Why I keep pushing an awareness of the broader canon -

Did you know that the deuterocanonical/apocryrphal books are used either as lessons or as prayers in:

Oriental Orthodox Church
Assyrian Church of the East
Eastern Orthodox Church
Catholic Church
Lutheran Church (somewhat dependent on country and pastor)
Anglican Church
Methodist Church (somewhat dependent on country and pastor)
Amish churches
and is optionally available in all churches using the Revised Common Lectionary?

Whether presented as lessons, options for lessons, prayers, or simple allusions to the texts it is clear that a large portion of the Christian market needs the tools of Logos to treat the deuterocanonical/apocryphal books as relevant. Considerable progress has been made, but trust me, I'll keep pushing.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

HansK

push :-)

Kathleen Marie

Whether presented as lessons, options for lessons, prayers, or simple allusions to the texts it is clear that a large portion of the Christian market needs the tools of Logos to treat the deuterocanonical/apocryphal books as relevant. Considerable progress has been made, but trust me, I'll keep pushing.

This is so controversial. I am saddened by so much that I am learning. Yes, I need access to all the books treated as relevant, but ... there are powerful people that have wanted everyone not to have access to these books for centuries. I am too little and too weak and too unschooled to think that what I need matters to the more powerful.

I am interested to watch what happens, but it will probably make me sad, whatever is decided.

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1183660#Comment_1183660

I guess I'm more optimistic. The slow steady expansion of Orthodox, and MJ's not unpleasant badgering offers hope.

OL's pretty much done (prepubs stuck in Logosian limbo; english Strack). 2nd Temple is in overkill, and the jewish basics are available ... obviously nothing close to what's in Israel. And the Peshita/syriac is stuck (publisher).

So! The Eastern church and the deutero/apocrypha support offer new growth. Right now the latter is pretty spotty (critical and intertext).

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1183660#Comment_1183660

This is so controversial.

It shouldn't/needn't be. For a millenium, the major branches of the church agreed on a canon, nevermind:

they agreed that the Old Testament was Septuagint based but avoided the question of what books were in the Septuagint -- there were several versions of the canon on this issue
they agreed on the 27 book New Testament canon ... but that didn't mean that you had to print or use all of them leaving the shorter canon still very much alive in practice
if a book(s) they traditional used didn't make the cut, they would give a nod to the statement "it's not canonical" and still include it in their Bible's as an "appendix so the text doesn't get lost" or more creatively divide the book to serve as an introduction/epilogue to Biblical books ... leaving us uncertain of the canonical status of books bound in the Bible.
it was only with the rise of the sola scriptura view that the definition of the actual canon became critical -- no longer "we agree even though our practice differs".

. there are powerful people that have wanted everyone not to have access to these books for centuries.

Generally, they have been accessible because of their use as the background for understanding scripture or because of their use in liturgy, hymns, art, and early church writings ... but people ceased to know what the "Biblical" source was. Note that lost texts and gnostic literature has a different history as do the Oriental Church canons which were ignored because the existence of the Oriental Church was ignored.

But mainline Protestant churches are begining to recover their heritage ... and some are expanding it to include Dead Sea Scroll and Gnostic sources (The New New Testament, and The Uncommon Lectionary (Butcher) are examples).

At the moment I'm concentrating on getting more of the deuterocanon pericopes into the Compare Pericopes tool and exploring getting them into the Biblical Events Navigator ....

1Cor10 31

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1183665#Comment_1183665

Regardless of the truth, Faithlife, as a business, has the right to determine where they should invest their $. Thus, we can only infer that Faithlife has deemed including these resources is not profitable as of now. Otherwise, they would have done it. We cannot infer that Faithlife is not including these resources because they think they are not part of the cannon.

Carmen Gauvin-O'Donnell

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1183670#Comment_1183670

May I commend (and re-commend!) Faithlife's course BI291 - The Apocrypha - Witness Between the Testaments, taught by Dr. David deSilva? It was EXCELLENT. Or you can read his book, Introducing the Apocrypha - Message, Context and Significance.

In fact, I fully plan to create a TEDD talk (Theology, Education, Doctrine and Discussion!) for my church, tentatively titled, "The Apocrypha - Evangelicals, Be Not Afraid!" [:D]

Am I convinced that they are not Inspired Scripture? Without a doubt. But does that mean they are not useful? OF COURSE NOT. And now I understand WHY Paul, before his conversion, was such a fanatical ding-dong, among other things.

So, off you all go now... [H]

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1183670#Comment_1183670

Regardless of the truth, Faithlife, as a business, has the right to determine where they should invest their $.

Oh so true. Remember the excruciating years before Korean and Chinese got support (major 'Global South Christian areas). And currently pulling teeth for East European mission fields translations, while yet another english translation is greeted with gusto.

Gregory Lawhorn

trust me, I'll keep pushing.

So you won't mind if someone else pushes back . . .

Kathleen Marie

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1183665#Comment_1183665

This is so controversial.

It shouldn't/needn't be. ...

But mainline Protestant churches are begining to recover their heritage ...

What should and needs to happen is not what happens in the church. There are some that don't want anyone to recover their heritage or reunite with those they have broken from.

Greg Dement

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1183700#Comment_1183700

I made note of Carmen’s recommendation. In a similar vein, I know very little to none about the Orthodox Church. I hear from some in the Orthodox Church not to try to understand by trying to read online and to be careful which resources to read. What resource would you recommend to a Protestant wanting to understand it better? (Concise As possible). If it is helpful I have at least Bronze in all denominations in Logos 7, 8 and 9, I see I even have Silver in Logos 8 Orthodox.

Greg Dement

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1183704#Comment_1183704

FYI: if it was offensive to create distinctiveness from Protestant (which in my limited understanding there is), it was out of ignorance not intent.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1183670#Comment_1183670

. Thus, we can only infer that Faithlife has deemed including these resources is not profitable as of now. Otherwise, they would have done it.

If you were around when they first announced and postponed, and postponed, and postponed a Catholic Bible version, you would know that there are real complexities added by truly supporting the broader canon. But they kept at it and eventually added verse mapping (and less obviously book name/division mapping) so they had the infrastructure to support alternative canons. Unfortunately, resolving resources that appear as pseudepigrapha and as canon has been a slow process as well. Once they had the infrastructure, they have been gradually expanding their bases - deliberately targeting Eastern Orthodox, Catholic, and Lutheran larger canons. Anglican is probably also included but I can't think of a specific resource or feature off the top of my head. My concern is more with how Faithlife can serve us better and expand the "us" which the product fully supports.

We cannot infer that Faithlife is not including these resources because they think they are not part of the cannon.

No, I would not. But I would state that Faithlife has few employees truly familiar with the additional material so it has, in the past, been forgotten, given cursory treatment, or handled well with a bit of a reminder.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1183692#Comment_1183692

trust me, I'll keep pushing.

So you won't mind if someone else pushes back . . .

Not at all. If you want FL to be a niche company of limited value to academics, that is certainly your right. More likely, if you want FL to spend their resources implementing your personal priorities -- welcome aboard, you're part of the human race.

I would like a universal user option that allows the user to control what appears as canonical, deuterocanonical, and noncanonical. Quick. Can you tell me the difference between Anglican apocrypha and Lutheran apocrypha?

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1183673#Comment_1183673

Carmen, you may also benefit from The First Bible of the Church: A Plea for the Septuagint by Mogens Müller

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1183704#Comment_1183704

The Orthodox Way: Revised Edition by Kallistos Ware for theory if you want it
For the Life of the World by Alexander Schmemann for practical implementation of their world view - very popular with some Protestants
The Way of a Pilgrim: The Jesus Prayer Journey Annotated & Explained by Gleb Pokrovsky not my favorite edition by a long shot, but a strong, popular introduction to the practices in daily life.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1183705#Comment_1183705

FYI: if it was offensive to create distinctiveness from Protestant (which in my limited understanding there is), it was out of ignorance not intent.

The Eastern Orthodox are distinctive culturally from the Oriental Orthodox and the Catholic Churches because their history has never taken them far from the early church fathers (primarily the Greek fathers) in their expression of their faith and because they are holistic (rather than the Catholic dissection) in their approach. The result is that it sometimes takes some serious digging to understand what they are saying because they frame it differently.

Greg Dement

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1183741#Comment_1183741

Today I was learning a little about phronema and nous which I think are related to your saying ”framing it differently”.

Greg Dement

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1183742#Comment_1183742

Thank you for referring the resources I already own! [:D]