45 Topical Bible reading plans, source of the verses?

Hi power users:

From the following article:

https://blog.faithlife.com/45-topical-bible-reading-plans/?utm_source=l8_homepage&utm_medium=homepage_card&utm_campaign=rss

We get an example of a topic showing the verses:

Does anyone know where are the verses gotten from?

It does not seem to come from the topic guide:

Nor from the Dictionary of Bible Themes:

Or are the lists curated for the reading plans? If so any idea where one can find the list of verses for each topic?

Thanks ahead for any input clarifying this.

Find more posts tagged with

Desktop App

Comments

MJ. Smith

Does anyone know where are the verses gotten from?

IIRC they come from the front matter of a Bible ... one published by Zondervon IIRC. I think they were also available online.

Hamilton Ramos

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1178567#Comment_1178567

Thank you MJ, I did not find the exact Bible in L9 that has the topical readings, but did find many alternate resources that systematize information very well.

Peace and grace.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1178594#Comment_1178594

I did not find the exact Bible in L9 that has the topical readings

I was one of the people promoting having these in Logos nearly a decade ago. I don't recall the the front material ever bring available in the Logos Bible. IIRC they were promoted with new Christians as the target audience

Hamilton Ramos

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1178601#Comment_1178601

Yes MJ, if your input was to be acted upon, we would have wonderful capabilities available.

On another note, I was thinking about the topics list, and was wondering if there is a resource that systematizes such topics into broad areas maybe following a worldview type outline...

Example:

a. How it was in the beginning before the fall:

Kingdom of God

Glory

Worship

Light

Holy Spirit

b. what really happened and how by losing the presence of the H.S. we lost g:koinonia with God: (i.e. wrong actions have consequences)

Truth

Justice

Holiness

Suffering

c. The mess humans got into by trying to be autonomous without the Aseity and creative power God has:

Sin

Pride

Lust

Guilt

d. How our Creator God had lovingkindness and mercy of us and came to the rescue:

Covenant

Forgiveness

Prophecy

Hope

Faith

e. What the plan to help redeem the world and us is:

Grace

Discipleship

Wisdom

Love

Baptism

Worship

Spiritual growth

Speech

f. some recommended disciplines and outcomes of:

Generosity

Fasting

Prayer

Encouragement

Freedom

Friendship

g. the particular contextual situation that we live and the apex of such experience: (from the spiritual side (us as Bride of Christ)

Marriage

Patience

Perseverance

Second coming

h. the particular contextual situation that we live and the apex of such experience: (from the failed self reliance experiment)

Government and citizenship

Hospitality

The Poor

Work

Doubt

Money

Grief

Humility

Not that work has no value, but if it is not related to eternal values, then is questionable if do not contribute positively to the common good.

Just a different view on topical studies for further research, reflection and constructive comment.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1178621#Comment_1178621

I find most of the topical resources in Logos to not be useful for my purposes partially because they represent an ontology that does not fit my own very well. The ones that I find useful because they fit well against two millenia of data are ones that are organized around the Apostles' creed or, less comprehensively, against the Lord's Prayer.

Hamilton Ramos

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1178670#Comment_1178670

Interesting MJ, in your opinion what is a good resource (s), that deal with Catholic and / or Eastern Orthodox ontology?

Do you agree with Essence / Existence framework? or do you consider there is a better construct?

Finally, do you know of any resource that compares selected versions of Christian worldview as commonly accepted by:

Catholics, Charismatic / Pentecostals, Reformed / Presbyterian, Baptists etc. to get a better understanding of what angles do they emphasize?

In other threads you have mentioned that the kind of Worldview description I subscribe to has not been found by you in any particular tradition, and that may be because I borrow from many.

One of the main theologians that I think had a very good grasp of what could be the well explanatory construct of Christian Worldview is Donald G. Barnhouse, Presbyterian if I remember well.

It seems to me that some of his unconventional topic writings were not well received because maybe people had no clue where he got his conclusions from. There is a possibility that he was illuminated by the Holy Sprit in my opinion, but it is just my conjecture.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Barnhouse

https://www.amazon.com/-/es/Donald-Grey-Barnhouse/dp/031020481X/ref=sr_1_1?__mk_es_US=ÅMÅŽÕÑ&dchild=1&keywords=Donald+Barnhouse&qid=1630680354&s=digital-text&sr=1-1-catcorr

Thanks ahead of time for your input.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1178756#Comment_1178756

Interesting MJ, in your opinion what is a good resource (s), that deal with Catholic and / or Eastern Orthodox ontology?

In this context, ontology has two meanings:

[quote]

NOUN

the branch of metaphysics dealing with the nature of being.
a set of concepts and categories in a subject area or domain that shows their properties and the relations between them.

I was referring to the second meaning as illustrated by Lexham Systematic Theology Ontology: Dataset Documentation | Logos Bible Software, Lexham Cultural Ontology Supplemental Dataset | Logos Bible Software, Lexham Counseling Ontology Dataset | Logos Bible Software, and Faithlife Greek Grammar Ontology | Logos Bible Software. Your question is about the first to which the answer is simply "there is no single ontology in Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, nor Oriental Orthodoxy". I know of no Logos resources which are focused primarily on ontology in the aforesaid churches.

Hamilton Ramos

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1178792#Comment_1178792

Yes the different definitions seem to be about different things, but are they truly?

From:

https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11258a.htm

Excerpt:

"Ontology is not a subjective science as Kant describes it (Ub. d. Fortschr. d. Met., 98) nor "an inferential Psychology", as Hamilton regards it (Metaphysics, Lect. VII); nor yet a knowledge of the absolute (theology); nor of some ultimate reality whether conceived as matter or as spirit, which Monists suppose to underlie and produce individual real beings and their manifestations. Ontology is a fundamental interpretation of the ultimate constituents of the world of experience. All these constituents — individuals with their attributes — have factors or aspects in common. The atom and the molecule of matter, the plant, the animal, man, and God agree in this that each is a being, has a characteristic essence, an individual unity, truth, goodness, is a substance and (God excepted) has accidents, and is or may be a cause. All these common attributes demand definition and explanation — definition not of their mere names, but analysis of the real object which the mind abstracts and reflectively considers. Ontology is therefore the fundamental science since it studies the basal constituents and the principles presupposed by the special sciences. All the other parts of philosophy, cosmology, psychology, theodicy, ethics, even logic, rest on the foundation laid by ontology. The physical sciences — physics, chemistry, biology, mathematics likewise, presuppose the same foundations. Nevertheless ontology is dependent in the order of analysis, though not in the order of synthesis, on these departments of knowledge; it starts from their data and uses their information in clarifying their presuppositions and principles. Ontology is accused of dealing with the merely abstract. But all science is of the abstract, the universal, not of the concrete and individual. The physical sciences abstract the various phenomena from their individual subjects; the mathematical sciencesabstract the quantity — number and dimensions — from its setting. Ontology finally abstracts what is left — the essence, existence, substance, causality, etc. It is idle to say that of these ultimate abstractions we can have no distinct knowledge."

Seems that Aquinas went into this, even though other thinkers also had something to say.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontology

It is incredible that after so many experts work on all kinds of stuff for over 2000 years, yet us normal sheep have no clear guidance on the heart of the matter on Ontology, and its relation to worldview.

As usual the common sheep is left to search on his / her own, and luckily if has L9, some good info can be found, that then has to be synthesized.

If I was an expert at things theological, I would be very embarrassed at the situation. LOL.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1178801#Comment_1178801

Please remember to keep your discussions Logos/Faithlife oriented. Read Dominion: How the Christian Revolution Remade the World | Faithlife to see how much of Christian philosophy has trickled down to "us normal sheep" without our recognizing it as such.

Hamilton Ramos

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1178802#Comment_1178802

Yes MJ.

Not sure if the advent Catholic Encyclopedia is the same that is offered in Logos.

I did find a resource that seems to be good at clarifying ontology:

https://www.logos.com/product/151387/philosophical-foundations-for-a-christian-worldview