Questionable "Bible Study Magazine" Ad
Comments
-
Josh,
It is amazing how your Light has exposed and has brought into public focus the darkness that exists in many hearts.
How deeply troubling it is to see dear precious souls either denying or not fully affirming the blessed and glorious Revelation of who the True God is! may God open the eyes of many to understand the wonderful scene when the Holy Spirit descended upon the Son and the Father spoke to the Son, it was then on the banks of the jordan river where the Glory of the triune God began to be fully seen. That is THE Begining of Gods full self Revelation very early in the first century.
Robert.
0 -
Personally, I'd rather not see this ad in BSM. I realize that there is a gray area involved in deciding what ads to accept, but I think the group behind this ad is clearly heretical. It would be nice to see the folks at BSM take a stand and choose to not run the ad.
Just my opinion, and I'm not going to make a big deal about it.
0 -
Purely because it has not been mentioned in this thread yet, I'd like to express my affection for and appreciation of pie.
"I read dead people..."
0 -
Pastor Jesse Blevins said:
Maybe it will take some people cancelling their subscription to the magazine.
I have thought about ordering it but not now or as long as thesetypes of ads are bein g placed in it.
The magazine has the right to publish any adds it wants. I also have the right not to subscribe to it. I was about to renew my subscription but I think I'll just pass.
George0 -
Brother Mark said:
Purely because it has not been mentioned in this thread yet, I'd like to express my affection for and appreciation of pie.
I like pie.
"As any translator will attest, a literal translation is no translation at all."
0 -
Paul Miller said:
You are correct, and I have been disrespectful of the rules of the forum regarding theological issues. I respectfully withdraw from discussion, and beg your and others pardon.
However, I hope the advertisement of the magazine everywhere on the softwares website does not confuse others like myself. I was honestly unaware that this was not the proper place, as I purchased my magazine subscription during checkout of buying additional parts of the software. I will read the forum rules and be more aware next time.
I'm sorry if I have offended anyone or have seemed uncharitable.
Paul,
Thank you for this gracious and thoughtful response to my prior post.
In case I didn't make myself clear before, I indeed honor and respect the passion you hold for the Trinity.
Blessings,
Bill
0 -
DMB said:
Very interesting point, Frank. And Josh, I think you live in the 1st century (that's a compliment).
I was going to comment about this last night but other things were going on, anywho:
FYI - The doctrine was not first century, it was later when it was made a Law. If Josh was living in the first century he would be more of a Restorationist, but in either case it is out of place.
Thanks.
DISCLAIMER: What you do on YOUR computer is your doing.
0 -
Paul Golder said:Brother Mark said:
Purely because it has not been mentioned in this thread yet, I'd like to express my affection for and appreciation of pie.
I like pie.
starting to calculate pie to 400 places
3.141592653589793238462643383279502884197169399375105820974944592307816406
286208998628034825342117067982148086513282306647093844609550582231725359408
128481117450284102701938521105559644622948954930381964428810975665933446128
475648233786783165271201909145648566923460348610454326648213393607260249141
273724587006606315588174881520920962829254091715364367892590360011330530548
820466521384146951941511609490 -
This sort of discussion is best suited for Faithlife. I just created a discussion group called "Discussion of the Trinity". I am automatically listed as the Administrator. If anyone desires to relieve me of this role, it would be most welcome.
Faithlife is the place for discussions where we can discuss theology. We asked Logos for a forum for this purpose, so lets use it for that purpose.
Anyone can create a group for discussion on various matters. https://faithlife.com/discussion-of-the-trinity
Mission: To serve God as He desires.
0 -
Paul Golder said:Brother Mark said:
Purely because it has not been mentioned in this thread yet, I'd like to express my affection for and appreciation of pie.
I like pie.
But do you like pi pie? I prefer pecan pie. (And that's puh khan for you that don't know better)
0 -
Room4More ... I was referring to Josh's insistance on what he considered to be critical to belief. Don't know about your church, but at the ones I attend, it's not acceptable to discuss theology for fear of offending. All my Christian friends avoid talking about what they believe.
Getting back to Logos, I'm currently reading resources on the early church. What impresses me is the assumption that believers in later centuries had a monopoly on these type of discussions. I wouldn't be surprised if the same issue were in the 1st century since it's so obvious.
I also think the pie discussion is in contrast to Josh; it's clearly meant to offend him.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
Lynden Williams said:
I just created a discussion group called "Discussion of the Trinity".
Anyone can create a group for discussion on various matters. https://faithlife.com/discussion-of-the-trinity
I am in, already left a question. You can transfer me if you so desire.
DISCLAIMER: What you do on YOUR computer is your doing.
0 -
Done.
Mission: To serve God as He desires.
0 -
Brad Fry said:Paul Golder said:Brother Mark said:
Purely because it has not been mentioned in this thread yet, I'd like to express my affection for and appreciation of pie.
I like pie.
But do you like pi pie? I prefer pecan pie. (And that's puh khan for you that don't know better)
Yes [:D] And I love Pecan Pie
By the way, if you wanted to calculate pi to any digit you can use the Bailey, Borwein, Plouffe formula:
Pi = SUMk=0 to infinity 16-k [ 4/(8k+1) - 2/(8k+4) - 1/(8k+5) - 1/(8k+6) ]
(doesn't work with puh khans though [;)])
"As any translator will attest, a literal translation is no translation at all."
0 -
Lynden Williams said:
Done.
Thanks.
I made a post on faithlife.com beta for the need to add 'edit' / 'quote' buttons...
DISCLAIMER: What you do on YOUR computer is your doing.
0 -
DMB said:
Room4More ... I was referring to Josh's insistance on what he considered to be critical to belief. Don't know about your church, but at the ones I attend, it's not acceptable to discuss theology for fear of offending. All my Christian friends avoid talking about what they believe.
Getting back to Logos, I'm currently reading resources on the early church. What impresses me is the assumption that believers in later centuries had a monopoly on these type of discussions. I wouldn't be surprised if the same issue were in the 1st century since it's so obvious.
I also think the pie discussion is in contrast to Josh; it's clearly meant to offend him.
thanks for the comment. I was brought up that one should understand what they believe and be able to explain what they believe based on 1 Peter 3:15. Also interesting concerning the ECF was how they also used 'dirty politics'. Yes, I would have to agree about having a piece of pumkpin pie....
DISCLAIMER: What you do on YOUR computer is your doing.
0 -
DMB said:
I also think the pie discussion is in contrast to Josh; it's clearly meant to offend him.
While I suspect it was an honest attempt to derail the debate since nothing else had worked, I do agree its not the best mechanism. The moving of the debate to Faithlife was a very good idea that I wish I had thought of.
DMB said:it's not acceptable to discuss theology for fear of offending.
Luckily, this is not true at my parish nor at the cathedral. We tend to have the attitude "he's a pig-headed fool but he's my pig-headed brother in Christ so don't you pick on him." But, like siblings, we continue to argue with the pig-headed fool - think large raucous, argumentative family kept safe by parental boundaries.
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 -
Goodness,what a lot of heat (and fire) and precious little light! Please do remember that Jesus prayed we would show we are His disciples and that He was who He said He was by our love for one another, not our love for doctrine. The early church impressed the people around them by their LOVE for one another not by their correctness of doctrine.
History is littered with the bodies of brothers and sisters who have died over an abundance of love of doctrine and an absence of the love Jesus prayed for.
Consider this: Will marking others in a public forum using Guilt by Association or being an Inquisitor cause the ad to be unprinted? What's done is done. The ad cannot be unprinted. But the accusation and judgement will stay long after the slightly sweet taste pride and ego gives the satisfaction of the accusation.
Peace and Grace
0 -
MJ ... your ability to discuss among 'family' is nice.
I was talking with the Lutheran leader here and he was laughing that his Lutheran church had few Lutherans. Our evangelical church had a ladies luncheon the other day and it's always a pleasant surprise to hear which denomination they kind of follow. Each is unique. A month back a large Baptist church was meeting with the Catholics in the new Catholic church building and invited us. Mainly just to understand each other. Each year our protestant churches get together with the synogogue to do 'good works' as they call it. And so people can't get too wound up.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
MJ. Smith said:DMB said:
I also think the pie discussion is in contrast to Josh; it's clearly meant to offend him.
While I suspect it was an honest attempt to derail the debate since nothing else had worked, I do agree its not the best mechanism. The moving of the debate to Faithlife was a very good idea that I wish I had thought of.
Since I posted the first "pie" note, I'll respond for those of us that viewed it as a humorous attempt to defuse a (clearly) inappropriate discussion. Several took it in the spirit it was offered, but I apologize to DMB and Josh for any unintended slight... it was only intended as an opportunity to stop, smile, and bleed off a little of the emotion.
"I read dead people..."
0 -
Brother Mark said:
Since I posted the first "pie" note, I'll respond for those of us that viewed it as a humorous attempt to defuse a (clearly) inappropriate discussion. Several took it in the spirit it was offered, but I apologize to DMB and Josh for any unintended slight... it was only intended as an opportunity to stop, smile, and bleed off a little of the emotion.
so I don't get that piece of pumkin pie - bummer [:'(]
DISCLAIMER: What you do on YOUR computer is your doing.
0 -
Brother Mark said:
Since I posted the first "pie" note, I'll respond for those of us that viewed it as a humorous attempt to defuse a (clearly) inappropriate discussion. Several took it in the spirit it was offered, but I apologize to DMB and Josh for any unintended slight... it was only intended as an opportunity to stop, smile, and bleed off a little of the emotion.
I am the one that posted the digits of pi. I did not see that someone was slighted by the pi remarks. You can add me to the apologizes list. Sorry.
0 -
David Ames said:Brother Mark said:
Since I posted the first "pie" note, I'll respond for those of us that viewed it as a humorous attempt to defuse a (clearly) inappropriate discussion. Several took it in the spirit it was offered, but I apologize to DMB and Josh for any unintended slight... it was only intended as an opportunity to stop, smile, and bleed off a little of the emotion.
I am the one that posted the digits of pi. I did not see that someone was slighted by the pi remarks. You can add me to the apologizes list. Sorry.
Oh, c'mon now, I wouldn’t worry too much about Josh, I think he took his toys and went home….I think we made him upset..he won't talk to us.
but ya got to admit it was interesting how it went from just complaining about an ad in a magezine to calling people heretics and the like....I invited him to the faithlife group - but I dunno....
DISCLAIMER: What you do on YOUR computer is your doing.
0 -
Room4more said:David Ames said:Brother Mark said:
Since I posted the first "pie" note, I'll respond for those of us that viewed it as a humorous attempt to defuse a (clearly) inappropriate discussion. Several took it in the spirit it was offered, but I apologize to DMB and Josh for any unintended slight... it was only intended as an opportunity to stop, smile, and bleed off a little of the emotion.
I am the one that posted the digits of pi. I did not see that someone was slighted by the pi remarks. You can add me to the apologizes list. Sorry.
Oh, c'mon now, I wouldn’t worry too much about Josh, I think he took his toys and went home….I think we made him upset..he won't talk to us.
but ya got to admit it was interesting how it went from just complaining about an ad in a magezine to calling people heretics and the like....I invited him to the faithlife group - but I dunno....
Josh made a serious point about about the proper scope of Logos business, he was told that this is not the place for pressing the point so he withdrew. It is in very poor taste to have a go at him for doing so and it is just as out of bounds to keep presenting a position that something is not heretical as the opposite. This board should not be a forum for repeatedly pushing a theological position that many find absolutely disgusting.
0 -
[Y]Mike Pettit said:Josh made a serious point about about the proper scope of Logos business, he was told that this is not the place for pressing the point so he withdrew. It is in very poor taste to have a go at him for doing so and it is just as out of bounds to keep presenting a position that something is not heretical as the opposite. This board should not be a forum for repeatedly pushing a theological position that many find absolutely disgusting.
0 -
Mike Pettit said:
Josh made a serious point about about the proper scope of Logos business, he was told that this is not the place for pressing the point so he withdrew. It is in very poor taste to have a go at him for doing so and it is just as out of bounds to keep presenting a position that something is not heretical as the opposite. This board should not be a forum for repeatedly pushing a theological position that many find absolutely disgusting.
Yes he did, he should get a medal. No, he withdrew because he started throwing stones. No one is 'having a go at him', but if you consider one as heretical as the other, then by all means come to the faithlife group and voice your opinion. As to 'repeatedly pushing your position', isn't that what you are doing now?
It's been noticed others have......
Did ya hear the one where the pot called the kettle black.......
Thanks.
DISCLAIMER: What you do on YOUR computer is your doing.
0 -
Straight-up:
I've noticed this more often and I do not understand most of you all here, you play your harp's about the forum guidelines, but then it's like the same people that do all the harp playing are the same one's that want to be the Regulator's but on the side are doing just the opposite. I don't get it.....are there two different sets of 'forum guidelines'?
No need to answer just ponder the statement......
Thanks. R4m.
DISCLAIMER: What you do on YOUR computer is your doing.
0 -
Room4more said:
Yes he did, he should get a medal. No, he withdrew because he started throwing stones. No one is 'having a go at him'
As I see it, what Josh was doing was wrong. He was called out because of it, and he stopped. Now, what you are doing is equally wrong, and you have been called out on it. No one is playing by different rules. Both of you are throwing stones (different stones, but still stones). He quite, and you have not. Please stop throwing your stones.
0 -
tom collinge said:
As I see it, what Josh was doing was wrong. He was called out because of it, and he stopped. Now, what you are doing is equally wrong, and you have been called out on it. No one is playing by different rules. Both of you are throwing stones (different stones, but still stones). He quite, and you have not. Please stop throwing your stones.
Thanks Tom,
How quick we are to turn….But nevertheless. Lynden has provided a group in Faithlife, And, I would think that all those who made gestures would be more than eager to jump in and correct me – but they have not. So……
So, in the real world, I have only encouraged those to join me – how is that wrong? Is it possible that the bark is louder than the bite? And they brought the woman taken in adultry to him and accused her.......but they all left, one at a time - paraphrased.
[:D] , Thanks.
DISCLAIMER: What you do on YOUR computer is your doing.
0 -
Everyone is getting tangled up in the theology of the ad placer consider the ad and it's appearance, in a magazine titled "Bible StudyMagazine"
I question how BSM can claim to be a serious Bible Study Magazine and carry ads that basically say if you aren't reading the King James Version of the scripture you aren't reading the Word of God. It would be similar to Car and Driver magazine running an ad that says Chevolet is the only real automobile in existence today.
Think of the implication to Car and Driver magazine, if that ad were true why buy Car and Driver Magazine all the reviews not on Chevy have to be made up.
Likewise why do any Bible study it has been done for you and put into King's English all you have to do is read and accept it so why buy Bible Study Magazine.
One could also conclude that since the ad claims that KJV is the Word of God then in fact there would be no need for Logos and it's language tools. So one of Logos' claim to fame, "excellent original language study tools" is really not need and since BSM which is an arm of Logos ran an ad that said as much it must be true.
Did anyone on the BSM staff give any thought to the implications of this Ad?
0 -
tom collinge said:Room4more said:
Yes he did, he should get a medal. No, he withdrew because he started throwing stones. No one is 'having a go at him'
As I see it, what Josh was doing was wrong. He was called out because of it, and he stopped. Now, what you are doing is equally wrong, and you have been called out on it. No one is playing by different rules. Both of you are throwing stones (different stones, but still stones). He quite, and you have not. Please stop throwing your stones.
[Y]
0 -
tom collinge said:Room4more said:
So, in the real world, I have only encouraged those to join me – how is that wrong?
For me as a reader, your invitation did not sound like an invitation. For me, your invitation sounded more antagonistic.
[Y]
0 -
tom collinge said:Room4more said:
So, in the real world, I have only encouraged those to join me – how is that wrong?
For me as a reader, your invitation did not sound like an invitation. For me, your invitation sounded more antagonistic.
See Tom, it did not matter. People still read what I said, again, And they still posted, and ignored it. What you might call antagonistic I see as an honest request. It was mention to move it – it was moved – - - -
“Woman, where are your accusers?”
[:-*] Thanks.
DISCLAIMER: What you do on YOUR computer is your doing.
0 -
Just for those who question Logos running of the ad in their magazine[just so there is no confusion, go to faithlife and type in 'Mormon' - you may be surprised] [:D]:
http://carm.org/comparison-between-christian-doctrine-and-mormon-doctrine
http://www.logos.com/products/search?q=the+book+of+mormon
EDIT:
This sounds familiar:Now if Logos created a Mormon base package along with a video series that helped Mormons use Logos within a Mormon Scripture study methodology - that would be a different story. This would be Logos clearly promoting the propagation of the Mormon faith as a legitimate "Christian" faith. To me this would be unacceptable. Could Logos do this? Yes. But because of the nature of their product - namely the Bible - many of its users would be offended and outraged. (http://community.logos.com/forums/p/44253/332278.aspx#332278 same as this thread -perhaps)
-'nough said...[:#].
DISCLAIMER: What you do on YOUR computer is your doing.
0 -
R4M,
Why must you keep throwing stones, to use your words, at Josh? You are being passive aggressive, and I have reported this post for abuse.
0 -
I think it would be best if we let this thread fade away. We all know that discussing theology and doctrine is against forum guidelines, and we would ask you to respect that.
Further, I believe that a case has been made both for and against the ad being run in Bible Study Magazine. Please direct any further comments to John Barry: john@biblestudymagazine.com
Thank you for your respect in this matter.
0
