A new type of pre-pub - it isn't in print yet!

Page 8 of 9 (172 items) « First ... < Previous 5 6 7 8 9 Next >
This post has 171 Replies | 9 Followers

Posts 1674
Paul N | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Sep 13 2010 3:20 PM

 

Logos is an amateur at publishing, at least commentary publishing . . .

I don't believe there are amateurs in the commentary publishing business.  I believe there can be professionals that take plenty of hard knock lessons whilst they produce commentaries but the "amateurs" are probably less inclined to make it past gathering the writers and developing the content"

It would be nice to see the proposed format of one, just one commentary. What is it the authors are supposed to do with their commentaries? Technical lexical stuff? Exegetical stuff? From the hype, I see nothing on the proposed content or format. There is a big difference between a TNTC and a BEC and a NIGTC and a NIC commentary. I mean Bock wrote two whole large volumes on Luke. What is there left for Porter to say?Big Smile

Its possible over 16,000 fans on facebook and many others want to see a less solely technical lexical and a more applicative commentary.  Of course many commentaries have attempted this very formula, I believe the EEC would be one to recommend straight to the church members instead of stopping at the well trained pastor or leader.

Some of the commentators are not even assigned. Unless God is on the staff of Logos and has made his mind known, not even Logos can guarantee the aggressive timetable.

The series was already underway before Logos became involved.  I would assume some of the material is in the editorial process or beyond.

and maybe I missed it but I was curious as to your proposal Jeff, was there something you thought maybe Logos could change on as they move forward?

 

Posts 8967
RIP
Matthew C Jones | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Sep 13 2010 8:17 PM

Jeff Straub:
Logos is an amateur at publishing, at least commentary publishing .

There is a difference in digital publishing and traditional publishing. The old guard must change with the times or die. We saw Nelson undergo a big shakeup in company leadership earlier this year. Traditional publishers have been abandoning the big projects as too expensive and risky. It is not just an EEC thing.
Logos is THE leader in publishing digital commentaries. No one else comes close. Logos has been successful because they watch, listen and adapt to meet the needs of the moment. You have to concede NIC, ICC, WBC and all the other fine commentaries are MORE useful in the Logos format than they are in hard copy form. My favorite lexicographer, Oreste Vaccari, had a motto: "To do better what others do well." This is what I see Logos doing every day of every year. They take something good and make it better. I would put my money on Logos to actually be able to pull off this ambitious EEC project better than any of the traditional publishers could. Bob Pritchett has shown he can chase a dream into reality and Dale and Dan Pritchett know how to sell others on the dream. If it is going to get done, it will be done by Logos.


Logos 7 Collectors Edition

Posts 1359
Edwin Bowden | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Sep 13 2010 8:47 PM

Matthew C Jones:

Jeff Straub:
Logos is an amateur at publishing, at least commentary publishing .

There is a difference in digital publishing and traditional publishing. The old guard must change with the times or die. We saw Nelson undergo a big shakeup in company leadership earlier this year. Traditional publishers have been abandoning the big projects as too expensive and risky. It is not just an EEC thing.
Logos is THE leader in publishing digital commentaries. No one else comes close. Logos has been successful because they watch, listen and adapt to meet the needs of the moment. You have to concede NIC, ICC, WBC and all the other fine commentaries are MORE useful in the Logos format than they are in hard copy form. My favorite lexicographer, Oreste Vaccari, had a motto: "To do better what others do well." This is what I see Logos doing every day of every year. They take something good and make it better. I would put my money on Logos to actually be able to pull off this ambitious EEC project better than any of the traditional publishers could. Bob Pritchett has shown he can chase a dream into reality and Dale and Dan Pritchett know how to sell others on the dream. If it is going to get done, it will be done by Logos.


In Dan P's post about the EEC, he admitted that they didn't have all the answers, but were committed to making the project work. Logos has a proven track record and I am confident that they will do what is necessary to make this project work for everyone involved. They are real pioneers. When mistakes are made, they admit it and find another solution.

Posts 5
Scott Lumsden | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Sep 13 2010 9:17 PM

Is anyone else just a little concerned that the Genesis commentator is a creationist. I must be more out of touch than I thought with the evangelical take on genesis. or maybe there are different stands of evangelical thought. the electronic series is bold, i'll give them that. i'm just concerned about the scholarship. if they invite a literalist to write on Genesis, what does that say about the rest of the series. 

Posts 19274
Rosie Perera | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Sep 13 2010 11:46 PM

Scott Lumsden:

Is anyone else just a little concerned that the Genesis commentator is a creationist. I must be more out of touch than I thought with the evangelical take on genesis. or maybe there are different stands of evangelical thought. the electronic series is bold, i'll give them that. i'm just concerned about the scholarship. if they invite a literalist to write on Genesis, what does that say about the rest of the series. 

Scott, as you might imagine, people with a wide variety of positions on Genesis use Logos BIble Software and read the forums, so by asking a question like that you're inviting theological debate, which isn't helpful on the forums and is actually strongly discouraged by Logos who hosts these forums. Many people likely agree with you, but nobody is supposed to be voicing such opinions here. It's unfortunate we can't have that kind of discussion to help people decide whether they want to buy this resource or not. But I'm sure there will be some of folks for whom that characteristic of the volume's author is a selling point. It is still a very live issue among some evangelicals.

Posts 5
Scott Lumsden | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Sep 14 2010 6:26 AM

I see your point Rosie and get it that Logos does not want theological debate to cloud its product. i even somewhat agree that that's a good policy. But that made more sense when they were publishing other people's works. Logos is making a decision with this series to step into the world of Christian publishing by offering original work. The difference between publishing others work in digital form and publishing your own work means that you've made editorial decisions and are indeed promoting a position. I have no problem with Logos doing this, in fact I'm quite supportive and even excited that they've made this step. My point here is that at this point, Logos can't have it both ways. They can't say, "Hey, this is a landmark event of evangelical scholarship" and then not receive some comment from their constituency about what others think about content because they're now (for the first time) responsible for content.  

Posts 8967
RIP
Matthew C Jones | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Sep 14 2010 6:30 AM

Scott Lumsden:

Is anyone else just a little concerned that the Genesis commentator is a creationist. I must be more out of touch than I thought with the evangelical take on genesis. or maybe there are different stands of evangelical thought. the electronic series is bold, i'll give them that. i'm just concerned about the scholarship. if they invite a literalist to write on Genesis, what does that say about the rest of the series. 

 

Hi Scott,

We won't settle the Creation question, virgin birth, bodily resurrection or even the existence of eternal, literal punishment in a forum debate. So we can abandon that goal. Your question has another underlying question we can address, and already have several times. That being, "Should I entertain theological viewpoints in my Logos resources that I do not agree with?" That is a fair question that merits asking.

I have been treated by very brilliant medical doctors who hold to religions that I find bordering on the ridiculous. (I refuse to enumerate the long lists of things I find unbelievable about their dearly held beliefs.) Their naivete in spiritual matters did not prevent them from very ably addressing my biological needs. Had I marginalized them because of my differences I would have lost out on their help.

While I do not hold the same disdain for the viewpoints of the EEC authors I would consider hearing their points even if I did disagree with them. There is hardly a consensus of theological matters across the board with the present scholarly commentaries in print. My response to the divergent views expressed could be to mock them, or attack them, or avoid them like a disease. Or I could read them and become aware of why they hold to their viewpoints. Caveat: An open mind can sometimes be changed. So if our goal is to remain in the place we presently find ourselves, it takes nothing more than blindfolds and earplugs.  It all comes back to our answer to the question in blue stated above. Can we learn from people we disagree with? Do they have anything worthwhile to teach us? Have we considered & addressed their points to our satisfaction? Can nothing new be learned? The true spirit of scholarship is asking the questions with an open mind.

Welcome to the forums.

 

Logos 7 Collectors Edition

Posts 8967
RIP
Matthew C Jones | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Sep 14 2010 6:58 AM

Scott Lumsden:
you've made editorial decisions and are indeed promoting a position. I have no problem with Logos doing this, in fact I'm quite supportive and even excited that they've made this step. My point here is that at this point, Logos can't have it both ways.

Logos has not wavered off the same spot they have been standing in from the beginning. They are all about Bible study. They have published Bible study material by literalists, mystics, textual critics, agnostics and even (dare I say?) cultists! There have been frequent outcries against various resources being published. (Thayer's lexicon comes to mind.) Some have tried to denigrate other denominations or theological camps, even to the point of requesting Logos cease publication. That is what lead to the forum guidelines forbidding theological debates http://community.logos.com/forums/t/10072.aspx . Logos operates under the free enterprise system. They publish what they will and we vote with our dollars. If they get real goofy on us they will lose enough sales to go out of business. If they allow others to dictate what will (or will NOT) be published, they will not enjoy the success they presently do. It is all about Bible study. Be that Septuagint, Korean Bibles, The Message, Reverse Interlinears, what-have-you...

btw: I am not sure Logos made all the author choices for the EEC anyway. It really doesn't matter -- unless we are afraid we will be swayed off our dogma with a good scholarly argument presented by someone we disagree with.  Surprise

Logos 7 Collectors Edition

Posts 33257
Forum MVP
MJ. Smith | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Sep 14 2010 12:58 PM

Matthew C Jones:
That being, "Should I entertain theological viewpoints in my Logos resources that I do not agree with?" That is a fair question that merits asking.

How does one test one's beliefs without exposure to other opinions? I will admit, however, that last night I was so tempted to enter a suggestion that I be able to enter negative stars for incredible stupidity - the issue was language not interpretation.Big Smile

Orthodox Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."

Posts 222
LogosEmployee
Mike Aubrey | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Sep 14 2010 1:07 PM

Matthew C Jones:
btw: I am not sure Logos made all the author choices for the EEC anyway. It really doesn't matter -- unless we are afraid we will be swayed off our dogma with a good scholarly argument presented by someone we disagree with.

Yes. In fact, I am sure that Logos did not make all the author choices. As it states on the EEC website in the history of the project. Logos came into this after many volumes were on their way to completion. Logos was connected with looking for a few scholars to contribute, but not many--not many at all.

Posts 5846
DIsciple II | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Sep 14 2010 1:13 PM

MJ. Smith:

Matthew C Jones:
That being, "Should I entertain theological viewpoints in my Logos resources that I do not agree with?" That is a fair question that merits asking.

How does one test one's beliefs without exposure to other opinions?

Two great questions.

 

Posts 2896
Mike Childs | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Sep 14 2010 8:41 PM

Scott Lumsden:
The difference between publishing others work in digital form and publishing your own work means that you've made editorial decisions and are indeed promoting a position.

It is ludicrous to insist that Logos endorses every theological view of every author in this commentary series.  In fact, that would be impossible because a commentary set of this scope (like the NICOT/NICNT) will have a variety of theological views among the authors.  For example, there are Wesleyan as well as Calvinist authors in most such scholarly sets. 

"In all cases, the Church is to be judged by the Scripture, not the Scripture by the Church," John Wesley

Posts 99
JJ Miller | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Oct 1 2010 10:17 PM

Thanks Rosie for the information about the blog: Don't Eat the Fruit. "about the the role of technology in the redemptive movement from the Garden to the City."   I hadn't known about that one. Sounds good. 

JJ

Posts 483
Gary Butner, Th.D. | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Oct 5 2010 9:23 AM

I just went on SS and so this leap of faith is out of question.

Posts 2832
David Ames | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Mar 17 2011 7:59 PM

Michael Childs:

It is ludicrous to insist that Logos endorses every theological view of every author in this commentary series. 

Why? why not have ALL views? That would mean that there would need to be about four or five times as many volumes [one for each view]

But NOT endorse - just see that all views get shelf space. 

[If you have not personally read [imho] their works and their commentaries you have only seen a shadow of what they are]

And get the denominations that back each view to put up some of the funding for their view.  Then we will welcome the four or five different views and at the same in depth level of scholarship and maybe then we could figure out if we are in the correct church. [if we can get past the thought that all others are heretics]

One poster asked Should I entertain theological viewpoints in my Logos resources that I do not agree with?" I say YES!!! That is the only way we learn!

Posts 8967
RIP
Matthew C Jones | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Mar 18 2011 11:28 PM

David Ames:
why not have ALL views?

ALL the views that present themselves as economically viable to produce. The Gospel According To Peanuts should take lower priority than The Chronicles Of Narnia  imho.

David Ames:
But NOT endorse - just see that all views get shelf space. 

Agreed. I do not endorse all 31 flavors of ice cream at BR. But I would not enjoy going there if they only offered the top three I always seen to settle on.

David Ames:
One poster asked Should I entertain theological viewpoints in my Logos resources that I do not agree with?" I say YES!!! That is the only way we learn!

I think that poster is a really smart guy!  Big Smile

A concern was raised that the Evangelical Exegetical Commentary author for Genesis is a creationist. There are even many differing perspectives among creationist. I was surprised to learn a few new perspectives held by Hugh Ross in the Reasons To Believe Collection. I do not agree with all of Hugh's views as of this date but I find them very worthwhile and will not call him crazy or ignorant. Logos does not need to endorse everyone they publish nor ban everyone they disagree with

Logos 7 Collectors Edition

Posts 33257
Forum MVP
MJ. Smith | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Mar 19 2011 1:06 AM

David Ames:
 just see that all views get shelf space. 

I'm not sure that is possible. From the forums, I'm beginning to believe there are 3 views for every two Christians - mine, yours and theirs - the final one is what we agree we don't believe ... and randomly assign to some mythical, dangerous other.

I am also horrified by the assumption that if you know someone's personal beliefs, you know what their writings will say. I'm use to people admitting that their scholarship does not necessarily support their belief ... and stating what direction further research must go to resolve the discrepancy.

Orthodox Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."

Posts 887
Eric Weiss | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Mar 19 2011 6:16 AM

Andrew McKenzie:

Yes it is an interesting situation.... a big upfront commitment for something unseen.

Ἔστιν δὲ πίστις ἐλπιζομένων ὑπόστασις, πραγμάτων ἔλεγχος οὐ βλεπομένων.

 

Optimistically Egalitarian (Galatians 3:28)

Posts 8967
RIP
Matthew C Jones | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Mar 19 2011 6:29 AM

MJ. Smith:
I'm beginning to believe there are 3 views for every two Christians - mine, yours and theirs - the final one is what we agree we don't believe ...

Once upon a time, many years ago, I had a Pastor who invited the men of the church to stand in the pulpit and give their own views of the book of the Revelation. There were 13 men who spoke and 15 views presented. Not much good came of the event but a lot of confusion certainly did  .edit: If the 13 men had access to the EEC maybe they would have fared better. But then some of the wilder ideas about Revelation would not have been heard. Devil

Our doctrinal beliefs should not be developed with a cafeteria plan where we pick what appeals to us and discard what doesn't. My desire to have "ALL" views on my Logos shelf is more out of curiosity and a desire to understand others than to synthesize a new theology.

MJ. Smith:
the assumption that if you know someone's personal beliefs, you know what their writings will say.

I don't think withholding judgment is the same thing as endorsing a view. And tolerance of conflicting views is not a bad thing in academia.

LOGOS is a tool for Bible study. LOGOS is not the Church and I hope believers have more in their spiritual lives than just software.

Logos 7 Collectors Edition

Posts 688
Ted Weis | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Mar 19 2011 8:33 AM

Michael Aubrey:

Matthew C Jones:
btw: I am not sure Logos made all the author choices for the EEC anyway. It really doesn't matter -- unless we are afraid we will be swayed off our dogma with a good scholarly argument presented by someone we disagree with.

Yes. In fact, I am sure that Logos did not make all the author choices. As it states on the EEC website in the history of the project. Logos came into this after many volumes were on their way to completion. Logos was connected with looking for a few scholars to contribute, but not many--not many at all.

What company started this project? Is that some big secret?

Page 8 of 9 (172 items) « First ... < Previous 5 6 7 8 9 Next > | RSS