THEOLOGY GUIDE NEEDS WORK

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1028591#Comment_1028591

This has been a source of disappointment to me as well.

Myke Harbuck

I rarely, if ever, voice my disappointments about Logos, but I must agree here. I had hoped to see much improvement with this feature. Hopefully they are working on this behind the scenes and just have not made us aware of that yet. One can only hope.

Kevin A Lewis

Kingdom of God/Heaven within this also is a disappointment - it is assumed to be eschatological only - when there is a consider body of opinion that has it being announced with Christ, presaged in this age and only coming to fulfilment in the future.

Shalom

J. Remington Bowling

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1028616#Comment_1028616

Kingdom of God/Heaven within this also is a disappointment - it is assumed to be eschatological only - when there is a consider body of opinion that has it being announced with Christ, presaged in this age and only coming to fulfilment in the future.

Shalom

I'm not sure exactly what the complaint is here. The 'already' aspect of the kingdom wouldn't make it not-eschatological, would it? The recommended readings suggest Scot McKnight, Geerhardus Vos, Herman Ridderbos, etc. Who or what perspective would you like to see?

Steve Farson

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1028616#Comment_1028616

Yes... The Theology Guide,

Over advertised,

because

under developed.

Kevin A Lewis

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1028626#Comment_1028626

Probably the weakness of systematic theology to give a topic a primary home - rather simplifying the structure typical of 'systematics'. Theology is always far more nuanced that that. I am not arguing for it not be eschatological - it is not to be categorised 'beneath' eschatological' which strongly implies it is ALL future.

Shalom

Sean Boisen

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1028591#Comment_1028591

I'm sorry our Theology Guide coverage hasn't increased more quickly. As mentioned here and here, we're committed to eventually indexing the widest possible selection of systematic theology resources in Logos. The process we used for curating the initial set of resources won't scale well to this many resources, so we've had to step back and build some new tooling to help. I'm hopeful that we'll see additional resources aligned in the next month or two.

Sean Boisen

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1028616#Comment_1028616

Kingdom of God/Heaven within this also is a disappointment - it is assumed to be eschatological only - when there is a consider body of opinion that has it being announced with Christ, presaged in this age and only coming to fulfilment in the future.

Shalom

While the article does say "The eschatological dimension of the kingdom is prominent in the New Testament.", I believe it also addresses the current presence of the Kingdom: "On the most basic level, we may say the kingdom of God is present wherever the king is to be found." As a survey, the treatment of the different dimensions of each subject are necessarily brief.

If you have other suggestions for how to improve the coverage of this article, I would encourage you to share them on the Faithlife group we've created for discussion of the content of the survey: https://beta.faithlife.com/lexham-survey-of-theology/activity.

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1028633#Comment_1028633

... The process we used for curating the initial set of resources won't scale well to this many resources, so we've had to step back and build some new tooling to help. I'm hopeful that we'll see additional resources aligned in the next month or two.

Goodness, the forum has always been a theological hornets nest. This is not going to be pretty.

I wonder if the 'tooling' is what Bob talked about using high-end discussion-locating.

Milkman

yeah I'd like to weigh in here.

Absolutely the Theo/Guide needs works. I can do a better search with out it. However, and for me this is the Big However. All three of the theological, Bible theme and Topical Sermon Workflows are outstanding.

Where were these before?!

FL? Fantastic job on the WF's mentioned above. Thanks.

Now on to a better (?) Theo/Guide as Sean B has mentioned.

mm.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1028633#Comment_1028633

I'm sorry our Theology Guide coverage hasn't increased more quickly. As mentioned here and here, we're committed to eventually indexing the widest possible selection of systematic theology resources in Logos. The process we used for curating the initial set of resources won't scale well to this many resources, so we've had to step back and build some new tooling to help. I'm hopeful that we'll see additional resources aligned in the next month or two.

I hope that you're able to develop tools and processes that help you do this quickly. Really, though, as a business you need to stop advertising and selling products in such an unfinished state. You know many of us are locked into Logos as our primary Bible study/research tool. We're not really left with any option but to sit back and wait X number of months/years until the product eventually does what it was initially advertised as doing.

Please accelerate this process.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1028721#Comment_1028721

Please accelerate this process.

As someone who reports far more than my fair share of data errors and anomalies, I strongly disagree. I want them to take the time to do it right rather than rush it through with their usual "good enough for what it's for" approach. Mind you, I know they use machine assistance to strictly machine coding so I do not expect perfection. Depending upon what is being coded, I expect accuracy within the mid-to-high ninety percents and a recognizable pattern in the errors. I am disappointed that they didn't find and report the scaling problem earlier.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1028724#Comment_1028724

Please accelerate this process.

As someone who reports far more than my fair share of data errors and anomalies, I strongly disagree. I want them to take the time to do it right rather than rush it through with their usual "good enough for what it's for" approach. Mind you, I know they use machine assistance to strictly machine coding so I do not expect perfection. Depending upon what is being coded, I expect accuracy within the mid-to-high ninety percents and a recognizable pattern in the errors. I am disappointed that they didn't find and report the scaling problem earlier.

This task primarily involves tying sections/reading ranges to topics to the LSTO. I cannot believe that in 3 months they could not complete this properly and accurately for at least 2-3 resources to include them with yesterday's dataset update. They have definitely the time and the ability to make at least some progress; what I question is the will.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1028730#Comment_1028730

They have definitely the time and the ability to make at least some progress

You did understand that Sean B. said they did not have a satisfactory method ... without knowing how to do it, you cannot make progress. And because they did not use a representative sample but rather used a coherent subset for their original links, I am not surprised. Big error in their original planning.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1028736#Comment_1028736

They have definitely the time and the ability to make at least some progress

You did understand that Sean B. said they did not have a satisfactory method ... without knowing how to do it, you cannot make progress. And because they did not use a representative sample but rather used a coherent subset for their original links, I am not surprised. Big error in their original planning.

That I definitely agree with. As someone who did this sort of thing, albeit manually, for seminary students for a number of years, my sympathy here is rather limited.

Last month's FBotM were works in systematic theology that should have been fairly easy to integrate into this system. It would have been a good opportunity to show off the utility of this Guide if they'd been added.

David Mitchell

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1028635#Comment_1028635

Hi, I have the same frustration - it seems like a very powerful tool that is stuck in first gear... it's a great idea - please deliver on it soon! Thank you!

Doc B

Faithlife, we know how you operate; no one is expecting a complete, fully polished product at the rollout of a new version.

I've decided the name, "Faithlife" was chosen because that's what the customer needs to stay engaged...a lot of 'faith' in their 'life' that the programmers will eventually deliver on what the marketing people promised.

I will disagree with you on one point: On the contrary, I *do* expect a complete, or almost complete, product at rollout. That's very different from, 'just started.' Part of the problem we have is our patient willingness to put up with so-called vaporware in terms of promised features. If we (customers) weren't so willing to tolerate it, the company would be forced to change or it wouldn't sell any product.

This approach has been too consistent to expect it to change, and it isn't the fault of the good folks doing the grunt work; it is a management philosophy issue. All we can do is make sure prospective buyers are aware of what they are getting in to, which I now do. As another post noted, we are locked in...we can either throw our invested money away or keep dealing with unmet expectations from the marketing hype.

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1032252#Comment_1032252

This approach has been too consistent to expect it to change, and it isn't the fault of the good folks doing the grunt work; it is a management philosophy issue. All we can do is make sure prospective buyers are aware of what they are getting in to, which I now do. As another post noted, we are locked in...we can either throw our invested money away or keep dealing with unmet expectations from the marketing hype.

I think I have L8, but I'm on L7 until I decide I need a new computer. But, it's interesting to be presented on L7 with 'this still doesn't work' and 'that doesn't work'. And I'm fully confident my (?) L8 has the same issues.

But, I do wonder ... no offense meant to FL. But the individuals have to know that deliverables are not there. As noted, pretty consistently. No word to decently honest customers (not me, of course). I'd be uncomfortable in that situation.

Phil Gons (Logos)

This is just coming to my attention, and I'd like to apologize for how we did a poor job of setting your expectations for what to expect with the Theology Guide. The priority was to deliver the ST dataset, survey resource, and media, knowing that we'd not deliver the alignment with the full ST catalog that we or our users ultimately want. But we didn't have the capacity to do both. Somewhere internally there was a miscommunication or misunderstanding between the people who built the Theology Guide and the people who described it on the website. We didn't do a good enough job reviewing the materials to make sure they accurately reflected the state of things as they were at launch rather than what we'd like them to be in the future. This was not an attempt to mislead but a case of the right hand not knowing what the left hand was doing. I'm sorry for that.

I'm working with the teams to revise the communication to make sure it's accurate and sets the right expectations for users and to make sure we have better systems in place to catch these kinds of things before they make it outside the building in the future.

I'm also working to accelerate alignment for the rest of our ST catalog. We did the first small batch internally. Our external team is now trained and beginning to work through the long list of STs. We should have many more showing up within a month or so, if all goes according to plan.

I'm sorry for how we failed to communicate well and set your expectations for what to expect and for the slow progress in getting more STs aligned.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1033231#Comment_1033231

This is just coming to my attention, and I'd like to apologize for how we did a poor job of setting your expectations for what to expect with the Theology Guide. The priority was to deliver the ST dataset, survey resource, and media, knowing that we'd not deliver the alignment with the full ST catalog that we or our users ultimately want. But we didn't have the capacity to do both. Somewhere internally there was a miscommunication or misunderstanding between the people who built the Theology Guide and the people who described it on the website. We didn't do a good enough job reviewing the materials to make sure they accurately reflected the state of things as they were at launch rather than what we'd like them to be in the future. This was not an attempt to mislead but a case of the right hand not knowing what the left hand was doing. I'm sorry for that.

I'm working with the teams to revise the communication to make sure it's accurate and sets the right expectations for users and to make sure we have better systems in place to catch these kinds of things before they make it outside the building in the future.

I'm also working to accelerate alignment for the rest of our ST catalog. We did the first small batch internally. Our external team is now trained and beginning to work through the long list of STs. We should have many more showing up within a month or so, if all goes according to plan.

I'm sorry for how we failed to communicate well and set your expectations for what to expect and for the slow progress in getting more STs aligned.

Thanks for the update Phil. I know you and the team are working hard on MANY aspects of Logos 8 and it has been encouraging to see steady progress. For example, I can now apply my labels again!

Thank you for your humble attitude and transparency when you make a mistake. Keep up the good work my friend.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1033231#Comment_1033231

I'm sorry for how we failed to communicate well and set your expectations for what to expect and for the slow progress in getting more STs aligned.

Apology accepted. I hope that your push to improve communication also is more cautious on the use of "all" when "most" is what is implemented and identification of trials rather than allowing us to assume the features will continue to be maintained. And, perhaps, a final push on the documentation of datasets where you made real progress that has proved to be quite useful.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1033231#Comment_1033231

I'm also working to accelerate alignment for the rest of our ST catalog. We did the first small batch internally. Our external team is now trained and beginning to work through the long list of STs. We should have many more showing up within a month or so, if all goes according to plan.

I'm sorry for how we failed to communicate well and set your expectations for what to expect and for the slow progress in getting more STs aligned.

Thank you, Phil, for your update. Whenever I see that you have posted in a thread, I know it's going to be a helpful and informative addition.

I hope you are successful in getting this tool to a more useful state soon.

SineNomine

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1033231#Comment_1033231

This is just coming to my attention, and I'd like to apologize for how we did a poor job of setting your expectations for what to expect with the Theology Guide. The priority was to deliver the ST dataset, survey resource, and media, knowing that we'd not deliver the alignment with the full ST catalog that we or our users ultimately want. But we didn't have the capacity to do both. Somewhere internally there was a miscommunication or misunderstanding between the people who built the Theology Guide and the people who described it on the website. We didn't do a good enough job reviewing the materials to make sure they accurately reflected the state of things as they were at launch rather than what we'd like them to be in the future. This was not an attempt to mislead but a case of the right hand not knowing what the left hand was doing. I'm sorry for that.
I'm working with the teams to revise the communication to make sure it's accurate and sets the right expectations for users and to make sure we have better systems in place to catch these kinds of things before they make it outside the building in the future.

I'm also working to accelerate alignment for the rest of our ST catalog. We did the first small batch internally. Our external team is now trained and beginning to work through the long list of STs. We should have many more showing up within a month or so, if all goes according to plan.

I'm sorry for how we failed to communicate well and set your expectations for what to expect and for the slow progress in getting more STs aligned.

Forgiven, and thank you.

Kyle G. Anderson

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1033231#Comment_1033231

I wanted to let you know that we're currently in the process of annotating a large batch of Systematic Theology resources. They are a mix Systematic Theology resources found in Platinum and Verbum base packages.

You won't see any updates on Monday but on March 18th and April 1 (No joke) we're planning on substantial updates where you'll see approximately 50-90 new resources appearing in the Systematic Theology section of the Theology Guide.

Updates will continue after this but I wanted to prepare you all for this initial round of updates.

Thank you for your patience on this. We're also glad you're all excited about the Guide.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1036974#Comment_1036974

I wanted to let you know that we're currently in the process of annotating a large batch of Systematic Theology resources. They are a mix Systematic Theology resources found in Platinum and Verbum base packages.

You won't see any updates on Monday but on March 18th and April 1 (No joke) we're planning on substantial updates where you'll see approximately 50-90 new resources appearing in the Systematic Theology section of the Theology Guide.

Updates will continue after this but I wanted to prepare you all for this initial round of updates.

Thank you for your patience on this. We're also glad you're all excited about the Guide.

Will there be a list of what works are included in the guide? If not, I would like to suggest keeping up an ongoing list. I think it is important people know what is being searched and what is not.

Myke Harbuck

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1036974#Comment_1036974

on March 18th and April 1 (No joke) we're planning on substantial updates where you'll see approximately 50-90 new resources appearing in the Systematic Theology section of the Theology Guide.

Updates will continue after this

Exciting news. Thank you for taking the time to share.

Kenneth Neighoff

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1036974#Comment_1036974

I wanted to let you know that we're currently in the process of annotating a large batch of Systematic Theology resources. They are a mix Systematic Theology resources found in Platinum and Verbum base packages.

You won't see any updates on Monday but on March 18th and April 1 (No joke) we're planning on substantial updates where you'll see approximately 50-90 new resources appearing in the Systematic Theology section of the Theology Guide.

Updates will continue after this but I wanted to prepare you all for this initial round of updates.

Thank you for your patience on this. We're also glad you're all excited about the Guide.

Thanks Kyle

Looking forward to this update.

Keep up the good work.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1036974#Comment_1036974

I wanted to let you know that we're currently in the process of annotating a large batch of Systematic Theology resources. They are a mix Systematic Theology resources found in Platinum and Verbum base packages.

You won't see any updates on Monday but on March 18th and April 1 (No joke) we're planning on substantial updates where you'll see approximately 50-90 new resources appearing in the Systematic Theology section of the Theology Guide.

Updates will continue after this but I wanted to prepare you all for this initial round of updates.

Thank you for your patience on this. We're also glad you're all excited about the Guide.

I'm very happy to hear this. I also appreciate your updating us very much.

SineNomine

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1036974#Comment_1036974

You won't see any updates on Monday but on March 18th and April 1 (No joke) we're planning on substantial updates where you'll see approximately 50-90 new resources appearing in the Systematic Theology section of the Theology Guide.

Now that's good progress!

They are a mix Systematic Theology resources found in Platinum and Verbum base packages.

Thank you for remembering Verbum.

Liam Maguire

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1037083#Comment_1037083

I hope the theology guide will work with multiple forms of the same resource. For example, when Calvin's institutes are tagged and aligned with the guide I won't need to have a specific version (eg. Battles, etc.) in order to make use of the guide. Similarly, if/when the Westminster Confession/catechisms are tagged, the tags will work with all available versions and not just the one in the Platinum base package.

Please :-)

Doc B

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1037275#Comment_1037275

I hope the theology guide will work with multiple forms of the same resource.

This request is actually a lot bigger deal than many realize. There are quite a number of multiple-version resources, and even more resources in multiple editions.

I hope your wish is recognized for its importance by the FL folks.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1037311#Comment_1037311

This request is actually a lot bigger deal than many realize. There are quite a number of multiple-version resources, and even more resources in multiple editions.

I would be surprised if it were not as it is the general practice to link through milestones/datatypes where they are available. Where the problem occurs is where the resource is indexed by page number and a new edition is released.

Sean Boisen

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1037275#Comment_1037275

I hope the theology guide will work with multiple forms of the same resource. For example, when Calvin's institutes are tagged and aligned with the guide I won't need to have a specific version (eg. Battles, etc.) in order to make use of the guide. Similarly, if/when the Westminster Confession/catechisms are tagged, the tags will work with all available versions and not just the one in the Platinum base package.

Please :-)

For resources that have their own data type (like Calvin's Institutes), it should work with multiple editions.

This list of data types looks fairly recent. If you see an issue once this next round of updates are released, let us know and we'll see what we can do about it.

Liam Maguire

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1037522#Comment_1037522

For resources that have their own data type (like Calvin's Institutes), it should work with multiple editions.

This list of data types looks fairly recent. If you see an issue once this next round of updates are released, let us know and we'll see what we can do about it.

Thanks Sean! :-D

Kyle G. Anderson

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1038359#Comment_1038359

Quick Update:

On Monday, March 18th we're shipping an update to the LSTO data base. It will include new LSTO alignments for 15 resources:

The Church (Bloesch)
The Church (Clowney)
Eschatology, or the Catholic Doctrine of the Last Things (Pohle)
Foundations of the Christian Faith (Boice)
God: His Knowability, Essence, and Attributes, A Dogmatic Treatise (Pohle)
Understanding Theology, Volume One (Kendall)
Understanding Theology, Volume Two (Kendall)
The Last Things (Bloesch)
Mariology (Pohle)
The Person of Christ (Macleod)
The Providence of God (Helm)
The Revelation of God (Jensen)
Soteriology: A Dogmatic Treatise on the Redemption (Pohle)
Epilogue (von Balthasar)
The Work of Christ (Letham)

April 1st Plan:

We have new LSTO alignments for 12 more resources that are basically ready to go but didn't quite make the shipping cut-off. They will be in the April 1 update.
We have additional new LSTO alignments for 55 more resources that are scheduled to be finished next week.
I'm hoping all 55 can be processed by the cut-off for April 1 but I will keep you updated as we get closer to the April 1.

General Notes:

The 82 resources receiving LSTO annotations are the Systematic Theology resource type resources that are found in top-of-the-line Logos 8 base packages for the standard track and Verbum.
We've approved production for the remainder of systematic theology resources in our library. They will be delivered in regular updates through the remainder of 2019 though I'm targeting an early Fall finish.
For all new Systematic Theology resources we will be performing LSTO annotation as a part of their production. However due to system constraints and shipping schedules there may be a one-week lag between when the resource ships and when it appears in the data base.

Fred Chapman

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1040169#Comment_1040169

That's good news Kyle. Thanks for the update

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1040170#Comment_1040170

This sounds like a solid plan Kyle. Thanks for the update and the tentative timelines.

scooter

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1040169#Comment_1040169

On Monday, March 18th we're shipping an update to the LSTO data base.

I do not have the Theology Guide, but I am finding it much more enticing with more within it.

I am keeping a list of volumes utilized within this Guide.

What were the first 5 books systemized this way? Could some one please provide a list?

Thank you so much.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1040204#Comment_1040204

Packer, J. I. Concise Theology: A Guide to Historic Christian Beliefs. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House, 1993.
Ryrie, Charles Caldwell. Basic Theology: A Popular Systematic Guide to Understanding Biblical Truth. Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1999.
Hodge, Charles. Systematic Theology. Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997.
Strong, Augustus Hopkins. Systematic Theology. Philadelphia: American Baptist Publication Society, 1907.
Berkhof, L. Systematic Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans publishing co., 1938.

scooter

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1040232#Comment_1040232

Packer, J. I. Concise Theology: A Guide to Historic Christian Beliefs. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House, 1993.

Ryrie, Charles Caldwell. Basic Theology: A Popular Systematic Guide to Understanding Biblical Truth. Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1999.

Hodge, Charles. Systematic Theology. Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997.

Strong, Augustus Hopkins. Systematic Theology. Philadelphia: American Baptist Publication Society, 1907.

Berkhof, L. Systematic Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans publishing co., 1938.

Thank you so very much for this information, MJ. I pasted it in with the soon coming list above. I will watch + see how FL + my money goes.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1040169#Comment_1040169

Thanks for the update, Kyle.

Andrew Biddinger

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1036974#Comment_1036974

I wanted to let you know that we're currently in the process of annotating a large batch of Systematic Theology resources.

Will Wayne Grudem's Christian Ethics (which is shipping 3/28) come integrated?

https://www.logos.com/product/166084/christian-ethics-an-introduction-to-biblical-moral-reasoning

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1040603#Comment_1040603

Will Wayne Grudem's Christian Ethics (which is shipping 3/28) come integrated?

FL staff would have to give a definitive answer, but I don't think so. As it stands at present, the Lexham Survey of Theology doesn't seem to include ethical categories, and I doubt they'd expand it as would be necessary to include such a work.

General speaking, Christian ethics is considered a subordinate discipline of theology, but many (most?) works of systematics include little, if any, formal exposition of ethics.

Andrew Biddinger

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1040612#Comment_1040612

FL staff would have to give a definitive answer, but I don't think so. As it stands at present, the Lexham Survey of Theology doesn't seem to include ethical categories, and I doubt they'd expand it as would be necessary to include such a work.

General speaking, Christian ethics is considered a subordinate discipline of theology, but many (most?) works of systematics include little, if any, formal exposition of ethics.

Thanks, Sean. That makes sense.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1040612#Comment_1040612

Will Wayne Grudem's Christian Ethics (which is shipping 3/28) come integrated?

FL staff would have to give a definitive answer, but I don't think so. As it stands at present, the Lexham Survey of Theology doesn't seem to include ethical categories, and I doubt they'd expand it as would be necessary to include such a work.

General speaking, Christian ethics is considered a subordinate discipline of theology, but many (most?) works of systematics include little, if any, formal exposition of ethics.

Systematic Theology typically includes the following categories classically:

Prolegomena
Theology Proper
Bibliology
Christology
Pneumatology
Soteriology
Anthropology
Angelology
Demonology
Hamartiology
Ecclesiology
Eschatology

Logos also identifies several additional categories:

Exegesis
Theologians
Traditions
Other

The other category is the only one that ethics might fall into but traditionally it is not part of Systematic Theology.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1040169#Comment_1040169

Quick Update:

On Monday, March 18th we're shipping an update to the LSTO data base. It will include new LSTO alignments for 15 resources:

The Church (Bloesch)
The Church (Clowney)
Eschatology, or the Catholic Doctrine of the Last Things (Pohle)
Foundations of the Christian Faith (Boice)
God: His Knowability, Essence, and Attributes, A Dogmatic Treatise (Pohle)
Understanding Theology, Volume One (Kendall)
Understanding Theology, Volume Two (Kendall)
The Last Things (Bloesch)
Mariology (Pohle)
The Person of Christ (Macleod)
The Providence of God (Helm)
The Revelation of God (Jensen)
Soteriology: A Dogmatic Treatise on the Redemption (Pohle)
Epilogue (von Balthasar)
The Work of Christ (Letham)

The dataset for these resources has downloaded. It is good to see progress.

Looking over the guide, I have a couple points.

First, navigating the topics in a locus is not easy. If I open ecclesiology or the doctrine of the church, there's no easy way to navigate to the subtopics within the guide. I would think that I could click on the points in the ontology tree, but all that does is open the image in media. If I start with a subtopic, such as the attributes of the church, I can navigate the tree easier, but clicking on another topic opens another instance of the Theology Guide. That is not desired behavior; it should jump to the new location in the same window.

Second, I don't understand the repetition of the "Systematic Theologies" section. Clicking the add button adds another copy; I don't see the purpose behind that. But even without clicking it, the section is showing up twice in the guide:

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1040825#Comment_1040825

I would think that I could click on the points in the ontology tree,

I can go up the ontological tree from the crumb trail in the Topic section. I haven't found a way to navigate down.

Clicking the add button adds another copy; I don't see the purpose behind that

It allows you to have multiple copies running off personal subcollections - so I might set up 3 - one for Catholic/Orthodox, one for Anglican/Lutheran, one for everything else.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1040832#Comment_1040832

It allows you to have multiple copies running off personal subcollections - so I might set up 3 - one for Catholic/Orthodox, one for Anglican/Lutheran, one for everything else.

Oh, I see this now! The settings pulldown doesn't show up unless you hover over it. Thanks, MJ.

Kevin A Lewis

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1040646#Comment_1040646

So where does

Israelology

Fit in this scheme?

Shalom