Forum Guidelines: No Theology Debates

Please stop the theology wars in Logos forums.

Bob, may I suggest that to this we add: Stop debates about Bible versions.

The vitriol can be similar and the value of the debates equally dubious.

EDIT: I just realized I didn't thank you for this post. Thank you, thank you,thank you!

Please stop the theology wars in Logos forums.

Bob, may I suggest that to this we add: Stop debates about Bible versions.

The vitriol can be similar and the value of the debates equally dubious.

Agreed! [Y]

Debates are different than discussions.

Proselytizing and judging should be checked at the door.

edit: If all Bible versions were the same, we would only have one. With dozens to choose from, they can't all be equal. With 2.1 billion potential Bible readers, we will not settle on which is "best." No debates.

Michael

Please stop the theology wars in Logos forums.

[Y]

Alan Charles Gielczyk

Thanks Bob,

I hope everyone will take this advice. I thought of jumping into the conversation that spawned this thread but did not because of all the reasons Bob stated. I have strong doctrinal beliefs and I believe I am right. This means I believe many others are wrong HOWEVER, this is not the place to deal with those. This is the place where we can discuss the tool that helps us study the scriptures and that is the best thing anyone can do to find the truth. Please everyone who has participated in that thread STOP!

My prayer is that ALL who contributed repent, think and move forward with our discussions about the best tool around for Bible study.

Alain Maashe

I appreatiate Bob's intervention but I wish the clarifications had been… clearer.

Bob emphasized theological wars and heated debates. However, the specifics concerning what people should not do appear to preclude any and all theological discussions: “Stop posting about errors in other people's doctrine. Please stop posting your own doctrine. Please stop responding to correct misperceptions or misunderstandings or to counter attacks”. I do not see any theological exchange that would not qualify.

I understand why a company would want to limit theological debates/discussions. When sales and customer satisfaction are concerned, there is little upside and a lot of downside when discussing religion. Offended or marginalized customers are less likely to stay.

However, I found some of the theological rationale (all that should matters is that people are studying God’s Word) to be less convincing and even counterproductive (the reason why individuals engage others theologically in venues such as this one is rarely because the other person does not study the Bible but mainly because of the belief that said person is doing it the wrong way). The solution is not to present theological differences as trivial (some, not all, have eternal consequences) and related discussions as a waste of time (promoting sound doctrine is encouraged by the Bible itself) but to emphasize the fact that by company policy, this website is not the place for such exchanges (plain and simple). Such a rule does not need a somewhat questionable theological rationale and stands on its own.

As a user of this website, I respect Logos’ rules and regulations and as such, I do not participate in activities that are forbidden by the company (even though I like constructive theological discussions as much as the next man). However, even if discussions were allowed, I would still stay out of many of them because of the lack of edification. It is good that Bob decided to step in and calm things down.

Alain

[Y][Y]

I am just sorry you needed to write it all. May God and His Word be praised by all who are here.

nicky crane

Thank you, Bob, it needed saying. I'm an Anglican, albeit a reluctant one. I worship with the Catholics. Used to worship with the Evangelical church as well, till they cold-shouldered me for worshipping with the Catholics. Present pastor and family are good friends of mine and very supportive. I'm just back from a visit to them. He says "theological problems" are usually an excuse for a personality clash... I live in a Muslim village, and we do Bible study according approximately to the evangelical model because that's what makes sense to the participants. We don't use the term Christian, but call ourselves Believers in Jesus. I use Logos daily for Bible study and Vyrso even more for reading. Some of my Bible study is done from an old fashioned paper Bible, but I then turn to Logos for commentaries.

I normally enjoy the forums, but have tended not to open the threads that appear to have a theological/aggressive bias.

I normally enjoy the forums, but have tended not to open the threads that appear to have a theological/aggressive bias.

Could you loan me some of your self-control? [8-|]

nicky crane

IT'S NOT self control. I just find them unattractive. I've suffered enough from intolerance about my heretical views, whether it's believing the Bible too much, or failing to understand it the way the other person does, that I'm just turned off by theological diatribes, or what appear to me to be diatribes, or over-dogmatic statements .

Westie

I know the attacks are painful and unkind, but please understand that you're "surrounded" by people who traditionally are more likely to split a church than seek unity. In the protestant mindset there isn't a single authority figure who will be respected, let alone able to quell debate and dissension.

Bob,

I have spent a great deal of money, and continue to spend money on your software. My daily use of the forum is basically limited to looking at what people say regarding specific resources that I may have overlooked. I am a partner in a 250 person CPA firm with over 2000 clients. I can’t imagine speaking to my clients or employees in this manner.

Your statement is extremely offensive. To make such a sweeping statement is wrong. There are many protestant / reformed persons like myself that simply scan the forum daily for information.

To be clear… I respect authority figures. Within the church I submit to the elders, outside the church I submit to all governing authorities, just as the bible commands me to. I seek unity around the authority of the bible, hence the reason that I have spent so much money on your software, and why I study any chance I get. Lastly, I have never “split” a church, or caused dissention in a church.

Mark

Bohuslav Wojnar

Thank you Bob for stepping in and sharing with us all you have said. I am sorry you have to do it but appreciate it even more. Please, keep on with your vision of building a strong Bible Software company for all/any/whoever would take Bible into his/her hands. I believe it is a God-given mission. God bless you in all you are and you do. [Y]

Greg

Well said.

Can we sticky this post and lock it down so its always visible?

To be clear… I respect authority figures. Within the church I submit to the elders, outside the church I submit to all governing authorities, just as the bible commands me to. I seek unity around the authority of the bible, hence the reason that I have spent so much money on your software, and why I study any chance I get. Lastly, I have never “split” a church, or caused dissention in a church.

Mark,

If everyone were like you and respected authority and sought to live peaceably with all men, there would be no dissension. There are around 750,000 Logos users and the overwhelming majority of them are nice people who respect others. Bob's "sweeping statement" is just that, sweeping. He is attempting to clean up a mess. It is a bit silly for a company CEO to have to have to smooth things over because "Christian adults" can not behave.

Obviously Bob's statement is not referring to you or 749,950 of the other Logos users. These forums are for you & them. Law enforcement is only necessary against lawbreakers. If you can be a peacemaker behind the scenes, God bless your efforts.

God bless your efforts.

I would have liked to have seen Bob use the word 'statistically' instead of 'traditionally.' [8-|]

Ralph Mauch

Logos Bible Software is here to serve everyone who studies the Bible. That is intentionally "big tent" and we intentionally do not have a statement of faith or a doctrinal position.

The forums are here to support and discuss Logos Bible Software. There are plenty of forums for gladitorial theological combat; please take those discussions there.

Bob, you are going to have trouble with the Big Tent mentality when it comes to the folks that buy your software, and how they want to express themselves on a forum like this. Just as you brought up good points about church splits etc, when you are talking about the Bible, it will cause some to ask questions, who do not know about any discussions on other web pages (some of them I pray will never be found), but are reading your product and have questions. Or, do you simply want only question to come up about what button do I press to do this or that, and how do you inforce that?

With that said, I think you need to allow some of your VIP's authority to kill a thread when it gets out of hand. I don't think you need to make a commentary on all of this, or let Dan take the brunt of it (humor), because folks will view your comments differently then you probably intended them to.

I am sorry that you had to step in, and I don't know the thread that caused it, but you have some pretty good VIPs that could help nip this before it gets out of hand. Just some thoughts.

Ralph

(‾◡◝)

I think you need to allow some of your VIP's authority to kill a thread

While I sympathize with this sentiment, I don't think it is the answer. Ultimately, if this policy is implemented, you have the potential of producing a lot of hurt feelings. "Why did you kill my thread but not this one?" "That MVP is biased against [name a theological position here] but sympathetic towards [name a theological position here]." "Unfair." "Capricious."

I think a better solution would be to establish a Cage Match forum which could be entered voluntarily or, posts/threads could be redirected there by the MVPs. Perhaps, in extreme situations, it might even be used to banish a recalcitrant for a timeout with no access to the main forums ... sort of like a penalty box. Either way, the Cage Match forum would be a no holds barred, enter at your own risk, place where the more philosophically pugnacious, those who like theological jousting, and those who fantasize themselves as Valiant for Truth can go and have at it. Meanwhile the rest of the Logos Forums can be dedicated to the software and the books as the owner/provider of forum has stated many times over.

Just my two cents ...

Schezic

With that said, I think you need to allow some of your VIP's authority to kill a thread when it gets out of hand.

I think a better solution would be to establish a Cage Match forum which could be entered voluntarily or, posts/threads could be redirected there by the MVPs.

Make sense to me. Look how it worked in Mayberry. Hang a star on the village idiot and let him patrol the halls.

You assume that an unpaid hall monitor is more effective than a paid hall monitor?

I do not want to moderate the forums. I do not want to pay someone to moderate the forums. I am opposed to deleting or locking threads because it's pointless: the person who must make their voice heard will find other ways to do so. And the person who would respect the shut down doesn't need to be "deleted," only told. And I want to spend our resources on building tools, not hiring hall monitors for the forums.

My two cents is that these things need to be killed IMMEDIATELY if they escalate as quickly and divisively as the recent one did. Especially if the poster has a previous history or is especially adamant that (s)he speaks for God and the rules as stated here don't apply to them.

In another thread a wise man recently said this: http://community.logos.com/forums/p/34988/264860.aspx#264860

and this: http://community.logos.com/forums/p/34988/264902.aspx#264902

and this: http://community.logos.com/forums/p/34988/264927.aspx#264927

Let Bob run Logos. [C]

Is Mebin

Just thought I would tell a little story (fairly light-hearted)...

I was once working at a service station (gas station) and a Jehovah's Witness came in doing his night-time ministry. He introduced himself. I said "Great, because I'm a Jehovah's Witness too. Yes, I witness about Jehovah all the time! But I'm also a Muslim!" He said, "how can that be?" I said, "I believe in the one true God - that makes me a Muslim doesn't it? But wait, I'm also a Mormon." Looking even more bewildered, he asked, "How?" "Well" I said, "I belong to the Church of Jesus Christ, and I am a saint living in the last days...doesn't this make me a Mormon?" "Im also a Catholic" I continued, "Yes, I also go to the one true church!"

"Oh" said the JW, "so you are a Christian!" I said, "well, I could be a Baptist because I've had the full immersion done...I could be an SDA as I belive in the Sabbath...I could be a Pentecostal because I've had one of those experiences too!" "Wait, wait!" said the JW, "what church do you go to?"

'I could go to the CRC, COC, CCC, AOG...but I belong to the church of the Living G-O-D!!!"

Finally he understood what I meant...so we decided to pray together that we would both understand God's Word better...I closed my eyes right then and there...begun to praise in tongues...when I opened my eyes, all I saw was the automatic doors closing.

My story always makes me think of the parable of the Good Samaritan. I am positive that our Lord's theology was better than mine, yet he could put it aside to help somebody that the rest of the religious leadership might not want, or be able, to. Indeed, even his own race!

Prayer..."Lord, please pour you oil upon us that our scars my soften and fade, and help us to drink of your new wine so that we are sensitive to your Holy Spirit. Let your love reign in our lives."

Thank you to everyone who has contributed to this forum...I find myself looking forward to checking it every day. For a non-church attender, this can count as true fellowship, believe me!

I would have liked to have seen Bob use the word 'statistically' instead of 'traditionally.'

Sometimes I just think funny things.

/threads could be redirected there by the MVPs.

I have volunteered for many things in my lifetime (US Navy, submarine duty, etc), but I am not a volunteer to supervise these forums. [N]

This is not the purpose of the MVP program, and this one does not want that job. I don't mean to sound harsh, but I want to emphasize that any hint of thread control by MVPs is not an acceptable solution to the problem of abusive posters.

Bob Pritchett is CEO of Logos and one of the founding partners. He owns the ball, the bat, and the playing field. He makes the rules—or lack thereof, not the MVPs.

I have volunteered for many things in my lifetime (US Navy, submarine duty, etc), but I am not a volunteer to supervise these forums.

Moderating is NOT fun, that much I know. But moderators don't have to make the rules, they are there to enforce them. The rules we have right now, are short, sweet, to the point and above all—WISE! Let's not screw up a good thing here. Anyone with ANY sense KNOWS this is NOT a good forum for theological discussion. DON'T THEY? I'm more than a little unclear about whether we have new, unposted rules, or not. Can I now tell everyone exactly how I feel about a certain 'Reformed' grunge pastor from Seattle, or more precisely, his method? *I* don't even want to hear what I have to say on the subject. If I feel the need to voice my opinion, I'll do so elsewhere. Logos Forums are the perfect place to talk about Logos software and that's about it really. Shoot, I've even been shot down here for asking if a given resource is faith-filled. I wasn't even asking if it was faith-void. But the answers to my simple, sincere, uncharged question has implications all by its lonesome.

BillS

Please stop the theology wars in Logos forums.

Just stop.

Thank you!

/threads could be redirected there by the MVPs.

I have volunteered for many things in my lifetime (US Navy, submarine duty, etc), but I am not a volunteer to supervise these forums.

This is not the purpose of the MVP program, and this one does not want that job. I don't mean to sound harsh, but I want to emphasize that any hint of thread control by MVPs is not an acceptable solution to the problem of abusive posters.

Bob Pritchett is CEO of Logos and one of the founding partners. He owns the ball, the bat, and the playing field. He makes the rules—or lack thereof, not the MVPs.

And I didn't volunteer to be a hall monitor in a Pre-School. I love my Logos software and like to talk with others about it. I don't care for sports, multi-level marketing, or conspiracy theories. I just want to learn how to better use Logos for Bible study. Now if Bob would give me all Logos resources for free, I'd gladly spend 40 hours a week baby-sitting.
[:D] Hey, Bob.... That is a serious offer. No, really. Have your people call my people. [;)] Who loves ya baby?

(‾◡◝)

/threads could be redirected there by the MVPs.

I have volunteered for many things in my lifetime (US Navy, submarine duty, etc), but I am not a volunteer to supervise these forums.

This is not the purpose of the MVP program, and this one does not want that job. I don't mean to sound harsh, but I want to emphasize that any hint of thread control by MVPs is not an acceptable solution to the problem of abusive posters.

Bob Pritchett is CEO of Logos and one of the founding partners. He owns the ball, the bat, and the playing field. He makes the rules—or lack thereof, not the MVPs.

Actually, you confirm one of my implied points very well, Jack.

Whether the LoPD (Logos Police Department) consisted of volunteer MVPs or paid Logos workers, it would be a thankless job and one that would be subject to all sorts of criticisms once they start to enforce the rules by killing threads and censuring people. It's part of the reason that I think Bob's laissez-faire-but-please-act-like-mature-Christians approach is the best.

My only modification is to recognize that human nature, being what it is, is still going to produce squabbles and bickerings and divisions among a small percentage of forum users. But rather than kill a post or a thread, I suggest moving it to another corner of the forum world where they can debate, fight, hiss all they want. And if the current slate of MVPs do not want the role, I am sure it wouldn't be difficult to find a small group of users who would be willing perform the function so that the they (the MVPs) can continue to do the fine job they do supporting the software in the forums.

Please forgive me if I sounded like I was trying to volunteer you or anyone else.

(E-5 radar/ecm, 70-74, Destroyer Escort, west coast)

Ward Walker

...

Please stop being the second party that turns an unkind post into a flame war.

...

Wouldn't it be great if all the people who waste their time and energy on petty things put that time and energy into Bible study?

...

[Y] Personal Bible Study...in a collegiate atmosphere

Abi Gail

I do not want to moderate the forums. I do not want to pay someone to moderate the forums. I am opposed to deleting or locking threads because it's pointless: the person who must make their voice heard will find other ways to do so. And the person who would respect the shut down doesn't need to be "deleted," only told. And I want to spend our resources on building tools, not hiring hall monitors for the forums.

Since the linked posts have been deleted, It would seem that you have changed your policy ... AGAIN?

In another thread a wise man recently said this: http://community.logos.com/forums/p/34988/264860.aspx#264860

and this: http://community.logos.com/forums/p/34988/264902.aspx#264902

and this: http://community.logos.com/forums/p/34988/264927.aspx#264927

Let Bob run Logos.

Mark Smith

Since the linked posts have been deleted, It would seem that you have changed your policy ... AGAIN?

Chris, perhaps Bob is interested in continuing the discussion. If not Bob is available via email at Bob@logos.com (try getting Bill Gates to respond to email). Maybe that is the way to get an answer directly from him.

I will say that I can't help but feel your response is an attempt at creating yet another discussion that has nothing to do with Logos Bible software or using Logos for Bible study. You may not mean it that way but that's how I perceive it. Please don't expect me to argue this point. I'm not interested in arguing, just in trying to help you gain another user's perspective.

Bob Pritchett

There is no "policy," there's just how we do things. Not deleting is the general rule, but even that hasn't been absolute. We do delete robot spam, for example.

We're generally trying the "no delete" style, but I thought the Kilroy creation and posts were just an intentional provocation, and weren't from a real user. (No address, no phone, no purchase history.) I don't see deleting a "not real user" as contrary to my free speech policy.

I did delete the one thread that was inflaming all this this week simply because I was tired of its continued existence. That was an arbitrary personal indulgence, not a policy. :-)

Yay, team!

tom

There is no "policy," there's just how we do things. Not deleting is the general rule, but even that hasn't been absolute. We do delete robot spam, for example.

We're generally trying the "no delete" style, but I thought the Kilroy creation and posts were just an intentional provocation, and weren't from a real user. (No address, no phone, no purchase history.) I don't see deleting a "not real user" as contrary to my free speech policy.

I did delete the one thread that was inflaming all this this week simply because I was tired of its continued existence. That was an arbitrary personal indulgence, not a policy. :-)

Thank you

I did delete the one thread that was inflaming all this this week simply because I was tired of its continued existence. That was an arbitrary personal indulgence, not a policy. :-)

Sounds like a good enough reason to me. Thank you, kind sir.

Thank you.

Feel free to engage in any other arbitrary personal indulgences that would make you feel better. You're on a roll.

Thank you.

Feel free to engage in any other arbitrary personal indulgences that would make you feel better. You're on a roll.

And if Bob feels like having a Logos sale for Independence Day (July 4th in the USA) I say, "Knock yourself out!"

Richard Masciantonio

Bob,

Thanks for bad mouthing 95% of your customer base. As for Logos' new Catholic project manager

As a former Roman Catholic and convinced Protestant, but someone who is still interested in Roman Catholic theology, I am disappointed with the decision by Logos to introduce this emphasis in their product line. Nothing personal against Andrew, but to already hear of the 'living tradition' means that he will have to introduce works that argue against sola scriptura which will of necessity set the authority of the Roman church above the Word of God. But of course in Rome's view, their tradition IS the Word of God. Let's hope Logos will have the spiritual fortitude to produce works that expose the errors of Rome and save the unknowing from the errors of a system that can refer to a man as 'Holy Father'.

I don't want to sound out of control, but I was just wondering where's the Lutheran, or Greek Orthodox, or Pentecostal project manager?

I don't want to sound out of control, but I was just wondering where's the Lutheran, or Greek Orthodox, or Pentecostal project manager?

Perhaps if there was a large market for those groups, I'm sure Logos would hire product managers.

Nothing personal against Andrew, but to already hear of the 'living tradition' means that he will have to introduce works that argue against sola scriptura which will of necessity set the authority of the Roman church above the Word of God.

You are not forced to purchase those resources, what is your point? As a convert to the Catholic Church, I certainly do not get upset if I hear Protestant theology or views... why should you get upset hearing "Roman" viewpoints? If you are convinced, then grow thicker skin.

- Michael

Richard Masciantonio

Michael

I’m glad you noticed the ‘market’ factor here; though I hope that’s not the reason Logos brought Andrew on board.

My point is Logos can publish RC titles without a project manager as they have done in the past and many of which I have purchased. My point, which I made in my post, is that many Roman Catholic works will of necessity reduce the written Word of God to the level of ‘living tradition’. I am sure that you are aware that the Catechism puts the Word of God within the larger category (in Rome’s opinion) of Tradition, again the very tradition that allows the title for God the Father to be applied to a man.

Jn. 17:11 Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.

All of those who have true faith in Jesus Christ are in organic unity with one another and enjoy true catholicity, and this is the work of the Holy Father. Christian courtesy will keep me from commenting further on how some apply this title.

God bless

Lu.6:28

My point, which I made in my post, is that many Roman Catholic works will of necessity reduce the written Word of God to the level of ‘living tradition’.

Richard, I think this is venturing into precisely what Bob is telling us not to do in the first post of this thread: engaging in a theological debate.

Stop.

I’m glad you noticed the ‘market’ factor here; though I hope that’s not the reason Logos brought Andrew on board.

I've got no inside knowledge into their reasoning...

My point, which I made in my post, is that many Roman Catholic works will of necessity reduce the written Word of God to the level of ‘living tradition’.

Who cares... Within the Protestant tradition there are many people on this forum who hold different views on important topics such as salvation. Should Logos select a particular tradition and dismiss all others? Common Richard, grow some skin... people here come from all sorts of neat and interesting backgrounds... When you read something from Andrew (or any other Catholic), just dismiss it and move on. I've noticed that most people here are quite secure in their faith and will not be swayed by a single "tradition" statement from Andrew or any Catholic.

- Michael

J.R. Miller

he will have to introduce works that argue against sola scriptura which will of necessity set the authority of the Roman church above the Word of God.

In my personal opinion, your point is exactly the reason Protestants and Catholics should be PLEASED with what Logos is doing—not angry.

- From a Protestant perspective, having resources in Logos that are more authoritative in the Roman Catholic tradition will allow you to develop a stronger argument to persuade others of their error.

- From a Protestant perspective, having resources in Logos that are more authoritative in the Roman Catholic tradition will bring in more Roman Catholic users who will then also get exposed to Protestant resources that could persuade them to embrace Sola Scriptura.

- From a Catholic perspective, having resources in Logos that are more authoritative in the Catholic tradition will simply make them happy to use Logos.

Logos, like any good Library, is neutral to "why" people read certain content. If a user wants to read a book to research and writing... you win. If a user wants to read a book to debunk bad theology... you win. If a user wants to read a book to reinforce their theology.. you win.

In the end, more Catholic resources is a Win Win Win situation for everybody of every tradition who cares about the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

- From a Protestant perspective, having resources in Logos that are more authoritative in the Roman Catholic tradition will bring in more Roman Catholic users who will then also get exposed to Protestant resources that could persuade them to embrace Sola Scriptura.

I expect a note from the forum police on this... If I get an infraction on my message above this one, surely, this will as well... <smiles> We're getting close to silliness...

- Michael

PS: I'm wondering if the person giving me the infraction actually read my entire message....???

J.R. Miller

Hi Michael,

The point I am making is that Logos is not in the business of controlling how users might apply the resources in their library. There is no reason for Logos to take a position (Catholic or Reformed, or Arminian) because everyone who reads will have a different use for the same book. If someone wants to read a book to affirm their faith or research a paper or develop a stronger apologetic, you are free to do that.

Here is my analogy. Imagine Logos has been selling screwdrivers for the past 20 years. Now, Logos has decided to expand their line of tools and sell hammers. Some customers might get angry and say, "Hey Logos, don't you care about screwdrivers anymore?" "If everyone starts buying hammers, then they wont love their screwdrivers as much." "Logos, if you are going to sell hammers, why is there no disclaimer on the right way to use it?"

Again, this is just my personal perspective, but Logos just provides the hammer, you can decide how to use it.

Clinton Thomas

As a Pentecostal with a cousin who is a Catholic Priest, a son-in-law who is a Lutheran pastor, a sister-in-law who is a devoted Catholic, and a now deceased uncle who was a Free-Methodist pastor, I've found that we can agree on far more than we disagree on. And I've been enriched by peaceful discussions, over the Word, about the areas we disagree on.

Hi John,

I was expecting your sentence to end something like:

"... and a now deceased uncle who was a Free-Methodist pastor, I found that letting our theological discussions get out of hand did not end well..."

Regards,

Clinton

Jacob Hantla

he will have to introduce works that argue against sola scriptura which will of necessity set the authority of the Roman church above the Word of God.
In my personal opinion, your point is exactly the reason Protestants and Catholics should be PLEASED with what Logos is doing—not angry.
- From a Protestant perspective, having resources in Logos that are more authoritative in the Roman Catholic tradition will allow you to develop a stronger argument to persuade others of their error.

- From a Protestant perspective, having resources in Logos that are more authoritative in the Roman Catholic tradition will bring in more Roman Catholic users who will then also get exposed to Protestant resources that could persuade them to embrace Sola Scriptura.

- From a Catholic perspective, having resources in Logos that are more authoritative in the Catholic tradition will simply make them happy to use Logos.

Logos, like any good Library, is neutral to "why" people read certain content. If a user wants to read a book to research and writing... you win. If a user wants to read a book to debunk bad theology... you win. If a user wants to read a book to reinforce their theology.. you win.

In the end, more Catholic resources is a Win Win Win situation for everybody of every tradition who cares about the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

good point, Joe.

The more books the better. And the more ability that anybody has to actually study the Bible and be exposed to the Bible texts the bette.r

Bill Coley

- From a Protestant perspective, having resources in Logos that are more authoritative in the Roman Catholic tradition will allow you to develop a stronger argument to persuade others of their error.

- From a Protestant perspective, having resources in Logos that are more authoritative in the Roman Catholic tradition will bring in more Roman Catholic users who will then also get exposed to Protestant resources that could persuade them to embrace Sola Scriptura.

- From a Catholic perspective, having resources in Logos that are more authoritative in the Catholic tradition will simply make them happy to use Logos.

With all respect, Joe, your three points do not a friendly invitation to all Catholics (or other non-Protestant Christians) offer. Reworded, they sound like this: In Logos, Protestants find ammunition for their dispute with Catholicism and hope for their efforts to convert its faithful, while Catholics find resources they'll enjoy.

Seriously?

Why must we frame the Protestant-Catholic (or Baptist-Presbyterian, or Evangelical-Mainline, or...) in such combative terminology, as if we and they (whoever "we" and "they" might be) are in a struggle for superiority, some kind of ecclesiastical/theological death match of wisdom and wills? Why think of Logos as a tool to use against other followers of Jesus at all?

How about this instead....

In Logos, Protestants may find resources to aid and encourage their exploration of Scripture, and in the process grow their faith and strengthen their connections to the Savior those Scriptures proclaim.

In Logos, Catholics may find resources to aid and encourage their exploration of Scripture,
and in the process grow their faith and strengthen their connections to
the Savior those Scriptures proclaim.

In Logos, Protestants, Catholics, Orthodox, and all who claim Jesus as Lord may find resources to deepen their understanding of and respect for their own and each other's traditions, resources that will help describe the history, doctrine, and practices that define both the diversity and essential unity of the Body of Christ to which all followers belong.

And if you can't say something that respectful about those "other" Christians, the ones whose theology you are just convinced is their ticket to Hell, then simply say Logos helps you. (STOP! That's all! Shhhh! Don't talk about "them"! Step away from the conclusion!)

The thread that prompted this current thread turned acrimonious because the focus turned away from the tools Logos provides for Bible study (common ground for us COPs (Catholics/Orthodox/Protestants), and toward the character and faithfulness of those who use those resources. Had the original post said something like, "I am looking for resources about my tradition other Logos users have found particularly helpful. Recommendations?" This current thread would not exist.

At its best and most useful, Logos is not an implement deployed in contests against other Christians. It is a tool to explore and understand God's Word. Surely we can grow our own faith, value our own traditions, and use our own Logos installations without devaluing others.... At least in these forums.

Blessings,

Bill

I notice we're still discussing/debating theology. [8-|]

With all respect, Joe, your three points do not a friendly invitation to all Catholics (or other non-Protestant Christians) offer. Reworded, they sound like this: In Logos, Protestants find ammunition for their dispute with Catholicism and hope for their efforts to convert its faithful, while Catholics find resources they'll enjoy.

I agree with your assessment... I just didn't want to start a theological debate. <grins> the poster is coming from the assumption he is correct and other people are wrong. Which if this was the correct forum I would be dispute... which it is not. In any event, that's not a good way to start a dialog with people who have differing opinions... I do agree with the poster, sorry forget name, that more material for all is a great thing.

- Michael

David Paul

As a former Roman Catholic and convinced Protestant, but someone who is still interested in Roman Catholic theology, I am disappointed with the decision by Logos to introduce this emphasis in their product line. Nothing personal against Andrew, but to already hear of the 'living tradition' means that he will have to introduce works that argue against sola scriptura which will of necessity set the authority of the Roman church above the Word of God. But of course in Rome's view, their tradition IS the Word of God. Let's hope Logos will have the spiritual fortitude to produce works that expose the errors of Rome and save the unknowing from the errors of a system that can refer to a man as 'Holy Father'.

I don't want to sound out of control, but I was just wondering where's the Lutheran, or Greek Orthodox, or Pentecostal project manager?

This website and company is BOB's puppy, his ball, his bundle of joy. HE calls the shots, period. I don't have to like it...though sometimes I do (which is why he has so much of my money). [:|]

I hear your "concern", Richard. But hard as it may be to take and swallow, you're overstepping, IMO. God said, "I set before you life and death, blessing and cursing. Therefore, choose life." (Deut. 30:19) This choice is ultimately a personal one, and no one (other than a parent of a child) has a right to hinder that process of making a choice, even if the wrong choice is made. YHWH could have killed off Satan before creating Adam and Eve and thus eliminate any worry about coming into contact with a "contaminating influence", but that would have avoided the whole PURPOSE, which was for people to CHOOSE which "spiritual style" they desire...blessing and life or cursing and death. You are worried and concerned people will be swayed by material you think will lead to cursing and death. Understandable. But consider this--what if Catholics AND Protestants (and Lutherans, Orthodox, Pentecostals, to include those you mentioned) are ALL wrong??? Considering what Rev. 12:9 says about Satan deceiving the whole world, it's something worthy of consideration...and it may not be as preposterous as you first think. Unless the apostle was wrong...

Point being, stop worrying about other people's decisions and contact with error. This world is DESIGNED by YHWH to give every person precisely that OPPORTUNITY...to encounter error and conclude that it is a bad deal altogether...and determine that God has the better offer. You do what you can to influence them in the way that you think is best--if it really is best. And with all this in mind, let Bob have his way. This is his ball...he makes the rules. He's just giving peole the tools to make their decision...whether good or bad.

Also, while this is directed at Richard, all should give ear. NO MORE THEOLOGICAL DEBATES! (Disclaimer: Though the above may appear to be a theologically-tinged comment, it is rather intended as a purely logical defense of the proprietor's method of operation. Any appearance of theological seemingness is merely a by-product of attempting to convey the suitability of that M.O. using the most appropriate tools at hand.) [:$]

Milford Charles Murray

Logos Bible Software is here to serve everyone who studies the Bible. That is intentionally "big tent" and we intentionally do not have a statement of faith or a doctrinal position.

The forums are here to support and discuss Logos Bible Software. There are plenty of forums for gladitorial theological combat; please take those discussions there.

Peace to you, Bob!

Thank you for your post! Indeed! The Forums have been a real blessing to me.

You and Logos Bible Software will be in my prayers!

Remember! Always Joy in the Lord!

*smile*

Logos Bible Software is here to serve everyone who studies the Bible. That is intentionally "big tent" and we intentionally do not have a statement of faith or a doctrinal position.

The forums are here to support and discuss Logos Bible Software. There are plenty of forums for gladitorial theological combat; please take those discussions there.

Peace to you, Bob!

                       Thank you for your post!              Indeed!                               The Forums have been a real blessing to me.

You and Logos Bible Software will be in my prayers!

                                                      Remember!                            Always Joy in the Lord!

                                          *smile*

[Y]

Mike Childs

Thanks, Bob.

Michael

Anyone know of any good commentaries on this section of Galatians?

Galatians 5:13-15

13　You, my brothers and sisters, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the flesh; rather, serve one another humbly in love. ¹⁴For the entire law is fulfilled in keeping this one command: "Love your neighbor as yourself."　^k¹⁵If you bite and devour each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other.

Anyone know of any good commentaries on this section of Galatians?

Nice, messages are almost died down to nothing...people got it. But, if your intention was to throw the Bible in my face, it worked; however, if it was truly to highlight an important principle, thank you. Your motivation is something only you and God know.

- Michael

Michael

The sermon at church yesterday was on this passage. I am new to Logos and am not very good at finding things in it yet and I wanted to research this scripture. I thought this was a good place to ask. I apologize if it wasn't.

Mike

Bob,

Having read all the responses to your original post, which I hadn't seen until this morning, I will just say:

Thanks for your original post.

Jim Orr

Wouldn't it be great if all the people who waste their time and energy
on petty things put that time and energy into Bible study?

With this comment, you are suggesting that the truth of the gospel is a petty thing? While there are some who attend Roman Catholic churches who are true Christians, Roman Catholic Theology itself is not consistent with the Biblical gospel as proclaimed by the apostles. Consider the stern warning Paul gave to false teachers in Galatians 1:6-9.

George Somsel

Wouldn't it be great if all the people who waste their time and energy on petty things put that time and energy into Bible study?

With this comment, you are suggesting that the truth of the gospel is a petty thing? While there are some who attend Roman Catholic churches who are true Christians, Roman Catholic Theology itself is not consistent with the Biblical gospel as proclaimed by the apostles. Consider the stern warning Paul gave to false teachers in Galatians 1:6-9.

My friend, you think Catholic theology isn't consistent with the gospel, but I would tell you that "evangelical" theology also isn't compatible with the gospel. The gospel is not theology and doesn't depend on theology. The gospel regards a trust in the love of God revealed in Jesus Christ and not in thinking the right thoughts. When Christianity was still in the crib there was a movement known as gnosticism which essentially contended that you need to get your thoughts straight regarding reality. If you conceived of reality properly, then you were home free. That is not Christianity; that is not the gospel.

My friend, you think Catholic theology isn't consistent with the gospel, but I would tell you that "evangelical" theology also isn't compatible with the gospel.

George, while I've really wanted to say something directly against the position of these trolls, I've refrained. Except for Peter of course, we had an exchange in email but not here... Yes, I want to scream at their logic, but I do not... it just feeds them. Anyway, perhaps we should let it lie and maybe they will go away and stay on the CARM forums?

- Michael

john joyce

At least he was brave enough to put his real picture on - unlike some of the earlier theological geniuses

My friend, you think Catholic theology isn't consistent with the gospel, but I would tell you that "evangelical" theology also isn't compatible with the gospel. The gospel is not theology and doesn't depend on theology. The gospel regards a trust in the love of God revealed in Jesus Christ and not in thinking the right thoughts. When Christianity was still in the crib there was a movement known as gnosticism which essentially contended that you need to get your thoughts straight regarding reality. If you conceived of reality properly, then you were home free. That is not Christianity; that is not the gospel.

Amen - some of the wisest words you have spoken.

Yours because His,

Floyd

I'm not aware of too many things, I know what I know, if you know what I mean. One of those things I know that comes into play here is, this is NOT the place to discuss theology. This is NOT the place to start discussions on theology. This is NOT the place to finish discussions on theology. And finally I tell those who have ears to hear, this is NOT the place to stay mired in discussions of theology.

Steve Meister

In other words, "Please study the Bible, but be sure not to actually arrive at any convictions," right? Interesting mission statement...

Keith Larson

protestants don't do a good job getting along on a single doctrinal statement. That's why the Catholic church is basically one large church, and the average protestant church splits after reaching 100-200 people. I know the attacks are painful and unkind, but please understand that you're "surrounded" by people who traditionally are more likely to split a church than seek unity. In the protestant mindset there isn't a single authority figure who will be respected, let alone able to quell debate and dissension.

Bob,

While I support your policy not to debate theological issues and am saddened that some users have offended Roman Church users. I am also offended by the closing words of your last paragraph. As a Reformational Christian I in no way believe that I have split away from the true church. The reformation was about preserving the one Holy Apostolic Church, not splitting it up.

As for divisions there have always been divisions in the church. You would do well to read some of your excellent resources on church history. The Roman church as aways had theological divisions and still does. Most Protestants get along with other Protestants better than most monastic orders did in the middle ages. Your characterization of Protestants was very unfair.

Sincerely,

Keith Larson

Ryan Schatz

protestants don't do a good job getting along on a single doctrinal statement. That's why the Catholic church is basically one large church, and the average protestant church splits after reaching 100-200 people. I know the attacks are painful and unkind, but please understand that you're "surrounded" by people who traditionally are more likely to split a church than seek unity. In the protestant mindset there isn't a single authority figure who will be respected, let alone able to quell debate and dissension.

Bob,

While I support your policy not to debate theological issues and am saddened that some users have offended Roman Church users. I am also offended by the closing words of your last paragraph. As a Reformational Christian I in no way believe that I have split away from the true church. The reformation was about preserving the one Holy Apostolic Church, not splitting it up.

As for divisions there have always been divisions in the church. You would do well to read some of your excellent resources on church history. The Roman church as aways had theological divisions and still does. Most Protestants get along with other Protestants better than most monastic orders did in the middle ages. Your characterization of Protestants was very unfair.

Sincerely,

Keith Larson

It is correct that Logos should be a tool for all users no matter what their theological background. Cluttering up the forum with non-software related discussions detracts from users easily finding information on how to use the software.

That being said, Bob could have stopped at telling people that this is not the place for theological discussions... for the above reason... period. He didn't have to throw in his own theological jab at protestants.

Pat Flanakin

Mr. Pritchett,

Perhaps a global point should be addressed...what is the true point of the forums and are they really serving that purpose you expected them to (they are your forums correct?)?

I believe the only way to stop the theological debates, etc.... is to shut down the forums. Additionally, and I may be misunderstanding this, however, I wish that companies like Logos would rely on their customer service teams to address questions about Logos (either on the phone, chat, skype, remote access, etc...) instead of referring people to the forums to obtain their answers from amateurs.

I include myself in the beguilement that has occurred where so many technology/software companies have relegated customer service to a Logos-type laity.

Overall, I would think that the purchase of your software would include world-class customer service for all aspects of the software, including the latest media to access such professionals under your employment, where the aforementioned avocational forum would be unnecessary.

In summary, perhaps if Logos were to remove the expected reliance for customer service on those outside of the customer service employment by Logos (i.e. theologians, etc... using the forum and are well versed in Logos), the forums would be most unnecessary and the pugilistic polemics of theology would become archaic.

Perhaps a global point should be addressed...what is the true point of the forums and are they really serving that purpose you expected them to (they are your forums correct?)? . . .

I'm sure Bob can speak for himself, but as a part of the forums from the beginning and now a forum MVP, I might be able to answer some of your points.

The purpose of the forums, as I understand it, is for users to talk with each other about Logos software. It's really that simple. This used to happen in a newsgroup, and now happens in a web-based forum. We give each other tips and advice, ask some basic 'how to' questions, and sometimes wonder out loud about what we wish the software could do (sometimes to find out that it actually does it already).

As regarding the forums as a place to refer people when they call customer support, I've just got a few comments that come out of listening to Logos talk about how the forums work for/with their paid support staff.

First, I would rather have Logos spend money on developing resources and the program, than in answer simple tech problems that can often be resolved with a little friendly advice from a fellow user. This saves Logos thousands of dollars a year, and solves many of the problems that do not need professional support at all. My guess is that the majority of their support calls could be resolved by us amateurs in these forums.

Second, when there is a problem that we users can't handle, we are not reluctant to refer them on the tech support. In fact, having run through the most obvious solutions, they are that much farther ahead and often more knowledgeable about their issues when then get to tech support.

Third, Logos has been impressed with the level of support the forums have been able to provide, going beyond their expectations. That referral on the phone isn't a cop-out as much as it is an acknowledgement that tech support has some peers here who volunteer our time and expertise.

Sure, sometimes we get it wrong. I know I have. And hopefully we learn as we go and come to understand where the limits of our ability to actually help stops, and where the time to refer to professional support begins.

Logos is a world-class company and actually does offer world-class support. A part of that support strategy has come to include the forums.

I don't know if it's possible to totally eliminate theological debates. And I'm quite sure that Logos doesn't want to be heavy handed about applying it. I'm also quite sure Logos is discussing how best to proceed with managing these forums as a welcome place for all its users. I pray God's wisdom for them as they do.

Richard Masciantonio

Amen

spitzerpl

Hi Pat,

First, I truly do appreciate what you are saying. I think everyone will acknowledge that the cost of Logos when compared to competitors' prices would lead someone to believe that customer service should be vastly superior to the competition. Personally I have found that it is. Not many Bible Software companies have a voice answer the phone every time you call with no phone tree. They have provided video tutorials to help get people started learning the software. The president of the company stays engaged on the forums as much as possible and has employees who monitor them for bug reports, suggestions, and the like. Granted they do not police the forum, but that topic has been beaten into the ground lately and I'd rather leave it there with 6 feet of dirt on top :-) Mark Barnes has done an excellent job creating tutorial videos that are freely available to supplement Logos' videos. Yes, Logos could invest huge sums of money and resources to duplicate that which Mark has done so that Logos reps could point users to their own videos. However that would be somewhat pointless and, IMHO, somewhat unappreciative of the work Mark has done. The fact that there are resources available in addition to Logos own excellent support (e.g. the Wiki, videos from Mark and others, the forums, not to mention paid services) does not diminish the fact that Logos' support is excellent, it just adds to it. Granted I do believe there should be greater in-application help available but in general when I have a question I often find the answer in the Logos help file.

instead of referring people to the forums to obtain their answers from amateurs.

I would argue that many who answer questions on these forums are anything but amateurs when it comes to Logos software. They are pastors, teachers, chaplains, and students of scripture who use the tool daily to help them accomplish their jobs. I mean no disrespect to the great customer service personnel at Logos but while they are busy answering phones and often looking up answers in a standard sheet (which is their job) those who answer questions on these forums are busy using the software to prepare sermons, bible lessons, and care for people. On the side they multiply the benefit of what they have learned by answering questions on the forums. I would argue that regardless of whether they are amateurs, paid staff, or professionals they are the most qualified individuals to answer other peoples' questions about Logos software. Granted we do have a ways to go sometimes with how to answer those questions and when to avoid responding when our answers will not benefit someone's use of the software. In that way we can perhaps be unprofessional sometimes but we love the software and we are willing to make some mistakes along the way for the sake of those we benefit.

including the latest media to access such professionals under your employment, where the aforementioned avocational forum would be unnecessary.

As mentioned above, I believe this would result in no real benefit to Logos users as Mark's videos have been a benefit to many users. The only benefit I would gain is being able to afford fewer resources because they would have to charge even more for them. That's a benefit I can live without!

I believe the only way to stop the theological debates, etc.... is to shut down the forums.

True, that would stop the theological debates, but it would also end all the support and answers many people have found on these forums. I personally hope that does not happen because often I find myself being the recipient of someone else's discovery.

Alain Maashe

My friend, you think Catholic theology isn't consistent with the gospel, but I would tell you that "evangelical" theology also isn't compatible with the gospel. The gospel is not theology and doesn't depend on theology. The gospel regards a trust in the love of God revealed in Jesus Christ and not in thinking the right thoughts. When Christianity was still in the crib there was a movement known as gnosticism which essentially contended that you need to get your thoughts straight regarding reality. If you conceived of reality properly, then you were home free. That is not Christianity; that is not the gospel.

George,

You have accomplished a feat that I have not witnessed in
more than a decade of seminary studies with the help of Logos software. Pay no
attention to the jealous folks who insist that there is a reason it (the feat)
has never been done.

You have managed to define what the gospel “is not” and what
the gospel “is” without making a single theological statement. Bob must be
happy. (Of course, if these were theological statements as some might argue, it
would mean that even your gospel is theology, even if it is theology that one
needs to live out in through personal trust in God). [:P]

As Always...

Alain

Ralph Mauch

The gospel regards a trust in the love of God revealed in Jesus Christ and not in thinking the right thoughts.

You have managed to define what the gospel “is not” and what the gospel “is” without making a single theological statement. Bob must be happy. (Of course, if these were theological statements as some might argue, it would mean that even your gospel is theology, even if it is theology that one needs to live out in through personal trust in God).

[Y]

Mike

Well Bob, when well we get a rep from Jehovah’s Witnesses and New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures?

...Mike

George Somsel

Well Bob, when well we get a rep from Jehovah’s Witnesses and New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures?

...Mike

Are you suggesting that Logos might want to create such a position and are you suggesting it -- or is this simply a provocative statement?

Well Bob, when well we get a rep from Jehovah’s Witnesses and New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures?

I'm not Bob so I don't have an answer. But I would buy the New World Translation without any help from a rep. And I'm not a Jehovah's Witness.

My college roommate did evangelism in Salt Lake City and found it helpful to know what the various Mormon texts said.

I have a Pre-Pub order in for The Sacred Books of the East (50 vols.) to better understand people who practice those religions.

Mike Childs

I just want to state that these forums have been a blessing to me. Thanks to those who have participated.
We are all Bob's guests here. We must abide by the rules or go away. It is that simple.
There is nothing Christian about rudeness, and arrogance is not a fruit of the Spirit.
As Wesley said, "One may be almost as orthodox as the devil, though all men have some error in their theology and the devil knows the truth, and still be twice the child of hell that he is."

Mike

Why not? The Bible can only have one way to believe. RCC is not correct until they stop praying to Mary and other falsehoods. Bob just wants to sell more logos Dbooks. Back in the DOS days he would not done so.

...Mike

George Somsel

Why not? The Bible can only have one way to believe. RCC is not correct until they stop praying to Mary and other falsehoods. Bob just wants to sell more logos Dbooks. Back in the DOS days he would not done so.

...Mike

In such a short post you have included multiple errors.

Catholics do not "pray to Mary." The rationale is that just as we would ask a friend to pray for us so too one can ask the departed saints to pray for us. They do not therefore consider that their prayer is directed to Mary but that they are asking for her prayers on their behalf.
I think you are being most uncharitable respecting Bob. Vanity of vanities -- as the Preacher said, "Of making many books there is no end." In addition to the suggestions posted on this forum there are many suggestions sent directly to suggest@logos.com so I'm certain that Bob doesn't need to search for works to publish. "Who are you to pass judgment on servants of another?"

There is nothing Christian about rudeness, and arrogance is not a fruit of the Spirit.

I can't figure why you are replying to my post. Did I offend you? Sorry if I did, but I seriously would buy the Book of Mormon, Pearl of Great Price, Doctrine & the Covenants, and the New World Translation in Logos format. I already have all these in non-logos format for reference purposes.

edit: I would also read writings from feminist, Unitarian, liberation, or MCC perspectives. Not for doctrine, but perspective. I also buy oil from Muslims and diamonds from Jews. (You probably do too.)

Bob Pritchett

Your characterization of Protestants was very unfair.

See, this is why I hate these arguments... I'm in over my head. :-)

I've heard a few people (here, and on blogs) saying I've "thrown protestants under the bus" or gone "anti-protestant." That certainly wasn't my intention at all, and I apologize if I was somehow unfair to protestants, among whom I number myself.

This is a case of writing too quickly and posting without enough thought, in the heat of the moment. I wasn't trying to make any bold statements about Catholics and protestants; I actually thought I was making a mildly clever point in response to calls for someone to "step in and settle things," by pointing out that protestant churches don't have the hierarchy of the Catholic church. When protestants disagree on doctrine, they rarely kick the issue upstairs for an authoritative answer from the church hierarchy; they just split the church. I was trying to make the point that it was harder to get people so inclined to ever "settle down and get along" when they believe they are arguing a theologically important point. I thought that the request for someone to "set the rules" reflected a perspective that might be informed by experience in a more hierarchial church structure.

This was obviously too subtle a point and too gross a simplification, and probably too informed by my own experience in small non-denominational churches, all too many of which seem so split over trivial stuff.

Even my use of split wasn't a reference to departing "away from the true church." I meant splitting as in Tom, Mary, and their small group are leaving to start a new church down the street where we will use harmonicas during worship....

I apologize for the confusion, and for my flippancy. I plead jet-lag (last week) and too many simultaneous fires.

-- Bob

When protestants disagree on doctrine, they rarely kick the issue upstairs for an authoritative answer from the church hierarchy; they just split the church. I

Being Baptist, I understood your point completely. [8-|]

Nord Zootman

Thanks Bob

James Macleod

I can't be bothered to read through this whole thread so this may already be addressed but I just want to say that Logos is doing the right thing. I don't want some narrow minded person dictating to me what I can buy and read. What if I am studying Catholic doctrine and want to get some authoritative resources on the subject? What I buy and read is my choice. Keep up the good work logos.

Terry Poperszky

I rarely read anything except technical posts on the forum anymore for the same reason that a straight forward request (decree?) from the president of Logos is still generating hype 8 pages later. But I must admit that I am sure glad I opened this one, just wish I had some popcorn as I sat down to watch the show.

Carry on. [8-|]

spitzerpl

just wish I had some popcorn as I sat down to watch the show.

Can't wait till the intermission...

MJ. Smith

just wish I had some popcorn as I sat down to watch the show.

Can't wait till the intermission...

I settled for iced tea and peanuts.

I can't be bothered to read through this whole thread so this may already be addressed but I just want to say that Logos is doing the right thing. I don't want some narrow minded person dictating to me what I can buy and read. What if I am studying Catholic doctrine and want to get some authoritative resources on the subject? What I buy and read is my choice. Keep up the good work logos.

[Y]

Schezic

request (decree?)

Personally, I think of a decree coming from a tyrannical organization. For instance, the one handed down during the Inquisition: That anyone in possession of a Bible would be put to death. Is this an example of the members following the leadership, The quality that is missing in the Protestants?

For instance, the one handed down during the Inquisition: That anyone in possession of a Bible would be put to death.

Do you have a reference for that decree? Who published it? When?

I am Baptist and have heard this charge before, but have never seen an authoritative source.

Mark W. Gaither

To be clear… I respect authority figures. Within the church I submit to the elders, outside the church I submit to all governing authorities, just as the bible commands me to. I seek unity around the authority of the bible, hence the reason that I have spent so much money on your software, and why I study any chance I get. Lastly, I have never “split” a church, or caused dissention in a church.

Mark,

If everyone were like you...

I agree with Mark. Bob can open the door wider for others without slamming our fingers in it.

Bob's post was pugnacious and offensive to the majority of Protestant Logos users. I just felt poked in the eye and now have negative, resentful feelings toward a company I like and a product I use daily. I'll let it roll off and continue as I have, but this was not good marketing.

DMB

Welcome to the forum, Mark. You might be a little frustrated, but you do have to admit you have a talent for them 'fightin words' ... slamming fingers, pugnacious, poked in the eye, and letting it 'roll off' (I assume a heavy punch). I did learn 'pugnacious' sounds canine-ish but turns out to be pugilistic. So, great addition.