Is Logos 4 theologically biased?
Comments
-
Matthew C Jones said:
1) Zondervan has license restrictions controlling where the NIV can be sold so the proper profit can go to the proper pockets. In the past, Logos had to disable your NIV if you lived in Europe.
Actually this isn't accurate. In fact, it is wrong, inflammatory and cruel to Godly men and women. You would be wise to become informed before you speak.
The problem is that Zondervan is only licensed to sell the NIV in North America. Zondervan doesn't own the NIV. Biblical/IBS does. Because the Logos NIV receives the license from Zondervan, Logos has also been limited by Zondervan. Biblica/IBS licenses the NIV in English to other publishers.
Matthew C Jones said:DISCLAIMER: I am NOT arguing against "intellectual property rights." I AM criticizing the holders of copyrights for highway robbery & total denial of access. Also I highlighted in purple the Logos specific points of this post.
Again, you don't know what you're talking about. It is only highway robbery only if you think that supporting hundreds Bible translation projects around the world is highway robbery. What you call appear to be calling greedy profits, the translators from Lutheran Bible Translators, Wycliffe Bible Translators, Pioneers Bible Translations, and many others call financial support for an incredibly important ministry. I know of multiple translation projects that either would never have been completed or wouldn't exist today without the profits of the NIV.
And the same thing can be said for the German Bible Society (I don't know about Lockman). GBS makes Bible translation possible around the world as well.
So I repeat myself, don't talk so confidently about things you know nothing about. Missions cannot happen without Scripture in native languages. Scripture in native languages cannot happen without translation. Translation cannot happen without funding. Projects like the NIV make that funding possible for many, many languages.
To conclude, I'd like to adapt your own words:
If you truly believe that people having the actual words of God translated is so very important, how in the world can you possibly deny others access to those words through translation because of your wrong assumptions about the greed of fellow believers. Considering the reality of IBS/Biblica, I'd suggest that they've put far, far more thought into how the poor servant mishandled the one talent entrusted to him. And over the past 30 years through the NIV, they have multipled both scripture & translation a hundredfold.
UPDATE: I should say that the limits on Logos sale of the NIV being limited because of Zondervan's limited placed by IBS/Biblica is an assumption. I know that Zondervan is limited to North America. I don't know for sure that this is the reason behind Logos NIV limits.
See especially this blog post at BetterBibles.com (the blog for English Bible translation written by a number of Wycliffe Bible Translators & linguists):
http://betterbibles.com/2009/03/31/the-production-of-the-tnivniv-bible-the-standard-of-integrity/
0 -
This thread has veered so far off course that in the interests of our peace, joy, love, unity, & guidelines, can we let it go?
Grace & Peace,
Bill
MSI GF63 8RD, I-7 8850H, 32GB RAM, 1TB SSD, 2TB HDD, NVIDIA GTX 1050Max
iPhone 12 Pro Max 512Gb
iPad 9th Gen iOS 15.6, 256GB0 -
BillS said:
This thread has veered so far off course that in the interests of our peace, joy, love, unity, & guidelines, can we let it go?
++
πάντα εἰς δόξαν θεοῦ ποιεῖτε
0 -
huh... I did not know that.Mike Aubrey said:The problem is that Zonderrvan is only lisensed to sell the NIV in North America. Zondervan doesn't own the NIV. Biblical/IBS does. Because the Logos NIV receives the license from Zondervan, Logos has also been limited by Zondervan. Biblica/IBS licenses the NIV in English to other publishers.
0 -
Joe Miller said:
huh... I did not know that.Mike Aubrey said:The problem is that Zonderrvan is only lisensed to sell the NIV in North America. Zondervan doesn't own the NIV. Biblical/IBS does. Because the Logos NIV receives the license from Zondervan, Logos has also been limited by Zondervan. Biblica/IBS licenses the NIV in English to other publishers.
Note also that I can't spell:
lisensed = licensed
English = England
Oops. I'll correct this in the post.
0 -
Sorry to light your fuse Mike. It is funny you mention the Jehovah Witnesses since they are the ONLY cult that requires payment for the books they offer at your door. Every other religion will offer it for free. God's grace is FREE. Man puts a price on the delivery. Many churches in Japan do not pass an offering plate. They hide it so the non-bellievers don't feel compelled to give. Believers discreetly place their money without fanfare.
Mike Aubrey said:Zondervan doesn't own the NIV. Biblical/IBS does. Because the Logos NIV receives the license from Zondervan, Logos has also been limited by Zondervan. Biblica/IBS licenses the NIV in English to other publishers.
Thank you for this information.
Out of 87,000+ posts, You are the first person to ever make this statement. Assuming you are correct, just replace "Zondervan" with "Biblica/IBS" and I stand by my statement. I DO know about Lockman Foundation & the Japanese Bible translation project because I know the missionaries that did the actual translation work! I also know about Adoniram Judson & Hudson Taylor and John Wycliffe. They did not live in opulent houses relaxing in a life of leisure. The Summer Institutes of Linguistics was based at the University of Oklahoma long before Logos published the exegetical guides. (I almost joined Wycliffe back in the 1980's. The SIL was their exclusive training program then.) The Church of England used to chain the Bible to the pulpit and only seminarians were allowed to read it.
I maintain that GOD is the one who is spreading His Word around the world and will accomplish His will whether or not IBS, The Pope, The Church of England, The Lutheran Church or whomever is a willing, or grudging participant. Pharoah was used of God in the deliverance of Israel according to God's purpose. He was not a willing or benevolent participant. To give him accolades because he was used of God is misplaced gratitude on your part.
BACK TO THE ORIGINAL POST TOPIC: There is virtually NO effective theological bias in the Logos software prorgammers group. You only introduce bias by the imbalance of your library content. I believe most users want their collections to favor their own leanings. Otherwise you would see broad support across the board for all divergent views in the Pre-Pub program. It would be interesting to know if Bob Pritchett has excluded giant blocks of theological content from his own library. I doubt he has. If I were the CEO of Logos I would have EVERYTHING in my library. That is how I know I am not biased. [:D]
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
Mike Aubrey said:
I'd hope you're talking about the Jehovah's Witness' "translation," but they've never claimed it was a paraphrase.
FYI: I was referring to "The Message" I just hate to say the corrupt "New World Translation is a more accurate translation % wise than "The Message"
[:'(] [:(] [+o(] Oh! I just fell sick saying that.
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
BillS said:
This thread has veered so far off course that in the interests of our peace, joy, love, unity, & guidelines, can we let it go?
Bump.
Grace & Peace,
Bill
MSI GF63 8RD, I-7 8850H, 32GB RAM, 1TB SSD, 2TB HDD, NVIDIA GTX 1050Max
iPhone 12 Pro Max 512Gb
iPad 9th Gen iOS 15.6, 256GB0 -
okay okay. And i admit it. I am theologically biased!!!!! [6][A][:#]
I like Apples. Especially Honeycrisp.
0 -
Matthew C Jones said:
Out of 87,000+ posts, You are the first person to ever make this statement. Assuming you are correct, just replace "Zondervan" with "Biblica/IBS" and I stand by my statement.
If you search the internet, you could have found similar statements (again here: http://betterbibles.com/2009/03/31/the-production-of-the-tnivniv-bible-the-standard-of-integrity/ straight from the horses' mouth)
Matthew C Jones said:They did not live in opulent houses relaxing in a life of leisure. The Summer Institutes of Linguistics was based at the University of Oklahoma long before Logos published the exegetical guides. (I almost joined Wycliffe back in the 1980's. The SIL was their exclusive training program then.) The Church of England used to chain the Bible to the pulpit and only seminarians were allowed to read it.
I am affiliated with Wycliffe/SIL.Matthew C Jones said:I maintain that GOD is the one who is spreading His Word around the world and will accomplish His will whether or not IBS, The Pope, The Church of England, The Lutheran Church or whomever is a willing, or grudging participant. Pharoah was used of God in the deliverance of Israel according to God's purpose. He was not a willing or benevolent participant. To give him accolades because he was used of God is misplaced gratitude on your part.
The difference between IBS/Biblica & Pharaoh is that IBS/Biblica is a willing participant. They are good stewards of what God has given them and like Paul said in Philippians of Timothy & Epaphroditus, they are people would should honor.0 -
Matthew C Jones said:
FYI: I was referring to "The Message" I just hate to say the corrupt "New World Translation is a more accurate translation % wise than "The Message"
I'm going to have to agree with you.
But only because Eugene Peterson never claimed The Message was a translation. Obviously the NWT is going to be a more accurate translation than something that isn't a translation could ever be.
On the other hand, when we come to the question of theological reliability, even a paraphrase like The Message trumps the NWT. Last time I checked, Jesus is still God in The Message.
0 -
Ok let me add another two cents worth concerning the bias part I'm not sure nor convinced Logos is biased just the same as other competitors I would like to think that they try to get the most used works out there available today and of course from the business end demand has a big role in it. Touching translations unfortunately it is next to impossible to get another translation out to the public without being partial to the theology the translators hold (you would need I think to find some neutral translators i.e. possibly from unbelievers which I view as an improbability) All translations have there pluses and minuses some better than others. but for all of us that purchase bible software some from different vendors as myself we are perhaps above average as I would like to think we all tend to go deeper in studies and are open to the wide theological positions to form our opinions etc the fact that one would shell out the type of money it takes to possess software like logos says each of us plans or intends to go deep into our studies and learn as much as the Holy Spirit intends us to learn etc. My summary is this in looking at what logos offers in their collections and of course the extra collections you can build outside of the collection you own I see no restrictions.
0 -
Mike Aubrey said:
If you search the internet, you could have found similar statements (again here: http://betterbibles.com/2009/03/31/the-production-of-the-tnivniv-bible-the-standard-of-integrity/ straight from the horses' mouth)
Searching the internet also yeilds: "The Message" by Eugene Peterson is a translation according to publisher NavPress. http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Message-MSG-Bible/ And ever since I was a little kid, talking horses creep me out. Now talking donkeys is another thing alltogether.
Veering back to the original post: Nope. Logos programmers are not theologically biased. They can not even persuade me "The Message" is a valid, accurate translation. Even though it is listed among my 45 or so Bibles in Portfolio. (I don't think the horse is alive anymore. Seems not to say a word when I'm kicking it.)
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
Matthew,
I seriously don't get your vehemence (or whatever it would be called) against the Message. I don't always think his way of expressing it is that good, but sometimes it is marvelous, and I can't htink of any time any body has been led astray by it. It is not a literal translation, nor even dynamic. But it is what it is, a very unique and challenging way to express God's word.
I hadn't seen this side of you in I don't know how long. The whole translation reaction thing kind of baffles me. In fact, i have ran into more memorable issues with the NASB than I have the Message (of course I was holding NASB to a different standard. and don't get me wrong, I like it too). I just was never taught to think that way. take each for what it is, and use it that way.
I remember people slamming the LB when i was a kid. Now, i disagree theologically with several of his theological positions and resulting paraphrasing. But I gotta tell you: as a teen growing up in pagan Germany, that "translation" (yeah, i know what it really is) kept me grounded in God and reading and reading and reading. And I still grew up loving Him and being theologically infallible [;)]
Back on topic. This was really a weird thread. I am biased. I love Logos 4. [8-|]
I like Apples. Especially Honeycrisp.
0 -
Dan DeVilder said:
I seriously don't get your vehemence (or whatever it would be called) against the Message.
I have no particular animosity towards "The Message. " I just figure if they are big enough to make the claim (as they do) that it is a translation (some people actually believe that claim) then they should be able to bear scrutiny as well. Isn't that another form of textual criticism we champion these days?
My whole point in raising the translation issue was that is where we may be mislead rather than by commentary of men. Calvin, Luther, Augustine, MacArthur, Swaggart, Newman & Barth never laid claim their writings were the inspired Word of the Almighty God. Most Logos users do not give these men equal weight with the Bible.
I still assert: No, Logos programmers could not successfully bias the software if they wanted to. And I don't believe they would ever try to.
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
Matthew C Jones said:
I have no particular animosity towards "The Message. " I just figure if they are big enough to make the claim (as they do) that it is a translation (some people actually believe that claim) then they should be able to bear scrutiny as well. Isn't that another form of textual criticism we champion these days?
It's true.
Thankfully, the author of The Message does not consider it a translation and never intended it to be thought of as one. It has always been a paraphrase. What is unfortunate is that Navpress, its publisher, doesn't seem to follow through on that.
0 -
Matthew C Jones said:
Out of 87,000+ posts, You are the first person to ever make this statement. Assuming you are correct, just replace "Zondervan" with "Biblica/IBS" and I stand by my statement.
By the way, the main reason why such as act (replacing "Zondervan" with "Biblica/IBS") isn't helpful is that Biblica/IBS is a nonprofit organization. They post their financial reports online. They distribute scripture around the world and do it well. They do translation for languages with 1 million people or more and contribute financially to organizations like Wycliffe/SIL who do translation with minority languages. Quote:
"Right now, Biblica has 300 full- and part-time Bible translation
staff working in 29 languages."http://www.biblica.com/aboutus/index.php
All that to say (and I'm trying to be informative, not polemical, about this quality Christian para-church organization): Biblica/IBS cannot be characterized in the way you have described in previous posts. Maybe Lockman can, I don't know about them and couldn't find too much info on their website. But Biblica/IBS is a quality, Godly group of men and women doing very important work. I'm greatly saddened that you stand by your statement. Organizations that do translation work deserve our support.
0 -
Matthew C Jones said:
No, Logos programmers could not successfully bias the software if they wanted to. And I don't believe they would ever try to.
I am generally with you, and really, the programmers have never come to my mind in that way. I have sometimes wondered about library offerings, thinking perhaps that en toto, they were weighted toward the Calvinist side; that said, I am glad to have those in my library, as well as the whole range from Pannenberg (whom my dad took lectures under at the University of Munich) to Lucado to JPS publications.
I realize this is a different companies software, but Z has the g l o software, and there IS bias there, although I am trying to figure out if it is programming or library, or a little of both. They group subjects into "constellations." When you click on the end times constellation, there is far more info on Pre-mill related material--even the constellation itself is weighted toward that way, offering things like "rapture" "pre/mid trib" etc (operating off of memory here). It is like they can't even THINK of categories that might relate to Amill. So, I don't think that exists within Logos, but perhaps subtly, it could. Of course Joe M might say I am leveling an accusation with no evidence, only that there could be evidence. [6] Not trying to stir up trouble, just saying: I have seen a program show bias in g l .o software, and i realize that kind of thing could happen elsewhere.
But this is really just a goofy pursuit, by now. Not sure why I keep posting here. I htink it is just easy to pontificate rather than figure out tech questions. [:P]
I like Apples. Especially Honeycrisp.
0 -
Another Questions about "Theological Bias"
What about the things that pop up on the home page? I noticed that many of them come from the same resources. I can't recall anything ever popping up from a Lutheran resource I have - except "books of the Day".
BTW - I agree with everyone else that your Logos library, on a whole, is only as theologically bias as your library. But I do wonder how the home page is chosen.
0 -
sullivanmp@hotmail.com said:
What about the things that pop up on the home page? I noticed that many of them come from the same resources. I can't recall anything ever popping up from a Lutheran resource I have - except "books of the Day".
I wondered about this too, then was thinking it's possible that the excerpts are drawn only from "base package" material, rather than independent publisher material. I don't feel like doing a multi-day item by item check against the base package contents, but I would be interested to know if anyone's home page excerpts reflect anything they know to be outside the contents of the various base package resources.
Tom
1 Cor 2:2
0 -
sullivanmp@hotmail.com said:
Another Questions about "Theological Bias"
What about the things that pop up on the home page? I noticed that many of them come from the same resources. I can't recall anything ever popping up from a Lutheran resource I have - except "books of the Day".
BTW - I agree with everyone else that your Logos library, on a whole, is only as theologically bias as your library. But I do wonder how the home page is chosen.
i think it is randomly selected . . . from your library! [:)] (seriously, it is)
I like Apples. Especially Honeycrisp.
0 -
sullivanmp@hotmail.com said:
What about the things that pop up on the home page? I noticed that many of them come from the same resources. I can't recall anything ever popping up from a Lutheran resource I have - except "books of the Day".
Good question, I too have noticed that none of the resources that I purchased and used do not show up on the home page.
Note 1: I did turned off most of the items on the homepage because they did not interest me.
Note 2: I use v3 99.75% of the time because of the note functionality in v4.0 -
Well, as far as the original question, I'm pretty sure that theologically Logos favors Christian theology over Muslim theology. I could be wrong, though [:D]
0 -
JohnFrady said:
Does a programmer tell the computer how to respond to a search?
No.
Of course we have our own views, but we're building a library (and a bookstore), not running a teaching ministry. We try to keep the software as neutral as possible, and to license a broad range of resources. Yes, there's a slant towards the 66 book "North American Protestant" canon, and towards books you'd find in American Christian bookstores. But we're working hard to expand our support for not only the larger canon (we have a big advocate for better apocrypha/deuterocanonical materials in-house), but a wider range of resources. And, of course, that initial slant was driven more by where the market is than anything else. We're also slanted towards English materials, for similar reasons. It's not a dislike of other languages, it's just the one we know and the one spoken by most of the customers we can reach. As we get bigger, we (collectively) have more language skills, reach more people, etc. and start offering more stuff.
With 175+ people at Logos, there's lots of diversity of views and opinions.
Now, if I must confess to some actual bias... we tend to offer more of the products that sell.
:-)
(We believe in the Bible, and we have many opinions about it, many of which are probably wrong. Since we can't be sure which are right and wrong, confident though we may be, we provide tools to help you study it yourself.)
0 -
Bob Pritchett said:
We're also slanted towards English materials
Now that just cracked me up! [:D]
See, Mr. Joe Miller, I KNEW they were biased, even though I couldn't quite prove it!
I like Apples. Especially Honeycrisp.
0 -
Bob Pritchett said:
Yes, there's a slant towards the 66 book "North American Protestant" canon, and towards books you'd find in American Christian bookstores.
How about a reverse interlinear apocrypha, then?
0 -
Bob Pritchett said:
Now, if I must confess to some actual bias... we tend to offer more of the products that sell.
Good choice [H]. Our family's business has the same bias. Wonder why?
0 -
Mike Aubrey said:
How about a reverse interlinear apocrypha, then?
Now under development.
* English-Greek Reverse Interlinear of the NRSV Apocryphal Texts
Win 7 x64 | Core i7 3770K | 32GB RAM | GTX 750 Ti 2GB | Crucial m4 256GB SSD (system) | Crucial m4 256GB SSD (Logos) | WD Black 1.5 TB (storage) | WD Red 3 TB x 3 (storage) | HP w2408h 24" | First F301GD Live 30"
0 -
tom collinge said:
Good question, I too have noticed that none of the resources that I purchased and used do not show up on the home page.
My purchased resources pop up frequently, e.g. BST, Translators Handbook, Tyndale commentary, etc etc. Actually I'd prefer it if they didn't as I know I have those and use them regularly. I've been very grateful when the homepage has drawn my attention to base package resources I didn't know i HAD. This is not a complaint, it just shows different people have different preferences! Maybe when we have a direct download of Logos to the braincells, Logos will be able to check other braincells to discover our preferences and adapt its random pop ups to suit them [;)]
0 -
nicky crane said:tom collinge said:
Good question, I too have noticed that none of the resources that I purchased and used do not show up on the home page.
My purchased resources pop up frequently, e.g. BST, Translators Handbook, Tyndale commentary, etc etc. Actually I'd prefer it if they didn't as I know I have those and use them regularly. I've been very grateful when the homepage has drawn my attention to base package resources I didn't know i HAD. This is not a complaint, it just shows different people have different preferences! Maybe when we have a direct download of Logos to the braincells, Logos will be able to check other braincells to discover our preferences and adapt its random pop ups to suit them
One thing I know that influences my Home Page is my prioritized resources. You see first those devotionals you prioritize. It might be also with other type of resources like commentaries.
Bohuslav
0
