Commentaries - Denomination

Factbook is a perpetual work in progress. They are rolling out an update to the data factbook exposes every couple weeks.

What definition of "Reformed" is being used?

A denominational one, not a theological one.

Very seriously, I treat "non-denominational" to be a school within the denomination "American Evangelical/Fundamentalist".

I suppose if you define American Evangelical widely, yes. But if you start equating American Evangelical with Fundamentalist, no. In many ways Evangelicalism and Fundamentalism are distinct movements that do admittedly overlap enough that is confusing to us outsiders.

Edit: To give an example, I think that Rob Bell would describe his work as being Non-Denominational. But it is in no way Fundamentalist.

the emphasis is "American" rather than "Fundamentalist" or "Evangelical"

That makes more sense. But of course, we have exported that to the rest of the world.

What definition of "Reformed" is being used?

A denominational one, not a theological one.

But the original post asked why authors (e.g. MacArthur) are not included in the taxonomy. This exposes the challenge when Logos tags by denomination but users read it as theological.

When the denomination packages were first introduced I must say I stopped using Logos as often as I felt the 'labels' did not seem accurate or fair. Your comment only highlights the inconsistencies. I began using WordSearch more but now I am going to live within these 'labels'.

Is there someway they can be turned off?

Colin

I don't criticize the groupings or the desire for more tagging. I just believe there is a HUGE opportunity for misunderstanding if a user doesn't realize the fluidity of these categories.

Same; I'm having difficulty seeing the value of the effort of an exercise like this for commentaries, where approach and methodology (e.g., critical or pre-critical) are far more determinative than the author's denominational affiliation.

Thanks for that Graham. I have now seen the Morris Proctor Webinar which explained how the options work. The option to filter by other means is helpful.

Colin

I'm having difficulty seeing the value of the effort of an exercise like this for commentaries, where approach and methodology (e.g., critical or pre-critical) are far more determinative than the author's denominational affiliation.

Authors from Group A usually don't say fantastically stupid things about Group A and its history, theology, approach to a particular passage, etc., but they may do such things with regard to Group B. They also come from different cultural backgrounds and intellectual traditions, which are meaningfully delimited by accurate denominational assignments. Those backgrounds come into play in their Scripture commentaries not only in their selection of approaches and methodologies, but in their execution thereof.

Does anybody (please..? ) agree with me that Arland J. Hultgren should be moved

Of course he should be in the Lutheran category, as should the Concordia Self-Study Commentary.

And the Baker New Testament Commentary series should be Reformed.

The whole feature is in process. It may never be finished since of the writing of books there is no end, but there are obvious improvements that Faithlife has been making even since Monday.

Sean et al,

I think this feature is well-intentioned and useful to some. But the label "Denomination" might just be too contentious. (As someone pointed out in another post, should "Jewish/Judaism" be included?)

Would "Tradition" be a better label, and being more consistent with how the Base Packages are labeled?

Peter

I don't know where this figure of 40k comes from. 

Factbook currently includes a little less than 200. These are organized into about 35 denominational groups, 25 of which are labeled in the Passage Guide Commentaries section under "Denomination".

Faith Life Forum "groups"

1. Anglican Products  
2. Baptist Products  
3. Catholic Products  
4. Jewish Products  
5. Lutheran Products  
6. Messianic Jewish Products  
7. Methodist & Wesleyan Products  
8. Orthodox Products  
9. Pentecostal & Charismatic Products  
10. Reformed Products  
11. Seventh-day Adventist Products  

 Currently you have 11 “denominational” Forum “groups” [Yes, I know that the word “denominational’ does not fit all of them but I am lacking a better word while considering tagging resources as to who would want to use that resource] If I was doing this [and I am glad that I am not]  I would start by grouping them into the Forum “groups”. As which Forum group members would be most likely to purchase and use these.   Then split them finer if need be.  [[of course there are some of us that buy from more than one "group" but a tool that told us what group a resource fits when found in a search  will be useful]]  

 Also: Did a 'google' on "count of denominations": estimates range from 30 to 45 thousand.  We have come a long way since we were just People of THE Way.  [Stress on the word “THE” as in the one and only way.]

Good luck!  Will review which "Groups" that I find useful after we can use your tool to see which is in what.

Why can't you use the term "Traditions" (as in the Base Package labelings) instead of "Denominations"?

[Y]   

But then we will need to define each "tradition"