What Would The Bible 2.0 Look Like?

godvertiser —  2009/10/18 — 6 Comments

The Bible has been around for ages.  It’s worked just fine in print.

First, people tried to bring it alive with audio.

Then others said, hey, while we’re at it, why not dramatize it!

And now we’ve apparently arrived at the next iteration of experiencing God’s Word. . .

Finally, some one has brought the Bible into the present Web 2.0 world.  Or have they?

Here’s my wish list for a Bible 2.0 that would embrace all

  • We live in an Internet world, put it online! A multi-media Bible should be available on-line, all the time, from anywhere.
  • Instant Community – We should be able to interact live with other people that are reading the same portion of the Bible at any given time.  If it’s on the internet, it would be easy to know who’s invovled with which parts of the Bible in real-time.
  • The Power of User-Generated Content – We grow by hearing each other’s testimonies.  By sharing our own.  By identifying with the common struggles we are all going through.  The next generation Bible will allow individuals to contribute their own stories, their own viewpoints, their own insights and joy.  Content shouldn’t be limited to ivory tower authors.  Wikipedia is more accurate than the Enclyopedia for a reason.
  • Don’t Let Sermons Go To Waste – Preachers generate TONS of content weekly, easily tagged to a specific anchor verse.  Imagine being able to open the Bible and gain access to thousands and thousands of sermons of different flavors on the same portions of scripture.
  • FAQ + SAQ – By aggregating the masses, you could assemble the most robust set of answers to FAQ’s as well as the Seldom Asked Questions.  Just imagine how many more questions would be sparked by a resource like that!
  • Tour Guides – You could have live or multi-media guided tours of the Bible.  With virtual tours of Biblical landmarks, drama, art and other great content, real value can be created by taking people different journeys that bring new meaning to Bible Reading Plans.

Those are just some wish list ideas off the top of my head.

But I guess just like the Web 2.0 is waiting for the next big thing to bring us to Web 3.0, the Bible 2.0 is a step in the right direction.

What other features would you want in the Bible of the Future?

Related Posts with Thumbnails

6 responses to What Would The Bible 2.0 Look Like?

  1. The Bible 2.0 is not far from you, my friend. The web 2.0 Bible is already here, and has been around for many months now. Take a spin at http://www.youversion.com — it's online, it's got space for community, it's got user-generated content, it's got links and embed videos of sermons. And it's all generously supported by the Digerati team and community at Lifechurch.tv .

    To get more content online, a la multimedia, FAQs, and tour guides, it's that nagging question of how will it be funded, and who will do the work? Will you play point on the effort, and make your dream come true?

  2. I have a few little problems with this.

    1. It was released without a Mac-compatible version. If you're going to release some massive software like this, it might be wise to consider a simultaneous release.

    2. User-generated content is an afterthought. Look, Web 2.0 is centralized around social networking and user-generated content. Like you said, "UGC" is powerful, and we need to harness that power. I really think YouVersion is on the right path. They've centered their Bible-reading experience around user-generated content, and that's what will propel them to the next level.

    3. To thrive in a Web 2.x world, it's important to put social networking and sharing at the forefront of your user experience. We'll have to wait and see (especially since their social-networking component isn't releasing until 2010), but from what I can tell, they're already marketing themselves without pushing the social-networking component. Pointing back to YouVersion, they've developed a Bible experience that's centered around the idea of community and sharing, which are the heart of social networking.

    Maybe I'm a little skeptical, but Glo, as a web-based Bible, still has some growing to do. It looks cool though, and when that Mac version comes out, I'll definitely be giving it a shot.

  3. @djchuang Yup, I like youversion.com too (it is one of 3 Bibles supported in my latest 1-step Bible Lookup web app), and in a way it is kind of like the missing side of Glo Bible or vice versa. IMHO, what youversion lacks (today, 10/2009) is the multimedia content.

    If you combined the youversion interactivity with the RICH mutimedia of Glo, you'd have the very very good effort toward the real thing.

    They are both steps in the right direction. If you read the latest Barna study about age vs. Interaction with the Bible, we must keep pushing ahead in these areas so that the next gen stay engaged in praxis.

  4. @Nate — Thanks for the thoughtful comments!

    1) Not to be a PC snob, but Mac owners represent only 3% of the worldwide market. All the more reason why my thoughts that Glo would be delivered via the Internet — that would solve this issue immediately.

    2) I think BOTH are on the right path, but coming from different sides. Let's hope we find someone who combines these elements or they meet in the center quickly!

    3) I agree – "COMMUNITY" can't happen with out people connecting with each other!

    Great thoughts Nate!

Trackbacks and Pingbacks:

  1. Why Nobody Will Pay A Dime For Logos 4 Bible Software For iPhone These Days. (Hint: It’s Free) - Godvertiser.com - 2009/12/05

    […] a way, it’s much like the recently launched Glo Bible which is tauted as the hipped something-2.0 Bible. I guess it better be because Glo Bible is $50, […]

  2. The Bible 1.0 - Godvertiser.com - 2010/02/09

    […] get so excited about the latest and greatest versions of the Bible that sometimes we forget to reflect about the Bible 1.0. […]

Leave a Reply

Text formatting is available via select HTML. <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

*