Theology Guide
Comments
-
Sean Boisen said:
You can expect that we'll annotate most major systematic theologies in Logos.
Could you elaborate more on your plans for this please? I know it's against policy to give a time frame, but a general idea of your plan would be nice. Right now, this tool is the deciding factor as to whether or not I'll go for an upgrade or just stay put with L7. It looks good with great potential, but being indexed to only 5 very conservative North American evangelical theologies means that it's practically useless to me in its present state of development. Please give me some concrete assurance that this is going to become useful in a reasonable span of time. (That is, not everything needs to be in it overnight, but it should be steadily improved at a rate that can be noticed and appreciated by the user. Months, not years, with recognition that some works like Barth's CD may well be impossible to integrate into such a system.)
0 -
Mark Barnes said:
Just to clarify this. There are several sections in the Theology Guide. Recommended Reading is a hand-curated bibliography for every theological topic. It will include resources you already own, and those you may not. It's is selective, broad and can be considered "finished".
Hi Mark
Is there a defined "tradition" for the hand curated lists? Or put another way, can you offer any insight to the criteria used to "recommend" a particular article, author or book.
0 -
Graham Owen said:Mark Barnes said:
Just to clarify this. There are several sections in the Theology Guide. Recommended Reading is a hand-curated bibliography for every theological topic. It will include resources you already own, and those you may not. It's is selective, broad and can be considered "finished".
Hi Mark
Is there a defined "tradition" for the hand curated lists? Or put another way, can you offer any insight to the criteria used to "recommend" a particular article, author or book.
(Not Mark, but ...)
The Recommended Resources come from the authors of the individual articles, and therefore reflect those author's choices. Our editorial direction was to take a broad and inclusive perspective ("small 'o' orthodox") on the topic, rather than a narrow reflection of a particular tradition.
For those authors that have Factbook pages, their bylines are hyperlinked, which might tell you something about their backgrounds.
0 -
Sean said:
but being indexed to only 5 very conservative North American evangelical theologies means that it's practically useless to me in its present state of development.
[:O]
0 -
Also looking forward to many, many more systematic theologies indexed/linked to the guide.
0 -
Sean said:
but being indexed to only 5 very conservative North American evangelical theologies means that it's practically useless to me in its present state of development.
I, too, hope it will expand significantly, but I imagine this has already been a daunting task. It might help to recommend some theologies you'd like to see included. That might help FL prioritize their effort.
Pastor, North Park Baptist Church
Bridgeport, CT USA
0 -
Sean said:Sean Boisen said:
You can expect that we'll annotate most major systematic theologies in Logos.
Could you elaborate more on your plans for this please? I know it's against policy to give a time frame, but a general idea of your plan would be nice. Right now, this tool is the deciding factor as to whether or not I'll go for an upgrade or just stay put with L7. It looks good with great potential, but being indexed to only 5 very conservative North American evangelical theologies means that it's practically useless to me in its present state of development. Please give me some concrete assurance that this is going to become useful in a reasonable span of time. (That is, not everything needs to be in it overnight, but it should be steadily improved at a rate that can be noticed and appreciated by the user. Months, not years, with recognition that some works like Barth's CD may well be impossible to integrate into such a system.)
I can give you concrete assurance that it's already useful for me, and i suspect, for many others [:)]
We currently have more than 300 systematic theologies on offer at logos.com, and there's no automated way to do this kind of annotation (that's part of what makes it especially valuable). Our highest priority will be those resources that impact most of our users, which is a combination of most owned, most used, and most important to the field (of course, that last attribute is hard to quantify objectively). How much effort this alignment will take depends greatly on the specific resource, as you suggest, and we have to weigh the cost of this annotation against the value of the book to our customers (one of many reasons Logos resources often cost more than Kindle editions). Some resources may have too few users to justify the cost.
I expect the progress will be noticeable on the scale of months. I also predict (with high confidence) it won't be fast enough to satisfy our users: it won't be fast enough to satisfy me, either. But we're committed to this project, and our goal is to annotate as many systematic theology resources as make sense.
0 -
Sean Boisen said:Sean said:Sean Boisen said:
You can expect that we'll annotate most major systematic theologies in Logos.
Could you elaborate more on your plans for this please? I know it's against policy to give a time frame, but a general idea of your plan would be nice. Right now, this tool is the deciding factor as to whether or not I'll go for an upgrade or just stay put with L7. It looks good with great potential, but being indexed to only 5 very conservative North American evangelical theologies means that it's practically useless to me in its present state of development. Please give me some concrete assurance that this is going to become useful in a reasonable span of time. (That is, not everything needs to be in it overnight, but it should be steadily improved at a rate that can be noticed and appreciated by the user. Months, not years, with recognition that some works like Barth's CD may well be impossible to integrate into such a system.)
I can give you concrete assurance that it's already useful for me, and i suspect, for many others
We currently have more than 300 systematic theologies on offer at logos.com, and there's no automated way to do this kind of annotation (that's part of what makes it especially valuable). Our highest priority will be those resources that impact most of our users, which is a combination of most owned, most used, and most important to the field (of course, that last attribute is hard to quantify objectively). How much effort this alignment will take depends greatly on the specific resource, as you suggest, and we have to weigh the cost of this annotation against the value of the book to our customers (one of many reasons Logos resources often cost more than Kindle editions). Some resources may have too few users to justify the cost.
I expect the progress will be noticeable on the scale of months. I also predict (with high confidence) it won't be fast enough to satisfy our users: it won't be fast enough to satisfy me, either. But we're committed to this project, and our goal is to annotate as many systematic theology resources as make sense.
Sean,
And if you don't get to those in the Wesleyan-Holiness Camp soon enough, I know how to find the sections I am looking for through search in Logos and having used the print version of the Logos resources, for years before having them in Logos. Sometimes we just forget how to do things "old school".
I love this new resource and look forward to using it as I teach Theology during the Spring term.
0 -
Mark Smith said:Sean said:
but being indexed to only 5 very conservative North American evangelical theologies means that it's practically useless to me in its present state of development.
I, too, hope it will expand significantly, but I imagine this has already been a daunting task. It might help to recommend some theologies you'd like to see included. That might help FL prioritize their effort.
That's a very positive suggestion, Mark. Feel free to join the Faithlife group for Lexham Survey of Theology and make recommendations for resources you'd like to see annotated, or add other suggestions for improvements. You could also post them on this forum thread.
0 -
I am finding the Theology Guide very helpful. Today I was reading the section on the Church and Israel in the Lexham Survey of Theology. I came upon this by Brian Collins, the author of this section:
"While the church may have a Great Commission to declare the message of Jesus and the apostles, it does not have a commission to convert Jewish people away from their faith to that of a gentile church."
Guys, I wonder if this is true. From what I know, it isn't.
Is there a way to further dive into this to get a better idea where Brian got this???? Or to contact the author???? Or, am I just plain wrong?
0 -
Rob Lambert said:
"While the church may have a Great Commission to declare the message of Jesus and the apostles, it does not have a commission to convert Jewish people away from their faith to that of a gentile church."
Guys, I wonder if this is true. From what I know, it isn't.
This forum isn't supposed to be a place to discuss theology. But I guess that what Brian is trying to say is that you don't need to stop being Jewish to start being a Christian. All the earliest Christians were Jews and they would all have said that they retained their Jewish faith even as they stopped offering sacrifices, keeping Sabbath and food laws, and worshipping in the Temple.
This is my personal Faithlife account. On 1 March 2022, I started working for Faithlife, and have a new 'official' user account. Posts on this account shouldn't be taken as official Faithlife views!
0 -
Sean Boisen said:
That's a very positive suggestion, Mark. Feel free to join the Faithlife group for Lexham Survey of Theology and make recommendations for resources you'd like to see annotated, or add other suggestions for improvements. You could also post them on this forum thread.
Off the top of my head, as mentioned above, I'd suggest some of the 19th century Wesleyan Arminian theologians you have in Logos such as Miley and Pope. They would be good in comparison to the other theologians you already have. Also, their structures should lend themselves well to this task. Ditto for Orton Wiley.
From the continent, Bavinck should be a top priority. Berkouwer's Studies would be awesome to have in this, but I imagine it would take a lot more work than many others. Pannenberg would also be great.
Again from older theologies, Franics Hall and Joseph Pohl would be good additions.
Useful popular systematics would be Erickson and <gulp> Grudem.
Those would be excellent as a next step. Expanding in those directions should improve the tool's utility for comparative study of theology.
ETA: And Calvin's Institutes! How could I leave off that? How could you, for that matter? It should go in ASAP. [:P] Seriously, though, there's a lot of useful theology out there besides Princeton/Westminster and Dallas. Most of it doesn't bite. Why did you have to do both Hodge and Berkhof before getting to some of these others?
0 -
Kenneth Neighoff said:
And if you don't get to those in the Wesleyan-Holiness Camp soon enough, I know how to find the sections I am looking for through search in Logos and having used the print version of the Logos resources, for years before having them in Logos. Sometimes we just forget how to do things "old school".
So do I. The same can be said about the resources already in the guide--Berkhof is already my default resource for answers fast. But if I'm paying a couple hundred $ to get this in Logos (my main if not sole reason for buying a feature set), I'd really like for it do more.
0 -
Mark Barnes said:
...you don't need to stop being Jewish to start being a Christian. All the earliest Christians were Jews and they would all have said that they retained their Jewish faith even as they stopped offering sacrifices, keeping Sabbath and food laws, and worshipping in the Temple.
[:S]
ASUS ProArt x570s Creator, AMD R9 5950x, HyperX 64gb 3600 RAM, ASUS Strix RTX 2080 ti
"The Unbelievable Work...believe it or not." Little children...Biblical prophecy is not Christianity's friend.
0 -
Thanks Mark...
Now I understand what he was trying to communicate.
0 -
Rob Lambert said:
Now I understand what he was trying to communicate.
Really?? That's a trick! I can think of at least half-a-dozen to a dozen issues in that statement that are so mish-mashed and disputable that extricating anything worthwhile seems well-nigh impossible. For starters, there's the fact that Jews might not be Jewish. Let the slidy slope commence...
For the sake of clarity, I see problems with the original quote and Mark's "elucidation".
ASUS ProArt x570s Creator, AMD R9 5950x, HyperX 64gb 3600 RAM, ASUS Strix RTX 2080 ti
"The Unbelievable Work...believe it or not." Little children...Biblical prophecy is not Christianity's friend.
0 -
I disagree with Brian Collins. Like others have said that is faulty thinking.
Keith Pang, PhD Check out my blog @ https://keithkpang.wixsite.com/magnifyingjesus
0 -
Let's please keep the thread on track discussing the Theology Guide, not forbidden theology topics. [:D][:#][A][;)]
0 -
Systematic theologies to consider: Ryrie voigt frame [systematic theology] john macpherson bloesch berkhof [History of Christian Doctrines] feinberg beet
0 -
scooter said:
Systematic theologies to consider: Ryrie voigt frame [systematic theology] john macpherson bloesch berkhof [History of Christian Doctrines] feinberg beet
I strongly second Bloesch. Also, Thomas Oden's ST is excellent for the many links it has to other resources, especially the fathers, that otherwise wouldn't lend themselves to the Guide's structure.
0 -
I know, just stating.
Keith Pang, PhD Check out my blog @ https://keithkpang.wixsite.com/magnifyingjesus
0 -
Rob Lambert said:
I came upon this by Brian Collins, the author of this section:
"While the church may have a Great Commission to declare the message of Jesus and the apostles, it does not have a commission to convert Jewish people away from their faith to that of a gentile church."
Guys, I wonder if this is true. From what I know, it isn't.
While we don't want to discuss theology here, I want to question not whether Mark's answer to your question is true, but whether it fits the resource. It seems to me that you inadvertently put the quote outside of context. The longer paragraph reads:
"In a post-Holocaust world, supersessionism has fallen out of favor. Among nonevangelicals, some have argued that the drive behind anti-Semitism comes from a redemption-focused soteriology that involves continued efforts to convert Jews to Christianity. While the church may have a Great Commission to declare the message of Jesus and the apostles, it does not have a commission to convert Jewish people away from their faith to that of a gentile church.
Among evangelicals, some have argued that...."Brian Collins, “The Church and Israel,” in Lexham Survey of Theology, ed. Mark Ward et al. (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2018). (boldface by me)
I understand Brian Collins to summarize a non-evangelical position towards Christian mission of Jews, which goes beyond the argument Mark makes and basically downplays or fully declines the need for conversion to Christ / acceptance of Christ as Messiah, especially in light of the Shoah. This seems to be the majority position among non-evangelical protestants and also non-traditionalist Catholics over here in Germany.
Rob Lambert said:Is there a way to further dive into this to get a better idea where Brian got this???? Or to contact the author????
There would be, since there is a tool called "Ask the Author" - unfortunately, as per the tool pane, it is (currently?) "not available for this resource." I don't see an author profile for Brian on Faithlife.com either.
Have joy in the Lord!
0 -
Thanks All....
I do have a follow up question: Where do Logosians discuss theology????
0 -
Rob Lambert said:
Thanks All....
I do have a follow up question: Where do Logosians discuss theology????
The Faithlife group would be an appropriate place to discuss the contents of articles in the Lexham Survey of Theology: https://faithlife.com/lexham-survey-of-theology/ .
0 -
Sean Boisen said:
We currently have more than 300 systematic theologies on offer at logos.com, and there's no automated way to do this
Looking at that list kind of shows how I am not in the main stream of Logos customers. On that first page, I own only 1 of the top 15 systematic theology resources - namely the Battles translation of Calvin's Institutes, although I do also have 2nd ed of Erickson...
Works that I think should be high priority for tagging would include:
Augustine City of God, The Trinity, and maybe since it was so important for the Reformation, "The Spirit and the Letter".
Aquinas, Summa Theologica
Calvin, Institutes
Scheiermacher, The Christian Faith
Barth, Church Dogmatics and Romans
Somewhat lower priority:
Athanasius: On the Incarnation
Basil: On the Holy Spirit
John of Damascus: Orthodox Faith
Luther: Bondage of the Will and Large Catechism (they are the two works Luther of his that Luther said were most important)
Behr: Formation of Christian Theology
Bonhoeffer: Discipleship
All standard confessional writing collections
I will admit that many of the above are not traditional "systematic theologies" but in my opinion all are significant theological works that can inform our conversation.
The Gospel is not ... a "new law," on the contrary, ... a "new life." - William Julius Mann
L8 Anglican, Lutheran and Orthodox Silver, Reformed Starter, Academic Essentials
L7 Lutheran Gold, Anglican Bronze
0 -
Sure looks mainstream and traditional to me [;)]
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
I'll follow my advice and suggest:
Anabaptist: Bible Doctrine, A Treatise... Daniel Kauffman
Arminianism: John Miley's Systematic Theology, John Miley
Baptist: Systematic Theology, James Leo Garrett
Others: Summa Theologica, Systematic Theology (Oden), Systematic Theology (Grudem), Systematic Theology (Thiselton),
I think a strong candidate from each church stream should be covered before duplication within streams occurs.
Pastor, North Park Baptist Church
Bridgeport, CT USA
0 -
Author here.
The fuller context that NB.Mick highlighted is essential for reading that sentence correctly. I was summarizing the non-evangelical position, rather than stating what the true position should be. I agree with those who see that statement as being in error.
Brian Collins
0 -
Thank you Brian.
0 -
Mark Smith said:
I think a strong candidate from each church stream should be covered before duplication within streams occurs.
I strongly agree with that.
I do understand that some works (such as the highly structured 19C STs) will be much easier to integrate into the guide than others (Barth, many of the works of the fathers). But I think the primary usage of such a tool should be comparison, not confirmation of one particular approach to theology.
0
