FSB should be called the FaithLESS Study Bible
I thought that study Bibles were intended to AID the faith of believers, but the so-called "FaithLife Study Bible" seems to have the explicit goal of destroying it. I have been perusing the Context Studies, and according to every article I've read so far in this FaithLESS Study Bible, the scripture itself seems to be all wrong.
Shame on you, Logos!
Mark 9:42
Comments
-
Don't get me started on what is wrong with all the different Bible versions.
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
Ed said:
I thought that study Bibles were intended to AID the faith of believers, but the so-called "FaithLife Study Bible" seems to have the explicit goal of destroying it. I have been perusing the Context Studies, and according to every article I've read so far in this FaithLESS Study Bible, the scripture itself seems to be all wrong.
Shame on you, Logos!
There is a group where you can discuss your suggestions to make it better. https://faithlife.com/fsb-users/activity
Mission: To serve God as He desires.
0 -
Lynden Williams said:
There is a group where you can discuss your suggestions to make it better. https://faithlife.com/fsb-users/activity
That is one benefit to a digital Bible. It can be corrected more easily. I do recall Logos has already edited the Fathlife Study Bible.
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
Lynden Williams said:
There is a group where you can discuss your suggestions to make it better. https://faithlife.com/fsb-users/activity
Good suggestion. I looked through it, and one of the users mentioned emailing the editor. So I did. [:)] Thanks!
0 -
It seems to me that the Faithlife Study Bible does a good job of reflecting the perspective that it claims to reflect. If you disagree with that perspective, you will at times disagree with some of its statements. However, the forums are not the place to debate personal agreement or disagreement. Nor is it the place to rile up the fans of the product.
My personal opinion on the FSB? I think it does a good job of meeting its stated goals. I also think that it is unlike to ever get much use from me ... a statement I make for most study bibles.
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
Deleted by user
"No man is greater than his prayer life. The pastor who is not praying is playing; the people who are not praying are straying." Leonard Ravenhill
0 -
I would be interested in seeing an example of some of the objectionable material. I don't use it, but I have seen these types of critiques before. What bothered you most?
Disclaimer: I hate using messaging, texting, and email for real communication. If anything that I type to you seems like anything other than humble and respectful, then I have not done a good job typing my thoughts.
0 -
MJ. Smith said:
... the forums are not the place to debate personal agreement or disagreement. ...
I'm not trying to be merely defensive or argumentative, but seriously? The forums are the perfect place. Indeed, they are the intended place. In fact, that is the very definition of "forum":
forum: n. 1 a place, meeting, or medium where ideas and views on a particular issue can be exchanged
But enough said ... this thread was to address the lack of faith presented in the FSB, and now it is being hijacked to discuss forum etiquette. How incredibly ironic. [:)]
0 -
Ed said:MJ. Smith said:
... the forums are not the place to debate personal agreement or disagreement. ...
I'm not trying to be merely defensive or argumentative, but seriously? The forums are the perfect place. Indeed, they are the intended place. In fact, that is the very definition of "forum":
forum: n. 1 a place, meeting, or medium where ideas and views on a particular issue can be exchanged
But enough said ... this thread was to address the lack of faith presented in the FSB, and now it is being hijacked to discuss forum etiquette. How incredibly ironic.
Ed, its Logos house, they make the rules. http://community.logos.com/forums/t/10072.aspx from the thread:
Please abide by the following guidelines as you interact on our forums.
- Please keep your discussions focused on Logos Bible Software: our software, products, websites, company, tools, etc.
- Please do not discuss or debate biblical, theological, or other controversial topics. Use one of the many web forums intended for these kinds of discussions.
- Please treat each other with the love, courtesy, respect, and kindness that you would if you were sitting in your living room together.
- Please do not use our forums to
- sell or give away anything or link to anything you’re selling or giving away—including Logos products
- promote or link to competitors
- point people to other places that sell Logos-compatible products
- advertise yourself, your business, your ministry, your website, etc. (a tasteful link in your forum signature is acceptable)
- post Logos Coupon Codes. If you are aware of a special promotion Logos is running online, you are welcome to link directly to the promotion.
- Please search before posting. It’s likely that someone has already asked your question.
- Please help others follow these guidelines. If the problems continue after you’ve given a gentle reminder of these expectations, please click “Report Abuse” under “More” or send an email to forums@logos.com.
Thank you for your cooperation. Enjoy discussing and learning about Logos Bible Software.
Mission: To serve God as He desires.
0 -
Joseph Turner said:
I would be interested in seeing an example of some of the objectionable material. I don't use it, but I have seen these types of critiques before. What bothered you most?
For example, from the article The Extent of the Biblical Flood from the Sidebars->Context Studies:
[quote]
"A straightforward reading of Gen 7:19–22 indicates the writer envisioned a flood on a massive scale—covering “all the high mountains which were under the entire heaven” (Gen 7:19)."
... then ...
[quote]
The physical evidence for a global flood is limited and inconclusive.
In the article, the writer systematically tears down the Biblical account of the flood with his claim that "physical evidence is inconclusive," and he presents no bibliography or basis for the "evidence" upon which he stands. In fact, despite this author's claims, much evidence exists for the Biblical account of the flood. But instead of presenting an unbiased view of all facts, the author presents a biased view without facts. To me, that is not only an inexcusable abuse in a so-called "study Bible," and not only a failure of scholarship, it is a typical attack against faith with pseudo-scientific propaganda. Why would this tripe be included in a study Bible?!?
That is one example of the general tone of many of the articles in the Context Studies. The article on The Fall of Jericho is similar, as well as others that I reviewed. Hope that helps clarify my concerns.
0 -
Ed ... your conclusions are correct. Don't know about 'faithless'. But it's pretty unbelieving-ish. Like MJ said ... on target for them.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
Lynden Williams said:
Ed, its Logos house, they make the rules. http://community.logos.com/forums/t/10072.aspx from the thread:
Understood. The discussion is specific to a Logos product: namely the FSB. And simply my concern with that product, that it presents anti-Biblical and anti-faith information under the guise of being a "study Bible." I am a pastor, and I sometimes have to clean up the mess when young believers have their faith stumbled or even destroyed by anti-Christian publications that sneak into churches as "Bibles." God help us.
Having said that, I respect people's right to disagree respectfully.
0 -
Ed said:
Having said that, I respect people's right to disagree respectfully.
Hope you don't mind.
I respectfully AGREE with you.
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
Hi Ed
Ed said:he presents no bibliography or basis for the "evidence" upon which he stands
Did you see the "See Also:" section at the end of the article?
I have just scanned one of them (the DOT P article) but these probably will provide more light on the perspective and arguments presented. And this is consistent with the way the FSB is designed to work.
Graham
0 -
your example proves your point. You should state it at the beginning. If the audience for FSB is not academic but general then those articles can easily destroy someone's faith
"No man is greater than his prayer life. The pastor who is not praying is playing; the people who are not praying are straying." Leonard Ravenhill
0 -
Graham Criddle said:
Did you see the "See Also:" section at the end of the article?
...
I have just scanned one of them (the DOT P article) but these probably will provide more light on the perspective and arguments presented. And this is consistent with the way the FSB is designed to work.
Graham
Good point. I actually did see the "See Also" section, but alas, as a lowly Logos Gold owner ( [:(] ), most of those resources are not in my library. But the article's perspective (and not just one article) is that when God's Word contradicts modern "science," God's Word is in error and science is supreme. The point I'm simply trying to make is that a study Bible should build the faith of a believer. And a Bible cannot deny the inerrancy and authority of God's Word, and edify believers in God's Word at the same time. (Psalms 11:3; Mark 3:25)
I think the information in the Context Studies has its place, but never inside a "Bible." They should be removed from the FSB and placed in a separate volume with a title like, "Why We Don't Believe The Bible Is God's Word." That way people who are trying to build their faith through Bible study won't let their guard down. [^o)]
Colossians 2:8
0 -
I have never thought of chapter and verse markers, pericope titles, word definitions, cross-references, sidebars or any other appended materials as part of a Bible even when published in a study Bible. I think the electronic formats make any such confusion even less likely. There is a very
The FSB is no different than other Logos resources: it presents a particular point of view that is agreeable to some portion of the Logos market. That portion of the Logos market purchases and uses the product; the rest of the Logos market hides it, doesn't purchase it, or gives it so low priority it is seen only when specially requested.
What is it about the availability of this particular resource that bothers you? Why do you see it as more threatening to believers' faith than other resources? I fail to see the intent of the thread beyond complaining about a resource you disagree with. Can you image the length of a thread in which we all listed the products we disagree with? Actually, written with the right sense of humor that could be fun ... but off topic and inappropriate for the forums.
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
MJ. Smith said:
...
What is it about the availability of this particular resource that bothers you? Why do you see it as more threatening to believers' faith than other resources? I fail to see the intent of the thread beyond complaining about a resource you disagree with. ...
The intent of this thread was to raise awareness.
0 -
Ed said:
The intent of this thread was to raise awareness.
Thank you - that makes sense. Unfortunately, it also indicates that all participants in the thread need to remind themselves of the forum guidelines and re-evaluate the appropriateness of their posts.
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
MJ. Smith said:
it also indicates that all participants in the thread need to remind themselves of the forum guidelines and re-evaluate the appropriateness of their posts.
Since this is a Logos-edited and produced resource, discussion of its theological slant seems appropriate in the Logos forum.
For the record, I tend to agree with Ed's assessment of the resource.
0 -
Jack Caviness said:MJ. Smith said:
it also indicates that all participants in the thread need to remind themselves of the forum guidelines and re-evaluate the appropriateness of their posts.
Since this is a Logos-edited and produced resource, discussion of its theological slant seems appropriate in the Logos forum.
For the record, I tend to agree with Ed's assessment of the resource.
Very good comment ,I agree with you Jack.
Blessings in Christ.
0 -
MJ. Smith said:Ed said:
The intent of this thread was to raise awareness.
Thank you - that makes sense. Unfortunately, it also indicates that all participants in the thread need to remind themselves of the forum guidelines and re-evaluate the appropriateness of their posts.
if someone says that resource leans to be Calvinistic, it doesn't mean that he is in theological debate, he just expresses the nature of the resource. i don't see anything wrong with that, we do discuss here about logos products, which in this case is FSB and the nature of it, which in this case raises science over the Bible. The only thing here what's seems to be wrong according to guidelines is "shame on you logos"
"No man is greater than his prayer life. The pastor who is not praying is playing; the people who are not praying are straying." Leonard Ravenhill
0 -
OK ... MJ ... wake up your logic dog. He'll probably need some exercise on my post.
Maybe 'faithless' might be a tad over the line, but discussing the perspective of Logos resources is an area quite germaine both from a personal belief perspective, and even an academic one as well. This is actually the first thread I've seen that stated the obvious; that FaithLife probably targets a population somewhere in the AYBD range (me!).
But I can guarantee I'd not recommend it at church. The reason isn't 'head in the sand'. The problem is that most people are trying to 'live' faith; not study it. FaithLife targets the latter, and I've no problem with that. But I can guarantee it'd be a problem at church.
Here, I'm probably going to get in mucho trouble, but the present Pope in Brazil this week essentially proposed the same issue. Though I'm not Catholic, I sure find his discussions refreshing. I notice Pastor Rick Warren is back from a very unfortunate experience, with the same message.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
Denise said:
I notice Pastor Rick Warren is back from a very unfortunate experience, with the same message.
I think that was a bit more than an "unfortunate experience." That was a tragedy. I haven't read his book and don't follow his teaching so as to know his position, but pray that God will give him peace.
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
I guess the wording could be a problem, but in all reality, there is little evidence for a world-wide or large-scale flood, just like up until recent years there was no archaeological evidence of Kind David, even though there have now been archaeological finds that prove David existed.
The fact that there may not be much evidence for something is not a denial of its existence. This happens all the time in Ancient Near Eastern history. There are many people/places that we know existed because there are written records, but we just haven't found the archaeological evidence.
Maybe a line that says something like, "See the following resources for evidence of a local flood;" see the following resources for evidence of a world-wide flood...; see the following resources for blah, blah, blah;" or the reader could take the time to look at the suggested resources at the end of the article as they are listed and read the information to see what the resource is about.
Logos could also take the time to annotate the suggested resources. It would take a little more time, but since the point of having those resources listed is to sell books, then they should not have a problem adding a little extra incentive next to each suggestion.
Disclaimer: I hate using messaging, texting, and email for real communication. If anything that I type to you seems like anything other than humble and respectful, then I have not done a good job typing my thoughts.
0 -
Thank you for the feedback on Faithlife Study Bible. I am sorry to hear that a few of you would not feel comfortable endorsing it.
In general, the sentiment that this type of discussion is not well suited for the forums is correct, since this discussion is in the realm of "theological debate." If you email us at editor@logos.com, we will read your email and respond directly. We also take all feedback into consideration, and often edit notes, articles, etc. as a result. When we say that your feedback is important to us, we mean it.
Faithlife Study Bible aims to be as unbiased as possible, and we hold to the ECPA Statement of Faith. You can read more on our publishing philosophy here: http://www.logos.com/about/publishing-philosophy
Since it has been suggested that Faithlife Study Bible's article about the flood is not as unbiased as it could be, we will take a look at it again and consider making changes in a future update. In this regard, the more specific feedback you can send to editor@logos.com, the better.
At times, you will disagree with the content we publish, but it is our aim that when multiple viewpoints are available on a topic to present them fairly. I am very sorry to hear that some of you feel that we have not done a good enough job at this.
Thank you again for your feedback.
0 -
Denise - this is not for you, but as he was within a keystroke (send) of an appearance prior to your post ...
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
Just to let you know, I believe that the FSB's article about the flood is unbiased.John D. Barry said:Since it has been suggested that Faithlife Study Bible's article about the flood is not as unbiased as it could be, we will take a look at it again
0 -
John D. Barry said:
Thank you for the feedback on Faithlife Study Bible. I am sorry to hear that a few of you would not feel comfortable endorsing it.
...
Thank you again for your feedback.
John ... I received your email, and I appreciate your consideration and objectivity. I am very impressed that you were not only willing to hear customer concerns, but also seem willing to consider their basis or merit in light of Logos' policies. I could not ask for more. Thank you!
0
