Quick Explanation of The Bible


Sorry, lately my indignation button has been pressed.

The Bible is the word of God.

If I tell you that 140 years ago, men conspired and acted covertly to deliberalty gut the Scriptures of any verse that they didn’t agree with, it should concern you.

If I tell you they deliberatly changed the verses they didn’t remove but still didn’t like – it shoud greatly concern you.

We reject the New World Translation for doing exactly that. But then we smugly open our NIV’s or ESV’s, and start our devotionals, and feel sudden nagging doubts about the deity of Christ. Or we feel no urge to fast, because the Bible doesn’t emphasize it.

Uh, the New World Translation was translated from the same Greek manuscripts that the ESV comes from.

Doesn’t that concern you?

“well, no, the NWT is deliberately mistranslated to support their doctrinal views.”

Sure. And the Wescott-hort, Nestle-Aland, and United Bible Society Greek texts all did the same thing, just in Greek. Doesn’t that concern you?

The Bible is God’s word. Any attempt to change that should arouse our immediate anger. You touch my Bible, them’s fightin’ words.

And I see dozens of videos, articles and books by people who’ve NEVER researched the issue defending their Bibles. That’s great! But investigate this issue FIRST! You may suddenly conclude you’re on the wrong side.

I know, I did! I loved the NIV. I had just got an expensive NASB bible when I became aware of this controversy. I began investigating it, to disprove it – and was convinced in a matter of minutes. The more I look into it, the more convinced I become.

I have a perfect Bible. I have an english version of God’s word. I can hold it in my hand and say, “This is God’s word.”

And then I see links to articles and videos saying, “the myth of the perfect Bible debunked.” And the same arguments, baseless and long since disproved by D. A. Waite, David Cloud, Edward Hills and many others, are repeated.

The reality is, they’re not investigating the issue. And I notice NONE of these New Bible advocates EVER address the issues of WEscott & Hort’s redactionism. So, the bible publishers moved to using a near-duplicate (almost letter for letter identical), the Nestle-aland, whose authors admittedly simply were duplicating Wescott & Hort’s work. With the same motive. They avoided the controversy of W/H, but kept the same result.

None of the New Bible advocates ever address that issue, either. Geisler trys to prove that we can trust translations done from a Greek Text deliberatly done in secret by men who were being paid to translate from the established Greek Texts, but instead covertly and without authorization turned to two other manuscrpts, and attempted first to harmonize their wildly contradictory readings. Why? THey were opposed to the plain sense of the Greek Text of the Bible. They never adress that.

They never address the fact that W&H called the Greek Text of the complete Bible “Villainous.” They never address the fact that Tischendorf, when searcihng for ancient Bible manuscripts, was searching for ANY texts that differed from the Textus Receptus. He was looking for ANY text that was different.

Why? HE WAS OPPOSED TO GOD’S WORD!

It’s almost amazing to watch Ankerberg, a staunch opponent of King James Only’ism, routinely side with anyone who opposes Fundamentalism on his TV show.

STOP. THINK.

Fundamentalism means “I believe the bible literally.”

Why would you oppose that?

If you are saved, the Bible is your rulebook. Your marching orders. There’s no ROOM for you to say, “Well, I don’t like that.” I have to start asking uncomfortable questions about people when they oppose the word of God!

The obvious conclusions is that you’re backslidden, there’s sin issues in your life, or you’re not saved. Which is it? first two are fixed by getting back to God’s word. The last one is fixed by getting saved. Just don’t try to fix #3 with the solutions for 1 or 2.

And that’s what this boils down to. I see opposition of the Bible as being a sin issue. so many pastors have said, “The Bible will keep you from sin, or sin will keep you from the Bible.” So if you’re opposed to the Bible, it means it’s convicting you – and so you try to avoid it.

Most people read the NIV because it’s easy. Sure! And it’s misleading. NASB and ESV as well. It takes a little while to understand the King James Bible. But you CAN understand it. And once you understand WHY its written the way it is, you’ll appreciate it for what it is.

Bottom line – the Bible is your marching orders. God says, you do. “Yes, sir!” Like the army. You got your orders.

Pray? yup.

Fast? from time to time, when you understand WHY. Gotta know what a tool does in order to use it right.

Jesus is God? Yup.

Get back to the Bible. The real one.

Advertisements

Weakening The Christian Mind


Christian MindThe Bible says…

1 Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things. Romans 2:1 (KJV)

Here’s where it gets weakened.

Romans 2:1(RSV)

1Therefore you have no excuse, O man, whoever you are, when you judge another; for in passing judgment upon him you condemn yourself, because you, the judge, are doing the very same things.

Romans 2:1(NASB)

1Therefore you have no excuse, everyone of you who passes judgment, for in that which you judge another, you condemn yourself; for you who judge practice the same things.

Romans 2:1(NKJV)

1Therefore you are inexcusable, O man, whoever you are who judge, for in whatever you judge another you condemn yourself; for you who judge practice the same things.

Romans 2:1(TLB)

1“Well,” you may be saying, “what terrible people you have been talking about!” But wait a minute! You are just as bad. When you say they are wicked and should be punished, you are talking about yourselves, for you do these very same things.

Romans 2:1(TMSG)

1Those people are on a dark spiral downward. But if you think that leaves you on the high ground where you can point your finger at others, think again. Every time you criticize someone, you condemn yourself. It takes one to know one. Judgmental criticism of others is a well-known way of escaping detection in your own crimes and misdemeanors.

See how at first the separation is in “wherein thou judgest another thou condemnest thyself” to finally, absolving you of the guilt? “THerefore thou art inexcusable” becomes “therefore you have no excuse” (reducing it) to “What terrible people have you been talknig about (in other words, I’m not without excuse, I’m no longer making excuses, to terrible people…)

to “those people are on a dark downward spiral.”

A Christian without a Bible is weaponless,and ineffectual.

Get back to the King James Bible.

The King James Bible issue explained (for people who don’t know)


King James BibleIn light of Phil Stringer’s speech to the King James organizations last year (which I finally just listened to!) I thought I’d explain the whole King James issue.

One person who reads my blog wrote on their own blog, “I don’t mind the King James issue, but I hate the people who defend it.” And to a certain extent, I can’t blame them for thinking this way. Presumably that means me as well, but hey… a lot of us do deserve the comments. I’ll explain.

For starters, no one person speaks for the King James only movement. There’s a lot of people who speak for the issue. And there’s several that most of us frankly wish, would shut up.

I don’t own any writings, ebooks or audio recordings by Gail Riplinger. She’s written some things that I’ve seen quoted that I agree with… and she’s written many things that I do not agree with.

She’s said many mean-spirited things… and honestly, some wild-eyed things that make us KJV defenders all look like idiots. I own – and use – a Strong’s concordance. From what I’ve seen quoted in it, the “Toxic” book sounds like, well, lunacy. She’s done a poor job of research, and makes the same mistake a lot of evangelical Christians do as well.

Briefly, if I get a book published by Tyndale, I’d probably be bouncing like an idiot. “I got published! Yes!!!” I’d send my manuscript off, check my proofs carefully, and very possibly, if the editor was feeling generous, I might even get to okay the book cover.

It does not mean I’m having any secret meetings with any of the other Tyndale publishers. Let’s just hypothesize that James White also landed a publishing deal with Tyndale. It doesn’t mean we’re getting together and having coffee. It also doesn’t mean he and I are plotting to edit (HORRORS!) or destroy the King James Bible.

Gail Riplinger does make those kinds of leaps of logic. But so do a lot of evangelical Christians I’ve seen books by. Many of the people who investigate the Illuminati, new world order, etc make those very same leaps of logic. I guess it’s okay for Texe Marrs to do it, but not a King James only person?

Let me briefly distance myself from another King James defender I wish would shut up. Or at least tone it down. Peter Ruckman. The man’s a cult leader. He makes some very strange statements, is very bigoted, and no doubt would dismiss me as a “jackass” and a “kike”. Yes, he does talk like that. My seminary president visited his church once, and testified that yes, Ruckman says the “N” word from the pulpit. Racism really is not helping the cause of the King James Bible any.

Those kind of people really do the King James world a disservice. NO, I don’t stand on street corners with a megaphone shouting, “You’re going to hell! You’re going to Hell!” Peter S. Ruckman’s church does that, from what Marc Monte says.

Okay, there you go. I know I’m rough. I know I speak very strongly. But then again, I’ve read the Bible a lot, and Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Joel, and many others did so as well. I get so absolutely fed up with people – heretics, really – question the bible, deny the Bible, make up their own doctrine, and steer my Christian brethren on a sleepwalking road back to Rome. So, I tend to speak very harshly about such people.

So, let me explain the King James issue. I know you’re not James White. I know you’re not Ron Rhodes. I know you’re not John Ankerberg. These people all speak against the King James issue, and in reality,most of the people who speak against the King James Issue have never studied it.

When you see us slam the opponents of the King James issue, pause and consider this – we’re defending our beliefs. And many of the people that oppose us often have agendas. And many of them hold to secret heresies they won’t admit to. That’s very often the people we’re mentally imagining when we write these articles.

The first thing you should be aware of is… who is on these Bible translating committees? Check these people out. Read about the names of these people. Oh, wow… hey, James White is on the translating committee of some modern translations – that means financially he’s got a stake in attacking the ing James Only movement!

What about Virginia Mollenkot? What are her beliefs about Bible inerrancy, God, the inspiration and preservation of Scripture?

What about Cardinal Carlo Martini? The Jesuit? What agenda does he have?

What about some of these other names? Kurt Aland. Matthew Black, Bruce Metzger, Allen Wikgren? what do these people believe? What are their statements of faith? Should these people be deciding how to translate the Greek texts into English? Some words such as Uranos can mean heaven or sky. Do you want someone who does not believe in heaven translating your Bible?

Let me ask a question – and again, I understand that many of you have simply never been educated in the Bible issue.

1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; 1 Timothy 4:1 (KJV)

Okay, we all understand, agree, and are aware the Bible says that in the last times heretics will arise.

1 But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. 2 And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of. 3 And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not. 2 Peter 2:1-3 (KJV)

Even the most trusting evangelical Christian begins to suspect this may not be a person in the congregation, but also pastors as well.

If Satan was going to weaken Christians and lead them astray, where’s the best places to get his tools? His wolves? In the pulpits.

And translating your Bibles

Are you aware that Kurt Aland, of the Nestle’-Aland Greek Texts, is a heretic? He does not even accept that the 66 books we have in our Bible belong there. And he’s open to other books being put in, and probably even some of ours being taken out. There’s quotes from Aland about that very subject. Read them.

And keep in mind, he’s the man responsible for the Greek texts used by the Bible societies.

Scared yet? You should be.

Because the truth is that all the modern texts come from codex sinaiticus – a Greek text that a known manuscript forger confessed to forging over 100 years ago… – and from a copy of Codex Vaticanus. Not the original, but a copy. Vaticanus is exhibited at the Vatican library, but if it looks like you’re reading it or translating it, it’s yanked away and placed back in the back rooms.

Neither of these books are complete. Sinaiticus has several apocryphal texts and pseudopigraphal texts in it. Does that mean we should be accepting these books as canon?

Sinaiticus is written in the wrong Greek, Attic Greek, not in Koine greek – this places it either in the wrong era (100 BC) or… as a clumsy forgery. And remember, Constantinus Simonides (a known Bible and manuscript forger) had already admitted to forging it early in his career. Even he admitted it was a clumsy forgery!

Here’s the issue. Vaticanus does not have some books. Sinaiticus does not have some books. They disagree with each other in tens of thousands of places.
If I were to translate the New Testament from these texts, I’d have years of heartache about it, trying to decide which of the texts are correct. Do I choose the verse that is missing half the words, or do I choose the one that has left out some words? One verse is missing in one text the name of God, the other is missing the name of Christ. Almost every reference to fasting is removed from one of the manuscripts.

And both of them disagree GREATLY with over 5200 other Greek Texts, that all the Christian churches had been using since the times of the Apostles.

Now, those 5200 agree. There’s some minor copying errors between them, and a few misspelled words – but aside from that, they all agree. You can go from one to the other of those 5,200 manuscripts and find that they all pretty much say exactly the same thing word for word.

So, which would you choose? The copy of Vaticanus and the possibly forged, incomplete Greek text that disagrees with Vaticanus in 10,000 places? Or the 5,200 other manuscripts?

You and I would find this one a no-brainer. Go with 2 flawed manuscripts, or go with the 5,200 ones that agree? I think we’d all turn to the really big pile. The work would actually go faster. You don’t have to decide which version to go with! You just simply read them, and when you come to a repeated word or a space that looks like a word was misspelled or left out, you consult another. You could do it with three or four manuscripts.

Or, you could use one of the manuscripts that’s already been compiled by men who’ve done just that! The compilation often bears the same name as the same family of texts, the Textus-Receptus.

But what do Nestle and Aland choose? Or Wescott and Hort? What did they ALL choose for the modern translations? Why, the forged manuscript and the copy provided by the Vatican.

Huh. The… very choice you’d expect men who deny the deity of Jesus Christ, the inspiration, preservation and canon of the Bible to make.

It’s the only conclusion I can come to. The protests of James White and John Ankerberg cannot sweep away that fact. They’re choosing texts that are flawed, incomplete, and possibly forged.

By an amazing coincidence, these Greek texts neglect almost every reference to fasting. They omit many references to the Blood of Jesus Christ. There’s a few Charismatics who follow this blog. They’d be shocked to find that out!

And many of the verses deliberately change many of the verses that affirm the deity of Christ. Would you trust the manuscripts that affirm many times that Jesus Christ is God, that ye must be born again, that Christ rose from the dead? Or do you want the ones that omit these references?

this is the King james only issue. This is the issue at hand. And Christians who love the Bible, once they become aware of it and begin looking up the translations of various verses, all become convinced of the issue. And they get fighting mad!

I’m furious we have allowed men like Bruce Metzger who denies openly the deity of Jesus Christ and calls Genesis “a fable” to translate our Bibles. We allow Unitarians to suggest wordings they can live with. After all , the thought of Hell makes Unitarians uncomfortable! If they deny the existence of Hell, and give it names like “tartarus” “gehenna” and “hades”, they can sleep a little easier at night.

Because they deny that Jesus Christ is God. And if you believe that, you are not saved. And if you’re not saved, where will you go when you die?

If you’d like, I can list verse after verse after verse that will scare you and will make you put away your other Bibles. And even get you to the point that you will start calling the Modern Bible Versions… well, you’ll start adding the prefix “per” to “version.”

I’m betting that if you can stay a follower of my often-too blunt blog for more than a week, you must be a committed Christian with a love for Christ and His Bible. And if that’s the case, you need to look into this issue. Because a lot is at stake.

What’s the difference between Logos Baptist Gold and Logos Standard Bronze?


Logos

I thought I’d bring this up, because I’m looking into what the actual benefits would be… I’ve spent probably $450-500 on Logos? I can’t remember. I’ve spent $50 on various books, and I got some “compression pay” in one year that was a lot of money, and my wife advised I use it on Logos, because she knew I wanted it and couldn’t afford it.

So, I’ve got an extensive Logos library, and it’s great. I’ve described how I got Logos 6 Baptist Starter, then upgraded to Logos 7 Standard starter. Then since I got Logos 6 right before the upgrade, they gave me an upgrade for free. So I chose Logos 7 Standard Bronze. I’ve mentioned before I would only get the Baptist packages from here on out, so I’d need to get Logos 7 Baptist Bronze (I think it’s $190 for me), then Logos Baptist Silver, and possibly Gold.

So, what would I get by doing this upgrade? I’m already at the max in terms of Logos features, a big change between Logos 6 and 7. You used to have to buy the Gold package to have all the cool features. Not anymore – once you have Bronze, you have it all.

Which is good, because Bronze is expensive. Gold is really expensive. Platinum is about a thousand dollars, which is roughly about 4 years salary for an IFB preacher. Okay, I’m exaggerating, but even if an IFB church were to offer me a pastor’s position, I’d have to decline it on the grounds I can’t afford the cut in pay!

I’m really serious. And that’s a massive denunciation of the IFB movement – the Bible enjoins us that those who labour in the word and preach well are worthy of double pay. So if an IFB pastor (who should be paid about 50K a year) preaches well, the Bible says you should double their pay.

Do the math.

Anyway! I’m digressing wildly as usual. Lack of sleep and caffiene together equals a Narrow is the Way Blog post!

Getting back on track (my longtime readers are laughing right now – this probably brings back a lot of memories of my early days), what would I get by paying $350 or so to get Gold?

That’s almost doubling what I’ve paid so far, by the way…

Nothing in the way of modern translations. I’m maxed out on those. Which is good, because if they were actual hardcover volumes, they’d have cobwebs so thick on them you’d need a machete to get to them! I think I’ve looked at them maybe six times. Mostly the CJB, because I wanted to see how heretical Stern had become, and yup, that’s a serious mass of stinking heresy in there.

I need more sleep. I love my cat. He’s just laying in his cat bed, looking like a happy little pig.

I WOULD get a lot of original manuscripts! I’ve already got the Textus Receptus, but I’d get the other two TR manuscripts (elzevir and I can’t remember the other). So that’s cool. I’m annoyed I’ve got Vaticanus on my hard drive. That should be a Logos Now subscription thig, so I could get it then let my subscription lapse, and watch satisfied as Vaticanus flies away.

Bye bye! (waves)

I need sleep.

Id get a TON of books on preaching. Wow. It’s like the Baptists are known for preaching, which is funny, because from what I’ve heard, most Baptists couldn’t preach their way out of a mummified paper bag that someone dumped water on.

And apparently I’d get everything Charles Spurgeon ever wrote, including grocery lists.

I see a lot of benefits to it, and I wouldn’t have to deal with every issue of Themelios, and a hundred commentary books on Pseudopigrapha, and the entire library of the Cairo Geniza.

Okay, I’ve stopped making sense. Time to go lie down for a nap.

Inerrancy of the Bible


Inerrancy

Since I’m on a kick of reviewing all the videos, sermons and materials I’ve got cluttering my hard drive (need to move all my pdf’s to Evernote…), One thing I thought I’d watch was the Inerrancy conference by John MacArthur.
I’d previously described MacArthur as the wrong man to lead the conference, because he’s light on Biblical Inerrancy. In light of it, I’d noticed that James White, the villain himself, also piggybacked on the Biblical Inerrancy conference with some blog articles, or perhaps it was a radio show transcription. And of course, White couldn’t resist defending modern Bibles.
I’m sure if we pinned James White down by repeatedly shouting at him (his favorite debate tactic) about “WHICH BIBLE! SIR, WHICH BIBLE!!!”, we’d find that he doesn’t consider the Living Bible, New Living Translation, New World Translation, Clear word Bible or the Message as Bibles. I think that’s disingenuous (great, now I’m talking like MacArthur) to decry the NWT because of its Arianist viewpoint, when ALL modern translations are using a Gnostic, Arianist Greek Text as their basis!
The issue is, only really the Fundamentalist – which MacArthur considers himself to be, when he’s truly only an Evangelical – can claim to believe in an Inerrant Bible.
The reason is… we exalt the Bible as the word of God. Textual Criticism at its core is an assault on Biblical Inerrancy. We believe the Bible is inspired, inerrant, and preserved of God, needing no correction. The word of God is PERFECT, like silver refined and purified seven times (Psalm 12).
Interestingly enough, James White titled his blog article “Inspired, Inerrant, Preserved” – which is something White does not believe in.
It has been pointed out by other King James defenders that we are not obligated to defend our King James Only position – we’re not the ones who made the move from an established, accepted position. It’s the modern translations that did.
Here’s the issue on inerrrancy – you proclaim you believe the Bible is perfect, inerrant in all its parts – and yet you ascribe to a so-called science where the aim is to “rediscover the original words of the Bible.” Excuse me, we KNOW the original words of the Bible.
One claim we have made that has NEVER been answered is the issue of the Ben Chayyim text. There has been no answer to the fact that Kittel – based upon his hatred for my people (he was a card-carrying member of the Nazi party), changed from the only text accepted by Jews to another, minority text, not accepted by Jews as halakhically valid.
My exchange with the Accordance Bible Software president was revealing about that. “It’s almost the same” was her disinterested response.
My unanswered response to this was, “According to Halakhah (Jewish Law), a single error invalidates a scroll.” There was no response.
Because there can be no response. And if James White were ever to challenge me to appear on his radio show, that would be something I’d hit on.
The issue with Biblical inerrancy is this – MacArthur decries the words and writings of Griesbach, Wellhausen, Wescott and Hort – but he accepts with blind faith their work.
You can’t have it both ways.
If the branch is rotten, so is it’s fruit. If the root is embedded in toxin, so too is the tree and the fruit thereof. If we decry Griesbach as a heretic, if we denounce Bengel as a theological liberal and a modernist, we must reject all their works as tainted. There’s no difference between Griesbach and Bengel vs. Metzger and Martini, or Aland and Aland. Literally, they’re all saying the same thing. And Tischendorf spoke from the same playbook as Bengel and Griesbach.
MacArthur made a joke about some people spend entire careers “ressurectring dead Germans” – in other words, denouncing the modernists and liberals who started the textual criticism theory – yet no attempt was made to address the issue of textual Criticism, because MacArthur – a King James user until a KJV only proponent pointed that out – believs in “scholarship.”
Again I ask the question – if I took EVERY class at the Master’s College, EVERY one of them – would that give me, a mere man, the right to decide which of God’s words belong in the Bible?
And isn’t that the very thing MacArthur was fighting against?
You can’t have it both ways. You believe the Bible is without error, perfect, inspired of God, preserved – or you do not.
So in many ways the inerrancy conference was a sham. Everything MacArthur was trying to do was tainted, because there was no call to reject the modern translations that question and deny God’s word.

Two Weeks with Logos part 2


Logos

I’m enjoying the time with Logos.
I will say this!

I think that unless I absolutely had money to burn, I would never get Logos Standard Platinum. Maybe Logos Baptist platinum, but definitely not any more Standard packages higher than this one.
Why?

I don’t know why! Ok, kidding, I know why.

The largest number of volumes in this seem to be post-Nicene “Fathers”. Ante-nicene “fathers”. The Cairo Geniza manuscripts. Pseudopigrapha. Commentary on the Pseudopigrapha (Nobody cares!). The volumes of Themelios. Roman Catholic guide to saints. Catholic liturgy. I’d say probably 45% of what downloaded onto my computer for the trial was useless to me. I might poke at it because I’ve got a strong Apologetics streak running through me.

But I’d say, yeah, almost half of what downloaded was garbage.
I don’t remember off hand what’s in the Baptist package, but I’m inclined to say, if it’s anything like the Platinum package, I don’t need it. I think Logos Baptist Silver is about as high as I’ll go.

Unless they hire me and I can put together a Fundamentalist package, then you better BELIEVE I’m going to get the Platinum Fundamentalist package!

There is a number of other books they have on Preaching. Those I’d read. So, it’s pretty much only half usable to me, which really doesn’t justify the kind if money Logos wants for it.

So.

The 10 days with Jonah I’m doing again, as I mentioned. Hopefully, some of you are doing it with me. Somehow, it created a automatic reading plan, wihch is an issue, because I’d already done it once, then Logos tried to do it again back in July. I’d just marked it completed, and deleted it. But here it is back again, and because it was made by Logos, I can’t edit the dates of it.

It’s the first real glitch I’ve had with Logos, really. That’s pretty good. Much better than the info window crash of Wordsearch 11, which pretty much makes it useless as a tool.

If you’re following with the 10 days of Jonah thing, be sure to go over and leave comments on the Faithlife group page for the free trial. Lesson #3 was all about reading it in multiple translations, which of course was to introduce the “compare translations” tool. Personally, that’s a really nifty tool for a Fundamentalist, but not in the way they intend! I could seriously go on to my Doctorate, and actually include a lot of information on the doctrinal superiority of the King James Bible. Comparing translations means basically accepting the validity of Codex Vaticanus, which most Fundamentalists are not prepared or willing to do.

However, I will say I’ve actually learned quite a bit – and I’ve got a degree in Pastoring – doing the 10 days with Jonah. The “mark all repeated words” assignment showed me that there is quite a bit of repeated words, deliberately. It’s part of contrastive thinking, the fingerprint of God in the Bible,

Okay, I’ve rambled enough for a day. For once, this was like a real blog and not a newspaper column!

Two Weeks With Logos Platinum


Logos

Today starts my two weeks with Logos Platinum.It took over an hour last night for some 475 books to be downloaded, and then since it happened late last night (9 pm) I wasn’t up long enough for Logos to index, which is to go through all of the myriads of coding and install it.

My immediate take away impression is that… that’s a lot of stuff. Logos Platinum is pretty much forever beyond the reach of Baptist pastors, just because it’s about another $1,000 beyond what I’ve already spent – and I’ve spent several hundred dollars on it (and a free upgrade by Logos!). Logos is not the most expensive Bible program (that honor goes to Accordance), but from what I saw of what was being downloaded onto my computer was a lot of stuff that I’ll never need or get to, like scholarly peer review journals and Academic Journals (Themelios).

Maybe, just maybe I’d go through and read the Themelios journals, but I’m also loaded down with things like the Ante-Nicene writings and the “Church Fathers”. Why I would need that, I don’t know. Perhaps I could use the Ante-Nicene writings, but the problem is, apostasy set in VERY quickly into the early churches, and quoting from any of them could be problematic. How do I know which of the Ante-Nicene fathers believed in Baptismal Regeneration, for example? That heresy was setting in by 200 AD, and you’d have to slowly piece together by reading everything John Chrysostom wrote in detail to detect it.

There is a certain amount of glee in seeing hundreds of commentaries being downloaded. The one thing I’m doing this time during this two weeks is going through the “Jonah” study course again… And this time literally doing the exercises along with it. Last time I just watched it, nodded a lot, made sarcastic comments a lot (Lord, that’s a flaw in my character, please remove that!), and winced as the man leading the videos keeps recommending one theological liberal after another. Birds of a feather.

If you’re doing this trial along with me, then consider doing the Jonah study as well. I’d already made markups like he’s explaining in video one, and if you’ve done those separately, all you have to do is duplicate your markup, then move it to the “Observation” markup as he suggests. Everything is done through the triangle on the right hand side.

Right now, 43% of my computer resources are being used up by Logos as I wait for it to finish indexing. If you open Logos and the indexing is not done, expect it to take perhaps an hour to do all that. The program looks frozen, but it’s not. If you’ve got an HP, you’ll need to go for a jog or something. I’ve got a Dell, which is much faster.

I probably shouldn’t have done the two week free trial, because I’m afraid I’m going to love the massively expanded library. I do wish Logos would have asked everyone which library they wanted to try (since apparently someone at Faithlife is reading my blog, but they’ve yet to say, “Hey, we could use a good Fundamentalist working here!”), because they gave me the wildly ecumenical Evangelical package (That’s Logos Standard Platinum). I would have asked for the Baptist package, because what am I really going to do with all those books about Mary and the Popes and Catholic prayers?

Well, probably write 15 more articles dealing with Roman Catholicism. So, the thought occurs to me as my computer clicks and hums, is since they try to push Roman Catholic materials on Christians who buy Logos, do they push Baptist materials on Roman Catholics when they buy Verbum?

Well, after an hour of clicking and humming, Logos is ready. So now I’m going to gleefully poke at it!