Thank you "Logos Bible Software" !!!

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/75312#Comment_75312

(deleted)

Marlene C. Crouch

Dear Richard,

I'm sorry that's what it looks like to you. As an after thought, a picture of the book cover would certainly make it appear as such. However, the fact remains that without the Logos Bible Software it would have been virtually impossible for this High School drop out [me] to be published. Report what you may but I still cannot say enought good about the Logos Bible Software company. Yes, I may have been overly excited and zealous about the book in including the picture of the cover of the book, but 'spam' never entered my mind.

God Bless,

Marlene C. Crouch

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/75351#Comment_75351

Dear Mr. Sela,

I just wanted you to know that I am not a regular user of Face Book and that this was not my 1st post regarding Logos Bible Software. At the request of my 14 year old grandson, I joined Face Book on March 4th of 2009. I was so excited to learn that other Logos Bible Software user were on Face Book. I clicked on the link to a particular participant of the Logos Face Book Photo Contest. See the following picture of the person and also what I wrote to him in PRAISE of Logos Bible Software.

"I received an invitation an hour ago, via e-mail, to join "facebook". I've been using Logos Bible Software (version 1.6) for many years. Signing a book contract on Jan. 13, '09' would have been virtually impossible without this software. I expect the book to be released to the public by September.

Marlene Crouch

Logos–Facebook Photo Contest Winners - Logos Bible Software Blog

blog.logos.com

A week and a half ago we announced the Logos–Facebook Photo Contest and invited you to take pictures of yourself with Logos Bible Software and upload them to Facebook. The response to the contest was super. ...

March 4, 2009 at 11:17am Friends and Networks · Comment ·LikeUnlike · Share

Wes Saad

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/75351#Comment_75351

I find this book extremely offensive on this kind of web site/forum

Offensive? No. Disagreeable? To some, perhaps. At face value I see no self-promotion but just what the person claimed: celebration of Logos Bible Software to help in the completion of a book. It may be a book some people do not like, but that doesn't change the fact that the Logos software came in useful during the writing.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/75410#Comment_75410

Marlene, many new users of the forum make similar mistakes. It's not too late, though. You can edit your post up to 10 hours after you made it, by clicking on the "More" drop-down and choosing "Edit". You can remove the book cover and link to your website, as perhaps that is too much self-promotion which isn't appropriate for these Forums. However we're glad you found Logos to be helpful to you. Sorry you've remained stuck in the past with Logos 1.6, though. It has been through three major releases since then (2.0, Series X, and 3.0/Libronix) now 4.0 which is totally new. Maybe you'd want to consider upgrading? BTW, there are lots of faithful Catholics here on these Forums who use Logos and might not appreciate your book, and whom I've learned a lot from (not being Catholic myself). A thread you might want to read (to understand the general tenor of how we handle theological differences here on the forum: with grace) is here: http://community.logos.com/forums/t/9288.aspx (it is of particular relevance to Catholic theology; and there are some posters on that thread who are Catholics either by choice or by upbringing).

Blessings to you in our Lord.

Damian McGrath

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/75420#Comment_75420

Offensive?

Not to me either.

At face value I see no self-promotion but just what the person claimed

Seriously? With an absolutely enormous image of the cover of the book, a release date, and a web link?

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/75424#Comment_75424

deleted by user

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/75424#Comment_75424

(deleted)

J.R. Miller

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/75434#Comment_75434

Marlene, I am glad you found Logos helpful. Two suggestions, an upgrade to Logos 4 right now would get you a lot of great new resources at an incredible price. Two, you can always post a link to your website in your profile. I have posted stuff like that on mine and that way anyone who cares to find out more about me is welcome to get my books or read my blog, and at the same time I am not bothering others who don't care to read my personal stuff. Anyway, I am not bugged by your post, just sharing with you an alternative means that is available to all users. :-)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/75433#Comment_75433

[deleted by user]

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/75433#Comment_75433

(deleted)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/75446#Comment_75446

deleted by user

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/75447#Comment_75447

deleted by user

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/75448#Comment_75448

deleted by user

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/75454#Comment_75454

deleted by user

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/75458#Comment_75458

deleted by user

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/75471#Comment_75471

I've been a Logos Bible Software user (version 1.6) for many years.

I am delighted that you have found Logos useful and delighted that you have succeeded in an endeavor that is clearly important to you.

This is an interesting thread... a bunch of "Deleted"s.

Marlene C. Crouch

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/75424#Comment_75424

Thank you for your help in editing the post, Rosie! I will read the thread here: http://community.logos.com/forums/t/9288.aspx , with an open mind . With all due respect, I must tell you what is truly sad to me, and that is: If a comparison of the Bible with the Catichism of the Catholic Church, The Book of Mormans, The New World Translation, or any other book written by man is offensive to one who is utilizing the Logos Bible Program. Think about it.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/75502#Comment_75502

If a comparison of the Bible with the Catichism of the Catholic Church, The Book of Mormans, The New World Translation, or any other book written by man is offensive to one who is utilizing the Logos Bible Program. Think about it.

Are you saying that Catholics, Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses shouldn't use Logos? If Logos is a useful as you have found it and if those you believe misunderstand scripture find Logos useful, isn't it more appropriate to praise the Lord for giving the damned an opportunity to get it right?

Mark Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/75502#Comment_75502

Marlene,

This is a gathering place of people with an interest in Bible study and especially an interest in better using a tool we all feel the Lord has provided for us, Logos Bible software.

You probably don't know from not being on the forums for long that there are people who use Logos from a variety of different theological perspectives, including some Catholics. While I am not in agreement with many of the major teachings of the Catholic church I know this forum is not a place to discuss those differences nor to promote my particular point of view. There are many such venues available. I'm afraid that while I personally might want to read your book, I do find it out of place to promote it in any way on this forum, because of the nature of this forum and what binds us together here. I don't mean this to hurt you or demean your work for the Lord nor your enthusiastic appreciation of what you've been helped to do, just to help you understand that the Logos community includes many who might take (and may have taken) offense at using this community to promote a book dividing one group against another. I know you seem to have done this without any malice or attempt to create a problem, but it was correct for some to speak a word of objection, as I have.

Thank you for listening.

Marlene C. Crouch

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/75512#Comment_75512

Thank you Mark, for your kind input. Lesson learned ... I need to find out particulars before I start 'clicking' and typing. MY MISTAKE: I APOLOGIZE TO ALL.

Marlene

Mike Childs

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/75424#Comment_75424

Surely she meant that she has used Logos since version 1.6, not that she still uses version 1.6.

After deletion of bookcover, I see nothing offensive.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/75502#Comment_75502

Thank you for your help in editing the post, Rosie! I will read the thread here: http://community.logos.com/forums/t/9288.aspx , with an open mind . With all due respect, I must tell you what is truly sad to me, and that is: If a comparison of the Bible with the Catichism of the Catholic Church, The Book of Mormans, The New World Translation, or any other book written by man is offensive to one who is utilizing the Logos Bible Program. Think about it.

No worries. I'm glad all of the animosity was resolved. It's kind of amusing now to read all the "deleted" posts. [:)]

I have no objection to a comparison of the Bible with the Catechism of the Catholic Church if it is done objectively with no prior agenda to discredit the latter; if that's the conclusion you've come to after giving it due thought, then fine. In fact, someone on this forum was asking very objectively (I think it was in that thread I directed you to) for some resources to help him check the Catechism to see how Catholics defend it from Scripture. I have a copy of the CCC in print form somewhere (still packed away in boxes), but I do recall it had tons of footnotes referencing Scripture all over the place. I find it important to read and learn from Christians from different traditions, and people of other faiths, even though I might disagree with some or most of their theology. I can't have a fair discussion with them unless I understand their beliefs from their own perspective, not from the perspective of those outside their faith who might have "misunderestimated" it.

Your book title, together with the image on your book cover, might lead one to the conclusion that you believe Catholics are sheep who do not recognize the Master's voice and thus do not belong to Him (John 10:4-6, 25-28). I don't know whether that's what you really believe, but the book presents itself that way, and could be quite off-putting to the very people you hope to reach. The words on your website imply that you wrote the book in order to reach Catholics with the truth of Jesus Christ, which is a noble goal. Except for the fact that most Catholics I know would be very bemused and/or hurt by your assertion that they don't "hunger and thirst for the Word of God " or don't have a "personal, meaningful, relationship with Jesus Christ." You know, Catholics participate in home Bible Study groups, they hold Biblical Conferences, publish Bible Dictionaries, etc. They hold the Bible in high regard. See http://www.salvationhistory.com/studies/courses/online/, for some online Bible study courses being promoted by them amongst their flock. You might not agree with all of the content in such courses, but I'm sure you'd find on the whole that they teach pretty much the same thing you believe the Bible says. Scott Hahn is someone who has done a lot to promote biblical faith among Catholics, but he's done it in conjunction with becoming one of them (he was a former Presbyterian minister), and so he has a hearing among them. You might not be as winsome, with your adversarial approach to what Catholics hold dear.

I might read your book at some point to see all your research. But I can't help thinking it might be based on a somewhat outdated and inaccurate understanding of what Catholics really believe. They love the Word of God and believe it, and use it in their devotions. And they do believe in Jesus as their Savior. Sure, there might be Catholics who don't believe this, don't really understand it, or it doesn't make any difference in their lives -- they are still striving to earn salvation by their good works. However, there are Protestants like that, too -- proclaiming words of faith with their mouths but then turning around with unregenerate hearts and acting as if they don't truly believe what they say. Which is worse? Faith without works (more likely a Protestant error), or works without faith (more likely a Catholic error)? Probably equally fruitless. Both faith and works go hand in hand. It's not that both are separately required for salvation; it's that both acting in concert prove that one's salvation is real. And both Protestants and Catholics believe that, I'm pretty sure. It's just that we come at it from different directions. Among both groups, you will find people who have grown to different levels of maturity in their faith over it.

You might be interested in a paper I wrote for a theology class I took with J.I. Packer a number of years ago at Regent College, addressing differences in how Protestants and Catholics view the question of Scripture "versus" the Tradition of the Church (which the Catholic Catechism would be part of). Is it either/or or both/and? I've posted the paper online here: http://www.scribd.com/doc/25137189

Anyway, I want to commend you for being truly gracious and teachable. And I hope we all remain teachable here on this forum. We only grow together in our knowledge of God and his Word and each other by giving each other the space to grow at our own pace, and being open to learning from surprisingly unexpected places. Yes, even from those we might have thought were hopelessly lost. [;)]

Blessings.

James Macleod

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/75551#Comment_75551

I have no objection to a comparison of the Bible with the Catechism of the Catholic Church if it is done objectively with no prior agenda to discredit the latter; if that's the conclusion you've come to after giving it due thought, then fine.

Why do you object to someone having an agenda? Most people do. I respect authors that honestly state their biases and agendas. I'm really not clear why comparing a Catholic document to the bible (or comparing any two documents for that matter) is offensive, even if there is an agenda. I find the supression of ideas and arguments that might "offend" people more offensive than the offensive work. But since I'm not easly offended I'll let it pass.[:D]

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/75555#Comment_75555

I have no objection to a comparison of the Bible with the Catechism of the Catholic Church if it is done objectively with no prior agenda to discredit the latter; if that's the conclusion you've come to after giving it due thought, then fine.

Why do you object to someone having an agenda? Most people do. I respect authors that honestly state their biases and agendas. I'm really not clear why comparing a Catholic document to the bible (or comparing any two documents for that matter) is offensive, even if there is an agenda. I find the supression of ideas and arguments that might "offend" people more offensive than the offensive work. But since I'm not easly offended I'll let it pass.

Um, because I have absolutely no agenda whatsoever, myself.[;)]

OK, so I don't object to people writing books with agendas, or books that offend people. Of course people have agendas. But I was trying to explain to her that I didn't think she'd reach the very people she wanted to reach with it because of the way her message was packaged (I haven't seen the insides, so I can't comment on its content). She obviously cares about people and wants to win them to Christ. A lack of subtlety about it was my only real beef with her approach. My own agenda might have been less subtle than I'd hoped... But I admit I had one, too.

And if you want to talk about suppression of ideas and arguments that might "offend" people -- many of us chose to retract our messages on this forum because they were found to be offensive. But if we want to love each other in Christ, and encourage each other to know and love him more, sometimes that means withholding inflammatory stuff, and getting our message across through what Eugene Peterson calls "telling it slant" (after a poem by Emily Dickinson):

Tell all the Truth but tell it slant---
Success in Circuit lies
Too bright for our infirm Delight
The Truth's superb surprise
As Lightening to the Children eased
With explanation kind
The Truth must dazzle gradually
Or every man be blind---

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/75555#Comment_75555

Why do you object to someone having an agenda? Most people do.

Let me tell you a true story of exactly why I object to some agendas. They kill people. In high school, I played doubles in ping-pong with Chuck Goldmark. His father was a state senator. My junior year of high school, the John Birch Society began a smear campaign claiming that his mother was a communist. When his dad lost the election, his parents John and Sally Goldmark sued and won a defamation suit. The trial rated an article in Time magazine. The judge wrote a book on the case. Life goes on. John and Sally die. Chuck marries and has two children. Christmas eve many years later, a man who believed the John Birch Society smears killed Chuck and his family in a particularly brutal manner. His motive? the Chuck and his family were Jewish Communists. They were neither. Sorry but some agendas do require a severe rebuke from society. Without seeing the book, I do not know whether the book in question is one of them. But I do believe that the author is responsible for proving that the text is reasonable before posting it on this type of forum.

Then again, I don't believe promoting one's on non-Logos materials - beyond a tag line of a blog link - is appropriate on the Logos forums.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/75576#Comment_75576

FYI if interested, as everyone seems to have missed it -- there are excerpts of the book on the web site originally linked to, you can get a feel for the type of scholarly research being written in the book.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/75772#Comment_75772

there are excerpts of the book on the web site originally linked to, you can get a feel for the type of scholarly research being written in the book.

Yes, there are. The author appears to be sincere and well-informed in some aspects. However, only the longest segments give any indication of her reasoning. The shorter passages give something of her emphasis i.e. the things she considers important. Nonetheless, the issue is not the quality or lack of quality of her work. Nor is the issue her justifiable pride in her work and her praise of Logos. The issue is the apparent promotion of the work on the Logos forums. As she saw fit to withdraw the portion of her post that appeared promotional, I think we should let the matter drop. If anything, she deserves a bit of praise for being willing to withdraw a post that she saw as appropriate but some forums members saw as offensive.

James Macleod

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/75576#Comment_75576

Let me tell you a true story of exactly why I object to some agendas. They kill people. In high school, I played doubles in ping-pong with Chuck Goldmark. His father was a state senator. My junior year of high school, the John Birch Society began a smear campaign claiming that his mother was a communist. When his dad lost the election, his parents John and Sally Goldmark sued and won a defamation suit. The trial rated an article in Time magazine. The judge wrote a book on the case. Life goes on. John and Sally die. Chuck marries and has two children. Christmas eve many years later, a man who believed the John Birch Society smears killed Chuck and his family in a particularly brutal manner. His motive? the Chuck and his family were Jewish Communists. They were neither. Sorry but some agendas do require a severe rebuke from society. Without seeing the book, I do not know whether the book in question is one of them. But I do believe that the author is responsible for proving that the text is reasonable before posting it on this type of forum.

We were talking about theological and scholarly agendas, not killing people. You have a very passionate argument but the act of some wacko is irrelevant to a book about catholic doctrines as compared to the bible. The book will stand or fall on it's own merits.

Then again, I don't believe promoting one's on non-Logos materials - beyond a tag line of a blog link - is appropriate on the Logos forums.

I don't agree either but Marlene already apoligized a number of times. What more do you want, blood?

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/76236#Comment_76236

We were talking about theological and scholarly agendas, not killing people. You have a very passionate argument but the act of some wacko is irrelevant to a book about catholic doctrines as compared to the bible. The book will stand or fall on it's own merits.

Or, as I would put it, we were talking about books that exist solely to expose those who do not agree with you.

Note that my post was not addressed to Marlene, who I have praised for "doing the right thing". It was addressed to someone I frequently agree with whose post seemed not to understand why the implied topic upset people. Those involved in the Goldmark fiasco thought they were saving American democracy. They presented their material in language that convinced enough of the public they knew their material to unseat a popular legislator.

Icarus38376

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/76241#Comment_76241

Marlene, I can't wait to read your book! I'm glad to see that there are still some out there who see the deception and anti-christ spirit of Rome.

Pat Flanakin

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/75381#Comment_75381

Disagree...God can make anything happen, Logos or not.

it would have been virtually impossible for this High School drop out [me] to be published.

Pat Flanakin

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/75512#Comment_75512

Whether directly or indirectly, our point of view is promoted through anything we say in the forum. I would venture that many on the forum, enough to be a majority, believe in God. That is a point of view which means they believe there is a God.

That said, there comes a point when you get further and further out on the branches from that root belief that people splinter and the twigs of the branches get more sensitive to movement of external elements.

Therefore, I am careful to ensure that others never are wondering what I believe, nor do I get in a position to deny my Lord by being silent since it is He who saved me.

America has become a bastion of compromise and obsequiousness to the liberals who would deny Truth for Truth makes them responsible. May this forum never become part of that abyss.

this forum is not a place to discuss those differences nor to promote my particular point of view

Pat Flanakin

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/76435#Comment_76435

Marlene, I can't wait to read your book! I'm glad to see that there are still some out there who see the deception and anti-christ spirit of Rome.

Finally, an opinion!

I would venture to say those afraid of opinion, are afraid what they believe is not true.

Rene Atchley

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/76549#Comment_76549

I've kind of followed this thread with a bit of interest. I understand that the web site is sponsored by Logos and those who participate do so as quests and should behave with a high level of decorum. However, I am curious as to why the op should not be allowed to express his/her work within the Logos universe given the dominate nature of this company in the industry especially if that post promotes the brand. I find it a bit odd to say that he/she should not participate because of an advertising agenda given that Logos (imo) is one big marketing company....even to the extent that at least one executive participate(d) in a thread about Logos on other a related boards (i.e. Bible.org).

I'm not necessarily against the policy as expressed here as much as I am curious as the notion of limited advertising on a company board with products that promote the brand while outside boards are, at times, freely used to promote the brand. Perhaps I have missed something I don't know.

Rich DeRuiter

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/76569#Comment_76569

I'm not necessarily against the policy as expressed here as much as I am curious as the notion of limited advertising on a company board with products that promote the brand while outside boards are, at times, freely used to promote the brand. Perhaps I have missed something I don't know

When the original poster of this thread posted, it was her first and only post (at that time), and promoted a book that she wrote being sold by another publisher (Logos is a publisher). Most spam is by first time posters, and often disguise their spam with thin references to Logos software. (BTW, there has been some pretty bad spam on these forums. We want to catch them early.) Promotion of another publisher is frowned upon here for a number of reasons, some of which are explained in [ earlier posts on this thread ] (oops, I guess it was another thread).

When I followed the link to the book URL, I found no reference to Logos software there, but I did find what seemed to me to be a hostile attitude toward Roman Catholic theology. This led me to further suspect that this was spam, and that the author possibly intended to create controversy in order to promote and sell her work.

For these two reasons the original post looked like it fit the category of spam to me, so I objected and reported
it. Apparently Logos didn't feel it violated their terms of use and
left it up.

Further explanation by the original poster, along with an amendment to her original post, led me to withdraw my objections to her posting in this forum.

Hopefully this makes sense.

BTW, I'm not a forum moderator, or anything like that. But as an MVP I feel a responsibility to fellow forum users to report what looks like spam.

Rene Atchley

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/76582#Comment_76582

I will leave this issue after this post. Indeed it is bad form to spam a forum made to promote a publisher and its products. Catching such issues does help to keep forums clean from endless posting that serve as a form of self-promotion. The notion that someone is "hostile" to catholics as a reason to limit their posts in the diverse world we live in now strikes me as kind of odd when Logos itself has a portal to a site that deals with UFO's (fiction I suppose) in its front page in the lower right hand corner which apparently isnt a Logos product. Not that this really matters per se but some of the policies on forums like this just leaves me curious.

Kevin Becker

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/76614#Comment_76614

Logos itself has a portal to a site that deals with UFO's (fiction I suppose)

Yes, it does appear odd. However, it is a site promoting a book by Michael Heiser, Logos' academic editor. Once you get that connection, it's not all that odd.