Why is Amplified Bible missing from base packages?
I really enjoy the Amplified Bible, but for some reason it doesn't get much support. Why is this? None of the base packages (even Portfolio) include it. It seems strange to me that a "bible" program would be missing such a fantastic bible translation in even in its largest base package. Does anyone know why Logos made the decision to leave it out? Isn't it from the same people who produced the NASB? I can't see the publisher requesting special treatment for this translation.
Comments
I am not speaking for Logos, but I spent 20 years in Christian publishing.
Bible publishers told me that the Lockman Foundation (which owns the rights) is one of the more difficult copyright holders to deal with.
I have noticed several publishing oddities that seem to confirm this over the last 4 decades.
I think you can get it but you have to pay extra.
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!
Ahhh, yes - that's why The Message is included in the Bible Study library but not the Home library[;)]
I got the Amplified with the NAS Electronic Bible Library.
Dave
===
Windows 11 & Android 13
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
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)
Robert Pavich
For help go to the Wiki: http://wiki.logos.com/Table_of_Contents__
Logos is not only for the "uninformed". [:O] I can't see just any Joe Christian picking up the Scholar's base package. I guess it's a copyright thing. [:@]
Yep, partial knowledge can be very misleading. Some people don't understand electricity. Double-distilled water does not conduct electricity. But if someone acts on this partial knowledge without knowing "regular" water conducts electricity well, that person can be electrocuted,
If a user understands the proper use of The Amplified Bible, it will benefit their studies. It is NOT a translation in the true sense.I do not think the answer is to protect "Joe Christian" from having the tools to dig deeper, but to give the non-scholar all the tools possible and teach him how to properly handle those tools. A few weeks back Ted Hans quoted from the D.A. Carson book, Exegetical Fallacies. That post led me to purchase another Logos resource, The Hermeneutical Spiral, that I am enjoying very much.
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
Does anyone have a good example of a misleading text? Thanks.
I think what's being said is a valid criticism; that a person who believes (yes...they do exist) that you can just "pick the word that seems to suit you" is being done a disservice. Words have meaning, and context drives that meaning.
For example:
From Hebrews:
3He is the sole expression of the glory of God [the Light-being, the out-raying
or radiance of the divine], and He is the perfect imprint and very
image of [God's] nature, upholding and maintaining and guiding and
propelling the universe by His mighty word of power. When He had by
offering Himself accomplished our cleansing of sins and riddance of
guilt, He sat down at the right hand of the divine Majesty on high,
4[Taking
a place and rank by which] He Himself became as much superior to angels
as the glorious Name (title) which He has inherited is different from
and more excellent than theirs.
"The "light being"? Is that what the original author meant when he said "Theos?"
Here is another example:
1PAUL, SILVANUS (Silas),
and Timothy, to the church (assembly) of the Thessalonians in God our
Father and the Lord Jesus Christ (the Messiah, the Anointed One):
2Grace
(unmerited favor) be to you and [heart] peace from God the Father and
the Lord Jesus Christ (the Messiah, the Anointed One).
Since when is εἰρήνη "heart"?
It's misleading in that people believe that you can just insert any one of the choices into the text...that's simply not true.
Robert Pavich
For help go to the Wiki: http://wiki.logos.com/Table_of_Contents__
Robert ... on your examples of the Amplified Bible text, keep in mind that brackets mean something added; NOT in the original greek/hebrew. I got the Amplified, just like I got the Message Bible for the same reason .... another 'take' on the original text. I think its often misleading to assume you can easily move from one language to another without loosing embedded meaning. This is obvious if you're familiar with hebrew, and then read the LXX. I'm always a bit suspicious when someone worries that 'people might read the Bible wrong'. As if there's someone who has the 'right' version.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
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.
Win 7 x64 | Core i7 3770K | 32GB RAM | GTX 750 Ti 2GB | Crucial m4 256GB SSD (system) | Crucial m4 256GB SSD (Logos) | WD Black 1.5 TB (storage) | WD Red 3 TB x 3 (storage) | HP w2408h 24" | First F301GD Live 30"
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
Jim,
Slow down...lol...
The point is that the amplified (loudened/bullhorned/increased/verbosed) bible is that it gives you many choices of a word and many people think that you just "pick the one that fits"...and that's the difference between the Amp bible and a translation...that's the misleading part...not that the translators of the amp have made their choices....all translations make decisions...but that's the EXACT ELEMENT that's being discussed here...not translation choices....
Robert Pavich
For help go to the Wiki: http://wiki.logos.com/Table_of_Contents__
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
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.
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.
Win 7 x64 | Core i7 3770K | 32GB RAM | GTX 750 Ti 2GB | Crucial m4 256GB SSD (system) | Crucial m4 256GB SSD (Logos) | WD Black 1.5 TB (storage) | WD Red 3 TB x 3 (storage) | HP w2408h 24" | First F301GD Live 30"
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.
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.
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
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.
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.
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.
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.
Win 7 x64 | Core i7 3770K | 32GB RAM | GTX 750 Ti 2GB | Crucial m4 256GB SSD (system) | Crucial m4 256GB SSD (Logos) | WD Black 1.5 TB (storage) | WD Red 3 TB x 3 (storage) | HP w2408h 24" | First F301GD Live 30"
Whilst the Amplified Bible may enable a certain type of abuse I think it is wrong to associate this with any form of intent to encourage abuse. There are a whole range of Bibles, Language Tools, Commentaries, Theologies, etc. that can be used to abuse God's word.
Personally I also feel that the use of the term "lay person" is itself an abuse of others it is certainly one that I avoid because it is divisive and is actually poorly defined. I'm guessing that in the context of this thread "lay person" is synonymous with a person who does not posses the appropriate education in the original languages to determine the true meaning of the original text but another definition could be those who have not been ordained as "priests" within their denomination.
The problem is not the tool but the way we train people to use the tool and also the way we keep people away from tools that could damage them. I know many well educated so called "lay" people who use the Amplified Version, knowing its limitations, to help them get a deeper insight into God's Word.
God Bless
Graham
Pastor - NTCOG Basingstoke
Graham, thanks for making this comment. The term in this context simply differentiates professionals from non-professionals, which is the common use of the term. I included myself in this category, and certainly had no intention of being derogatory. Nor was it in any way a reference to priests and laity.
Win 7 x64 | Core i7 3770K | 32GB RAM | GTX 750 Ti 2GB | Crucial m4 256GB SSD (system) | Crucial m4 256GB SSD (Logos) | WD Black 1.5 TB (storage) | WD Red 3 TB x 3 (storage) | HP w2408h 24" | First F301GD Live 30"
I did understand your use of the "lay person" in context and personally feel that it is one of those "loaded" phrases that we need to be careful about using a lot like "fundamentalist" and "liberal". I genuinely appreciate that you were not trying to be derogatory in using that phrase but it is so open ended in its meaning that it can cause unnecesary conflict. Sorry if I cam across a bit harsh in my earlier comment on this.
For me this thread is important because it is opening up issues that need to be discussed and that more Christians need to be aware of. The denomination that I belong to proudly says that "we believe In the verbal inspiration of the Bible" yet many of our ministers and members have never taken the time to think about the implications of this. The very way that this is worded to me implies that we affirm the inspiration of the original manuscripts and therefore should have an interest in Textual Criticism, know which text we prefer and why. We still have a lot of people who remain loyal to the KJV, and I understand why, but most of them do not then understand that this makes an implicit statement about the preferred text being Textus Receptus!
God Bless
Graham
Pastor - NTCOG Basingstoke
I understood Jonathan's use of the word also. And I don't believe he meant anything derogatory by using it. The point raised is a valid concern; students of the Bible need to know how to properly use the study tools available. But I would hope their pastor, family and trusted friends would be the ones they look to when they go weeding out the "dangerous" stumbling blocks. Logos provides a wide array of study tools. A student cannot reconcile all viewpoints included within the Logos program resources. God has provided for our instruction in things doctrinal. It is our own responsibility to study and recognize correct doctrine.
My father, brother, son, and soon-to-be son-in-law are all clergy. They are trained for full-time, paid ministry and missionary work. I have many friends who have the specialized training but minister without compensation and feed their families working as a "lay" persons. I also know many who never had the chance for formal training yet they work tirelessly serving in their local congregations. Logos is not an absolute requirement for successful ministry for any of these individuals any more than a college degree is. But we probably are in agreement, formal education is helpful to ministry. I would extend that argument to say Logos is helpful to ministry. Even with the lesser helpful resources included.
"Laity" & "Clergy" can mean so many different things in different circles. Usually the distinction lies only in the fact of whether or not the people a pastor serves recognize it and reward accordingly. If a flock doesn't recognize, appreciate or reward a pastor it does not lessen the value of the ministry performed. The world has millions of uncompensated and under-compensated clergy. It is a sad distinction created by men that has barred many willing from serving God and excused many selfish from the same. Of all the Apostles, Paul is apparently the only one with formal religious training. The rest were all "lay" men equipped with nothing more than Jesus' teachings and the in-dwelling Holy Spirit. sarcasm alert [A] Just imagine what they could have accomplished with good Bible software! [6]
Logos 7 Collectors Edition