[request] Theology explorer
It would be nice to have some type of tool that categorizes different systematic theology concepts with verses in the Bible.
Comments
-
-
Yes, quite.
0 -
I would assume you would want to be able to filter it by tradition as well. And I'm glad to see Eli was intrigued by this too!
0 -
yes that could be another option
0 -
Robert Peters said:
It would be nice to have some type of tool that categories different systematic theology concepts with verses in the Bible.
I haven't gotten to try out the new L6 "Label" feature as much as I'd like. But isn't that something that could be accomplished with labels? And if Faithlife allowed "community labels", then these kinds of ideas could be developed in a crowdsourced fashion, at least taking it far enough that Faithlife gets a practical idea of how a specific type of curated content would be used.
"Logos Anytime."
Am I missing something here?
Donnie
0 -
The tagging feature does something totally different then a explorer. The tagging features allows one to see everything tagged in verses I or another person have selected. But a explorer would allow it as a more visual tool. One is more visual whereas the other is more searching then finding it.
0 -
Thinking along the lines of an interactive tool much like the Psalms Explorer or the Festivals and Feasts ExplorerDonnie Hale said:Robert Peters said:It would be nice to have some type of tool that categories different systematic theology concepts with verses in the Bible.
I haven't gotten to try out the new L6 "Label" feature as much as I'd like. But isn't that something that could be accomplished with labels? And if Faithlife allowed "community labels", then these kinds of ideas could be developed in a crowdsourced fashion, at least taking it far enough that Faithlife gets a practical idea of how a specific type of curated content would be used.
"Logos Anytime."
Am I missing something here?
Donnie
0 -
Robert Peters said:
It would be nice to have some type of tool that categories different systematic theology concepts with verses in the Bible.
great suggestion!
Using adventure and community to challenge young people to continually say "yes" to God
0 -
Great idea!
0 -
This is an awesome idea!
0 -
I find it interesting that shortly after this post was made FL asks for volunteers to work on a Systematic Theology project..... HOPING!
0 -
+1 [Y][Y]
0 -
Since I plan to major in Theology for my Ph D, anything Faithlife/Logos could do to better Theology studies (your idea is fantastic) would be great!
Nathan Parker
Visit my blog at http://focusingonthemarkministries.com
0 -
[Y]
0 -
Robert Peters said:
It would be nice to have some type of tool that categorizes different systematic theology concepts with verses in the Bible.
We have several ideas in the works along these lines.
A future release will likely include a new Systematic Theologies guide section, similar in nature to the Ancient Literature and forthcoming new Grammars guide sections.
We're also considering an interactive resource that allows you to browse systematic theologies and theological topics by a number of different categories.
Longer term, I'd love to see us develop a taxonomy of systematic theological topics where each topic would be categorized under one or more of the main areas of systematic theology and would have parents, siblings, and children, as appropriate. I'd also love to see us develop a dataset of controverted theological issues, along with the various positions / schools of thought on those issues, with fairly thorough lists of proponents (and opponents), linked to the sources where they defend their perspective. Think of the multi-view books, just way better.
Bible passages used in defense of various positions would also be a nice extension of this data.
We're eager to make Logos a must-have tool for serious theological study, like it currently is for exegetical study.
You can see some of the early work we're doing in this Faithlife group.
0 -
I've no real interest in Logos dividing theologians into various theological camps (I'd rather do that myself), but I would LOVE to have sections of systematic theologies tagged so they appear in the appropriate sections of the Factbook, Topic Guide and Sermon Starter Guide.
This is my personal Faithlife account. On 1 March 2022, I started working for Faithlife, and have a new 'official' user account. Posts on this account shouldn't be taken as official Faithlife views!
0 -
If by systematic theology you mean starting with the early church fathers and tracing the history of theological concepts forward, this could be interesting, even a valuable contribution to theology. If you mean starting with some contemporary textbooks and linking into their categories, this could be a monumental waste of time from my perspective - not that I'm ever opinionated. [;)]
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 -
Mark Barnes said:
I would LOVE to have sections of systematic theologies tagged so they appear in the appropriate sections of the Factbook, Topic Guide and Sermon Starter Guide.
I second this idea. I think all the suggestions would be helpful to the various users logos has: beginner, intermediate, and advanced. Particularly having a theology section in the exegetical and sermon starter guide would help bridge the text to systematic and biblical theological topics.
0 -
MJ. Smith said:
If by systematic theology you mean starting with the early church fathers and tracing the history of theological concepts forward, this could be interesting, even a valuable contribution to theology. If you mean starting with some contemporary textbooks and linking into their categories, this could be a monumental waste of time from my perspective - not that I'm ever opinionated.
Bingo. Not that contemporary categories should be wholly ignored or are invalid, but that Faithlife's systematic theology tools should be a lot more historically aware than many of today's systematic theologians. As with Western philosophers, new theologians (their own protestations to the contrary notwithstanding) typically fit much better into older categories than old theologians fit into new ones. Likewise theological positions. Furthermore, since the disciplinary divisions of formal theology are and have been for some time controverted issues, the best way to deal with them is to trace the historical divisions and their development. This isn't hard to do, and it would avoid allegations of arbitrary divisions and have a broader ecumenical relevance than other approaches.
“The trouble is that everyone talks about reforming others and no one thinks about reforming himself.” St. Peter of Alcántara
0 -
Mark Barnes said:
I've no real interest in Logos dividing theologians into various theological camps (I'd rather do that myself)
I'm curious why.
Mark Barnes said:I would LOVE to have sections of systematic theologies tagged so they appear in the appropriate sections of the Factbook, Topic Guide and Sermon Starter Guide.
We're first bringing STs to passage-based guides. We'll probably do LCV alignment and bring them to the Topic Guide (and Factbook?) as well. Not sure about Sermon Starter Guide, but we'll consider it.
0 -
Phil Gons (Faithlife) said:
We're first bringing STs to passage-based guides.
Have a tentative date when this would happen?
0 -
Robert Peters said:Phil Gons (Faithlife) said:
We're first bringing STs to passage-based guides.
Have a tentative date when this would happen?
It's currently scheduled to ship with 6.4.
We plan to ship 6.3 in a week and a half on Monday, May 18. With our six-week release cycle, 6.4 would ship on Monday, June 29.
0 -
I am sure that a theologian can not really be defined by this or that theological label. ???
I of course have no real experience labeling or even knowing what this or that label really means. I think I am an evangelical Lutheran that lives in America but there is absolutely no comparison between me and what I have heard and/or seen of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America (ELCA)
I will take one step back and say we agree "there's a God"
I recently asked a "reformed" Jew that question and they said no....how? They recite the schema every Saturday. Yet. No God?
Oh well I need to step off this platform.
0 -
I think it will be easier to understand than you think.William Bingham said:I am sure that a theologian can not really be defined by this or that theological label. ???
I of course have no real experience labeling or even knowing what this or that label really means. I think I am an evangelical Lutheran that lives in America but there is absolutely no comparison between me and what I have heard and/or seen of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America (ELCA)
I will take one step back and say we agree "there's a God"
I recently asked a "reformed" Jew that question and they said no....how? They recite the schema every Saturday. Yet. No God?
Oh well I need to step off this platform.
0 -
Phil Gons (Faithlife) said:Mark Barnes said:
I've no real interest in Logos dividing theologians into various theological camps (I'd rather do that myself)
I'm curious why.
For two reasons:
- I have my own preferences for systematic theologies, so if I just want to compare a few systematic theologies, I'd just use my favourites (I wouldn't use a collection of "reformed" or "baptist" or whatever theologies.
- Judging by the spreadsheet in the FL group, there's not really enough useful regarding "views". However, since I wrote the comment I discovered the "Categories" tab of the spreadsheet which gives me hope that more info might be added, but I'm not really interested in looking at "all baptists". I might be interested in looking at "all new covenant theologians", or "all amillennial charismatics".
PS - the ecclesiology area is missing the episcopalian view.
This is my personal Faithlife account. On 1 March 2022, I started working for Faithlife, and have a new 'official' user account. Posts on this account shouldn't be taken as official Faithlife views!
0 -
Mark Barnes said:Phil Gons (Faithlife) said:Mark Barnes said:
I've no real interest in Logos dividing theologians into various theological camps (I'd rather do that myself)
I'm curious why.
For two reasons:
- I have my own preferences for systematic theologies, so if I just want to compare a few systematic theologies, I'd just use my favourites (I wouldn't use a collection of "reformed" or "baptist" or whatever theologies.
- Judging by the spreadsheet in the FL group, there's not really enough useful regarding "views". However, since I wrote the comment I discovered the "Categories" tab of the spreadsheet which gives me hope that more info might be added, but I'm not really interested in looking at "all baptists". I might be interested in looking at "all new covenant theologians", or "all amillennial charismatics".
PS - the ecclesiology area is missing the episcopalian view.
Thanks, Mark.
What I'm more interested in doing than just classifying systematic theologies (or, better, systematic theologians) by denomination is developing a robust set of author metadata across all authors, allowing you to have more control and precision in browsing your library, building collections, running searches, and understanding where people are coming from as you read their content.
The views work is experimental for now and needs to be fleshed out. We've not really undertaken that work yet, but I've love to. The longer-term vision of that work is to enable you to
- look up any significant disputed theological issue
- see where it fits in the larger systematic theological hierarchy
- explore related issues nearby in the hierarchy
- see the major views on the issue
- see who holds to those views (with perhaps the ability to jump to a list of all known views by a given author)
- jump to defenses of those views
- see lists of Bible passages used to support those views
I think the outcome of this work will be extremely helpful to serious students of theology.
0 -
Phil Gons (Faithlife) said:
The views work is experimental for now and needs to be fleshed out. We've not really undertaken that work yet, but I've love to. The longer-term vision of that work is to enable you to
- look up any significant disputed theological issue
- see where it fits in the larger systematic theological hierarchy
- explore related issues nearby in the hierarchy
- see the major views on the issue
- see who holds to those views (with perhaps the ability to jump to a list of all known views by a given author)
- jump to defenses of those views
- see lists of Bible passages used to support those views
I think the outcome of this work will be extremely helpful to serious students of theology.
That tool in its happily ambitious fully developed form could be very awesome.
I do, however, have one very important request: involve Catholic theologians in this classification process. There are a myriad of reasons for this.
“The trouble is that everyone talks about reforming others and no one thinks about reforming himself.” St. Peter of Alcántara
0 -
Phil Gons (Faithlife) said:
What I'm more interested in doing than just classifying systematic theologies (or, better, systematic theologians) by denomination is developing a robust set of author metadata across all authors, allowing you to have more control and precision in browsing your library, building collections, running searches, and understanding where people are coming from as you read their content.
The views work is experimental for now and needs to be fleshed out. We've not really undertaken that work yet, but I've love to. The longer-term vision of that work is to enable you to
- look up any significant disputed theological issue
- see where it fits in the larger systematic theological hierarchy
- explore related issues nearby in the hierarchy
- see the major views on the issue
- see who holds to those views (with perhaps the ability to jump to a list of all known views by a given author)
- jump to defenses of those views
- see lists of Bible passages used to support those views
I think the outcome of this work will be extremely helpful to serious students of theology.
May I offer some observations?
- Why are you thinking it terms of hierarchy? It seems to me that a network is a more appropriate model.
- Why not use one of the models of argumentation to organize and display the data. Are you familiar with the old standby Toulmin? http://changingminds.org/disciplines/argument/making_argument/toulmin.htm and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Toulmin
- Note the Toulmin approach allows for coding and display without implying which position is right or wrong which is essential for the software.
- In addition to Biblical references as support, you also need to include Early church fathers and church documents .... yes, I know Logos has little of the latter but it is an area in which you must grow in supporting mainstream Protestants
- a major need is the ability to jump to the assumptions behind an assertion/proposition as well as careful definitions of the terms as used in a particular context - many theological arguments exist primarily because of differences in how different traditions and theologians define terms - canon being a prime example.
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:
May I offer some observations?
- Why are you thinking it terms of hierarchy? It seems to me that a network is a more appropriate model.
- Why not use one of the models of argumentation to organize and display the data. Are you familiar with the old standby Toulmin? http://changingminds.org/disciplines/argument/making_argument/toulmin.htm and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Toulmin
- Note the Toulmin approach allows for coding and display without implying which position is right or wrong which is essential for the software.
- In addition to Biblical references as support, you also need to include Early church fathers and church documents .... yes, I know Logos has little of the latter but it is an area in which you must grow in supporting mainstream Protestants
- a major need is the ability to jump to the assumptions behind an assertion/proposition as well as careful definitions of the terms as used in a particular context - many theological arguments exist primarily because of differences in how different traditions and theologians define terms - canon being a prime example.
Thanks, MJ. I appreciate the suggestions and links.
By hierarchy I meant, for example, that the topic of regeneration would be a child of the area of soteriology (though maybe it won't always be that clean). So we might have something like this:
- area: soteriology
- topic: regeneration
- issue: relationship to faith
- position 1: logically but not temporally precedes faith
- proponent 1: Wayne Grudem
- source 1: Systematic Theology, 700ff
- passages: Jn 3:5; 6:44, 65; Acts 16:14
- position 2: logically and temporally precedes faith
- proponent 1: another theologian
- source 1: another source, 125
- passages: more passages
- position 3: logically follows faith
- proponent 1: another theologian
- source 1: another source, 125
- passages: more passages
0 -
My view is only slightly different ... but of course I have to link an argument map from my favorite argument software (which does support Toulmin) so no I'm not asking for it in Logos yet. Your hierarchy isn't as foreign as I thought it might be.
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 -
Phil Gons (Faithlife) said:Mark Barnes said:
I've no real interest in Logos dividing theologians into various theological camps (I'd rather do that myself)
I'm curious why.
Mark Barnes said:I would LOVE to have sections of systematic theologies tagged so they appear in the appropriate sections of the Factbook, Topic Guide and Sermon Starter Guide.
We're first bringing STs to passage-based guides. We'll probably do LCV alignment and bring them to the Topic Guide (and Factbook?) as well. Not sure about Sermon Starter Guide, but we'll consider it.
I'm reading this thread because I'm intrigued... but I have to chuckle because this entire post (your response AND Mark's original comment) are absolute Greek to me! [:)]
Cynthia
Romans 8:28-38
0 -
Phil Gons (Faithlife) said:Mark Barnes said:Phil Gons (Faithlife) said:Mark Barnes said:
I've no real interest in Logos dividing theologians into various theological camps (I'd rather do that myself)
I'm curious why.
For two reasons:
- I have my own preferences for systematic theologies, so if I just want to compare a few systematic theologies, I'd just use my favourites (I wouldn't use a collection of "reformed" or "baptist" or whatever theologies.
- Judging by the spreadsheet in the FL group, there's not really enough useful regarding "views". However, since I wrote the comment I discovered the "Categories" tab of the spreadsheet which gives me hope that more info might be added, but I'm not really interested in looking at "all baptists". I might be interested in looking at "all new covenant theologians", or "all amillennial charismatics".
PS - the ecclesiology area is missing the episcopalian view.
Thanks, Mark.
What I'm more interested in doing than just classifying systematic theologies (or, better, systematic theologians) by denomination is developing a robust set of author metadata across all authors, allowing you to have more control and precision in browsing your library, building collections, running searches, and understanding where people are coming from as you read their content.
The views work is experimental for now and needs to be fleshed out. We've not really undertaken that work yet, but I've love to. The longer-term vision of that work is to enable you to
- look up any significant disputed theological issue
- see where it fits in the larger systematic theological hierarchy
- explore related issues nearby in the hierarchy
- see the major views on the issue
- see who holds to those views (with perhaps the ability to jump to a list of all known views by a given author)
- jump to defenses of those views
- see lists of Bible passages used to support those views
I think the outcome of this work will be extremely helpful to serious students of theology.
Okay! THIS I understood and love...and agree completely. As someone who has a ton of resources in her library, I am always going to the web to understand their theological view beforehand. It's not that I don't read it, I do, but I need to understand where they are coming from. Mark is brilliant at this, and knows a ton about authors and resources, but for the average user, I believe this would be very helpful!
Cynthia
Romans 8:28-38
0 -
Phil Gons (Faithlife) said:
- area: soteriology
- topic: regeneration
- issue: relationship to faith
- position 1: logically but not temporally precedes faith
- proponent 1: Wayne Grudem
- source 1: Systematic Theology, 700ff
- passages: Jn 3:5; 6:44, 65; Acts 16:14
- position 2: logically and temporally precedes faith
- proponent 1: another theologian
- source 1: another source, 125
- passages: more passages
- position 3: logically follows faith
- proponent 1: another theologian
- source 1: another source, 125
- passages: more passages
If you could produce a tool that was a systematic theology equivalent of SBL's Exegetical Summaries for the digital age, that would be an incredible service.
That said, if you're going to the trouble of creating that data, there are many additional ways I could see it being used, and I'd hope that users were given lots of options. Although L6 made really good progress in opening up new ways of searching, there's still a tendency for Logos not to expose the most useful data in tools.
This is my personal Faithlife account. On 1 March 2022, I started working for Faithlife, and have a new 'official' user account. Posts on this account shouldn't be taken as official Faithlife views!
0 -
Wow! I would never have thought one of my ideas would get so much attention, but after hearing some of the comments I think their are several features that could service all types of Bible Students. First, I love the passage guide feature This will allow pastors and Bible Teachers to connect the passage they maybe teaching. THis same feature could be used in the Factbooks and topic guide as well. Second, I would love not only systematic theology, but biblical as well. It will allow teachers to not just connect passages to a systematic theology but how this connects with biblical theology as well. Third, a theology explorer would be useful for those who not as versed in theology, but who would want to understanding a particular theological concept or tradition better. I see the explorer more suited for beginners/intermediate Bible students of theology. Whereas the passage Guide would be useful for everyone.
0 -
Mark Barnes said:
If you could produce a tool that was a systematic theology equivalent of SBL's Exegetical Summaries for the digital age, that would be an incredible service.
This is what I hope/thought is happening. I would pay for that (assuming links led to appropriate sections of the resources)
0 -
Any update on the development of this feature? Thanks!
Myke Harbuck
Lead Pastor, www.ByronCity.Church
Adjunct Professor, Georgia Military College0
