Logos Bible Software/Knox program now open to women
With great fanfare, Logos Bible Software has started a joint program with the infamously conservative Knox Theological Seminary to offer a special “DMin in Preaching and Teaching.” This is a hybrid program – most of the work is done as distance education, although there are four on-site classes each year. Now here is the kicker – the program offers special discounts on Logos Bible Software (a free copy of Logos’ Portfolio edition, normally priced at $4290 plus $600 worth of student-selectable free additional add-on packages). In fact, to add sweetener, “Logos Bible Software will cover your airfare booking and costs for your first on-site class if you apply before May 30, 2012.”
Further, this is a very weird sort of Doctor of Ministry degree: the very first required course is:
Enriching Preaching through Logos Bible Software (3hrs)
To preach and teach effectively, the pastor must have a foundation of sound exegetical competence upon which to build. This course is a developmental course designed to teach pastors and teachers the latest software tools in exegetical analysis stressing proficiency in skill and efficiency in time. It is designed to show the pastor or teacher how to use Logos Bible Software as a resource for thousands of illustrations and sermon texts to enrich Biblical teaching for maximum effectiveness. The timeless principles of classical rhetoric as first identified by Aristotle, that is, the use of all available means of persuasion, are developed to give structure and force to the message.
But here’s the thing – Knox does not allow women to enroll in its D.Min. programs:
The Doctor of Ministry is a professional program for pastors, missionaries, and others actively engaged in ministry-related fields. Admission to the Doctor of Ministry program is limited to men. This admission policy derives from Knox’s commitment to operate according to the Holy Scriptures and the constitution of the Presbyterian Church in America, namely the Westminster Confession of Faith, the Catechisms, and the Book of Church Order. [Emphasis added]
Now, to be fair, Logos offers academic discounts to a wide variety of institutions (I teach at a secular university and receive a very healthy discount). And to be fair, Logos has gone to a considerable efforts to include material relevant to Jews, Catholics, non-Reformed Christians, and others. But, those academic discounts are merely discounts – they do not make the software free. They do not include $600 of free credits. They do not include free airfare.
Now I might be inclined to forgive Logos for this new “men get it for free; women have to pay” policy if Logos were to partner with other institutions as well. But as it stands, men can get Logos for free by entering this program, whereas women simply have to pay more. That doesn’t seem right to me.
Update (5/18): Knox has now rescinded its language restricting the program to men only, and Dan Pritchett from Logos software has assured us that the program will continue to be open to both men and women. I would like to thank Logos and Knox for this change.
BLT 
Well I’m puzzled, because at http://dmin.me/pages/tuition_fees.php under “Refund Policy” I read:
“… In the event of the student having begun his/her dissertation work …”
Interesting. I cannot reconcile this with the quote found at http://www.knoxseminary.edu/programs/programs-of-study/:
“The Doctor of Ministry is a professional program for pastors, missionaries, and others actively engaged in ministry-related fields. Admission to the Doctor of Ministry program is limited to men.” I will write Knox and see if it can clarify.
That seems consistent with the view of the PCA that women cannot be preachers, elders or deacons, but can only serve as assistants to deacons.
Suzanne — I think there are two issues here — one is price (should male students pay a different amount than female students) and the other is access to education. As I pointed out above, much of the focus of this degree program is on using the Logos software. In fact one of the promised goals of the program is facility with the Logos program:
(Morris Proctor is a trainer for Logos software. I think some serious questions can be raised whether learning how to use a software program is doctoral level work, but I will skip over that for now.)
Now, it is not obvious to me how facility with the Logos program is something that should be restricted to men only — even under the most conservative of Christian beliefs. Does PCA also believe that women should not learn to read and do arithmetic? The other issue, of course, is that not only do men learn how to use this program — they get a several thousand dollar program for free and even get a free flight to take their first class. Women do not get that.
Now, I’d like to compare Knox’s admission policy to that of a Catholic seminary. I arbitrarily chose the Jesuit School of Theology located in Berkeley, California, and affiliated with the Santa Clara University. JST admits lay students, including women for all of its degrees, including M.Div., S.T.B., S.T.L., and S.T.D. degrees. Now, women cannot serve as clergy in the Roman Catholic church, but they are allowed to earn all of its ecclesiastical degrees.
Even if PCA forbids women from serving as clergy, it does not mean that women must be barred from earning a D.Min. degree; and it certainly does not mean that they should be forbidden from taking a course that teaches them how to use Bible software (and receiving that software for free and even the airfare to take the course for free.)
Some PCA believe that women should be encouraged to study home economics at university. The sacramental churches may be more accepting of women as scholars and professors, whereas the conservative protestant churches tend to restrict women from any role of teaching authority, whether in the university or church. In that case, women perhaps should not have equal access to something like software that gives the impression of authority, or that is seen as an instrument of authority.
I personally don’t agree that facility with software confers authority. The software is only as good as whoever designed it. The Logos creators seem to be unaware of the Pagnini and Erasmus translations, which I would rate as the 2 most influential translations along with Jerome and Luther. I have not ever been even the tiniest bit interested in what Logos seems to offer, although I am open to persuasion.
At one time, Logos contacted me, and I was briefly interested in becoming a Logos trainer. However, I was soon made aware that at least some Logos employees have the strong belief that women are saved by childbirth, and I found it all just a bit too awkward to have further contact with them.
Don’t get me wrong: Logos software is not bad at what it does and I find it very easy to use (which is one reason I am so stunned at the idea that one could offer an academic course — much less a purportedly doctoral level course — on how to use it).
You are right that it has an imperfect set of reference materials, and certainly it is no substitute for real learning (for example, doing the hard work to learn an ancient language). Logos does provide some quite high quality reference materials not otherwise easily available electronically and many ways to access them. (Unfortunately, Logos also has a lot of dreck).
But this instance of differential pricing and your comments above are really symptomatic of a bigger divide over their customer’s interests. On the one hand Logos has made huge strides in supporting their Catholic, Jewish, and mainline users. On the other hand, Logos felt it necessary to single out the TNIV translation for a special warning disclaimer.
As I said, I am open to persuasion, but having done tech training in other fields, I also have a hard time associating software usership with doctoral level studies. Certainly it does not replace language learning.
I know the BDAG is much valued, but I am lucky enough to own 2 editions, and a comparable French/Greek lexicon, as well as an older Latin/Greek lexicon. Naturally, it takes longer to transfer data, but sometimes that is useful. I once had an argument with a software theology expert who did not understand the abbreviation system in the BDAG.
I have asked about the gender views of Logos and have been assured that they do not have a policy in this area. I find this hard to believe since all Logos personnel that I have interacted with have been complementarians and the disclaimer against the TNIV seems to back that up.
Theophrastus,
Logos does not have different pricing structures for women or restrict them from any of our offerings. Women and men may equally feel free to apply to the new Knox DMin. and earn their doctorate degree through the program if accepted.
Women may also take advantage of the same sales and pricing offered on all our titles.
Suzanne, as for the staff, we are nearing 300 employees from a very diverse group of both men and women with views that run the gamut.
We look forward to handing out plane tickets, Logos Bible Software, and hard earned sheepskins to many new Doctors—both female and male.
http://dmin.me/
Dan Pritchett
Executive Vice President, Logos Bible Software
Dan, thank so much for your comment. Indeed, I have noticed just today that Knox has removed the “male only” language from the description of its program. I am glad that you and Knox have clarified this, and I will update the post accordingly.
Theo,
I have emailed you the url and a screenshot of the “limited to men” restriction. It is clearly marked with the 2012 calendar year. I don’t know how women could feel welcome. It also cites the PCA policy as backup as I had mentioned earlier in this thread. There is a clear connection between the book of church order for the PCA, that women can have no authority, and only serve as assistants to deacons, and their academic restrictions.
This concerns me personally as it explains the internal conflicts in my family about attending Tim Keller’s church – some of the women don’t want to – is my understanding.
Here is the link for the “limited to men” citation and the connection to the PCA book of church order. I wonder if this will be removed. I have saved a screenshot but will take a larger one now.
http://knoxseminary.edu/programs.php
This pdf indicates that the M/Div is also only open to men.
Click to access md_pastoral_ministry_emphasis.pdf
I doubt it will be as easy to edit.
Dan,
I hope you can get some clarification from Knox on whether women may apply to the D. Min. programme and if any have been accepted. Certainly the webpages would have discouraged most women from applying.
I am also wondering what Logos has to offer in terms of Bible translations in languages other than English, especially historic ones.
And – are there any female Logos trainers? Thanks so much,
Suzanne
I notice that the web page linked to above changed between yesterday and today.
http://www.knoxseminary.edu/programs/programs-of-study/#dom
Maybe our comments here helped to prompt that change. I hope that Knox updates its other web pages as well. Maybe our posts are doing some good!
My next comment will have a list of Bible versions I have on my version of Logos. It is, of course, not a complete list of everything Logos offers, but at least it indicates that Logos has a healthy range of translations. It does include a number of important non-English historic translations, although more could be included.
Sorry, that somehow got cut-off. Here is the rest:
P20 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P20. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P22 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P22. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P23 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P23. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P24 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P24. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P27 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P27. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P28 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P28. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P29 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P29. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P30 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P30. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P32 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P32. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P35 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P35. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P37 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P37. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P38 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P38. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P39 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P39. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P40 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P40. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P45 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P45. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P46 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P46. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P47 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P47. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P48 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P48. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P49 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P49. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P50 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P50. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P52 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P52. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P53 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P53. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P64 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P64. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P65 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P65. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P66 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P66. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P67 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P67. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P69 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P69. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P70 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P70. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P72 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P72. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P75 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P75. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P77 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P77. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P78 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P78. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P80 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P80. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P86 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P86. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P87 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P87. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P90 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P90. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P91 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P91. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P92 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P92. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P95 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P95. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P98 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P98. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P100 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P100. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P101 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P101. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P102 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P102. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P103 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P103. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P104 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P104. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P106 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P106. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P107 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P107. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P108 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P108. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P109 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P109. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P110 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P110. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P111 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P111. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P113 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P113. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P114 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P114. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
P115 from The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). P115. In The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
Papyrus Oxyrhynchus VI 848 from A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Revelation of St. John
Charles, R. (1920). A critical and exegetical commentary on the Revelation of St John. Edinburgh: T&T Clark International.
Papyrus Oxyrhynchus VIII 1079 from A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Revelation of St. John
Charles, R. (1920). A critical and exegetical commentary on the Revelation of St John. Edinburgh: T&T Clark International.
Papyrus Oxyrhynchus VIII 1080 from A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Revelation of St. John
Charles, R. (1920). A critical and exegetical commentary on the Revelation of St John. Edinburgh: T&T Clark International.
Papyrus Oxyrhynchus X 1230 from A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Revelation of St. John
Charles, R. (1920). A critical and exegetical commentary on the Revelation of St John. Edinburgh: T&T Clark International.
The Parallel Aligned Hebrew-Aramaic and Greek Texts of Jewish Scripture
Tov, E. (2003). The parallel aligned Hebrew-Aramaic and Greek texts of Jewish Scripture. Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software.
The Parallel Aligned Hebrew-Aramaic and Greek Texts of Jewish Scripture – Alexandrinus and Theodotion Variants
Tov, E., & Computer Assisted Tools for Septuagint Studies. (2003). The parallel aligned Hebrew-Aramaic and Greek texts of Jewish scripture – Alexandrinus and Theodotion variants. Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software.
The Pastoral Epistles of St. Paul: Text
Ellicott, C. J. (1869). The Pastoral Epistles of St. Paul: With a critical and grammatical commentary, and a revised translation. Bellingham, WA: Longmans, Green, Reader, & Dyer.
The Pastoral Epistles of St. Paul: Translation
Ellicott, C. J. (1869). The Pastoral Epistles of St. Paul: With a critical and grammatical commentary, and a revised translation. London: Longmans, Green, Reader, & Dyer.
The Peshitta
Kiraz, G. A. (2002). The Peshitta. Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software.
Psalmi cum Odis (Göttingen Septuagint X)
Rahlfs, A. (1979). Vol. X: Psalmi cum Odis. Vetus Testamentum Graecum. Auctoritate Academiae Scientiarum Gottingensis editum. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
Raamattu (1933, 1938)
Raamattu (1933, 1938). 2009. Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software.
The Revised Standard Version
The Revised Standard Version. 1971. Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.
The Revised Standard Version, Catholic Edition
Catholic Biblical Association (Great Britian). (1994). The Holy Bible: Revised Standard Version, Catholic edition, translated from the original tongues, being the version set forth A.D. 1611, Old and New Testament revised A.D. 1881-1885 and A.D. 1901 (Apocrypha revised A.D. 1894), compared with the most ancient authories and revised A.D. 1952 (Apocrypha revised A.D. 1957). New York: National Council of Churches of Christ in the USA.
Russian Modern New Testament
Российское Библейское общество. (2000; 2009). Russian Modern New Testament; Russian Modern New Testament. Bible Society of Russia; Москва.
Russian Synodal Bible Translation
Bible Society of Russia. (1995; 2009). Russian Synodal Bible Translation; Synodal Bible Translation. Российское Библейское общество; Москва.
Ruth (Göttingen Septuagint IV, 3)
Quast, U. (2006). Vol. IV, 3: Ruth. Vetus Testamentum Graecum. Auctoritate Academiae Scientiarum Gottingensis editum. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
Sahidic Coptic New Testament in English
Sahidic Coptic New Testament in English. 1911 (G. Horner, Trans.). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Sahidica: New Testament According to the Egyptian Greek Text
Wells, J. W. (2006). Sahidica: New Testament According to the Egyptian Greek Text. Logos Bible Software.
Sahidica: The New Testament According to the Sahidic Coptic Text
Wells, J. W. (2006). Sahidica: The New Testament According to the Sahidic Coptic Text. Logos Bible Software.
Sapientia Iesu Filii Sirach (Göttingen Septuagint XII, 2)
Ziegler, J. (1980). Vol. XII, 2: Sapientia Iesu Filii Sirach. Vetus Testamentum Graecum. Auctoritate Academiae Scientiarum Gottingensis editum. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
Sapientia Salomonis (Göttingen Septuagint XII, 1)
Ziegler, J. (1980). Vol. XII, 1: Sapientia Salomonis. Vetus Testamentum Graecum. Auctoritate Academiae Scientiarum Gottingensis editum. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
The Scriptures
Institute for Scripture Research. (2000). The Scriptures. South Africa: Institute for Scripture Research (Pty) Ltd.
Scrivener’s Textus Receptus (1894) With Morphology
Scrivener’s Textus Receptus (1894) : With morphology. 2002. Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software.
Second Targum to Esther
Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon. (2005). Second Targum to Esther; Targum Sheni to Esther. Hebrew Union College.
The Septuagint Version of the Old Testament: English Translation
Brenton, L. C. L. (1870). The Septuagint Version of the Old Testament: English Translation. London: Samuel Bagster and Sons.
Septuagint with Logos Morphology
Septuaginta: With morphology. 1979 (electronic ed.). Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft.
Septuagint with Logos Morphology (Alternate Texts)
Septuaginta: With morphology. 1979 (electronic ed.). Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft.
Septuaginta: Morphologically Tagged Edition
Septuaginta: With morphology. 1996. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft.
Septuaginta: SESB Edition
Septuaginta: SESB Edition. 2006 (A. Rahlfs & R. Hanhart, Ed.). Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft.
Septuaginta: SESB Edition (Alternate Texts)
Septuaginta: SESB Edition (Alternate Texts). 2006 (A. Rahlfs & R. Hanhart, Ed.). Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft.
St. Paul’s Epistle to the Ephesians: Greek Text
Robinson, J. A., D.D. (2009). St. Paul’s Epistle to the Ephesians: A revised text and translation with exposition and notes (Second Edition). Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software.
St. Paul’s Epistle to the Ephesians: Text
Ellicott, C. J. (1884). St. Paul’s Epistle to the Ephesians: With a critical and grammatical commentary, and a revised translation. London: Longmans, Green & Co.
St. Paul’s Epistle to the Ephesians: Translation
Ellicott, C. J. (1884). St. Paul’s Epistle to the Ephesians: With a critical and grammatical commentary, and a revised translation. London: Longmans, Green & Co.
St. Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians: Text
Ellicott, C. J. (1863). St. Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians: With a critical and grammatical commentary, and a revised translation. London: Longman, Green, Longman, Roberts, & Green.
St. Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians: Translation
Ellicott, C. J. (1863). St. Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians: With a critical and grammatical commentary, and a revised translation. London: Longman, Green, Longman, Roberts, & Green.
St. Paul’s Epistles to the Philippians, Colossians, and to Philemon: Text
Ellicott, C. J. (1876). St. Paul’s Epistles to the Philippians, Colossians, and to Philemon : With a critical and grammatical commentary, and a revised translation. London: Warren F. Draper.
St. Paul’s Epistles to the Philippians, Colossians, and to Philemon: Translation
Ellicott, C. J. (1876). St. Paul’s Epistles to the Philippians, Colossians, and to Philemon: With a critical and grammatical commentary, and a revised translation. Andober: Warren F. Draper.
St. Paul’s Epistles to the Thessalonians: Text
Ellicott, C. J. (1858). A critical and grammatical commentary on St. Paul’s Epistles to the Thessalonians : With a revised translation. London: John W. Parker & Son.
St. Paul’s Epistles to the Thessalonians: Translation
Ellicott, C. J. (1858). A critical and grammatical commentary on St. Paul’s Epistles to the Thessalonians : With a revised translation. London: John W. Parker & Son.
St. Paul’s First Epistle to the Corinthians: Text
Ellicott, C. J. (1887). St. Paul’s First Epistle to the Corinthians: With a critical and grammatical commentary. London: Longmans, Green, and Co.
Statenvertaling
Staten Vertaling. 1997 (electronic ed.). Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software.
Stephen’s Textus Receptus (1550) With Morphology
Stephen’s 1550 Textus Receptus: With morphology. 2002. Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software.
A Study of Augustine’s Versions of Genesis
McIntosh, J. S. (1912). A study of Augustine’s versions of Genesis. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
Susanna, Daniel, Bel et Draco (Göttingen Septuagint XVI, 2)
Ziegler, J. (1999). Vol. XVI, 2: Susanna, Daniel, Bel et Draco. Vetus Testamentum Graecum. Auctoritate Academiae Scientiarum Gottingensis editum. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
Susanna, Daniel, Bel et Draco: Theodotion Text (Göttingen Septuagint XVI, 2)
Ziegler, J. (1999). Vol. XVI, 2: Susanna, Daniel, Bel et Draco. Vetus Testamentum Graecum. Auctoritate Academiae Scientiarum Gottingensis editum. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
The Swanson New Testament Greek Morphology (UBS 4th Edition)
Swanson, J., Aland, B., Aland, K., Black, M., Martini, C. M., Metzger, B. M., & Wikgren, A. (2003). The Swanson New Testament Greek morphology: United Bible Societies’ Fourth Edition (4th ed.). Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software.
The Swanson New Testament Greek Morphology (Westcott-Hort Edition)
Swanson, J., Westcott, B. F., & Hort, F. J. A. (2003). The Swanson New Testament Greek morphology: Westcott-Hort Edition. Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software.
The Syriac New Testament: Translated into English from the Syriac Peshitto Version
The Syriac New Testament: Translated into English from the Syriac Peshitto Version. 2001 (J. Murdock, Trans.). Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press.
Tanakh, The Holy Scriptures
Jewish Publication Society. (1985). Tanakh: The Holy Scriptures. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society.
Targum Canticles
Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon. (2005). Targum Song of Songs; Targum Song of Solomon; Targum Canticles; TgCant. Hebrew Union College.
Targum Chronicles
Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon. (2005). Targum Chronicles. Hebrew Union College.
Targum Ecclesiastes
Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon. (2005). Targum Qohelet; Targum Ecclesiastes. Hebrew Union College.
Targum Job
Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon. (2005). Targum Job. Hebrew Union College.
Targum Job from Qumran – 4QtgJob
Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon. (2005). Targum Job from Qumran – 4QtgJob; 4Q157. Hebrew Union College.
Targum Job from Qumran – 11QtgJob
Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon. (2005). Targum Job from Qumran – 11QtgJob; 11Q10. Hebrew Union College.
Targum Jonathan to the Prophets
Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon. (2005). Targum Jonathan to the Prophets. Hebrew Union College.
Targum Neofiti to the Pentateuch
Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon. (2005). Targum Neofiti to the Pentateuch. Hebrew Union College.
Targum Onkelos
Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon. (2005). Targum Onqelos to the Pentateuch. Hebrew Union College.
Targum Proverbs
Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon. (2005). Targum Proverbs. Hebrew Union College.
Targum Psalms
Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon. (2005). Targum Psalms. Hebrew Union College.
Targum Pseudo-Jonathan to the Pentateuch
Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon. (2005). Targum Pseudo-Jonathan to the Pentateuch. Hebrew Union College.
Targum Ruth
Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon. (2005). Targum Ruth. Hebrew Union College.
Targumic Toseftot to the Prophets
Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon. (2005). Targumic Toseftot to the Prophets. Hebrew Union College.
The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manuscripts. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.
The Holy Bible in Today’s Greek Version with Deuterocanonicals
Greek Bible Society. (1997; 2006). The Holy Bible in Today’s Greek Version with Deuterocanonicals; Today’s Greek Version. ΕΛΛΗΝΙΚΗ ΒΙΒΛΙΚΗ ΕΤΑΙΡΙΑ.
Third Targum to Esther
Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon. (2005). Third Targum to Esther; Targum Shelishi to Esther. Hebrew Union College.
Tobit (Göttingen Septuagint VIII, 5)
Hanhart, R. (1983). Vol. VIII, 5: Tobit. Vetus Testamentum Graecum. Auctoritate Academiae Scientiarum Gottingensis editum. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
Tobit: GII (Göttingen Septuagint VIII, 5)
Hanhart, R. (1983). Vol. VIII, 5: Tobit. Vetus Testamentum Graecum. Auctoritate Academiae Scientiarum Gottingensis editum. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
Today’s New International Version
The Holy Bible: Today’s New International Version. 2005. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.
Traduction Oecumenique de la Bible
Traduction oecuménique de la Bible : Comprenant l’Ancien et le Nouveau Testament … 1977. Paris (58, rue de Clichy, 75009): Société biblique française.
Wadi Murabaat
Logos Bible Software. (2011). Wadi Murabaat. Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software.
Wadi Sdeir Genesis
Logos Bible Software. (2010). Wadi Sdeir Genesis. Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software.
Westcott and Hort Greek New Testament (1881) With Morphology
Westcott and Hort Greek New Testament (1881) : With morphology. 2002. Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software.
Western Text of Targum Lamentations
Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon. (2005). Western Text of Targum Lamentations. Hebrew Union College.
Willibrordvertaling
Katholieke Bijbelstichting. (1995). Willibrordvertaling.
XJoshua
Logos Bible Software. (2010). XJoshua. Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software.
Yemenite Text of Targum Lamentations
Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon. (2005). Yemenite Text of Targum Lamentations. Hebrew Union College.
Young’s Literal Translation
Young, R. (1997). Young’s Literal Translation. Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software.
Zürcher Bibel
Zürcher Bibel. 2007. Zürich: Genossenschaft Verlag der Zürcher Bibel beim Theologischen Verlag Zürich.
Русский Синодальный Перевод (1876/1956)
Bibliia (romanizedform)] ili, Kniga Sviashchennogo Pisaniia Vetkhogo i Novogo Zaveta. V russkokm perevode s parallel?nymi mestami i Ukazatelem tserkovnykh chtenii. 1956. Moskva: Izd. Moskovskoi Patriarkhii.
Suzanne, not sure what to say about the Knox site… that looks like some old copy that will be updated soon—I have one of my guys reaching out to them right now. I can’t speak for any Knox policy or program other than the one we are working on with them (http://dmin.me/), but I can assure you the DMin. we are offering in conjunction with Knox is open to women.
As for Bibles offered in Logos, we have well over 100 to choose from: http://lgs.to/JY3gVp
For texts in languages other than English, we have Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic, Latin, Syriac, Ugaritic, Akkadian, Canaanite, Coptic, Spanish, German, French, Dutch, Chinese, Arabic, Phoenician, Portuguese, Italian, Czech, Russian, Punic, Moabite, Ukrainian, Thai, Serbian, Finnish, Esperanto, Albanian, Maori, Mampruli, Hungarian and more.
As for female trainers, yes, we have several: Rebekah Quinn, based in Seattle; Suzanne Schmieding, based in Philadelphia; and Becky Rosillo, who is in charge of our service and support training videos.
If you would like, I’d be happy to arrange a demo or a training session for you, or a group you’d like us to work with, just let me know.
-Dan
I would like to thank Logos and Knox for this change.
Yes, thanks to Theophrastus and Suzanne for finding the websites and the copy, and blogging about it. Thanks then to Dan Pritchett and Logos and Knox for appropriately making the changes and the new offers, to women and to men.
Its not clear to me that the offer is open to women. There are still indications that M.Div and D.Min programs are not open to women. Their website stills says,
“The Doctor of Ministry is a professional program for pastors, missionaries, and others actively engaged in ministry-related fields. Admission to the Doctor of Ministry program is limited to men. This admission policy derives from Knox’s commitment to operate according to the Holy Scriptures and the constitution of the Presbyterian Church in America, namely the Westminster Confession of Faith, the Catechisms, and the Book of Church Order.”
I don’t see how they can effect such a major change overnight on policy based on the Holy Scriptures, the constitution of the PCA, the Westminster Confession, the Catechisms and the Book of Church Order.
Unless the D. Min. page explicitly says that it is open to women, my guess it that most applicants will think that it is not.
I have often received the impression that for many protestants, the policy that women are not allowed “teaching authority” is seen to operate in the domain of ancient languages and exegesis, both in the church and in academia.
For myself, I ran into two attitudes in some association with Logos – that “saved by childbearing” meant that women were to operate primarily in the domestic sphere, and that women could not have teaching authority. My understanding was that these were based on God’s design of women. I just found it awkward to continue to discuss code within this context.
However, I am pleasantly surprised that Logos does have female tech trainers. All my tech training work has been done in a predominantly female domain in education and special education.
Dan,
Thanks so much for your offer. I could pick up a training session at Regent or VST probably but since I don’t always have much time off from my full time work in special education, I haven’t been able to do this yet.
I was involved in tech training with the UBC education program last summer and do a lot of informal research on programs for special needs students. Unfortunately family and personal issues have limited my time much more so this year than usual. Perhaps next year.
I have looked at the list posted by Theo and it is amazing – mind boggling to have so much at one’s fingertips. It would be fabulous for me to be able to have something like that.
However, I have run into the situation that professors want me to cite from either the original or from a facsimile. In the case of Erasmus’ Latin translation there were variants in each edition which influenced the divergent use of “repentance” and “penitence” in various places in English translations. There are a series of Latin translations which circulated during the Reformation which acted as a working basis for the vernacular translations into the languages of Europe, and in most cases the lexicons derive from these Latin translations, so our understanding of many obscure words found in the original texts is based on these Latin translations.
Today I went to the page where this was found,
“The Doctor of Ministry is a professional program for pastors, missionaries, and others actively engaged in ministry-related fields. Admission to the Doctor of Ministry program is limited to men. This admission policy derives from Knox’s commitment to operate according to the Holy Scriptures and the constitution of the Presbyterian Church in America, namely the Westminster Confession of Faith, the Catechisms, and the Book of Church Order.”
and it has been deleted.
http://www.knoxseminary.edu/programs.php
Suzanne, I think that page was a stray page from a previous version of their web site. If you go to the bottom of any of Knox’s web pages and look on the left for Program of Study -> Doctor of Ministry it takes you to the page I linked to in my original post — which was changed shortly after this post.
I also wonder how effectively the institution will adapt to this apparent opening to women. But I prefer to be optimistic: many institutions of higher learning became co-ed in your lifetime (e.g., the Ivy League undergraduate colleges became co-educational in the 1970s, with Columbia the final holdout — it became co-education in 1982.) While I am sure it was not easy for them (and in some ways it is still a process that they are working through — see Lawrence Summers for a painful example) we have to agree that it was a significant step towards substantially greater educational opportunity for women at those schools.
I hope that Knox sees a similar commitment to education of women. In any case, we’ll see what happens ….
“If you go to the bottom of any of Knox’s web pages and look on the left for Program of Study -> Doctor of Ministry it takes you to the page I linked to in my original post —”
That’s today …..
Yes, Suzanne, that’s right.
Looking at the link from the bottom of the web pages was how I found the link I made when I made my original post:
(1) http://www.knoxseminary.edu/programs/programs-of-study/#dom
You found a different page:
(2) http://www.knoxseminary.edu/programs.php
but I’m not sure (2) was actually linked from any other page within the Knox web site.
Both pages had identical language as I originally quoted in my post (now crossed out).
I noticed that when Dan Pritchett posted, the language in (1) changed (and within 24 hours of his comment too!) He speculated that (2) was a stray page, and Knox has obviously removed (2) now. It seems that Knox very recently made the decision to drop the original language — within the last two weeks, and I think that was maybe because of this dialogue here.
So, I hope, that is progress. As I said, we will see what happens ….
Perhaps, but, the fact remains that the reason for restricting the programs to men was because of their belief about women in the church not being able to preach and have authority, as I mentioned earlier. This is clear.
It may have been a stray page, but it was clearly a published page, prepared for 2012 programs. Another document has also been removed, which repeated the same language for the M. Div. program. Clearly, up until the time that you uploaded this post, the D. Min. programs were restricted to men. The only puzzle remaining is whether Logos Bible Software staff were aware that the Knox D. Min. programs were restricted to men.
I would guess that all of this has been removed because of the dialogue here.
I had no idea that all those universities were restricted to men. My grandmother and her sisters all studied at McGill in the 19th century. Sorry, just having trouble digesting all of this.
McGill is a public university, and those admitted women much earlier.
The private universities were much more varied in their history.
For example Harvard began admitting women to graduate programs in the ’40s, but the undergraduate program was restricted to men. In the late 1960s, women could get joint “Radcliffe-Harvard” bachelor’s degrees, but men got “Harvard” bachelor’s degrees. The institutions did not complete a merger until 1999(!)
However, there are still some howlers out there. For example, another Presbyterian seminary, Western Reform Seminary, states that only men may receive ministerial degrees, but women are eligible to receive the “M.R.S.” degree.
And Western Reform Seminary ties this decision to the fact that women cannot hold church office. But the doctoral program at Knox is related to “ministry” rather than to “office” so should have been open to women.
I was brought up and lived in two worlds, one of secular academic access, and one of repression.
FYI: http://blog.logos.com/2013/02/the-francis-schaeffer-scholarship-winner-announced/
I get the impression that she may have made a lifetime commitment not to teach a man.
That is very possible.
. She’s active in her church’s food pantry, she’s helped start a women’s ministry, and she’s helped write curricula for women’s Bible studies. Pamelia mentors girls and young women through the Delta Academy. She wants to be used by the Lord to “help single mothers become women of God and raise successful children.”
She is staying well within the boundaries of the domestic. This will ensure her redemption. I myself work with kids, and mostly women, but at least I don’t think of my salvation depending on the relative lack of men under my supervision.
http://blog.logos.com/2011/04/discover_the_godly_womens_collection/
Read the comments. I, for one, boycott these products altogether. I simply think that any product which does not include the most influential bible translations in western history, is not worth it. And I won’t support people who put boundaries around women that they don’t accept for themselves.
Yes, I winced when I saw that. Frankly, Logos has a lot of dross, including that collection. But they also republish worthwhile works such as the Anchor Bible, Hermeneia series, most of the German Bible Society works, etc.
Not quite fair to say that Logos does not include the most influential Bible translations in Western history. the version I own does have some hundred or so translations, including KJV (w/Apocrypha), Luther Bible, Douay-Rheims, Septuagint (Gottingen & Rahlfs), various Targums, various Vulgates, etc. plus the usual range of 20th and 21st century translations (including some translations, such as Fox and Buber-Rosenzweig, that are not necessarily included in other Bible software). The translations do include efforts sponsored by diverse groups (ecumenical, Mainstream, Evangelical, Catholic, Jewish).
They’ve done some terrible stuff in the past (perhaps the worst was putting up a warning notice on the page advertising the TNIV translation), but they have been responsive to complaints (they did take that warning down.)
And, sure, their coverage could much better (they do have a “community pricing” initiative for other classic English Bibles: Geneva, Wycliffe, Tyndale, Coverdale, Matthew, etc., but I’m not sure it will actually get funded) and coverage of English translations seems to be much better than other modern languages.
So there are lots of darts to be thrown, but the company has lots of merit as well.
Thanks for listing all the bibles they do support – it’s quite a range. But I stand by my statement that Erasmus and Pagnini’s Latin bibles underlie all the bibles of the Reformation and they are lacking.
Anyway, I just don’t like to promote a product which seems to have an anti- female bias. It’s just my personal opinion. Also doesn’t fit my budget constraints, since I don’t work in this field.
But I am writing on bible translation, and need Erasmus, Pagnini, Calvin, Julia Smith, Nyland, Alter and many other translations which are not supplied here. Fortunately someone sent me a file for the Buber – R version. 🙂
Actually, I did not list “all” of the translations — just a sampling.
You are right that they don’t have the Erasmus, Pagnini, or Olivétan translations; they are indeed notable omissions (but is there other Bible software that includes them?) Logos definitely has a bias towards English language versions.
You’ll see from the link I gave that they are planning to provide the Julia Smith translation.
There has been clamoring for the Robert Alter translations — not sure whether the problem might not be publisher, though (since those works are under copyright).
I’m not sure that Nyland is sufficiently mainstream as a translator for demand to grow for her translations to be available electronically (which is not to imply that all of Logos’ other translations are mainstream!)
It is true that there are some outspoken individuals I know of who work at Logos who seem to have some strange opinions about women, but (I hope) that is not an official corporate position.
Well, there you are! I don’t use any software. How can you study the history of translation with a big hole in the middle?
Very interesting that they will add the Julia Smith translation. There is a book written recently about this translation, a vindication of her scholarship.
http://books.google.ca/books?id=Lk4E-fSR5PMC&printsec=frontcover&dq=julia+smith+bible&hl=en&sa=X&ei=RHAYUbTyH4GDjAKE2IHADg&ved=0CDMQ6AEwAQ
You are right about Nyland, but it is the most common reason that people email me – to find out more about that translation. Curious. Her notes are quite unique.
I have been explicitly told that Logos does not have an official position against women. Having said that, all the ones that I have had contact with, seem to share the view that women are saved by childbirth, or remaining within the domestic (read “under male headship in the home.”) Nasty stuff.
Logos hosts the Conference called Faithlife Women,
http://faithlifewomen.com/DefinedByGod/?utm_source=faithlifewomen.com&utm_medium=blog&utm_campaign=header
Every single speaker appears to be complementarian, and it is about being a pastor’s wife nothing else. I have never found even the tiniest hint or clue that Logos is open to egalitarianism. Not even a whisper of a hint.
I don’t use any software.
I strongly feel that research in the humanities has now come to embrace the use of computers to the point where young researchers are almost all required to use them. Not all researchers have signed onto the “electronic research” model, but the tide has definitely shifted, particularly among the current generation of graduate students.
At the very least, the availability of databases of classical works (e.g., Perseus) or electronic access to scholarly journals (e.g., JSTOR) has to a large extent replaced (or at least sped up) traditional functions assigned to the library. At a deeper level, computing itself has become a tool used in the humanities (along the theme of Dan Cohen’s [who created Zotero] forthcoming book.
Today, for example, our co-blogger Victoria reported on some research done by James McGrath. In his report, James said:
Now, you raise an excellent point — this software is expensive (and, one might add, so are many scholarly journals, so are many scholarly book [e.g., books published by Brill], so is access to electronic databases, etc.). That is a real problem, and creates very real scholarly inequalities.
I do worry that rather than acting as a democratizing force, the use of computer-based research has a very real potential to increase the caste-based mentality of the academy.
That was a sweeeping statement on my part. I do regularly search the perseus database, and have used the epigraphy database. I just can’t afford access to scholarly journals. Even if I buy a library card, I can’t get access at home. So honestly, there is so much that is out of my reach as a layperson with a modest salary. So, yes, I feel stuck in a low caste.
And to add to all this, in emails with recognized bible scholars, more than once, I notice that some can’t read the abbreviations and footnotes of standard lexicons properly. So I feel greatly disadvantaged with respect to some who are not even good scholars.
However, there is an additional point. The really reliable electronic copies are facsimile copies. How else can you know you are seeing the real thing.
And Logos has its own lexicon, which will surely be biased against women, since the only women I can find reference to on the site are wives of comp pastors.
I prefer using online databases and resources hosted by universities. I don’t like to be reminded of the subordination of women when I am researching.
Logos does publish some feminist titles.
(I’m not saying that their number is as great as the number of anti-feminist works they publish.)
Great! Thanks. This is good news. Perhaps it is to make the product acceptable in academia, not sure. In the Faithlife community, women are only the wives of famous complementation preachers. I don’t see evidence of anything else. Seeing the name Logos is just an unpleasant reminder of my welcome to the blogosphere by the “childbearing” crew, some of whom just happened to be Logos employees.
I cannot speak to “Faithlife” — I have not used it. (Like you, I also have my doubts about it.)
I did see that Logos published its own “Lexham” lexicon, but I have not used it — Logos seems to have a fairly wide range of lexicons, including LSJM and BDB.
Not those, but this –
http://www.logos.com/bible-sense-lexicon
Faithlife is part of the Logos community, something they seem to sponsor.
I cannot speak to the “Bible Sense Lexicon,” because I do not use it.
Faithlife is indeed sponsored by Logos, and it is their effort to support social networking. I suspect I would find that a great distraction, which is why I mentioned I have my doubts about it.
Oh, I just want to make clear that I am not seriously asking others to boycott this product. In fact, if I have a sticky problem that I feel needs this software to solve it, may I email you?