Why is Amplified Bible missing from base packages?

Maybe because Logos encourages a fairly scholarly approach to the study of the Scriptures.

The Amplified Bible can be misleading to the uninformed because it gives just about every possible nuance of a word or phrase whereas a word, in a particular context, is likely to mean only one of those things.

This version is, however, available to buy as a separate item - and I have it!

The (Amplified/Explained/Elaborated) bible is not (was not, will not) be (included/part of the package/published) because of the (Publisher/copyright holder/owner) and their (practices/customs)

just thought I'd have some fun with this thread.

The Amplified Bible can be misleading to the uninformed because it gives just about every possible nuance of a word or phrase whereas a word, in a particular context, is likely to mean only one of those things.

Does anyone have a good example of a misleading text? Thanks.

All translations are misleading!!!  Anyone saying the Amplified Bible is misleading had better be willing to admit that the translation they are using is misleading too!   I have no idea why it is not in all packages, although it is would be considered a special use bible. You must understand how it was translated and what it's purpose is, but that is true of all translations.  I am not sure but I think the publishers may have a copy of it to use on their website.

In Christ,

Jim VanSchoonhoven

Pick a word? Wrong! (as I understand the amplified version)  In this version the one WORD that all the other versions use is to be seen as not one word but the SUM of ALL of the listed words.  A word has a range of meaning and the Amplified is trying to show us that range. 

[Also there is another similar tool now gathering interest :

The Emphasized Bible, by Joseph Bryant Rotherham, is a unique translation which helps English-only Bible readers to understand the linguistic and literary nuances of the Greek and Hebrew texts. This translation aims for a literal rendering of the original languages, and adds markings to]

Robert, if you read my post again, you will see that I actually said, it was important to understand how something was translated and for what purpose.  That directly addresses your statement.  There is no doubt that many people fail to read the purpose statement in the front of their bibles, that is not the fault of those that did the translation.   It is also the cause of many people being mislead, no matter what their bible is!

The point I was addressing is that I doubt the Amplified Bible is left out of these packages for the reasons some have suggested.  In Logos there are other tools for those that do not know Greek to come to a better understanding of what a passage means, but for years I have used NASB, NKJV, as my two main bibles and when I was in doubt about a meaning and just wanted some quick ideas on other possible meanings I would read the Amplified to see if any of their meanings might have made more sense or helped me to see the meaning of a passage.

When I went to the Greek text and seen what it actually said, I often saw how many times the Amplified bible had actually been helpful without looking at the Greek.  This is the purpose of this bible, it is geared towards those that do not know Greek, and it is helpful when two or more very literal translations are not making sense to you, by bring up other possible ways that passage could have been translated.  It does this by giving you a bunch of possible meanings, that you can use in the context and see if one of those meanings fit better.

In Christ,

Jim VanSchoonhoven

When I went to the Greek text and seen what it actually said, I often saw how many times the Amplified bible had actually been helpful without looking at the Greek.  This is the purpose of this bible, it is geared towards those that do not know Greek, and it is helpful when two or more very literal translations are not making sense to you, by bring up other possible ways that passage could have been translated.  It does this by giving you a bunch of possible meanings, that you can use in the context and see if one of those meanings fit better.

Jim,

then you are smarter than the average bear!

Many people (not all) use it like a smorgasborg of words that they can pick and choose according to what they think fits....

That was my point...you're just smarter than most...that's all....

"The "light being"? Is that what the original author meant when he said "Theos?"

To be fair, I think that's what the Amplified thinks the author meant by the glory of theos. But believe me, I'm as unimpressed with the Amplified as anyone else who knows how translation should work.

Pick a word? Wrong! (as I understand the amplified version)  In this version the one WORD that all the other versions use is to be seen as not one word but the SUM of ALL of the listed words.  A word has a range of meaning and the Amplified is trying to show us that range. 

That is precisely the way I use The Amplified Bible. And the way I believe it was intended to be used.

[Also there is another similar tool now gathering interest :

The Emphasized Bible, by Joseph Bryant Rotherham, is a unique translation which helps English-only Bible readers to understand the linguistic and literary nuances of the Greek and Hebrew texts. This translation aims for a literal rendering of the original languages, and adds markings to]

The Emphasized Bible   I am looking afterward to reading that one.

It's wrong for any translation to do that.

But it is NOT a translation.

What concerns me is that this gives the layman the idea that they can do a better job of translation than professional translation committees. I've seen too much 'Amplified Bible abuse' and 'Strong's Concordance abuse' to view favourably any tool which gives the layman the false illusion of superior knowledge without learning.

I have also seen abuse of The Living Bible, The Message, The NIV and pulpits across America. I would not seek to ban any of these venues or restrict their use to pre-qualified experts. I know from your posts you are a well educated and clear thinker. You were not born into this state of maturity and scholarship. Someone allowed you (as a novice) to read, study, think & question. Just because another must spend many hours weekly in pursuits that are mundane but necessary to his survival (a layman) we should not deny him the same opportunity to study.

Jesus chose a bunch of laymen to be his disciples. We have examples of the religious scholars, both Jewish and Christian, who have tried to limit access to the treasures of the word of God to their own inner circles.

Looking at a bunch of alternative readings doesn't make the layman any better able to translate the text than if they were looking at a translation which only provided one reading.

I would prefer Logos' present modus operandi of providing as much resources as possible to that of censoring all scholarship we deem inferior. Even if that means including material from   long list of current Logos resources  censored, so as not to offend .  I trust God is able to keep his half of the "seek & ye shall find" promise.

I have also seen abuse of The Living Bible, The Message, The NIV and pulpits across America.

Certainly, any translation can be abused. But the Amplified Bible specifically encourages a particular kind of abuse. It encourages it actively. Not many translations actually do that.

I would not seek to ban any of these venues or restrict their use to pre-qualified experts.

Nor would I. I just don't see the need to publish them when there are more useful resources which could be published instead. If people really want them, they can find resources like the Amplified Bible online.

I know from your posts you are a well educated and clear thinker. You were not born into this state of maturity and scholarship. Someone allowed you (as a novice) to read, study, think & question. Just because another must spend many hours weekly in pursuits that are mundane but necessary to his survival (a layman) we should not deny him the same opportunity to study.

Thanks for your kind words. I will say that if I had been left to believe that the Amplified Bible was improving my ability to understand Scripture, it would have taken me a lot longer to learn important principles about translation, and about understanding Scripture. If someone hadn't explained to me that the way I'd been using Strong's for years was completely wrong, I would have perpetuated that same error for who knows how long. I don't want anyone to have to spend years and hours learning very simple principles which they could learn in five minutes and save themselves the kind of time I wasted.

I would prefer Logos' present modus operandi of providing as much resources as possible to that of censoring all scholarship we deem inferior. Even if that means including material from   long list of current Logos resources  censored, so as not to offend .  I trust God is able to keep his half of the "seek & ye shall find" promise.

There's a difference between censorship and choosing not to provide product X. When a vendor chooses not to provide product X, and product X is already available freely on the Internet in half a dozen forms, that's not censorship. I agree that God is able to keep His half of 'Seek and you shall find', but I don't believe we should blindfold people who are seeking, or roll rocks in their way. I believe we should help clear the way as much as possible.

Robert, that's very clear and I agree with you.

Nor would I. I just don't see the need to publish them when there are more useful resources which could be published instead. If people really want them, they can find resources like the Amplified Bible online.

I have walked through many Christian bookstores thinking the same thing. One of Satan's most effective methods is to bury God's truth under mountains of half-truths. But I don't want Logos to turn over publication decisions to any one narrow perspective. I disagree with more viewpoints in Logos resources than I agree with. So chances are great The Censor would not choose the resources I value most. I am willing to entertaing divergent views so that I may have mine published too. The scholarly works you value probably could not get published in Logos without other works subsidizing scanners, coders and keyers.

Many Logos users complain frequently in the forums about resources they deem unfaithful to their understanding of the Bible. We have seen threads for and against Calvinism, fundamentalism, Catholicism, Adventism and so on. I am sure you and Robert don't agree with every resource Logos publishes. (How could you?) Why start with The Amplified Bible? As it is not included in a base package, you are not forced to pay for it. But we all received The Message in our packages and no one is complaining here. (George Somsel chastised me last year for my derision of Peterson's paraphrase. George was right to put me in my place. Others actually like The Message and I should not impede their access to it, no matter how much I want to protect them from it! [:O] )

I am sure you and Robert don't agree with every resource Logos publishes. (How could you?) Why start with The Amplified Bible? As it is not included in a base package, you are not forced to pay for it.

I'll try and be as clear as i can..

I WASN'T COMPLAINING...I WAS MERELY EXPLAINING WHAT SOMEONE ELSE SAID.....

I could care less what package it's in or if it's included in anything....gosh....