Why we need more base packages for different faith groups

I am having a difficult time understanding the reasoning behind different faith packages. It seems to be a marketing ploy. If all resources are available, then why not simply have on the website a package for different faith communities to purchase...but not call them base packages...because that adds and element of confusion...

One thing that I think it necessary to stress is that there should always be total interoperability between the different packages. It should not be necessary to purchase or simply download a different version of the program in order to utilize resources from another package. Why should I need a Logos X, Noet, and Verbum program on my computer? "One ring to rule them all." [;)]

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/588067#Comment_588067

I agree

William Gabriel

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/588067#Comment_588067

One thing that I think it necessary to stress is that there should always be total interoperability between the different packages. It should not be necessary to purchase or simply download a different version of the program in order to utilize resources from another package. Why should I need a Logos X, Noet, and Verbum program on my computer? "One ring to rule them all."

I like this in theory, but currently I wouldn't want Noet resources cluttering my Logos library. It would be great to have Logos "contexts" that you could switch between that would filter the library the program operated on as you used Logos/Noet/Whatever. One of those "contexts" would be All/Default, but I want a Theology context and a Classics context so that I don't have to think about whether Beowulf is going to show up in my Library Searches.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/588089#Comment_588089

One thing that I think it necessary to stress is that there should always be total interoperability between the different packages. It should not be necessary to purchase or simply download a different version of the program in order to utilize resources from another package. Why should I need a Logos X, Noet, and Verbum program on my computer? "One ring to rule them all."

I like this in theory, but currently I wouldn't want Noet resources cluttering my Logos library. It would be great to have Logos "contexts" that you could switch between that would filter the library the program operated on as you used Logos/Noet/Whatever. One of those "contexts" would be All/Default, but I want a Theology context and a Classics context so that I don't have to think about whether Beowulf is going to show up in my Library Searches.

While I can somewhat understand your argument and wouldn't necessarily oppose a switch to filter out various contexts, I do trust that I'm aware of the kind of literature to which Beowulf belongs and automatically filter it out in my mind. The problem I see with an automatic programmatic filtering of resources is that there are times when I find literary resources useful in illustrating theological principles. Your "All" category might solve that.

David Salazar

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/588099#Comment_588099

Didn't Libronix has something similar.

I remember that I could have the homescreen for just all the resources of the SDA Bible Commentary + Ellen G. White writings, etc..

It be nice is something similar can happen within one program, but also be able to search all resources across (brand packages).

Greg

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/588067#Comment_588067

I agree with George. Just one program for all of them please.

at most lets just have a toggle switch or drop down tab that let's us switch between the different feature sets.

David Paul

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/588121#Comment_588121

Not a programmer, but I would think that radio buttons would work best. That way you can turn on each set as you like so they can be used in entire searches or turned off to limit the searches to a particular set.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/588089#Comment_588089

I like this in theory, but currently I wouldn't want Noet resources cluttering my Logos library.

You are someone else can correct me if I am wrong...but as far as I know, Noet resources are already available in LOGOS...and LOGOS resources are available in NOET. And VYSRO resources are available in LOGOS (not sure if that works the other way around).

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/588130#Comment_588130

I like this in theory, but currently I wouldn't want Noet resources cluttering my Logos library.

You are someone else can correct me if I am wrong...but as far as I know, Noet resources are already available in LOGOS...and LOGOS resources are available in NOET. And VYSRO resources are available in LOGOS (not sure if that works the other way around).

Yes, they are all interchangeable. You use tagging and collections to filter your Library so you only see the resources you want to see in whatever app's UI. All Vyrso resources are of edition "eBook" for example, so to weed those out in Logos, you'd create a collection (say "Logos Only" or "Non-Vyrso") with the rule rating:<6 ANDNOT edition:e and then select that collection in the Library filter dropdown instead of "Entire Library" and then you're good to go:

You could do a similar thing with Noet resources by tagging them all "Noet" and then creating a collection that weeds them out (rating:<6 ANDNOT mytag:Noet). There might be a community tag already associated with Noet resources that you could rely on, but in case not, you'd have to tag them yourself.

You could weed out BOTH Vyrso AND Noet resources by combining the two partial rules into: rating:<6 ANDNOT edition:e ANDNOT mytag:Noet.

Good luck. You'll be sailing through this with ease before you Noet.

EDIT: typos fixed

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/588146#Comment_588146

Always helpful information, Rosie!

Now, it would be a nice dream to see these commands not as something we must type in to get results, but from a drop down list where we can click and make the results happen.

In other words, why should the many customers of LOGOS, most who will not be computer savvy, need to do this themselves? Why cannot a programer make such rules part of the program?

rating<6 ANDNOT edition:e

rating<6 ANDNOT edition:e ANDNOT mytag:Noet.

This is programming language! Would it not make sense that a list of the top and most used 50 rules be included in the program?

I hope those who read my posts understand I am not complaining. I like brainstorming. I am hoping LOGOS sees some of these ideas and realizes that yes," this or that is possible...great idea...we will add it to the next upgrade..."

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/588157#Comment_588157

In other words, why should the many customers of LOGOS, most who will not be computer savvy, need to do this themselves? Why cannot a programer make such rules part of the program?

Agreed. The Library filter dropdown already contains "Personal Books" as an automatic collection, and "All Open Resources" (which to me seems silly because it's so ephemeral, but whatever). So they could just as easily add automatic collections for Noet resources, Vyrso resources, and Logos resources. And I think they should. I'd be cautious about it including the top 50 rules because that could clutter the dropdown for novice users who aren't likely to use more than a couple of them. But the Collections Tab could provide some suggestions for common rules (the way the Search tab provides suggestions for common search syntax).

I agree that the codes used for collection-making and searching are essentially programming languages and should be hidden from basic users and revealed only for power users (the way the copy-bible-verses formatting styles are presented as a menu of readable options, and the code behind them is only available for power users to edit).

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/588160#Comment_588160

So really, what we're saying is simply to copy the Logos business plan for mobiles.

A single library all mixed up, and 5 different programs that do different things with it. Plus no guidance on which does what. (As Milford has hinted at.)

Is this what we're thinking?

(Just driving Mark up the wall.)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/588160#Comment_588160

I'd be cautious about it including the top 50 rules because that could clutter the dropdown for novice users who aren't likely to use more than a couple of them.

Yes, I agree with this. But somewhere in TOOLS, a list of the top 50 or 100 rules could be made. Perhaps they already exist in the WIKI...but then again, not easy for a computer novice to find.

If Logos is going to continue to compete, and if they really want to expand (I dont think it has been overtly said yet, but my activities on the forum of late is due to the fact that it does not take a rocket scientist to see that another huge change such as the one from L3 to L4 is coming upon us...perhaps and hopefully not as drastic), then it would be wise for us all to help LOGOS in the brainstorming of ways to manage the Library. Whether anyone from LOGOS is listening is of course, another story.

The bottom line is that the Library needs a better management system than the current system. It needs to be a system friendly to non programmers and people who don't want to spend hours in organizing their virtual shelves.

Bradley Grainger (Logos)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/588146#Comment_588146

rating<6 ANDNOT edition:e ANDNOT mytag:Noet

Unfortunately, a typo in this rule has the side-effect of eliminating most of the resources you want it to return. Use the simpler form:
* ANDNOT edition:e ANDNOT mytag:Noet

Or even:
* -edition:e -mytag:Noet

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/588113#Comment_588113

Didn't Libronix has something similar.

I remember that I could have the homescreen for just all the resources of the SDA Bible Commentary + Ellen G. White writings, etc..

It be nice is something similar can happen within one program, but also be able to search all resources across (brand packages).

What SDA resources? I don't think there were any in L3 (Libronix).

Simon’s Brother

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/588170#Comment_588170

Didn't Libronix has something similar.

I remember that I could have the homescreen for just all the resources of the SDA Bible Commentary + Ellen G. White writings, etc..

It be nice is something similar can happen within one program, but also be able to search all resources across (brand packages).

What SDA resources? I don't think there were any in L3 (Libronix).

George there definitely was an SDA package back in L3 days, not like the base packages we have being put out now, but it was never put on the store front, but you could easily find it if you browsed through the site. It probably came with its own publisher home page if I am understanding correctly what David is saying.

Here is a review to the llibronix package: http://www.reviewandherald.com/index.php/products/profile/0828020426 and it is still available for purchase from Logos today: https://www.logos.com/product/38873/seventh-day-adventist-bible-commentary-expanded-edition

David Paul

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/588170#Comment_588170

This was available in L3...

https://www.logos.com/product/38873/seventh-day-adventist-bible-commentary-expanded-edition

Simon’s Brother

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/588157#Comment_588157

This is programming language! Would it not make sense that a list of the top and most used 50 rules be included in the program?

Yes I agree with some more automated organisation of the library but personally I would want to be able to turn off this options as they way I want to organise my library is very different I suspect you want to organise your library and different again to how someone on a Mac in a Logos office would organise the library on our behalf and I would not want the drop down list cluttered with near but far duplicates of my personalised library organisation.

I am wary of a blanket Vyrso filter as a lot of books on Vyrso that I own are not fiction but are biblical studies type material and I would not want them filtered out of my library simply because they are Vyrso books. In reality they are full logos books waiting to happen. Equally I don't want a blanket Noet filter on my library. There is too much overlap, particularly when it comes to language material, same once again goes for Perseus. Blank filters based on branding or edition (ie. Logos, ebook or user-created) I would find abhorrent to organisation of my library. The only time I filter my library using edtion: e is when I am doing tagging in order to organise my library the way I want my library organised.

The commands used to filter your library are the same commands used to create your own collection rules and to conduct your own searches and are no more difficult to learn than it is to learn how to search with google. There is simply some more specific options that allow you to conduct filtering more relevant to your digital library than a general web search. There is a lot of flexibility and you can make it complex if you want but often simple filters will do the trick.

I respect not everyone consider's themselves computer savvy but if you are using a tool like Logos then to use it to its full advantage you will want to learn how to conduct searches and if you learn that then you will have no trouble filtering your library to tag your books and create rule based collections because it is the one and same thing. If you learn nothing else about the software learn how to do this if you have a library of a couple of thousand books +, it is a must. I believe Logos is doing a disservice to themselves, their customers and the product but not providing free quality training on this aspect of using the software. I would think this is more significant and important than pre-tagging all resources with branding meta-data such as Noet, Vyrso, Logos etc (These are arbitrary divisions) and providing a radio button to filter the library based on that branding.

Yes it will take a little bit of effort to learn, to setup up tagging and collections but the payoff is sweet, particularly when it comes to searching your digital library.

When the idea of personal tagging was first floated on the old Logos Newsgroup's I confess i was not a fan. I thought it would be to much work. I had started with Logos 2.1 which organised stuff for me. Today with an hugely significantly larger library I would not want to go back to that system. I love being able to tag and organise collections and hence my library the way I want it organised.

Matthew C Jones

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/588180#Comment_588180

I believe Logos is doing a disservice to themselves, their customers and the product but not providing free quality training on this aspect of using the software.

Logos may have painted themselves into the corner with Camp Logos. Does Logos even have a right to provide free training? I know about the free Verbum Practicum but there may be agreements we don;t know about.

Then there are free training videos by Mark Barnes.

I have been to Morris Proctor's Camp Logos and have the DVDs. I recommend both.

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/588169#Comment_588169

rating<6 ANDNOT edition:e ANDNOT mytag:Noet

Unfortunately, a typo in this rule has the side-effect of eliminating most of the resources you want it to return. Use the simpler form:
* ANDNOT edition:e ANDNOT mytag:Noet

Or even:
* -edition:e -mytag:Noet

Thanks. My bad. I've fixed the typos in my original post (should be rating:<6).

My understanding was that rating:>=0 (or the quicker to type but essentially equivalent rating:<6) was faster than * which is why I've been using that. There was some discussion about this on the forum a while back. (Oh, I see I'd forgotten about the optimizations which made * just as fast.)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/588180#Comment_588180

I respect not everyone consider's themselves computer savvy

Thanks Disciple...

I am computer savvy. But I would suggest that since there are now thousands using this program, the majority are not. They will never get on a forum etc. Logos is doing well but I am concerned about my investment. Logos is moving in a direction it appears where your answer just is not going to cut it. People want things to be a bit easier than it is today

Dan Francis

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/588209#Comment_588209

One program is ideal... that being said I did switch over to verbum being told that in the future there will be functions there not available in Logos. These functions presumably would be something Catholics and faiths like the Orthodox, Lutheran, and Anglican might find useful. I am anglican but feel more comfortable in a Catholic setting than a more evangelical setting.

-Dan

Matthew C Jones

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/588209#Comment_588209

since there are now thousands using this program, the majority are not. They will never get on a forum etc. Logos is doing well but I am concerned about my investment.

"Thousands using the program?" Since you agree most users will never get on a forum what do you think if over 137,000 users have posted? Would it be safe to say Logos has over one million users? Logos seems to be doing something right. I am not worried about my investment in Logos.

Simon’s Brother

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/588209#Comment_588209

If people want to be spoon fed they are best to stick to listening to podcasts of someone else telling them the answers. I am not against improving the way we do things I just don't want someone predeterming for me things I should be making the choice for myself if am using a program of the depth of Logos. If people don't want to learn how to use simple rules then they should stick to word search or olive tree or e-sword or one of the other bible programs out there that makes these sort of choices on your behalf - but please do not clog up logos will prebuilt drop downs of endless meaningless options that are not of interest. Logos as a company moved away from doing this sort of stuff like they did in 2.1 because they respected the diversity do user needs. Suggesting they should no longer respect an individual's choice and fill up drop downs that are slow enough as it is with a large library is not moving forwards but backwards and as people if we are happy to sit back and just be directed to the answers I come back to why even both using a program like Logos. and let's not just stop their lets go full circle back to pre-Middle Ages and allow only the select few access to he scriptures - then things will be real easy for them.

Mark I am not suggesting you want to be spoon fed, just taking what you are suggesting to the extreme conclusion of the slippery slope it leads. Let's keep moving forward encouraging people to be bereans rather than Thessalonians, and not to be happy to continue in craving to only be fed milk from the bottle, to be ready to chew over the meat themselves. Turn Logos Bible Software into a vending machine style package and you will put your investment at risk. People who want this sort of software won't continue investing in the company, making add-on purchases. They will buy a starter base package, maybe bronze and then expect they have to make no further purchasers and the software will by itself continually get been easier for them wihout them making no further purchasers. Put it another way give a preson fast food today and they will line up for more tommorow, but teach him to fish and well you know the outcome. Logos is not for those wanting fast food.

I respect not everyone consider's themselves computer savvy

Thanks Disciple...

I am computer savvy. But I would suggest that since there are now thousands using this program, the majority are not. They will never get on a forum etc. Logos is doing well but I am concerned about my investment. Logos is moving in a direction it appears where your answer just is not going to cut it. People want things to be a bit easier than it is today

David Ames

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/588122#Comment_588122

Not a programmer, but I would think that radio buttons would work best. That way you can turn on each set as you like so they can be used in entire searches or turned off to limit the searches to a particular set.

Was a programmer. Using a Switch or radio buttons [all referred to as switches] make it easy for the user - don't have to figure out what program to use. But make it very difficult for the programmer and maybe impossible for the programmer that is doing maintenance [fixing bugs or adding new functionality]. The switches will need to be checked EVERYWHERE: as in If 1 do this else if 2 do this else if 3 do this else if 4 do this else [to cover when no switch is on] do this. [[there are other ways of doing this but this gives you an idea => if switch x is on do the code after the else in else if x]] And most of the code in the else section will be exactly the same with a few small differences to execute switch x at this point in the code.

[[in the OLD days the size of the code would grow very large with more switches. Today each section will be in the form of else if x run_file_x_this_section_of_code. There will then be a selection of code files for everywhere the programmers added that if then else code. Lots of added code files]]

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/588261#Comment_588261

I was angry when they came up with an 'au-to-ma-tic' transmission. Good drivers are able to manage a vehicle without the help of fancy-dancy dumb-down contraptions. If someone can't use a manual, they should simply walk.

And keyboards are meant to type with. Mice need not apply.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/588240#Comment_588240

just taking what you are suggesting to the extreme conclusion of the slippery slope it leads

Yeah, I guess you are right. I can see now there is really no real point to improve the manageability of the library.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/588278#Comment_588278

I was angry when they came up with an 'au-to-ma-tic' transmission. Good drivers are able to manage a vehicle without the help of fancy-dancy dumb-down contraptions. If someone can't use a manual, they should simply walk.

Agreed. Moreover, why do we need electric starters to get our cars running? The hand crank worked just fine. If anyone's too lazy to reach out and squeegee the windshield when it rains, he should stay home.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/588236#Comment_588236

"Thousands using the program?" Since you agree most users will never get on a forum what do you think if over 137,000 users have posted? Would it be safe to say Logos has over one million users? Logos seems to be doing something right. I am not worried about my investment in Logos.

I knew the number was much much higher than what I wrote, but was not sure exactly what the figures were. The problem I have with this is that it simply reminds me of the KODAK story. One thing all investors in KODAK stock could be sure of in the 1990s was that their investment was safe. And they had very good reason to feel secure. Their demise is a very interesting read.

Is it safe to say that this thread has been officially hijacked?

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/588290#Comment_588290

Sorry about that, Lynden. I guess my response to your OP caused that to happen. Here again was your original post:

1. Greater appeal to more specialized groups.

2. More publishers on board, and Logos is in a better position to negotiate better prices, thus the customer gets a cheaper resource.

3. More customers, company has more capital. Company has more capital, greater investment in research and development.

4. More capital better paid workers, and as a result, more workers, and the company can afford the best talent out there.

5. More visibility. This brings more customers and the cycle continues.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/588298#Comment_588298

Any other suggestions on the advantage of Base packages or collections from different faiths. Who has not been invited to the party as yet?

SineNomine

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/588303#Comment_588303

Fewer complaints from actual and would-be customers about having to buy materials deemed heretical in order to own a base package.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/588333#Comment_588333

Fewer complaints from actual and would-be customers about having to buy materials deemed heretical in order to own a base package.

You mean like having to buy things like Oswald Chambers, Spurgeon, Lloyd-Jones, etc? [:P]

abondservant

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/588303#Comment_588303

Any other suggestions on the advantage of Base packages or collections from different faiths. Who has not been invited to the party as yet?

SOUTHERN BAPTIST BASE PACKAGE - they are the largest denomination in the US iirc, and they don't even have a product manager at the moment. In the interim you could use Danny Akins building a theological library as a base line

perhaps you would need to create a new level of base package - the pentultimate package (or Palladium - 15x rarer than platinum) - that contains everything in his recommendation book... Mohler may have something similar from a reformed perspective.

Secondarily:

Reformed Baptist Base Package (Maybe Al Mohler would be interested in offering suggestions, or my former roommate, now PhD grad whose authored books with Norman Giesler - the roommate I can provide you (logos) with contact info for - he has thousands of books, just nothing digital - yet).

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/589412#Comment_589412

I can provide you (logos) with contact info for - he has thousands of books, just nothing digital - yet)

Ask him to get in contact with Logos.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/589412#Comment_589412

SOUTHERN BAPTIST BASE PACKAGE - they are the largest denomination in the US iirc

Not likely. All Baptists are only 49.4% as large as Catholics.[8-|]

More specifically, Southern Baptists make up 6.7% of the US population; Catholics make up 23.7%

NB.Mick

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/588303#Comment_588303

Any other suggestions on the advantage of Base packages or collections from different faiths. Who has not been invited to the party as yet?

Methodist/Wesleyan. Of course there's some overlap to Baptist on the one side and to Pentecostal/Charismatic on the other side - but that's the same in Lutheran/Anglican/Verbum.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/588303#Comment_588303

Any other suggestions on the advantage of Base packages or collections from different faiths. Who has not been invited to the party as yet?

Campbellites/Restorationist

David Ames

1. Greater appeal to more specialized groups.

Do we get a base package for each group listed in this thread? [That is where do we stop?]
the Theology/Denomination Tags thread is up to page 18 with 342 items
http://community.logos.com/forums/p/54491/396432.aspx#396432

[Or there are said to be some 40,000 different Christian denominations]

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/589484#Comment_589484

Do we get a base package for each group listed in this thread? [That is where do we stop?]
the Theology/Denomination Tags thread is up to page 18 with 342 items
http://community.logos.com/forums/p/54491/396432.aspx#396432

[Or there are said to be some 40,000 different Christian denominations]

If the resources exist, Logos can license them, and there is an interest. Yes.

NB.Mick

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/589494#Comment_589494

I think that the differentiation of base packages allows Logos to target different groups (who may have their respective conferences, magazines, websites, seminaries etc.) who will recognize their stuff (authors, preferred bible translations, commentaries, lectionaries and other things). This won't go to 40k base packages.

Bill Shewmaker

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/589499#Comment_589499

Although I very much like the idea of having a base package for each "denominational" tradition, I still favor the BASE packages that Logos offers. Having said that, I would like to see an "add-in" list of packages that would allow me the luxury of adding to my BASE package those resources that pertain to my particular liking. I'm definitely not opposed to having a base package for each denomination, but I do think that if we only read/study the works of our particular group, then we miss out on other viewpoints and ideas. We also lose out on knowing the "why" some people do what they do in their worship or devotion time.

If I have a 'generic" base package that crosses all or most major denominational groups, then I can read/study/agree/disagree with a little bit of understanding of them all. However, if I choose to limit myself to ONLY my traditional authors, then I may be missing out on some jewels (pearls of wisdom) that someone else has dug deep enough to uncover.

Just my 2 cents worth.

James C.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/589520#Comment_589520

Restoration, church of Christ, Christian church, Disciples of Christ Base Package Please.

abondservant

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/589458#Comment_589458

SOUTHERN BAPTIST BASE PACKAGE - they are the largest denomination in the US iirc

Not likely. All Baptists are only 49.4% as large as Catholics.

More specifically, Southern Baptists make up 6.7% of the US population; Catholics make up 23.7%

                                   Original church
                                   /                        \
                            Catholic               Protestant
                                /                               \
                            Rites                          Denominations

I guess my point was that there are more baptists than Anglicans, than Reformed, than Episcopalians (maybe even combined). They know what makes the most sense(EDIT: In light of their business model), and the southern baptists do have their own deficient software. Lifeways purchase of which dropped my scholarship by 10% as they needed cooperative program funds to do so. Maybe it will be something in the future, but now is the time to get Logos into the hands and homes of southern baptists.

Maybe you can get the boxed products in Lifeway book stores on seminary campuses.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/589532#Comment_589532

Your diagram leaves me [*-)] - historically or theologically.

I don't disagree that a Baptist package should be in the works. And I do recognize that Southern Baptists are about 16% of Baptists worldwide. I was simply correcting a factual error.

Anglicans, Methodists and Reformed together are 135% larger than all Baptists i.e. there are 2 1/3 times as many as Baptists. A conservative estimate gives us 3 times as many Orthodox as Baptists (because of the Communist era some Orthodoxy counts are estimates, I chose the low one).

Francis

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/589653#Comment_589653

I am still waiting for the "Charismatic-Arminian-Premillenial-Choruses-only-Anti-Ecumenical-Pro-Life-New Perspective" series of packages [:P].

David Ames

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/589520#Comment_589520

I'm definitely not opposed to having a base package for each denomination, but I do think that if we only read/study the works of our particular group, then we miss out on other viewpoints and ideas. We also lose out on knowing the "why" some people do what they do in their worship or devotion time.

If I have a 'generic" base package that crosses all or most major denominational groups, then I can read/study/agree/disagree with a little bit of understanding of them all. However, if I choose to limit myself to ONLY my traditional authors, then I may be missing out on some jewels (pearls of wisdom) that someone else has dug deep enough to uncover.

Just my 2 cents worth.

Amen.