Books more suited to fit differing beliefs

I have L4b and I do love it! But there are some things that it does run short on. I just wish there were packages more suited to different church theologies. While I don't need a Catholic Lectionary, others don't want the works of Jack Hayford. I wish Logos could have Baptist, Catholic, Pentecostal/Charismatic, Lutheran, Presbyterian, and other packages as well. I know you can't make us all happy I just hope this can be considered!

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

DominicM

I used to agree with you, but over the years have come to love the diversity of resources,.Logos's strength is its diversity of resources, there are Charismatic resources out there, just as there are Reformed, and everything in between.

I think a purely denominational version (although understandable) would be a step in the wrong direction, athough we have had churches release their books in a single library disc before.

However, I actually find having a wide range of literature, helps me rationalise my veiwpoint while checking my theology is in balance with the scriptures, and if there are awkward passages examining the various theological viewpoints helps me to argue my points,having the broad church approach when studying, is also helpful to check I am not erring.

MJ. Smith

I wish Logos could have Baptist, Catholic, Pentecostal/Charismatic, Lutheran, Presbyterian, and other packages as well.

I agree to a point. I think that entry level packages should be targeted in a way that the user will actually use most the resources. What Logos needs to foster in the low level packages is that Logos resources are useful so one wants to add to their collection. If one only uses a small percentage of what one has there is little incentive to purchase more. It also needs to be easier to find resources on Logos' website. Possible approaches could be:

1) denominational resource blogs

2) index by author's professed denomination with a separate category for philosophy/linguistics and other reference texts

3) index by the assumed canon

4) people who bought this also bought ... web

5) who quotes who web (e.g. I'm more interested in someone who quotes Gregory Palamas than John Piper).

6) user topical lists as on Amazon where for a given topic a list of books are recommended along with the reason for each.

7) index by exegetical approach

I'm sure that with a bit of brainstorming, others could expand my list.

Wesley Crouch

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/111245#Comment_111245

I agree to a point. I think that entry level packages should be targeted in a way that the user will actually use most the resources. What Logos needs to foster in the low level packages is that Logos resources are useful so one wants to add to their collection. If one only uses a small percentage of what one has there is little incentive to purchase more. It also needs to be easier to find resources on Logos' website. Possible approaches could be:

1) denominational resource blogs

2) index by author's professed denomination with a separate category for philosophy/linguistics and other reference texts

3) index by the assumed canon

4) people who bought this also bought ... web

5) who quotes who web (e.g. I'm more interested in someone who quotes Gregory Palamas than John Piper).

6) user topical lists as on Amazon where for a given topic a list of books are recommended along with the reason for each.

7) index by exegetical approach

[Y] That is a MUCH better way of saying what I was trying but couldn't bring my little brain to say!

NetworkGeek

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/111264#Comment_111264

I also prefer the diversity, I am comfortaable enough in my faith to also be open to written ideas that may differ, and also to know when I disagree with something. Keep in mind though that most Christians actually agree on much more than they disagree with, so I have found many authors I might normally read if I had a more narrow focus, explain something better than an author I am more familiar with.

You know logically, everyone considers what they believe to be correct, otherwise they wouldn't believe it! But there are so many diverse viewpoints, by logic most are wrong - there can only be 1 right answer on any given point - we will all find out the right answer one day with Christ.

This is another reason to be open minded to reading as many thoughts as possible; (I also have found times where I know two different authors believe different things, but when I read it they are both saying the same thing but with different words!)

As for how to organize, I get a lot out of as many "quotes" as possible - it matters to me who recommends a work. My .02, I think it may be very difficult to classify by denomination, as many authors avctually walked in multiple camps over their lifetimes, and also varied in opinion with others of their faith at times. Also, for many denominations there are a ton of variations. The categorization sounds like it could be more onerous than reviewing the book in the first place, we need to be careful in what we expect Logos to do. Just my .02

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/111269#Comment_111269

I also prefer the diversity,

I personally read broadly but am biased towards the Orthodox-Catholic-Lutheran-Anglican-Buddhist-mystical side. However, there are many potential Logos users who either prefer to read broadly in paper and spine mode or prefer a more targeted reading simply for the preparation for classes. Logos has indicated that the majority of low end purchasers do not purchase additional resources. For those of us outside the Evangelical mainstream to get the resources we want, we need to expand Logos' market among those who share our taste in resources.

I think it may be very difficult to classify by denomination

I agree - Pelikan is a good example (by the way, I still consider him Catholic despite his leaving Lutherans for Orthodoxy). The problems with denominational tagging has been debated at length in another thread.

The categorization sounds like it could be more onerous than reviewing the book in the first place, we need to be careful in what we expect Logos to do.

I would not even recommend all the possibilities I mentioned - they were examples towards an end that is Logos' responsibility - the ability of customers to find resources of interest to them. With Logos gearing up to produce thousands of titles a year, this is core to their business plan.

Ward Walker

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/111272#Comment_111272

I personally read broadly but am biased towards the Orthodox-Catholic-Lutheran-Anglican-Buddhist-mystical side.

I'd hate to see what "broadly" means [;)]

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/111294#Comment_111294

I'd hate to see what "broadly" means

It means that if I tire of referring to myself as the little old lady lurking in the shadows I can refer to myself as that fat broad. As you can see, I carefully practice self-affirming statements. [:P]

BTW - for some reason at the Seattle Camp Logos few people recognized me from my picture or verbal self-portrait.