Is There any chance that Denominations and Theological tagging will make it into Logos 8?
Any chance that will happen soon or at all?
Thank You
[*-)]
The latest edition of the spreadsheet is: 5466.Denominations and Theology - 28 January 2017.zip
The reference guide is: 0763.Theology and Denomination Tag Reference - 5 April 2016.doc
Rather than add hundreds of new authors this time, I have mainly been checking the nearly 7000 authors already present against Bibliographical Dictionaries and Encyclopedia entries in Logos resources. The spreadsheet now records whether the authors are mentioned in works such as the Baptist Encyclopedia, Book of Saints, Jewish Encyclopedia, Lutheran Cyclopedia, SDA Encyclopedia and the massive Cyclopædia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature, along with its supplement and addenda (see the spreadsheet notes page for the complete list so far). This has allowed extra data to be added for existing authors, though it is clear that there is a minor discrepancy in the dates of birth and death for many authors. I've tended to favour the most recent publication.
I've also added theology categories for amillennialist, premillennialist, postmillennialist, annihilationist, theistic evolutionist and creationist. The spreadsheet differentiates some young earth and old earth proponents as well. I'm open to other suggestions, particularly if they are backed up by reliable starter lists of candidates.
As always, feel free to make suggestions, corrections, etc. and I'll try to add them as soon as I can. I've updated all the collections available through the Faithlife Group as well (https://faithlife.com/logos-library-theology-denomination-tags/about).
Note that the spreadsheet contains far more information than the collections in the Faithlife Group, but it is too unwieldy to create all the collections that could be created from the data in the spreadsheet, such as denominations with fewer authors and bespoke groups such as Female Lutherans, nineteenth-century Anglicans and 'either sixteenth-century or Catholic'.
I would love it if the data here was available directly in Logos, as suggested here (https://logos.uservoice.com/forums/42823-logos-bible-software-7/suggestions/9285627-library-hierarchy-and-filtering), and part of a larger database of biblical issues and stances, as suggested here (https://logos.uservoice.com/forums/42823-logos-bible-software-7/suggestions/17871697-create-a-database-of-biblical-issues-and-stances-w). If you appreciate this project, please consider supporting at least the second of these ideas by clicking the link, signing in and voting. Thanks.
Comments
-
This is definitely something we'd like to do. We've been discussing it internally and want to make sure we approach it in the right way. Once we have an agreed-upon approach, it's just a matter of timing when to do the work.
Thanks for your feedback on this.
0 -
[Y]
0 -
[Y]
0 -
Phil Gons (Faithlife) said:
This is definitely something we'd like to do. We've been discussing it internally and want to make sure we approach it in the right way. Once we have an agreed-upon approach, it's just a matter of timing when to do the work.
How wonderful! Definitely looking forward to simpler rules for denominational/theological collections!
(It's improvements like this which give us more functionality and a better user experience, while improving performance.)
Thanks to FL for including Carta and a Hebrew audio bible in Logos 9!
0 -
Thanks Phil
0 -
[Y][Y]
0 -
Phil Gons (Faithlife) said:
This is definitely something we'd like to do. We've been discussing it internally and want to make sure we approach it in the right way. Once we have an agreed-upon approach, it's just a matter of timing when to do the work.
Thanks for your feedback on this.
Thank you, Phil!
0 -
[Y]
L2 lvl4 (...) WORDsearch, all the way through L10,
0 -
Phil Gons (Faithlife) said:
We've been discussing it internally and want to make sure we approach it in the right way.
IMHO, the group tagging project is overly detailed. As an example, I just opened one that is tagged "Denom. Stream: Pentecostal; Denomination: Assemblies of God; Theology: Believers' Baptism; Theology Charismatic; Theology: Evangelical."
While one might question the "Evangelical" tag for a "Pentecostal" stream (depending on whether one sees the term as primarily a historical movement or as a set of theological statements), the other's seem redundant after the first. I don't know of any Pentecostal groups that baptize believer's infant children, or that are not charismatic, or wouldn't agree with much of what evangelicals say. Further, I don't think it's even helpful at all to dial down to the matter of when baptism happens (vs. dedication). Why center on that practice, as opposed to other practices and theological points of departure?
I'd be happier with a simpler division: Calvinist, Arminian, Weslyan, Pentecostal (others?). As a Calvinist, I'm usually interested to find if the author is/was Reformed (historically continental Calvinsts), or Presbyterian (historically UK Calvinists), as we differ on some points that are probably uninteresting to others, but of great interest to us. I'd be especially interested in another sub-category to include the so-called "Neo-Calvinists," as they differ from historic Calvinism as well.
But I wouldn't expect Logos to track all that for me. And I'd expect most others wouldn't be that interested in such subtleties. I'd guess Anglicans would be interested in knowing what sort of Anglican is writing. Pentecostals would want to know what sort of Pentecostal is writing. The same with Baptists, Lutherans, and so forth. Each group has it's own internal battles, which heighten their interests in certain questions that others really aren't all that sensitive to.
For most of us, the author's name and basic biographical data (it would be helpful to give a denominational affiliation, if known) tell us what we need to know (or tell us where to look). The most general categories are probably sufficient for the vast majority of us. I'd suggest that doing more than that will pretty much guarantee that you get something wrong, or leave something out that someone finds essential. There are just too many colors in this rainbow to name them all.Help links: WIKI; Logos 6 FAQ. (Phil. 2:14, NIV)
0 -
I think we could crowd source a list of things that people care about RE their field of study, or tradition. I would be deaf to the differences between people of the reformed faith geographically. But I do have interest in whether a person is creedo or paedo baptist. Perhaps whether they are covenantal, or dispensational (etc). Where they are on the calvinst or arminian spectrum (amyraldians?). What eschatology. there are a hundred questions that would be of interest to someone somewhere. Crowd sourcing the questions, and then submitting a multiple choice questionnaire to the "ask the author" folks might just be the way to go.
L2 lvl4 (...) WORDsearch, all the way through L10,
0 -
Thanks for pushing this, Bill. I've been off the forums for some time, so I hadn't seen the new thread.
The comments show that different people are interested in different levels and types of data. My feeling is that Logos should be capable of providing all of this. The current system allows people to pick up just the topics/denominations/streams/theological positions they're interested in. Therefore, if Rich hadn't downloaded the "Theology: Believer's Baptism" collection, then he wouldn't see the data. He can opt into the level of data he sees, but the system allows it all to be seen and used as appropriate.
Phil had given me the idea privately that Logos were on the case, so I've been focusing more on another stage of the project (see https://community.logos.com/forums/p/133058/918806.aspx#918806). This will potentially make even more use of the same data. Please vote for this on UserVoice if you think it may be worthwhile (https://logos.uservoice.com/forums/42823-logos-bible-software-7/suggestions/17871697-create-a-database-of-biblical-issues-and-stances-w) or come back to me with questions if you're not sure you understand it or the link between the projects.
My reservation with the system Logos will eventually produce is that they may throw away data, by aggregating too much. Some people will only want to know if someone is Baptist or not, but others will find it useful to know which branch they are in, where and when. There is a big difference between some of the Baptist groups, and this applies equally to many other denominations and streams. I don't see the point in throwing away data. My original categories tried to go as large as possible, with Streams, and as detailed as possible, with Denominations, so that anything in between can be deduced using the most refined category. The method and categories developed over time as my understanding grew.
I'd be only too happy to discuss this with the relevant team at Logos. Having studied computer science (including programming and relational databases) as well as theology, I feel I know some of the issues involved.
0 -
A couple of things occur to me.
1) This is the kind of problem that data scientists and librarians eat up. There's doubtless a smart way to set up categories that will accommodate varying levels of detail.
2) We don't want our desire for the perfect to be the enemy of getting something. FaithLife has demonstrated an ability to refine and expand things over time.
3) Even a fairly high-level categorization could be helpful in sorting through the huge libraries that some users accumulate.
I am very encouraged that FaithLife is looking into adding this feature.
0 -
I would also be in favor of this feature!
Would love to see this tagging also available in Personal Books (the "Add Field Category could list "Denomination" which creates a drop-down list in the Personal Book to tag it with the predefined Logos categories). While I know most use personal books just for their own writings, I (and I am sure others) have a variety of personal books created from the perspective of different denominations that would benefit from this tagging.
0 -
Thanks, Chris. I hope you've shown your favour by voting on UserVoice (https://logos.uservoice.com/forums/42823-logos-bible-software-7/suggestions/9285627-library-hierarchy-and-filtering), and for the larger database, if you're interested (https://logos.uservoice.com/forums/42823-logos-bible-software-7/suggestions/17871697-create-a-database-of-biblical-issues-and-stances-w).
0 -
Phil Gons (Faithlife) said:
This is definitely something we'd like to do. We've been discussing it internally and want to make sure we approach it in the right way. Once we have an agreed-upon approach, it's just a matter of timing when to do the work.
Thanks for your feedback on this.
What about setting things up so you can search in specific denominational base package version.
Example: If I want to search only through my resources in the Baptist Portfolio 7? Or Reformed Platinum 8? Or both those packages but no other resources?
This would really help. Especially if you can set it up as a collection or search function and then add other resources to the collection (e.g. other Baptist resources purchased outside of the Baptist Portfolio 7 resources but wanting to search through all of them and no other resources).
0 -
Phil Gons (Faithlife) said:
We've been discussing it internally and want to make sure we approach it in the right way
Hi Phil,
Is this still an active discussion?
If so, would you please give us a progress report on that discussion?
Could mention some of the issues or concerns in those discussions?
Could also tell us what alternatives are being discussed?
Thanks[:D]
0 -
Angela Lott said:
What about setting things up so you can search in specific denominational base package version.
I believe that the collection rules for the packages are available here. https://faithlife.com/logos-product-collections/activity As one can limit a search to a collection, this should meet your needs.
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
