’s far more helpful for me now and into the future. (A quick aside: an elderly woman in my congregation once told me that she had received a very nice Bible from her family for Christmas. Her grandson told her that he hoped she would make lots of notes in it. “That way,” he said, “we’ll have something to say at your funeral.”) The main thing for me now is that I don’t just a Bible with me, but I have access to original language texts and so many supporting resources. I have another five feet of shelf space devoted to lexicons, concordances, and grammars, and I am happy to say I haven’t had to use them in a long time.

Overall, I would have to say that the transition to a digital Bible has been a blessing for me. I still find that when I think of “Bible,” I think of a book and not a program or a smartphone, but the actual experience of reading the Bible has been enhanced. Additionally, I think we have only begun to think about digital media can enhance the ways we actually interact with the Bible and engage with it on personal, corporate, and global levels.

A second question you asked:

The Association of Theological Schools, the body that accredits both of the seminaries at which you and I are employed, will soon begin approving fully online seminary degrees, something that was previously prohibited. As higher education in general is changing, what role do you see online education playing in the theological and spiritual formation of seminarians of the future?

That’s a big question that we are seriously trying to think about at my seminary. I suspect that if it weren’t for the financial challenges all seminaries are facing, we would be moving more slowly into the realm of online education. Still, I am excited about the possibilities that online education offers and am cautiously optimistic that it really can be an improvement over the way we’ve always done things. I will say up front, that I love teaching and the interactions I have in the classroom. I’ve missed that when teaching online, but I remind myself that the focus should not be on my teaching but on student learning. To that end, already in my residential courses, I have been including more and more online aspects: links to resources, making class materials downloadable, doing online collaborative work, and trying to connect with the world outside the seminary. (For example, we were able to have you Skype in to our class to talk about your book with us! I’ve also been able to connect with the Lutheran seminary in Hong Kong where our Greek classes worked together.) We are also making more connections with other teaching partners, something that would not be possible without online possibilities. Our Religion and Media concentration, for example, came into being as a joint project between our seminary here in Gettysburg (PA), Luther Seminary in St. Paul (MN), and the Odyssey Networks based in New York. With this sort of distance cooperation, students will be able to enjoy a wider variety of classes. We are also setting up more possibilities for project based learning where the teacher serves as the guide and mentor, but the student is responsible for shaping the educational experience. We anticipate that much of this work will be done collaboratively and hence online and hopefully even globally.

So far I’ve talked about theological education, but you also ask about spiritual formation. I think that is going to be more difficult. Personal practices probably aren’t as much affected, but there is the communal aspect of spiritual formation that does need the real presence of other people. We are planning to use a ‘hybrid’ model where the online work is complemented by face to face, intensive gatherings. That can help both the communication necessary for online learning as well promote the bonds of community. But rather than thinking that spiritual formation mainly occurs at seminary, online instruction provides the opportunity to encourage spiritual development right where a person is at, in the real communities where they are now living. Perhaps also, this larger virtual community in which we all participate can help dispel some of the critiques of seminaries as ‘ivory towers’ disconnected from everyday life. No doubt, then, there are challenges, but there are also some great potentials.

Thanks Dr. Hoffman

Thanks to Dr. Hoffman for taking time to answer my questions. If you have additional questions for him, please leave a comment here, since he’ll be trolling for the next few days. And if you’re interested in a religious studies degree focusing on media and technology, be sure to check out LTSG concentration.

Thomas the Tank Engine day with my kids

Jon Acuff has a nice post about Skrillex (an Internet sensation for his electronic music) who recently advised a group of his fans that they shouldn’t try to experience his concert through their smartphones. In the words of Mr. Skrillex:

Don’t try to experience the party through your cell phone just so you can document it to show people later that you were there. Just be there.

Acuff follows with some helpful thoughts about parenting, and many of the commenters lamented that they feel pressure to document everything in order to be good parents. But among the comments, I especially appreciated this great suggestion from KC,

I have a 3 picture rule… If our daughter does something iPhone camera worthy, we snap 3 quick pics then put the phone back in the pocket.  Later, it can get Instagramed, posted, tweeted, whatever.   As first time parents, I love capturing those precious moments, but being IN that moment is far more important!

I love that KC is being thoughtful about the benefits and downsides of the smartphone. She recognizes problems, but instead of abandoning the technology altogether she puts two thoughtful boundaries around it that represent and reinforce her values:

1. First, she limits herself to three pictures instead of endlessly angling for that perfect shot which sometimes ruins the beauty of the event itself.
2. Second, it seems that she waits until later to post, tweet, instagram, etc. the photo  so she isn’t looking at the phone while her kids standby.

By setting these boundaries around the technology, she is able to balance the two things she values: being “IN” the moment and capturing memories. And if you have tips of your own, please share them in the comments!

Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle says you can’t measure something without altering it.

Last night, I had dinner with dear friends and in those sweet moments when the kids did something cute, we stopped, got out our phones, launched the camera apps, waited a second, and tried to snap the perfect pic. Then there was emailing, Instagraming, and the rest.

Wouldn’t it be nice if such things happened in the background without altering the event itself? I tell my fridge, “Make this cold” and it just works. Can’t I just tell something, “Capture this moment” without it getting in the way?

Google’s Solution: Project Glass

This morning, Google released a product concept video demo of “Project Glass” which are a pair of glasses that can tell its wearer about the weather, schedule meetings, snap photos, and handle voice and video chat.

It’s all very cool stuff and, other than the unsightliness of wearing such glasses, I’d love to give them a try. As long as it had an API that would allow me to add a Greek Bible concordance, I’d be on board in a second.

Technology in the background or the forefront?

I’m sure there are all kinds of horrible and distracting things that one could do with such glasses, but for a moment I’m more interested in whether Google’s project is a possible answer to making everyday modern technology fade into the background. Will it allow the functions of today’s smartphones to finally reach the last step of Chris Ridgeway‘s the Toy → Tool → Environment progression?

Would such a device allow you to do modern tasks like getting driving directions, checking the weather, videoing the kids, and making meeting requests in a way that’s as simple and thoughtless as putting milk in the fridge, or are these tasks fundamentally more complex than “milk in the fridge” such that they will always intrude somewhat into whatever’s happening?

Imagine that the glasses were not so hideous and could be installed as a contact lens. Would that make these tasks fade into the background of life or would their immediate constant presence make them play an even more prominent role? Would the glasses make technology fade into the background or would the technology make reality fade into the background?

Adapting

Of course, time will tell, and things never quite result in the either/or scenarios I’ve presented above. These things are tough to predict, because it always takes a bit of time before individuals and society as as whole have adjusted to the new ways of living technology introduces.

If I were to buy one, I’d probably start by turning everything on (RSS, email, etc.). After a few days of overload and beginning to freak out a little, I’d probably starting turning most of the features off. Then over time, my mind would begin to adjust adapting itself to the glasses and the information they present, allowing me to slowly re-add features.

And then, only after using it for a some time would I be able to articulate exactly how I and the tool have adapted to one another. I would have to be honest and say that I literally look at things differently than before, but then I would do my best to create disciplined strategies for handling the overload.

In the end, I’d probably conclude that as cool as these gadgets are, some things, in truth many things, are best experienced “glasses off.”

Update: Of course, this might happen too:

The past few years have seen the release of many books on technology and Christianity (including my own), but the trouble is most of the people who need to hear their message aren’t really into, you know, reading books. That’s why videos like David Murray’s God’s Technology and Phillip Telfer’s Captivated (from MediaTalk101) are so important. They speak the language (i.e. use the medium) of the person who most needs to hear the message itself.

About the Film

Though his organization MediaTalk101, Telfer has been giving talks at churches about media consumption for several years, and now he’s made the move to create a feature length (1 hour, 45 minute) documentary with interviews from both secular thinkers on technology and culture (Mark Bauerline, Maggie Jackson) as well as various religious figures (David Murray, Ray Comfort, Kirby Anderson).

The documentary also features interviews with several teenagers (and a few adults) who, after years of struggling with overusing media, eventually gave up their chosen form (for a teen girl it was music obsession, for a grandmother it was playing FarmVille endlessly). Some gave it up voluntarily, some as a family exercise, and some through attendance at a camp for trouble youths called Shepherd’s Hill Academy where no iPods, cell phones, or computers are allowed and chores like horse grooming are encouraged.

The first half of the documentary focuses on the subtle effects of media saturation on things like multitasking, concentration, deep thinking, mental feedback loops. This section includes interviews with neuroscientists and cultural critics who discuss studies linking overuse of media to sleep problems, obesity, concentration, and ADHD.

About half way through, the film shifts focus from media to its content. Here Christian thinkers are featured more often, and they discuss our changing attitudes about sex and violence in movies and video games, strongly urging us to consider the link between what we ingest and what kind of people we become as a result. Personally, I found the first half of the video more compelling than the later half probably because it’s harder to argue with a nueroscientist on whether or not the brain can multitask than a pastor talking about R-rated movies.

Using Captivated

As I mentioned, I’m glad to see resources like Captivated coming out because it provides something that churches, parents, and pastors can use to being talking about media and technology with the people around them. Even if there were things I wish had been included or elements I personally would have left out, I think its usefulness as one of the very few video resources on the subject outweigh any criticisms I might offer.

That said, there are three things I’d like to point to if you’re considering using the video. First, at 1 hour and 45 minutes (plus bonus material) the film is fairly long, so you’ll probably only be able to show a few selected segments in a single sitting. But this is also a good thing because it means you have a lot of material to work with when you begin selecting segments.

The second thing worth mentioning is that unlike God’s Technology which spends some time addressing about the good side of technology as a gift from God, Captivated (in the usual style of a documentary) focuses almost exclusively on the negative impact of media. The film opens with questions about media that are framed strong either/or dichotomies and some of the speakers (like Mark Bauerline) are quite negative about social technology. On the other hand, there is a fun sequence at the beginning showing how the film itself could be spread via social media, and there are a few places where a person says something like, “We’re not just saying ‘no media,’ just use it in responsible and God-glorifying ways.” But I wouldn’t be surprised if the average viewer came away feeling like the overall tenor of the film was “no media.” So again, if you’re going to use the video you’ll need to supplement it with a more holistic view of technology and nuanced understanding of art and culture so that your group doesn’t come away thinking about these important matters in black and white, on and off terms.

A final point is that while the film does a good job of pointing out research on the unintended and problematic consequences of media, it doesn’t attempt to provide a lot of practical guidance on how the average person can balance the reality of technology as we go forward. The testimonies are generally of people who completely cut out FarmVille or iPods or Facebook, turning to some kind of outdoor activity, and feel much better as result. But it seems that many people are looking for practical wisdom on how they can discipline their media usage without completely shutting it off. This means you’ll need to talk to your group about ideas like the Tech Basket or Phone Stack to help them come away with a more concrete strategy they can implement in their own lives.

Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio painting of Narcissus with a minor edit

Researchers at Western Illinois University recently published study in the the journal Personality and Individual Differences that shows a direct link between people who have “socially disruptive narcissism” and those who “had more friends on Facebook, tagged themselves more often, and updated their newsfeeds more regularly.”

Social networking has long been linked with narcism, but smart researchers are careful to point out that the research doesn’t prove that Facebook causes narcissism. However, they do say that Facebook provides a powerful platform for feeding the beast of toxic self-focused behavior.

Facebook’s Response

Though not directly linked to the research mentioned above, Facebook has rolled out a feature that lets you distinguish people with whom you regularly interact (i.e. “Friends” in the pre-Facebook meaning) and those you only know casually which Facebook calls “Acquaintances.” (Check out your suggested Aquaintances)

For the past several years, Facebook has tried introducing various features to help you filter large lists of friends. For some time now, Facebook has allows people to create custom lists of “Close Friends” and only receive update from those people and they also allow you to be friends with someone but manually unsubscribe from their updates. But it seems that most people don’t want to spend their time clicking buttons and curating lists (which is one of the reasons Google+ Circles haven’t really caught on).

So Facebook’s new solution is not to create an inclusive list, but to suggest people that you can filter out. By moving someone to the “Acquaintances” list, you’ll see less of them and hopefully be more connected to people to whom you have a deeper connection. It might not prevent narcissist tendencies, but it may help focus your online interaction.

A Lesson in Philosophy of Technology

When people talk about technology, they often fall into two camps. The first, which I call “instrumentalists,” believe that technology is purely neutral and has no effect on people. As long as you use it for good, then you’re good. At the opposite end of the spectrum are “determinists” who say that technology is such a powerful force that it completely shapes society and culture in its image which is mostly negative.

The study above disproves the first theory, and Facebook’s response disproves the second. The researches show that technology like Facebook is not in fact neutral, but Facebook’s response shows that technology often bends to the will of the people, adapting to their needs over time. Many have wondered if Facebook was redefining our understanding of the term “Friend,” but it appears that Facebook is now adapting to the ways peoples think about “friends” and “acquaintances” in real life.  In academic terms this middle ground is sometimes called “Social Shaping of Technology.” (see Dave Stearns’s excellent discussion of these various positions).

The Takeaway?

Rather than fall to either of the above extremes, I think that the careful, thinking Christian should will end up somewhere in the middle on Facebook. On the one hand we should come away with a healthy fear of social networking’s power to entice us toward the sin of self-focused narcissism. If Facebook recognizes the problem of too many friends, shouldn’t we also acknowledge it?

But at the same time, it doesn’t do any good to run in fear every time something new comes along believing it will unswervingly corrupt all who use it. We will undoubtedly adapt to it, and it will adapt to us. In the mean time, let’s keep having good-natured discussions about the pros, cons, and unseen effects technology can have, so that we can find safe, helpful ways to use it well.

But please, please, don’t make me just an “Acquaintance.”

Update from Dave Stearns

Dr. Stearns wrote with some additional categories that I think are really helpful:

I think Sherry Turkle’s categories of Affordances and Vulnerabilities are really helpful when thinking about Facebook’s tendency to reinforce narcissism. Facebook is to the narcissist as a Las Vegas casino is to the compulsive gambler. The casino is probably more purposely designed to deceive and ensnare than Facebook is, but some people can walk through those casinos without the least desire to gamble; others play a bit, have fun, and leave; and others quickly get drawn into addictive behavior. It’s when those affordances intersect with a person’s vulnerabilities that trouble really ensues.

My Hebrew is a little rusty.

Devices in the Pews

As more people make the move from regular cell phones to smart phones and tablets, many want to use the “smart” features during worship services to access the Scriptures, take notes, and even interact with the pastor. This has led to an ongoing, though fairly quiet debate about the proper place of such devices in church.

Some churches have responded by creating fun videos asking people to turn off their phones during the service while others have tried encouraging the use of participatory texting during certian special services. Regarding twitter in church, back in 2009 Josh Harris discouraged it, and the same discussion is still going on today.

Christian tech companies are also driving the discussion by creating new ways to for churches to employ mobile devices during the services. YouVersion, for example, has been pioneering various group-based applications for several years (see YouVersion Live). Logos, known for its Bible software, recently release Proclaim a cloud-based presentation application that lets users with the Logos app on their mobile devices sync up to the Bible passage on screen.

Non-Biblical Smartphone Usage on the Rise?

When I first started seeing phones used at my church, I guessed that even though there were all these great Bible apps, most people would probably be surfing the web or texting. To my surprise, however, these early adopters were almost always reading the Bible.

That was a few years ago. Over time, as such devices have become more common and perhaps even accepted, I’ve started noticing more of the “non-Biblical” (ha!) uses of smart phones that I had initially expected.

As a tech lover, part of me wants to write this off as just the same sort of thing that I did as a kid in the balcony of my church. Sure, phones have games and web browsers, but give my twelve-year-old self a prayer card and a pencil, and I could spend the entire service making a perfect scale model of an F-15 fighter jet.

Personally, I like using my phone as a Bible because it means I have one less thing to bring to church, and I can check multiple versions. And yet, as I’ve watched my fellow churchmates over the past few years, I’ve noticed three things that I think make mobile devices stand out as a new and different kind of distraction.

Three Ways Phones Are Different

1. Distractions from Without

Yes, I made this amazing image myself

As a kid, my distractions came from an unfocused mind and willing friends sitting next to me. But in the age of mobile phones, our distractions come not from the daydreams of our own minds, but from outside sources through the conduits created by AT&T, Verizon, and Sprint.

Most of us have gotten pretty good at setting our phones to vibrate so that a ring doesn’t distract others. And yet, by doing so, we are still saying, “As I worship the God of the universe, I want to allow things outside this building to get my attention.” Even if we’ve made a commitment not to play games or setup that appointment during the service, once we feel a vibration in our pockets, it requires considerable discipline not to at least glance down and see who or what caused it.

Perhaps then we need to repurpose the Airplane mode in church so that Bible apps are still available (at least the ones that work offline), but text message and Twitter alerts (which I get constantly, since I’m so huge there) can’t come through.

2. Alien Light Sources

Desaturated a bit for effect

I’ve often heard people say they find it distracting when someone else uses their phone or tablet during a church services. I used to think this was just that people were annoyed with new things or that they were jealous or judgmental of people who had money to spend on iPads.

But after watching closely, I think the main reason why devices seem so intrusive to many is that light from the screen is unlike everything else around it. As your eye scans about during a church service (or the photo above), you see all kinds of familiar textures and colors: skin, hair, clothing, wood, plastic, metal, and so on. But among those relatively flat and natural objects, a screen stands out like a lightsaber.

The saturation and brightness levels between screens and everything else are so different, your eye can’t help but notice the screen even among the vestments and trappings of the Roman leaders. Screens also casts light upward from themselves onto the hands and face of their users, making them stand out even more than if they had a Jimmy Carter Study Bible. Even when the screen is in “night-mode” (black background with white text), the backlight from the screen still casts light upwards onto its user.

3. Non-Charismatic Hand Motions

Use the Force, Luke.

The human mind is amazingly adept at filtering inputs and figuring out which ones are just background noise and which are so different that we should pay attention to them. Because o this, our minds don’t alert us when someone crosses their legs, takes a sip of coffee, or turns the page of a Bible.

But when someone starts tapping, swiping, and pinching at a device, our just can’t ignore it because they are not yet trained to do so. The entire computer industry knows that touch devices are radically different than anything that has come before and even the most cutting edge companies are still trying to figure out the best way for humans to use them. So it shouldn’t surprise us that these new gestures so readily capture our attention, standing out from all other human activities.

What To Do!?

So can these issues be overcome? Are phone doomed to destroy worship or can we gradually figure out how to use safely incorporate them?

The first issue (outside notifications) can be solved fairly easily. It just requires individual discipline and a community willing to talk through what’s acceptable within its culture. The easy recommendation is that in addition to setting the phone to vibrate, you should also turn off all notifications. It’s just 75 minutes, you can do it!

The second issue (screen lights), however, will likely only be solved by different technology. The early e-ink style Kindle’s were much less distracting since the lack of a backlight made them texturally similar to books, clothing, and other “normal” things. Perhaps one day, there will be fast, color e-ink like displays that don’t require a backlight, but for now their glow will continue to catch our eyes.

The third issue (gestures), will probably work itself out over time. Today, when a cell phone rings church, we certainly notice but its become so common that we are able to filter out it much more quickly than we did ten years ago. Eventually these gestures will probably become so common that we won’t consider them so distracting.

Until then, I have two simple recommendations. First, if you’re a tech lover like me, let’s be as vigilant as possible in self-evaluating our own tech usage especially around others. It’s all too easy for us to dismiss those who question our technology as backward, but we must acknowledge that we live and worship alongside others. Second, if you like me also find yourself suspicious of those who pull out their phones in church, let’s remember to be as gracious as possible. Let’s not immediately assume they are playing Angry Birds, but instead hope for the best and then if we have a relationship with the person, then talk openly about it, asking for mutual encouragement and accountability. Only when we approach one another with grace and truth will we be able to handle the changes that are coming.

FaceTime Facelift – If you’re totally vain like me, you might have noticed that the angle at which we hold our smartphones during video chat is not particularly flattering. A plastic surgeon has proposed a special procedure to taylor your face for just this point of view. Wow, talk about technology shaping humanity.

Digital ministry, made for the mainline – On Duke’s Faith and Leadership blog, Elizabeth Drescher argues that evangelicals, with their emphasis on individual conversion were perfectly matched to broadcast media, but not so much to the democratic, community focus of social media. Mainline Christianity, however, Dresher believes is better suited to adapting ecclesiology to social media and blurring the lines between “the place where we do religion” and our daily lives. Be sure to read the second page.

(video demo of the software discussed below)

Digital Bible Society

I’d like to an organization that you’ve probably never heard of: Digital Bible Society (DBS). For the last 10 years or so, they’ve been putting together something called Chinese Treasures which was a CD (and later a DVD) full of Chinese language Bibles and theological resources. It was distributed throughout China, and Christians were encouraged to “pirate” the disk (i.e. make copies and redistribute them) as much as possible.

Even 10 years ago, this was a big deal because the Chinese government was largely hostile to Christians not associated with the government church. Now that China is more open, DBS is making some shifts.

First off, CDs are out, SD chips are in (they are super fun to smuggle). Second, other closed countries (that speak languages like Farsi) are new areas of distribution. Third, the focus is not just desktop software, but mobile devices (which are common even in illiterate cultures). Finally, audio and video are often as important as text depending on the culture. The SD chips that DBS puts together have Bibles in a variety of formats (HTML, PDF, ePub, etc.) which means that most devices – from modern laptops to cheap eReaders to basic mobile phones – should be able to do something with the content

The Software (BibleWebApp 2.0): Sofia Bible Browser

About a year ago, the folks at DBS asked if I could take some of the work I’ve done on web-based Bible apps like http://biblewebapp.com/ and make it a part of the suite of applications DBS is developing for their SD chips. It’s labelled “Bible Browser” in the title, but I also call it “Sofia” for short.

Now, there are already lots of amazing Bible website and applications out there today built by wonderful Christian brothers and sisters, so it might seem unnecessary to build yet another Bible application. Each of these has a place in what God is doing in the world, but the software that DBS creates has some special requirements that necessitates something new:

1. Must be able to run without Internet access
2. Must be able to run without being “installed”
3. Must be able to run in any browser on any device

In a country where it’s illegal to follow Christ or ask about Christianity, installing Bible software and accessing Bible website are big no-nos, so this security is absolutely paramount. The best solution we have so far is to create an HTML/JavaScript application that runs on whatever browser the user has installed.

The challenged is that HTML-based applications can be a bit slower than full desktop software (like the awesome apps Logos, Accordance, or SWORD) and since we are designing them to run without Internet access (like the amazing YouVersion or Biblia) they can’t have a powerful server to do things like process search queries. This makes for some interesting programming challenges, but it’s also part of the fun of doing something different to serve the church at large. The app also needs to be able to run on very basic phones with limited HTML/CSS support, another fun challenge.

For those technically inclined, the basic setup is that each chapter of the Bible is a separate HTML file linked together by jQuery Mobile which makes browsing the Bible work really well on basic phones all the way up to iPhone/Android. Then a desktop application reads these same HTML files and uses them to produces the multi-pane application you see in the video above.

Unique Features of Sofia

In addition to the unique focus on an HTML app that runs in the browser off an SD card, there are few unique features of “Sofia.” While the main focus of the application is providing access to the Bible in every language, I’m also building in some powerful original language features for Bible students of all levels:

• Verse and Word matching – In the desktop version, as you put your mouse over verses and words, the corresponding verse and word in other versions get highlighted, so you can see the relationships and how the word was translated into a given language or English translation.
• Morphological Highlighting – A feature normally only seen in big packages like Logos, the morphological filter lets you add color codes to
  (1) specific Greek or Hebrew words,
  (2) Greek tenses and noun cases,
  (3) rare words.
  You can choose to a color for the word itself, choose a background color, or underline the word with a color.
• Media Gallery – We are also adding a number of media rich feature, including images linked to verses, audio versions of the Bible, and even versions of the Jesus Film. Below is an example of images of Nicodemus from John 3. The UI for this might change as we add additional resources like maps.
• Audio read along - Based on some great work by Weston Ruter, I’m also planning to match up the text of the Bible with the audio down to the version and even word levels.

Special Thanks

Before I say any more about the project, some special thanks are in order because every Bible project builds on the hard work of many others. First, CrossWire, the makers of several amazing open source Bible applications has provided the KJV2006 project which is a version of the KJV with embedded linguistic data (Strong’s numbers) linking the original Greek and Hebrew words with the English translation.

Second, on this demo site, I also have the NET interlinear and NASB interlinear thanks to bible.org and Lockman respectively who’ve generously given me permission to use their data on biblewebapp.com.

Finally, much of the data in the popups, including the strong’s dictionary, was provided by open source data initiatives from the Open Scriptures group especially the work of James Tauber, David Troidl, and Ulrik Sandborg-Petersen.

Where To Get it?

Another great feature of the Digital Bible Society’s work is that they are releasing what I’m building as an open source Bible reader that you can use on your own website (if you have permissions for a particular version). Here are some links:

• Live Demo: http://biblewebapp.com/v2/
• Demo Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDVg48VEs9w
• Download: https://github.com/digitalbiblesociety/browserbible

Please download  it, fork it, contribute, and/or give any feedback here or on github.com.

For every tribe, tongue, and nation!