Jehovah's Witnesses Works

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

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.

"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. 

MJ. Smith said:

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

[y]

Mike Pettit said:

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...

Ben said:

"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.

Phil Gons said:

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

Answers:

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

MJ. Smith said:

Mike Pettit said:

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.

Mike Pettit said:

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 said:

Some of Ankerberg's books would be good.

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

Phil Gons said:

1. Do you appreciate our offering broad religious content in Logos?
2. Would you be interested in having JW content in Logos?
3. Is there a different group we should focus on first?
4. Which would you rather have first: content from a JW perspective or content that provides a critical assessment of that perspective?
5. 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!) 

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.

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.

As an academic and apologist:

1. 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.
2. 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.
3. Is there a different group we should focus on first? In the US at least Mormonism and JW are the primary Gospel challenges.
4. Which would you rather have first: content from a JW perspective or content that provides a critical assessment of that perspective? Critical Assessment
5. Any specific recommendations on content we should prioritize? (e.g., the works of Charles Taze Russell?) The works of Taze would be terrific

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.  

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).  

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 said:

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. 

Lynden Williams said:

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.