Henry M. Morris complete collection

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/81940#Comment_81940

Not sure if we can do this, but:

-1

David Palmer

Great suggestion, I wouldn't hesitate to buy it.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/81963#Comment_81963

Not sure if we can do this, but:

-1

Greg,

If you do not like a book don't buy it.

This is how the system works with a business like Logos that seeks to meet demand among its customers.

I don't think anything productive will be achieved if we start voting against books that others are proposing (it is even less productive when no rationale is presented).

Alain

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/82008#Comment_82008

Alain,
I guess we can't do this! Must be another one of those unspoken rules everyone talks about, huh? [;)]

As I see it, voting for or against a series of books before they go into pre-pub allows Logos to gauge interest in the book. And I see no harm in letting one of my favorite companies know what's worth investing pre-pub resources into or not. While it may not happen as often on these forums, in the old newsgroups dissent over book suggestions was almost an everyday occurrence.

Other people on other suggestion boards have seen fit to leave a "+1" for their comment, also with no rationale, so I didn't see any harm in doing the same. Have you spoken to them about voting for something without any rationale given?

But if you are interested, I do not think Henry Morris would be a good addition to Logos because I've found his writings on scientific topics do not stand up well to scrutiny. I don't think its a good idea to propagate views that aren't true, just as I see no need to disseminate writings advocating geocentrism to people in the church.

While Mr. Morris' intentions were probably good, I consider the content of his writings misleading and harmful to a fulfilling view of God's creation. This is enough reason for me to add my negative vote to this suggestion.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/82053#Comment_82053

Greg,

I am afraid that it is your rationale that does not stand up well to scrutiny.

Let say for the sake of argument that your premise about the factual deficiency of Morris’ work is true

If your concern is that Logos not publish books that “propagate views that aren't true”, you should also voice your opposition to 1/3 or 2/3 of the books published by Logos (depending on where you fall on the theological spectrum). This “test of truth” should not stop with the science behind Morris’ interpretation of Genesis; it should also extend to all areas of knowledge. It should lead to the elimination of some of introductions to the OT or the NT. Commentaries (Dunn and Carson should not both be published when it comes to Justification), journal articles, monographs, and so on… since all sides of the theological spectrum cannot factually be right and at least one side is wrong.

There is the problem of who decides who is right and who is wrong.

But, I am reminded that Logos is not a Church but a business and as such does not endeavor to defend or propagate a set of views to the detriment of others.

Logos chooses books based on the positive interest expressed by its customers with the knowledge that not everyone will like or even consider buying a given resource.

A company decides to create a product based on the number of potential customers not based on the number of people that dislike the product. If the market is there, it does not matter a bit how many people do not like the product especially since one does not sell “negative” products. Despite my dislike for Macs and the great number of people who agree with me, Apple is still thriving and making Macs because the customer base is there and this is all that counts.

If Logos needs 1,000 potential buyers to publish a book, what do you think would happen if 1,500 are in favor and 2,000 or even 10,000 are against it or not interested? The book will still be published because it meets the market requirements and the penalty for a company like Logos for publishing a book that some do not like is negligible to inexistent

What you also fail to acknowledge is that publishing a book is not the same thing as endorsing it. Many of us desire to read books that do not line up with our theological beliefs and which make assertions that are considered false and misleading. A customer doing work in apologetics and adopting a position contrary to that of Morris’ would nevertheless do well to acquire (or at least consult) the work in question so as to work from primary sources and know what he or she is talking about.
I could compare Logos to my seminary library, the school’s theological distinctive are clearly and uncompromisingly evangelical. However, when it comes to books in the library, the school strives to provide all representative works on a given topic regardless of whether or not they agree with the author’s theological stance or presentation and handling of the evidence. My school’s library would be a very poor library if it only had works that advocated “compatible” views.

I see Logos serving a similar purpose but instead of print volumes, the company is primarily dealing with digital volumes.

What is my point? There is room for Morris and YEC, there is room for Hugh Ross and OEC, just like there is room for works who advocate theistic evolution. They cannot be (and are not) all factually correct, but they serve different purposes for different people.

If money (and time) was not an issue for me, I would not mind having them all in my library as I transition to a digital library.

Alain

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/82057#Comment_82057

I could compare Logos to my seminary library, the school’s theological distinctive are clearly and uncompromisingly evangelical. However, when it comes to books in the library, the school strives to provide all representative works on a given topic regardless of whether or not they agree with the author’s theological stance or presentation and handling of the evidence. My school’s library would be a very poor library if it only had works that advocated “compatible” views.

I agree that a diverse collection is ideal. Many of the books recommended here are by individuals I have never heard of. But I think that your argument needs at least one more point. A seminary library retains a certain quality standard as well ... with perhaps a special purpose collection or two that falls below that standard. I this Logos is better served by relegating some books to the PBB world although with a handful of exceptions, I am not qualified to identify such books.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/82057#Comment_82057

Alain,

While I thank you for engaging my initial post, I kept it short and to the point for a reason. I was not interested in having this become something more than I had intended.

I have a right to voice my disagreement with suggested books, and there is a strong tradition among Logos customers of doing the same on the previous newsgroups.

While I'm sure you will persist in disagreeing with my post, I do hope you will extend to me the right to do the same towards the suggested books.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/82060#Comment_82060

I could compare Logos to my seminary library, the school’s theological distinctive are clearly and uncompromisingly evangelical. However, when it comes to books in the library, the school strives to provide all representative works on a given topic regardless of whether or not they agree with the author’s theological stance or presentation and handling of the evidence. My school’s library would be a very poor library if it only had works that advocated “compatible” views.

I agree that a diverse collection is ideal. Many of the books recommended here are by individuals I have never heard of. But I think that your argument needs at least one more point. A seminary library retains a certain quality standard as well ... with perhaps a special purpose collection or two that falls below that standard. I this Logos is better served by relegating some books to the PBB world although with a handful of exceptions, I am not qualified to identify such books.

As your own post acknowledges an objective identification of what is a not a “quality” work often proves to be a difficult task.

What is certain is that looking for “quality” works is not (and should not) the sole criteria used by a good library, equally important is to make available works that have been or are influential in the discussion regardless of what actual value the work has. This is why library carry books advocating theories that have been clearly discredited but were part of the debate concerning a given topic. Whatever one believes about Morris’ view, his work has been influential in the discussion and a proper discussion of the past and present interpretation of Genesis from a scientific perspective cannot just overlook his body of work, even if it is solely because of the impact his has had at the popular level .

A business like Logos works according to similar principles. It seems to publish the top works in the field of religion (because of their financial and marketing potential) and it also seeks to satisfy the demand regardless of the perceived “quality” of the work. Quality (which is often in the eye of the beholder) does not necessarily pay the bills or create profit, satisfying demand in a cost effective way always does.

if you have any doubt about this principle at work, look at the pre-pubs and the speed of completion of the various resources.

Alain

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/82061#Comment_82061

Alain,

While I thank you for engaging my initial post, I kept it short and to the point for a reason. I was not interested in having this become something more than I had intended.

I have a right to voice my disagreement with suggested books, and there is a strong tradition among Logos customers of doing the same on the previous newsgroups.

While I'm sure you will persist in disagreeing with my post, I do hope you will extend to me the right to do the same towards the suggested books.

Greg,

We are clearly not talking about the same thing. Here you are talking about what you have the right to do, while I was referring to what is productive, considerate, and less likely to rub someone the wrong way,

Many users and even Logos itself are trying to get rid of some of those "strong traditions among Logos customers" that were not necessary beneficial

I do not plan to purchase Morris' works and as such I am not advocating it for my own benefit, but I would not be pleased (to say the least) if I was trying to obtain some electronic books for my personal library of someone else was trying to deny me that opportunity instead of merely refusing to buy the works himself.

if one's negative vote has an impact of the final decision to publish a work , it would not be as inconsequential (on the composition of one's library) as merely disagreeing with someone's view.

I rest my case.

Alain

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/81963#Comment_81963

Not sure if we can do this, but:

-1

While it was not my intention to get into a debate on this subject i think i should respond.

Greg, you disagree with my choice of books suggestion and think it propagate views that aren't true. Believing that the content of Henry Morris's writings are misleading and harmful to a fulfilling view of God's creation. Why? On the grounds that evolution is a better explanation for the origin of the universe - see this thread http://community.logos.com/forums/t/7289.aspx?PageIndex=1 for your views.

Well, i disagree with the evolutionary explanation of things(origins) and John Bowling on the same thread above took you on, on your views. John did a good job interacting with your views and showing many of the false assumptions of the evolutionary theories and the science behind it. That exchange did not end well.

Right or wrong a lot of Christians disagree with your "scientific theories" and i hope you will not be militant about voting their views down even if you disagree with it. It (Henry Morris) is still within the bounds of Christian orthodoxy whereas the jury is still out on evolution. Let us agree to disagree on this, for me it is enough that God created the world in the space of six days and not billions upon billions of years( though i see you hold to a unique six day view which differs from others who believe in the same theory of evolution).

You are welcome to your theories but i fear your views will end up undermining and "attempting" to dethrone the God of the bible in the hearts of men/women who do not know him or who do know him. If Henry Morris does appear on the Pre-Pub page there is always the option of not buying[;)] and in that you would not have lost anything[:)].

I hope my response did not come across as being rude, if so it was not intended to be.

Ted

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/82069#Comment_82069

Hi Alain,

Thanks again for your balanced approached on this issue. You have saved me the embarrassment of a full response. What can i say to your various post on this thread? I wish i could have put it as well as you did [*].

Ted

George Somsel

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/82069#Comment_82069

Alain,

While I thank you for engaging my initial post, I kept it short and to the point for a reason. I was not interested in having this become something more than I had intended.

I have a right to voice my disagreement with suggested books, and there is a strong tradition among Logos customers of doing the same on the previous newsgroups.

While I'm sure you will persist in disagreeing with my post, I do hope you will extend to me the right to do the same towards the suggested books.

Greg,

We are clearly not talking about the same thing. Here you are talking about what you have the right to do, while I was referring to what is productive, considerate, and less likely to rub someone the wrong way,

Many users and even Logos itself are trying to get rid of some of those "strong traditions among Logos customers" that were not necessary beneficial

I do not plan to purchase Morris' works and as such I am not advocating it for my own benefit, but I would not be pleased (to say the least) if I was trying to obtain some electronic books for my personal library of someone else was trying to deny me that opportunity instead of merely refusing to buy the works himself.

if one's negative vote has an impact of the final decision to publish a work , it would not be as inconsequential (on the composition of one's library) as merely disagreeing with someone's view.

I rest my case.

Alain

I happen to agree with you that Logos should not be placed in the position of having to be selective with regard to positions of the authors (Yes, miracles do occassionally happen), but having said that, I think it is acceptable that someone express his dislike for a particular author. It is not for the purpose of influencing Logos ("Let a thousand flowers bloom") but to call attention to the fact that an author may be less than what many would consider to be acceptable. There are a few such books in Logos which I consider to be undesirable, but if someone wishes to clutter up his library and mind with them, it's on his head. I'll give one example which hopefully is not too controversial: Thayer's Greek Lexicon is hopelessly outdated since it was written before the discovery of the Oxyrhynchus Papyri which taught us that the Greek of the NT was not a special "Holy Ghost Greek" but was the Greek of the average person of the time. Thayer may be of use if one wishes to have it to show the differences between then and now, but if he is using it as his main lexicon -- Oy Vey !

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/82108#Comment_82108

Alain,

I understand your argument, but knowing the audience of Logos Bible
Software, I think Morris' work would be used not for any historical
research, but for bolstering a set of outdated 20th century ideas about
the universe and the Bible. As the debate on origins continues to move
in the opposite direction of Morris' work, I see no need in letting his
ideas and inaccuracies continue on. Withdraw the life-support, I say,
and let them die in print. To mirror George, if anyone is using him as
his main research on origins -- Oy Vey !

As I have said before, thank you for engaging what I have written, but please allow me the same liberty that you exercise when disagreeing with my suggestion.

Ted,

Thank you for responding and bringing up that thread from a month ago! I don't think it took place in the way you described it though. There were several members berating and calling me names for my stated position, and only one who actually offered evidence to the contrary. I explained how it wasn't good evidence and and showed why, and it was dropped from later discussion. The forum user you mentioned asked to continue the discussion on his blog, which I did, only to find out that he likes to delete replies and leave only his remaining. Not exactly what I consider honest behavior.

If you consider those actions commendable, I would be hesitant to discuss anything regarding origins with you. Yet, since integrity is important to me, I do not alter the replies of whomever I am speaking to when it happens on my own turf. Since this post is about a suggestion of books, I do not think this is
the place to have that discussion. If you wish to discuss origins, find me on Facebook under my current name and we can do so. You can even go first.

To be frank, I find the reaction to my little "-1" completely over the top and ridiculous. Ted, you made this personal when you replied to me, and I think that was uncalled for. I should not have to defend my integrity simply because I don't agree with your book suggestion. Alain, I don't understand how you have the liberty to disagree and I do not. Quantity is good, quality is even better, but discernment is the ideal. Please forgive me for making mine public.

Good day to you all, and I hope we can move on now.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/82226#Comment_82226

I understand your argument, but knowing the audience of Logos Bible
Software, I think Morris' work would be used not for any historical
research, but for bolstering a set of outdated 20th century ideas about
the universe and the Bible. As the debate on origins continues to move
in the opposite direction of Morris' work, I see no need in letting his
ideas and inaccuracies continue on. Withdraw the life-support, I say,
and let them die in print. To mirror George, if anyone is using him as
his main research on origins -- Oy Vey !

Hmmm .... interesting taken on things![N] [:P][:D]

To be frank, I find the reaction to my little "-1" completely over the top and ridiculous. Ted, you made this personal when you replied to me, and I think that was uncalled for.

Sorry, you took my response to be personal it was not meant to be. If you read my post i said that in another word about not being rude. The irony is i find your response to my response as your comments above[:)]. Okay, take it easy point taken it was uncalled for.

If you consider those actions commendable, I would be hesitant to discuss anything regarding origins with you. Yet, since integrity is important to me, I do not alter the replies of whomever I am speaking to when it happens on my own turf. Since this post is about a suggestion of books, I do not think this is
the place to have that discussion. If you wish to discuss origins, find me on Facebook under my current name and we can do so. You can even go first.

I mentioned John's interactions with your views(John did actually, indeed interact with your views- no misrepresentation on my part), which i believe was good and i did not mention anything about anyone deleting anyone's post. It seems you are reading more into my comments than is warranted.

I don't mind having a chat with you on origins but to be frank with you i don't ever see myself buying into the evolution theory. My simple take on origins is, God created the world out of nothing. This is not a scientific question to me but one of theology, exegesis & the proper interpretation of scripture.

I agree with you, this is not the place to discuss it.

Every blessings,

Ted.

Larry Heflin

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/82272#Comment_82272

I'd love to see Morris's works in Logos. I'm hopelessly unenlightened and will no doubt die in my ignorance.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/82108#Comment_82108

Meanwhile, on another thread a position was called heretical - leading to a caution against a particular author and a particular book. In that case, I saw no sign that the denominational identification to support the term "heretical" was ever made. In that case, the author was not called to task. As I recall my Jewish logic as exhibited by Paul, that justifies the conclusion that the post of -1 was insufficient to justify this discussion. So can we simply say someone stated their opinion in a mode appropriate to a respectful living room conversation and drop it?

Matthew C Jones

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/82060#Comment_82060

I agree that a diverse collection is ideal. Many of the books recommended here are by individuals I have never heard of. But I think that your argument needs at least one more point. A seminary library retains a certain quality standard as well ... with perhaps a special purpose collection or two that falls below that standard.

Master's Seminary has lots of anti-Calvinistic writings in their library. They would even deem them lower quality because of their stance. But they see it is a positive thing to lay out for examination, consideration & refutation. The most vocal detractors against certain controversial subjects seem to be those who are afraid of the other side being correct. I just love it when the representative spokesperson my opponents put forth in the debate is incompetent. I have won debate points I was not even correct on because the other side did not know their material. Alexander Campbell would slay his debate opponents to the point they refused to engage him further, not because he was correct but because he was so eloquent in presenting his position. (Although I think he was frequently correct too. [:)])

But when somebody comes in with the [N] it only associates them with previous posters who went all-out against "too many Catholic works" or sacred namers (who contend we are all hell-bound for believing in the name of "JESUS") I just want to be allowed to read (& think) for myself. If I wanted somebody to think for me I wouldn't have a library at all.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/82360#Comment_82360

A seminary library retains a certain quality standard as well ... with perhaps a special purpose collection or two that falls below that standard.

Allow me to restate my point. A seminary library has (a) limited space to store materials and (b) limited dollars to purchase materials. Because of these restraints they make value judgments as to what to purchase and/or keep. This is how they define "quality" ... if I were to self-publish a book showing how the Bible taught that Jesus had been born, died and resurrected on each planet in our galaxy (or universe), I doubt very much that there would be much interest in it from seminary libraries.[:D]

Matthew C Jones

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/82365#Comment_82365

I doubt very much that there would be much interest in it from seminary libraries.

Point well made & taken.

Funny example too.

Jacob Hantla

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/82360#Comment_82360

I want to voice my vigorous support for a Henry Morris collection. I bet you would find all kinds of support and cooperation in getting them published from the Institute for Creation Research. I'm pretty sure that this prepub would meet it's needed bids very quickly.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/82754#Comment_82754

I want to voice my vigorous support for a Henry Morris collection. I bet you would find all kinds of support and cooperation in getting them published from the Institute for Creation Research. I'm pretty sure that this prepub would meet it's needed bids very quickly.

Agreed, thanks for the support.

Ted

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/82272#Comment_82272

Dan

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/82911#Comment_82911

I'd buy Henry Morris' books too.

Dan Cleghorn

I would like to see all of his books in L4 also. It is the only reason I still use Quickverse. They have the Defenders Collection.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/83075#Comment_83075

I would like to see all of his books in L4 also. It is the only reason I still use Quickverse. They have the Defenders Collection.

This raised my curiosity. I wonder if Logos has ever done a survey of what software Logos customers use besides Logos and why? Not that I have any need to know but it does pique my interest.

Jack Caviness

Henry M. Morris complete collection would make a good addition to the Logos
library

I would purchase this collection.

Ron

I'd buy this set in a flash...here's another vote in favor.

spitzerpl

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/82226#Comment_82226

I don't have any problem with someone putting a "doesn't float my boat" post but I fail to see the value of it. Logos isn't concerned with how many people won't buy a resource, only how many people will. But I don't think you were wrong in your post. You are as free to express a view that I ignore...which I didn't...but....oh well... :-)

Fall-Guy

Henry M. Morris complete collection would make a good addition to the Logos library. I am missing some of his books that i am not aware of but i would like to see a complete collection of his works. Thanks.

Ted
The Revelation Record: A Scientific and Devotional Commentary on the Prophetic Book of the End of Times by Henry M. Morris

Remarkable Record of Job: The Ancient Wisdom, Scientific Accuracy, and Life-Changing Message of an Amazing Book by Henry M. Morris

The Remarkable Journey of Jonah: A Scholarly, Conservative Study of His Amazing Record by Henry M. Morris

The Long War Against God: The History and Impact of the Creation/Evolution Conflict by Henry M. Morris

Biblical Creationism: What Each Book of the Bible Teaches About Creation & the Flood by Henry M. Morris

Scientific Creationism by Henry M. Morris III

The Bible Has the Answer by Henry M. Morris and Martin E. Clark

Many Infallible Proofs: Evidences for the Christian Faith by Henry M. Morris and Henry M. Morris III

Men of Science Men of God: Great Scientists of the Past Who Believed the Bible by Henry M. Morris

The Beginning of the World: A Scientific Study of Genesis 1-11 by Henry M. Morris

After Eden: Understanding Creation, the Curse, and the Cross by Henry Morris III, John Morris, and Henry M. Morris

That Their Words May Be Used Against Them by Henry M. Morris

The God Who Is Real by Henry M. Morris

For Time And Forever by Henry M. Morris

The Modern Creation Trilogy: Scripture and Creation, Science and Creation, Society and Creation by Henry M. Morris and John D. Morris

Some Call It Science: The Religion of Evolution by Henry M. Morris

Exploring the Evidence for Creation by Henry M. Morris

When Christians Roamed the Earth by Henry M. Morris

The Genesis Flood the Biblical Record and Its Scientific Implications by John C. Whitcomb jr and Henry M. Morris

Days to Remember: Devotions for the Holidays Throughout the Year by Henry M. Morris

Evolution and the Modern Christian by Henry M. Morris

That You Might Believe by Henry M. Morris and Ph. D. Morris

5 Reasons to Believe in Recent Creation by Henry M. Morris III

Sampling the Psalms: A Scientific & Devotional Study of Selected Psalms by Henry M. Morris

A History of Modern Creationism by Henry M. Morris

The Remarkable Birth of Planet Earth by Henry M. Morris

Biblical Cosmology and Modern Science by Henry M. Morris

STUDIES IN THE BIBLE AND SCIENCE or Christ and Creation by Henry M. Morris

Men of Science, Men of God Great Scientists of the Past Who Believed in the Bible by Henry M Morris

The God Who Is Real: A Creationist Approach to Evangelism and Missions by Henry M. Morris

The Biblical Basis for Modern Science by Henry M. MORRIS

YES! [Y] All we have now in Logos is the Genesis Record and the Revelation Record.

JPH

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/530491#Comment_530491

YES! All we have now in Logos is the Genesis Record and the Revelation Record.

It would also be great to get the CRS Quarterly too.

Doc B

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/82053#Comment_82053

I do not think Henry Morris would be a good addition to Logos because I've found his writings on scientific topics do not stand up well to scrutiny.

Well, you'd be flat wrong. Morris was a widely published scientist in the field of geology in his day. While you may not agree with his YEC stance, his science stands on its own. How many peer-reviewed papers have you published in your career? If you are qualified, critique his work on a point-by-point bases. Don't make generalized swipes at a person's research career because you disagree with his theology.

I don't think its a good idea to propagate views that aren't true

This statement is quite true. Therefore you should not have posted your untruthful characterization of Dr. Morris' writings. [:D]

I consider the content of his writings misleading and harmful to a fulfilling view of God's creation

So don't read them, but don't force your (evolutionary) theological leanings on the rest of the forum participants. Your -1 did absolutely no good whatsoever; stick with promoting resources you'll buy and like the rest of us, stop posting derogatory comments about resources you don't want.

David Paul

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/530538#Comment_530538

I don't know enough about the author to have an opinion about him, but I know that Greg's observation is certainly true for many of the "Christian-apologist-takes-on-science" types that are out there. Often their science is dreadful. Is Morris's? I dunno. But Greg is literally ENTITLED in this country to post "-1" if he wants and feels led to. Of course, folks can oppose his view also. But trying to shut down someone just because they have a different point of view isn't kosher.

I realize that this is a minority point of view, but a Bible-focused website is probably the worst place to become a champion of majority points of view.

Josh

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/530547#Comment_530547

Logos has both his Genesis and Revelation commentaries. [Y]

I own both. Good stuff. [:)]

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/530538#Comment_530538

So don't read them, but don't force your (evolutionary) theological leanings on the rest of the forum participants. Your -1 did absolutely no good whatsoever; stick with promoting resources you'll buy and like the rest of us, stop posting derogatory comments about resources you don't want.

Given that the post in question is from 2010, I think you make a good case for locking old threads. I generally have no interest in resurrecting an old issue without continuing consequences. I will admit to not being a Morris fan ... or a fan of 99% of science-religion theological writings as I've rarely run into any that understand abductive reasoning which is the foundation of science and of little importance in theology. So along with Morris, I would like to see Logos offer:

Abductive Reasoning by Mr. Douglas Walton

Defeasible Deontic Logic (Synthese Library) by Donald Nute

That gives a good base for understanding and evaluating all the science-religion theological writings.

George Somsel

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/530603#Comment_530603

So along with Morris, I would like to see Logos offer:
Abductive Reasoning by Mr. Douglas Walton

Defeasible Deontic Logic (Synthese Library) by Donald Nute That gives a good base for understanding and evaluating all the science-religion theological writings.

Good suggestion. I also have little use for most (if not all) science-religion writings. They usually fail to understand science and give a questionable view of inspiration.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/530538#Comment_530538

Doc B,

Your argument against my three-year old post was thorough and compelling. I will now reconsider everything I have previously believed on this subject.

David Paul

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/530610#Comment_530610

Doc B,

Your argument against my three-year old post was thorough and compelling. I will now reconsider everything I have previously believed on this subject.

lol

Doc B

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/530610#Comment_530610

Doc B,

Your argument against my three-year old post was thorough and compelling. I will now reconsider everything I have previously believed on this subject.

Even after all that time I see you are still able to deal with arguments on a point-by-point basis, dealing with the assertions, and avoiding ad hominem attacks and generalities. I feel thoroughly defeated.