Jots and Tittles - Christian Blogging - Jesus' social network - Superbowl
Jots and Tittles – February 2, 2007
Christian Blogging – Jesus’ Social Network (Data Visualization) – Church Superbowl Parties -- (Beware)
First is a link and a blog I ran across during the course of looking for something else. That’s my usual way of finding things – looking for one thing and following the white rabbit down the hole until I am way off on a tangent and spending time on subjects I had no ....
But, I digress….
Where was I? Oh yeah, I found this post on a Christian blog site that I thought presented both a challenge and a practical solution to blogging on Christian-related topics in a world that is decidedly neutral about Christ, if not hostile.
Here is the link: http://www.esv.org/blog/2007/01/being.dugg
And here is the post. It is a little long, perhaps, but worth the time to read:
Being Dugg
Last week’s post on New Testament social networks appeared on the front page of news site Digg over the weekend, giving us a month’s worth of traffic in a few days’ time. We want to reflect on what happens when a Christian blog experiences a fleeting burst of popularity from non-Christian or even anti-Christian sources.
Unlike some sites, this blog doesn’t focus on evangelism. It doesn’t overtly try to convert you to Christianity, largely because we assume that most of you are already Christian or at least sympathetic to Christianity. But every public Christian endeavor has an element of evangelism—you can’t help it: non-Christians watch your actions, hear your words, note your attitude.
Blogging magnifies this scrutiny. Anyone from anywhere in the world can come across any of your posts for any reason. What impression do you leave? Are your visitors, if Christian, encouraged or strengthened in their faith? If non-Christian, do they leave without thinking less of Christians, Christ, or the church?
Living a Christian life is a heavy burden (and, paradoxically, a freeing one). We’re not holding this blog up as a model by any means—but if you wonder why we don’t court controversy by getting involved in disputes or why we don’t respond forcefully to ESV critics, it’s because we do our best to cultivate our blogging around ethics of love, meekness, and generosity. (And we’re not saying that we always succeed.)
Tim Challies recently wrote about talking to the secular press about the church, a topic with parallels to blogging:
I don’t know of many people who would talk to the press about the problems in their families. If I found that a local reporter was attempting to write a negative story about my wife, and if she approached me asking me for stories about Aileen that she could use, I would never help her! I would explain that I love my wife and would never do anything to hurt her. Likewise, I love the church, for we are a family, and I would be very hesitant to air out her dirty laundry in front of the world.
Similar principles apply to blogging, but blogging is more direct, immediate, and raw than talking to the media. You don’t need to think about what you’re saying—you can simply write it up and press “Publish” for everyone to see. The long tail of the Christian blogosphere is full of comments that (we hope) people wouldn’t say to fellow Christians face-to-face. Something about digital communication suppresses the better angels of our nature.
We’re not arguing that you should avoid saying anything critical or controversial on your blog or stop discussing sin—sin is the human condition. You can’t have repentance and salvation without sin. Rather, we ask you to consider how your words will sound both to your regular audience and to random visitors. Your blog is a microphone to the world. If you could say one thing to thousands of people at a stroke, would it be your latest blog post?
Many of you read 1 Corinthians 13 in church this Sunday. It applies as much to blogging as it does to other areas of the Christian life. An excerpt:
And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. If I give away all I have, and if I deliver up my body to be burned, but have not love, I gain nothing.
Love is patient and kind; love does not envy or boast; it is not arrogant or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth. Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.
Love is not arrogant or rude, but rejoices with the truth. If only we always lived up to our ideals.
We’re going on at length about this topic because of some of the reactions we got to our Dugg post as it made its way into the wider blogosphere. First, we want to make clear that we appreciate all the positive comments we received.
At times, however, the intrinsic Christianity of our post ran into the casual atheism prevalent in the tech blogosphere. What struck us was the offhand treatment of the New Testament as a work of fiction, typified by a comment (beware coarse language if you follow the link) on Digg that lumped the New Testament with “Dune and Galactica [science-fiction universes] and other popular tales of fiction.” Other commenters didn’t restrain their outright hostility to the Bible.
Our post didn’t address (and probably couldn’t have adequately addressed) the concerns that these people had, yet we hope that God has used and will use the post to his glory. We wish you well if you feel called to minister to the tech blogosphere; you have your work cut out for you.
Even if you don’t consider your blog a ministry, it serves as one. And, as we found out, you never know when one of your posts will become popular or how people will interpret you. We try to keep James 3 in mind as we blog:
Not many of you should become teachers [or bloggers], my brothers, for you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness. For we all stumble in many ways. And if anyone does not stumble in what he says, he is a perfect man, able also to bridle his whole body… but no human being can tame the tongue. It is a restless evil, full of deadly poison. With it we bless our Lord and Father, and with it we curse people who are made in the likeness of God. From the same mouth come blessing and cursing. My brothers, these things ought not to be so….
Who is wise and understanding among you? By his good conduct let him show his works in the meekness of wisdom…. But the wisdom from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, open to reason, full of mercy and good fruits, impartial and sincere.
We ask your forgiveness when we don’t live up to these principles. We’re constantly amazed (and grateful) at how God uses sinful human beings for his glory. We praise God for whatever small contribution we make to his kingdom; at the same time, we’re thankful for each one of you and for the parts that you play, whatever they may be.
2. Jesus’ Social Network – A visualization
OK, I’m still working through this one, but if you are interested in seeing how different persons in the New Testament were linked to Jesus, this site is worth a look. I can’t describe it in words, exactly. It is a very visual thing.
http://www.esv.org/blog/2007/01/mapping.nt.social.networks
http://services.alphaworks.ibm.com/manyeyes/page/FAQ.html;jsessionid=4468CBF4C54F47F2EC720A354FD568BA
(Looks like I've messed up the HTML formatting on the last two links. Just cut and paste the link in a new browser window and you should be good to go.)
3. Finally, for you guys with the 55 inch TV’s or projections screens who want to have some friends over for the Superbowl, don’t get flagged on the play by the NFL cops. It appears that watching the “Big Game” on the large TV’s is considered a “public performance”, which is, of course, “out of bounds” according to the NFL.
The Link:
http://techdirt.com/articles/20070201/140812.shtml
The Article:
NFL Wants To Remind You That Having People Over To Watch The Super Bowl On A Big Screen Is Copyright Infringement
from the laws-written-by-lobbyists dept
What is it with sports leagues and their desire to limit how their fans can enjoy the game? There's Major League Baseball, who keeps trying to insist that they own the facts related to a game, and no one can use them without paying MLB first. Then, there's the NFL, who freaked out about TiVo and also tried to ban any broadcasters from using "unauthorized" video feeds to show what happens in the stadium (i.e., no sideline cameras any more). They've been particularly fussy about the Super Bowl, however, forcing advertisers to call it "the Big Game" or whatever, claiming excessive control over the trademark (remember, trademarks are really designed to prevent consumer confusion, not to give holders full control over the mark). The latest situation is perhaps even more bizarre -- but tragically, seems to fall closer to a correct legal reading of a really poorly written law. The NFL apparently nastygrammed a church for planning to host a Super Bowl party. The original complaint was first that the church was charging people, but also that they used the term "Super Bowl" (as if people would somehow believe that the church was associated with the NFL?). After the church agreed to let people in for free and not use the term, the NFL continued to complain, saying that showing the Super Bowl on a screen larger than 55 inches represents copyright infringement. While we, at first, doubted the reality of this, Ben Austro sent in the fact that it is, indeed, spelled out in copyright law that once you get above 55", you may be talking about a "public performance," though, as Ben notes, the wording sounds like it was clearly written by a lobbyist. No matter what the law states, this seems ridiculously short-sighted by the NFL. It's hard to see how they lose out in any meaningful way by not allowing groups to watch the Super Bowl together. Of course, now that this particular quirk of copyright law is getting some attention, how long will it be until the MPAA starts cracking down on those of you with really big screen TVs from showing movies in your home theaters. What was a joke just a few months ago, may become real.
- Lawscribe
Christian Blogging – Jesus’ Social Network (Data Visualization) – Church Superbowl Parties -- (Beware)
First is a link and a blog I ran across during the course of looking for something else. That’s my usual way of finding things – looking for one thing and following the white rabbit down the hole until I am way off on a tangent and spending time on subjects I had no ....
But, I digress….
Where was I? Oh yeah, I found this post on a Christian blog site that I thought presented both a challenge and a practical solution to blogging on Christian-related topics in a world that is decidedly neutral about Christ, if not hostile.
Here is the link: http://www.esv.org/blog/2007/01/being.dugg
And here is the post. It is a little long, perhaps, but worth the time to read:
Being Dugg
Last week’s post on New Testament social networks appeared on the front page of news site Digg over the weekend, giving us a month’s worth of traffic in a few days’ time. We want to reflect on what happens when a Christian blog experiences a fleeting burst of popularity from non-Christian or even anti-Christian sources.
Unlike some sites, this blog doesn’t focus on evangelism. It doesn’t overtly try to convert you to Christianity, largely because we assume that most of you are already Christian or at least sympathetic to Christianity. But every public Christian endeavor has an element of evangelism—you can’t help it: non-Christians watch your actions, hear your words, note your attitude.
Blogging magnifies this scrutiny. Anyone from anywhere in the world can come across any of your posts for any reason. What impression do you leave? Are your visitors, if Christian, encouraged or strengthened in their faith? If non-Christian, do they leave without thinking less of Christians, Christ, or the church?
Living a Christian life is a heavy burden (and, paradoxically, a freeing one). We’re not holding this blog up as a model by any means—but if you wonder why we don’t court controversy by getting involved in disputes or why we don’t respond forcefully to ESV critics, it’s because we do our best to cultivate our blogging around ethics of love, meekness, and generosity. (And we’re not saying that we always succeed.)
Tim Challies recently wrote about talking to the secular press about the church, a topic with parallels to blogging:
I don’t know of many people who would talk to the press about the problems in their families. If I found that a local reporter was attempting to write a negative story about my wife, and if she approached me asking me for stories about Aileen that she could use, I would never help her! I would explain that I love my wife and would never do anything to hurt her. Likewise, I love the church, for we are a family, and I would be very hesitant to air out her dirty laundry in front of the world.
Similar principles apply to blogging, but blogging is more direct, immediate, and raw than talking to the media. You don’t need to think about what you’re saying—you can simply write it up and press “Publish” for everyone to see. The long tail of the Christian blogosphere is full of comments that (we hope) people wouldn’t say to fellow Christians face-to-face. Something about digital communication suppresses the better angels of our nature.
We’re not arguing that you should avoid saying anything critical or controversial on your blog or stop discussing sin—sin is the human condition. You can’t have repentance and salvation without sin. Rather, we ask you to consider how your words will sound both to your regular audience and to random visitors. Your blog is a microphone to the world. If you could say one thing to thousands of people at a stroke, would it be your latest blog post?
Many of you read 1 Corinthians 13 in church this Sunday. It applies as much to blogging as it does to other areas of the Christian life. An excerpt:
And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. If I give away all I have, and if I deliver up my body to be burned, but have not love, I gain nothing.
Love is patient and kind; love does not envy or boast; it is not arrogant or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth. Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.
Love is not arrogant or rude, but rejoices with the truth. If only we always lived up to our ideals.
We’re going on at length about this topic because of some of the reactions we got to our Dugg post as it made its way into the wider blogosphere. First, we want to make clear that we appreciate all the positive comments we received.
At times, however, the intrinsic Christianity of our post ran into the casual atheism prevalent in the tech blogosphere. What struck us was the offhand treatment of the New Testament as a work of fiction, typified by a comment (beware coarse language if you follow the link) on Digg that lumped the New Testament with “Dune and Galactica [science-fiction universes] and other popular tales of fiction.” Other commenters didn’t restrain their outright hostility to the Bible.
Our post didn’t address (and probably couldn’t have adequately addressed) the concerns that these people had, yet we hope that God has used and will use the post to his glory. We wish you well if you feel called to minister to the tech blogosphere; you have your work cut out for you.
Even if you don’t consider your blog a ministry, it serves as one. And, as we found out, you never know when one of your posts will become popular or how people will interpret you. We try to keep James 3 in mind as we blog:
Not many of you should become teachers [or bloggers], my brothers, for you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness. For we all stumble in many ways. And if anyone does not stumble in what he says, he is a perfect man, able also to bridle his whole body… but no human being can tame the tongue. It is a restless evil, full of deadly poison. With it we bless our Lord and Father, and with it we curse people who are made in the likeness of God. From the same mouth come blessing and cursing. My brothers, these things ought not to be so….
Who is wise and understanding among you? By his good conduct let him show his works in the meekness of wisdom…. But the wisdom from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, open to reason, full of mercy and good fruits, impartial and sincere.
We ask your forgiveness when we don’t live up to these principles. We’re constantly amazed (and grateful) at how God uses sinful human beings for his glory. We praise God for whatever small contribution we make to his kingdom; at the same time, we’re thankful for each one of you and for the parts that you play, whatever they may be.
2. Jesus’ Social Network – A visualization
OK, I’m still working through this one, but if you are interested in seeing how different persons in the New Testament were linked to Jesus, this site is worth a look. I can’t describe it in words, exactly. It is a very visual thing.
http://www.esv.org/blog/2007/01/mapping.nt.social.networks
http://services.alphaworks.ibm.com/manyeyes/page/FAQ.html;jsessionid=4468CBF4C54F47F2EC720A354FD568BA
(Looks like I've messed up the HTML formatting on the last two links. Just cut and paste the link in a new browser window and you should be good to go.)
3. Finally, for you guys with the 55 inch TV’s or projections screens who want to have some friends over for the Superbowl, don’t get flagged on the play by the NFL cops. It appears that watching the “Big Game” on the large TV’s is considered a “public performance”, which is, of course, “out of bounds” according to the NFL.
The Link:
http://techdirt.com/articles/20070201/140812.shtml
The Article:
NFL Wants To Remind You That Having People Over To Watch The Super Bowl On A Big Screen Is Copyright Infringement
from the laws-written-by-lobbyists dept
What is it with sports leagues and their desire to limit how their fans can enjoy the game? There's Major League Baseball, who keeps trying to insist that they own the facts related to a game, and no one can use them without paying MLB first. Then, there's the NFL, who freaked out about TiVo and also tried to ban any broadcasters from using "unauthorized" video feeds to show what happens in the stadium (i.e., no sideline cameras any more). They've been particularly fussy about the Super Bowl, however, forcing advertisers to call it "the Big Game" or whatever, claiming excessive control over the trademark (remember, trademarks are really designed to prevent consumer confusion, not to give holders full control over the mark). The latest situation is perhaps even more bizarre -- but tragically, seems to fall closer to a correct legal reading of a really poorly written law. The NFL apparently nastygrammed a church for planning to host a Super Bowl party. The original complaint was first that the church was charging people, but also that they used the term "Super Bowl" (as if people would somehow believe that the church was associated with the NFL?). After the church agreed to let people in for free and not use the term, the NFL continued to complain, saying that showing the Super Bowl on a screen larger than 55 inches represents copyright infringement. While we, at first, doubted the reality of this, Ben Austro sent in the fact that it is, indeed, spelled out in copyright law that once you get above 55", you may be talking about a "public performance," though, as Ben notes, the wording sounds like it was clearly written by a lobbyist. No matter what the law states, this seems ridiculously short-sighted by the NFL. It's hard to see how they lose out in any meaningful way by not allowing groups to watch the Super Bowl together. Of course, now that this particular quirk of copyright law is getting some attention, how long will it be until the MPAA starts cracking down on those of you with really big screen TVs from showing movies in your home theaters. What was a joke just a few months ago, may become real.
- Lawscribe
posted by lawscribe | 9:25 AM
|
0 comments
