Jehovah's Witnesses Works

IMO, one of the best things about Logos is its broad library of resources. This breadth serves a wide array of theological perspectives and enables the study of opinions that differ from your own. There's great value in being able to cite a primary source, rather than always relying on a secondary one.

This quest to have a broad and comprehensive library for students of the Bible is seen in our launch of Noet, where we're focusing on classics, history, philosophy, literature, etc.

In our attempt to provide broad religious coverage, we've offered works on Islam and Mormonism (both for and against).

It seems like Jehovah's Witnesses works make a next obvious step in rounding out our coverage of important world religions. But before we start posting this content on Community Pricing, I wanted to get your feedback.

Do you appreciate our offering broad religious content in Logos?
Would you be interested in having JW content in Logos?
Is there a different group we should focus on first?
Which would you rather have first: content from a JW perspective or content that provides a critical assessment of that perspective?
Any specific recommendations on content we should prioritize? (e.g., the works of Charles Taze Russell?)

I'd love to hear your thoughts. Thanks!

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Randy W. Sims

I wouldn't purchase it, but I'm not necessarily against it if it helps other to reach out them.

I would definitely prefer to see more Jewish works & studies first, personally.

Sakarias Ingolfsson

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/564542#Comment_564542

I would also suggest that foreign language bibles might be a higher priority.

Mike Pettit

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/564542#Comment_564542

The more resources the better, just as long as:

Logos does not feel the need to hide stuff that the poor delicate little flowers may find offensive.

Logos does not seek to put their theology on a similar footing to Christian theology in the various Logos tools, I know this is a value judgement but so be it.

And finally Mr Gons, for the love of all that is holy please put new stuff on your blog, its a really great Blog that has been fallow for too long.

abondservant

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/564547#Comment_564547

I am always for having more primary source materials in Logos... I much prefer to read what was originally said, AND then read modern interpretations. So I think it would be of benefit to have more primary materials from other religions (and secondary subsequently).

Would like to see an increase in the Jewish materials because that can be directly relevant to interpreting scripture. But yes, I would be interested in JW (Scientology, the eastern religions like Taoism, Shinto, Ba'hai, and so forth... basically any cult or religion that a pastor, or missionary might encounter that has published materials); both primary and secondary materials, especially secondary materials from an apologetic perspective.

You may want to partner with Carm.org to publish their copious self published (and freely available) library of apologetic and evangelistic materials.

May even be a good hook to draw more people into Logos by way of their ministry.

Xegesis

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/564553#Comment_564553

Can Logos please get the Kingdom Interlinear Translation that the Jehovah's Witnesses use? That would help to show them from the greek how the Watchtower has corrupted God's word.

Ben

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/564547#Comment_564547

"I would definitely prefer to see more Jewish works & studies first, personally."

What Randy said. And from a Mormon perspective, Logos' "for" offerings (old public domain sermons) hardly stack up vs. the "against" (much more recent but seriously flawed works of the Evangelical anti-cult category). As is apparent from the comments, many only read the works of other traditions in order to better "stick it to them", doctrinally speaking.

If Logos wishes to shed its past reputation as being by and for Protestants of a certain brand (as many of its customers apparently wish it to remain), it should continue expanding as it has with its Catholic books.

Edit: Of course, there is constraint from publishers and market forces.

George Somsel

By all means though I would be more eager to see The Sacred Books of the East before some other modern cults. I don't suppose there is a possibility of splitting this into more affordable sections which is a shame since it might facilitate more bids.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/564558#Comment_564558

I am always pleased to see Logos broaden its base. I also have the same concerns as Ben regarding the danger of con overwhelming the pro. I'd like to see it as a broadening of your base not as canon fodder. I've watched the apparent partnership with the Seventh-day Adventists produce major blocks of their works and would like to see that with other groups that have an publishing house to work with.

For smaller groups, Jehovah's Witnesses is a fine next step although personally I'd prefer Christian Scientist or Unity Church.

tom

Do you appreciate our offering broad religious content in Logos?

YES, YES, AND YES!!!!!!! The broader the content the better.

Would you be interested in having JW content in Logos?

depends on the cost and how much $$$ I have at that time.

Is there a different group we should focus on first?

I would say pick the low lying fruit first. If JW is easier to do than another group's documents, then do JW. If another group's documents would be easier to put into Logos, then do the other group.

Which would you rather have first: content from a JW perspective

JW perspective.

tom

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/564566#Comment_564566

I also have the same concerns as Ben regarding the danger of con overwhelming the pro.

[y]

Mike Pettit

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/564568#Comment_564568

The advantage of public domain is that you do not see royalties flowing into the Watchtower which is not something that I think many (both inside and outside of Logos) would find acceptable.

abondservant

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/564569#Comment_564569

The advantage of public domain is that you do not see royalties flowing into the Watchtower which is not something that I think many (both inside and outside of Logos) would find acceptable.

[Y]

I wouldn't want my money going to any cult, false religion, or any religious group that twists scripture to the point where they stray into the territory of worshiping some other (little g on purpose) god.

Obviously, thats hard to follow with something like a base package...

"I would definitely prefer to see more Jewish works & studies first, personally."

What Randy said. And from a Mormon perspective, Logos' "for" offerings (old public domain sermons) hardly stack up vs. the "against" (much more recent but seriously flawed works of the Evangelical anti-cult category). As is apparent from the comments, many only read the works of other traditions in order to better "stick it to them", doctrinally speaking.

If Logos wishes to shed its past reputation as being by and for Protestants of a certain brand (as many of its customers apparently wish it to remain), it should continue expanding as it has with its Catholic books.

Edit: Of course, there is constraint from publishers and market forces.

I think you are addressing me - so I'll reply. I have no desire to "stick it" to anyone. My purpose and how I desire to come across should mirror 2 peter 3:9. As a protestant talking with a mormon, we have some fundamental disagreements. Disagreements I would be happy to talk to you about in a more private setting if you would like. Feel free to email me (and this is the email I sign up for mailing lists with... so if it gets spammed I'll not be surprised or inconvenienced) at jsschrstrcks at gmail dot com.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/564569#Comment_564569

The advantage of public domain is that you do not see royalties flowing into the Watchtower which is not something that I think many (both inside and outside of Logos) would find acceptable.

I'm already supporting lots of resources that I consider trash theology ... as I often do when purchasing in dead tree format. If you do not purchase the resource then you will send no royalties to Watchtower. I think most of us can handle that. I don't want to be limited to material that is often out of date and difficult to read.

Note: Catholics produce their fair share of trash theology don't assume I'm singling out a group - its particular authors.

Matthew C Jones

Do you appreciate our offering broad religious content in Logos?

Would you be interested in having JW content in Logos?

Is there a different group we should focus on first?

Which would you rather have first: content from a JW perspective or content that provides a critical assessment of that perspective?

Any specific recommendations on content we should prioritize? (e.g., the works of Charles Taze Russell?)

Answers:

Yes, I like broad religious content in Logos.
Yes, I'd like JW content in Logos.
Church of Christ (Stone-Campbell) [:D]
I like source material.
No recommendations.

David Paul

By all means, Logos should create a CP for the PD works of JW, PDQ and ASAP, IMO.

Mike Pettit

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/564575#Comment_564575

The advantage of public domain is that you do not see royalties flowing into the Watchtower which is not something that I think many (both inside and outside of Logos) would find acceptable.

I'm already supporting lots of resources that I consider trash theology ... as I often do when purchasing in dead tree format. If you do not purchase the resource then you will send no royalties to Watchtower. I think most of us can handle that. I don't want to be limited to material that is often out of date and difficult to read.

Note: Catholics produce their fair share of trash theology don't assume I'm singling out a group - its particular authors.

I own the Verbum package and am a Westminster confession guy so I do not necessarily disagree, but I do differentiate when it comes to groups like these and like it or not Logos would suffer a backlash if it started helping fund the watchtower. Logos would forgo any meaningful claim it had to having any Christian roots.

I know that many here would disagree but Logos would be antagonising some of its strongest supporters if it went this far.

George Somsel

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/564586#Comment_564586

By all means, Logos should create a CP for the PD works of JW, PDQ and ASAP, IMO.

I'm not sure about PDQ unless it's PDQ Bach. [:D]

David Paul

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/564588#Comment_564588

I know that many here would disagree but Logos would be antagonising some of its strongest supporters if it went this far.

Not to be...whatever...but--so? I would suggest that anyone and everyone should take a deep, calming breath...and then double-check their own fortresses for breaches in the walls before attempting to assail the compounds of those who are other-minded. Otherwise, while you are off having fun storming someone else's castle, you might find your own fortress wasn't nearly as unassailable as you suspected.

Why are you so convinced JWs are wrong? Unless you have direct, personal experience, making such a claim is worthless...unless you can document the claims. The best way to do that is through JW's own materials. Since everyone is under obligation to prove all things and hold fast that which is true, attempting to circumvent someone's ability to do that through censorship is extremely counterproductive. In all cases, evidence of some sort is needed to make a proper decision for or against. That is what some folks are asking Logos to supply where JWs are concerned.

And besides, believe it or not, what you believe may not hold up very well under scrutiny, either. Since that is the case, should we dismiss your position sight unseen?

James Chandler

Some of Ankerberg's books would be good.

George Somsel

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/564610#Comment_564610

Some of Ankerberg's books would be good.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVSRm80WzZk

DMB

I think Shinto would be good. I especially like the trees (true).

But the question is somewhat disappointing. Since we're talking 'voting' on CP, maybe indeed there's millions of JW purchasers just waiting around.

But with SO MANY really basic-to-Christianity (regardless the theology) that sit in CP and PP, one has to wonder.

I do have to agree with Ben; the Mormon bookstore offers far better quality than the oldies on Logos.

GregW

Do you appreciate our offering broad religious content in Logos?

Would you be interested in having JW content in Logos?

Is there a different group we should focus on first?

Which would you rather have first: content from a JW perspective or content that provides a critical assessment of that perspective?

Any specific recommendations on content we should prioritize? (e.g., the works of Charles Taze Russell?)

1. Yes

2. No

3. Yes - Jewish materials

4. Neither

5. No

We need to bear in mind that those of us who have had the benefit of theological training, or who have developed our own theological awareness are accustomed to using our critical faculties. This is not true of everybody, and the presence of these materials in the Logos store would certainly affect the number of people I recommend Logos to. I know this should not be the case, and that we should be training people to use their critical faculties (I do), but those of us who are church leaders preach the ideal and live with the real. I would not be happy about these materials being introduced without clear indicators in the store that they are JW materials (the same applies, in my view, to another set of material). Having said this, I know that some evangelicals would feel this way about Catholic material, and vice-versa, and once Jehovah's Witnesses were on Logos they would probably want to be warned about materials that others of us would value.

I have no doubt that it would only be a matter of time before a pastor came onto these forums to complain that his or her youth worker had delivered a Logos-based Watchtower Arian study to their youth group, or something similar. I know that some would say "so what?" but there are pastoral issues as well as intellectual issues involved in these moves.

I am writing this as someone who advocates and practices a generous orthodoxy and who is happy to work with and be enriched and challenged by Christians from nearly all the groups represented on Logos. I do, however, have some boundaries as to what I regard as orthodox and that orthodoxy constrains me to shield some of those for whom I exercise pastoral care from what I regard as unorthodox (I will refrain from using the "h" word here!)

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/564588#Comment_564588

I know that many here would disagree but Logos would be antagonising some of its strongest supporters if it went this far.

I don't know about "strongest supporters" but I am sure that it would antagonize a group of supports ... and they would be vocal about it.

Logos would forgo any meaningful claim it had to having any Christian roots.

I don't see this as following especially since the Watchtower has Christian roots ... If Logos is to have credibility as an academic or broadly Christian platform, they need to provide materials that some of their users find offensive if it presents a sizeable organization, a group its users frequently interact with or has historical relevance. It cannot redefine "Christian" to satisfy a subset of users and retain any street cred.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/564614#Comment_564614

We need to bear in mind that those of us who have had the benefit of theological training, or who have developed our own theological awareness are accustomed to using our critical faculties. This is not true of everybody, and the presence of these materials in the Logos store would certainly affect the number of people I recommend Logos to. I know this should not be the case, and that we should be training people to use their critical faculties (I do),

I find your argument thought-provoking because I would never suggest Logos to someone who hadn't developed their critical faculties. The language tools and tagging both can lead to a mistaken belief that you know things that you don't even begin to understand. The Guides provide so much material that one can easily mistake the activity of click & read for Bible study. Mind you, a number of Bible study methods for dead tree format also use time and activity to replace actual study. And the value of Logos is precisely the language tools, tagging, volume of content i.e. that which requires critical faculties.

Matthew C Jones

Any specific recommendations on content we should prioritize? (e.g., the works of Charles Taze Russell?)

I thought of one; Ravi Zacharias.

A collection of Ravi's works would complement the Peter Kreeft Bundle nicely.

Bruce Dunning

It seems like Jehovah's Witnesses works make a next obvious step in rounding out our coverage of important world religions. But before we start posting this content on Community Pricing, I wanted to get your feedback.

Yes, I would like to see JW resources being offered in Logos.

In my opinion, one of the best papers I wrote in Bible College was a paper comparing Jehovah's Witness concept of God to that of the book of Isaiah. During that time I read dozens of JW books in paper format that since I have discarded due to physical space. There is value in researching with original works.

tom

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/564615#Comment_564615

If Logos is to have credibility as an academic or broadly Christian platform, they need to provide materials that some of their users find offensive

[y]

Lynden O. Williams

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/564670#Comment_564670

I do not have any particular work that I want to see published, but I say yes lets publish it.

In the same way I am expected to read and be critical when walking into any bookstore or Library, (even Amazon) customers with theological training or none, must also take the time to read and decide if this or that book meets their needs.

Gentle people, Logos is in the business (profit) of meeting the needs of those interested in studying the scriptures, and anything remotely near to it they publish.

If you do not like the resources do not purchase.

I will purchase them if they are at the right price. I am sure some persons who follow that persuasion would like to have them in the Logos app, considering all that it can do.

Lynden O. Williams

Phil if you can get some of the current stuff, published in the last ten years of so then please go for it.

Sometimes I read their articles, even give a dollar towards it. Let them know that they can also use this as a means of distributing their literature for little to nothing, or free if they so desire.

My desire is to see Logos as a Excellent theological library. As long as sufficient students request a resource, the library will try and get if for their collection.

mab

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/564677#Comment_564677

There's so many more genuinely Christian works that are languishing in pre-pub or CP, that I would much rather see Logos get into libraries.

Let's keep the main thing, the main thing. You can readily find JW stuff in the average thrift shop, even those run by the Salvation Army. I think the average price is less than a dollar, and for that stuff, more than it's really worth.

James C.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/564724#Comment_564724

As one who often speaks to Jehovah's Witnesses and who has family members within that group I would be delighted to have access through Logos. I'd be interested in anything but many times the old material is of the most use because you can show where they changed their views. For example how they once taught that Jesus was going to return in 1914 and then once he didn't they changed what "really" happened in 1914 (the invisible return). I access their materials through PDF files, their software, and print materials but how much easier to do it in Logos.

So put me down for a BIG YES!

NB.Mick

IMO, one of the best things about Logos is its broad library of resources. This breadth serves a wide array of theological perspectives and enables the study of opinions that differ from your own. There's great value in being able to cite a primary source, rather than always relying on a secondary one. (...)

Do you appreciate our offering broad religious content in Logos?

Would you be interested in having JW content in Logos?

Is there a different group we should focus on first?

Which would you rather have first: content from a JW perspective or content that provides a critical assessment of that perspective?

Any specific recommendations on content we should prioritize? (e.g., the works of Charles Taze Russell?)

I'd love to hear your thoughts. Thanks!

Yes. I've kept your first paragraph on purpose, since I find it a really great description.
Not really. I don't think I'd want to pay for it. I can see the pastoral issues Greg brought up - and I think there is a business risk to Logos if JW apologetics on the web start to defend their doctrines with Logos-based "scripture studies" and use Logos' good name to gain credibility for theor results. You might win ten JW apologists as new customers and kill much of the market you aim for with Faithlife if people were to think "Logos can't be trusted". I know this is not rational, and it will not apply to the "critically trained" part of the user base, but my impression is that you want to grow somewhat beyond this.
I see lots of underdeveloped areas within traditional Christianity (those were you assigned product managers become better, but there's no complete coverage), as well as an overall issue with the ability of Logos to offer a near-current, near-complete coverage of their "home market", the evangelical.
To draw some very broad strokes: Currently you offset the overbearing (Neo-)Puritan/Reformed Evangelical with RC and some EO, but even non-calvinist evangelical is imho not adequately covered. The Baptist, Methodist and Lutheran denominations as well as the "Progressive Christian" group have some resources, but lack material, the Restoration Movement exists nearly only in PB. Lots of areas where you could extract even more from the wallets of your existing customers plus find new customers that will buy much of the existant stuff to round out their libraries.
If you want to grow into faith sectors beyond Christianity with material relevant for Christian users as well, I second those who voted for Jewish.
The five works your search gives on Logos.com have five more on Vyrso: https://vyrso.com/products/search?q=title%3a%22jehovah%27s+witnesses%22 plus potentially some more where JW is not in the title but in the focus of the resource. I think I own none of all these and have no idea if this is somewhere near the best and brightest of the countercult literature, or if there is a large gap. But I'm missing a "neutral" scholarly history of the JW group in these search results and a non-apologetic overview over JW doctrines and doctrinal differences.
If you were to go in this direction, I'd definitely think the Watchtower "bible" is indespensable.

JoshInRI

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/564542#Comment_564542

I would agree with Randy.

As for other works and traditions, I am working till to learn all I can about God's Biblical Truth.

I do not have time to do a comparative religion (and cult) study though I can appreciate there may be some nominal evangelistic benefit to it.

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/564749#Comment_564749

This whole thread really reminds me of my grandmother's chicken-coop and the refreshing fragrance. However, fresh eggs each morning were great, and it got them through the Depression.

I'm currently reading 'Women in the Church' by Grenz/Kjesbo. Quite obviously it's an 'egalitarian' view that's trying to whack the 'complimentarian' view and since the latter isn't around to defend themselves, the egalitarians are winning hands-down.

But the authors do reference Witherington, Wright and others' writings. But what's curious is that when you go to Logos, nobody's home. Gee, am I surprised. I notice this pattern quite a bit.

Everytime there's some hint of non-mainstream, Logos is out hiding in the chicken-coop. Except as regards the OT,in which case it's just the opposite. YHWH grew up in Edom. Although, I'll have to admit the pre-pub pages on Berit Olam surprises, with the Penteteuch written in Babylon.

George Somsel

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/564801#Comment_564801

This whole thread really reminds me of my grandmother's chicken-coop and the refreshing fragrance. However, fresh eggs each morning were great, and it got them through the Depression.

I'm currently reading 'Women in the Church' by Grenz/Kjesbo. Quite obviously it's an 'egalitarian' view that's trying to whack the 'complimentarian' view and since the latter isn't around to defend themselves, the egalitarians are winning hands-down.

But the authors do reference Witherington, Wright and others' writings. But what's curious is that when you go to Logos, nobody's home. Gee, am I surprised. I notice this pattern quite a bit.

Everytime there's some hint of non-mainstream, Logos is out hiding in the chicken-coop. Except as regards the OT,in which case it's just the opposite. YHWH grew up in Edom. Although, I'll have to admit the pre-pub pages on Berit Olam surprises, with the Penteteuch written in Babylon.

Perhaps they enjoy the refreshing smell. [;)]

178294z

As an academic and apologist:

Do you appreciate our offering broad religious content in Logos? Yes. I prefer to read primary source material. Logos' hyperlink interface is THE reason I utilize it over paper. When primary sources, especially broad religious/historical contnet, is immediately available one's quality of scholarship and contextual understanding is vastly improved.
Would you be interested in having JW content in Logos? Yes. I am excited about the Mormon Studies, Books of the East, & etc. Very helpful.
Is there a different group we should focus on first? In the US at least Mormonism and JW are the primary Gospel challenges.
Which would you rather have first: content from a JW perspective or content that provides a critical assessment of that perspective? Critical Assessment
Any specific recommendations on content we should prioritize? (e.g., the works of Charles Taze Russell?) The works of Taze would be terrific

Matt Hamrick

1. Yes, the broader the content the better.

2. Yes

3. It's going to go on community pricing so focus on any group doesn't really matter.

4. I would rather have primary source material from JW and secondary source material from the critics.

5. It's in prepub, but Edwards.

Rick Ratzlaff

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/564825#Comment_564825

I haven't spent any money at Logos for some time, pulled off Pre-pub items, and don't intend to purchase anything sore some time. Now to be fair I'm semi-retired and focused on getting to know my Bible (TRUTH).

And I was instrumental in selling probably 30+ programs.

However I was extremely disappointed when Logos began to come out with so much trash that is supported right out of the pit of hell.

I read academia supporting false theological resources. That's one of the foundational problems in the TRUE CHURCH. Academics spending too much time in "mind bending" false g, trash.

Can you imagine where the Church would be today if pastors read through their Bible's 7 times a year in the original languages.

Now that I've been so dogmatic, I'll make one more prediction. I know Logos needs to SELL BOOKS", however you are dealing with the GOD of the universe. "Avoid all appearances of evil", for one.

Your demise will be in the face that you haven't drawn the line in the sand between error and truth. Your business plan maybe need to change so you can become the "bastion of TRUTH".

This blog primarily speaks of the 2 cults JW's and LDS, but Logos has snuggled up to others like EO and RC.

Sorry but you get no more support from here. Dare to be different and God will take care of your needs. Ask Moses.

George Somsel

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/567440#Comment_567440

I haven't spent any money at Logos for some time, pulled off Pre-pub items, and don't intend to purchase anything sore some time. Now to be fair I'm semi-retired and focused on getting to know my Bible (TRUTH).

I hope you remembered to shut your eyes before burying your head in the sand.

Dean J

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/567442#Comment_567442

Just one comment--I very much doubt printing old Watchtowers and/or the works of Russell would be very welcome to the Watchtower Society; on the contrary, they would probably rather such works disappear without trace, as it makes their claim to be a mouthpiece of God a sham (e.g. 'millions now living--in the '20s!--will never die' etc').

Just market it right--'the material the average JW knows nothing about!' or similar. Make sure it's advertised as an apologetic resource. And then let Logos users decide if they want it (I can't say I would be).

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/567444#Comment_567444

Actually, an author in Logos' stable of tomes did an analysis of what happened when a religious leader/group made a bold prediction of the end of time (there have been many).

First, of course, they surprisingly all failed. Secondly, and even more surprisingly, it didn't impact each group. Humans are quite adept at re-calculating.

Many aren't familiar with some well regarded church fathers' failed calculations that accompanied their assurances of being divinely inspired.

Kent

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/567465#Comment_567465

I don't really care one way or the other what Logos sells. However, do you intend to keep the cross in you logo? Is Logos a Christian organization?

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/567477#Comment_567477

Is Logos a Christian organization?

No only individuals may become Christian. Logos is an American company specializing in Bible-study software. However, Logos is a company that employees many Christians who try to exhibit Christian values in their business dealings.

Bruce Dunning

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/567481#Comment_567481

No only individuals may become Christian.

[Y]

Lynden O. Williams

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/567483#Comment_567483

Furthermore, just about every Christian denomination has been criticized on these forums as not being Christian.

The Ceo of Logos says that every book they have published some has a problem with it.

Let Logos do what it does best, (publish digital resources) and let the user choose what they will purchase/read. If you are not sure about what to read, then seek assistance, if not do not buy.

tom

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/567481#Comment_567481

No only individuals may become Christian

While I totally agree with you, in the United States we do have a case in front of our supreme court to see business can have "a faith" and thus have the protection under our 1st amendment.

David Paul

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/567481#Comment_567481

Is Logos a Christian organization?

No only individuals may become Christian. Logos is an American company specializing in Bible-study software. However, Logos is a company that employees many Christians who try to exhibit Christian values in their business dealings.

In all these tiffs about who does and doesn't qualify as Christian according to the Bible, wouldn't it be a kicker if "Biblical" and "Christian" turned out to be non-equivalent terms?

David Paul

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/567487#Comment_567487

Furthermore, just about every Christian denomination has been criticized on these forums as not being Christian.

The Ceo of Logos says that every book they have published some has a problem with it.

My friend was watching the Nye-Ham debate this morning, and after I listened to a few minutes of it, I said, "The problem that most people have who watch this thing is that they are trying to decide which of these guys is right...when the correct answer is 'neither'." The strong delusion has a very extensive reach--except for the Bibles (which have a bit of mud on them), precious little in the Logos stable isn't stricken with the malady of deception. I've mentioned that I disagree with pretty much every single one of the non-Bible resources in my library. Funny how everyone who uses Logos believes the Bible...except for Rev. 12:9. That verse is only partially true...of course.

JoshInRI

I've returned to or reread this String's title so many times....each time I do a double take.

In my opinion a more fitting title would have been:

JEHOVAH WITNESS BOOK TITLES

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/567951#Comment_567951

<deleted>

Jehovah Witness's who own Logos should be free to follow the forums without being insulted.

Thank you Josh for editing your post.