Things You Probably Didn't Know About Logos Bible Software

My view: In principle it doesn’t matter to me if the company is secular or increasingly secular vs. a “Christian company.” But there’s the matter of eventual outcomes. It seems likely that over time business decisions are going to veer toward the bottom line/market and not necessarily toward what really makes for better ministry. (Assuming the article is correct.)

Arguably, that’s already happened some. I personally find the latest versions of Logos to be too cluttered for my taste (I’m on v10 though). A lot depends on how you want to use it, but I think at some point they are going to have to offer some toggles to switch to “streamlined Logos” vs. “little, jam-packed menus everywhere Logos.”

Call them “regular folks mode” and “advanced nerd mode.” 😉 Or “for dummies mode.” I don’t mind claiming the “Dummy” title if it gets me something where I am fighting the interface less and can focus on what I want to do.

But I have to think the bigger problem is that one’s view of the Bible has to shape how you develop a tool like that, doesn’t it? At some point, it seems like it would.

But what to do? You can’t exactly export your Logos titles and tools to some alternative. And what alternatives even exist?

I'm torn on that part of the article, as one of the things I tend to watch as a deacon is whether the ROI on things we buy for our church works. All too often, we end up "doing ministry" at a cost that really doesn't make sense--underutilized camps, unused kitchen equipment, etc.. So it makes perfect sense to me that the former CEO of Logos would say that there has to be a profit motive. And really, a lot of us "fundagelicals" need to get the hang of paying for things of value--the fact that we don't makes us easy prey for "ministries" whose products are free, and a bargain at a few dollars less, so to speak.

What does bother me a bit more is that there isn't any faith requirement for employment, and that's because we know from bitter experience (the original liberal theology move into the seminaries) what happens when we don't bar the doors from those who deny fundamental doctrines. For Logos, I can imagine that you could end up with issues of which references/documents are linked.

What's the alternative? Well, if you want the whole library and easy automated search and that, I don't know what's reliable and such. But that noted, a great way of addressing the reality that some do "put their fingers on the scale of truth" is to have a backup plan. Mine is a few hundred pounds of books that no firmware engineer can change.

The laborer is worthy of his hire. Is the author complaining about Christian schools, colleges, or seminaries charging tuition?

He apparently has issues with Christian publishers charging royalties. I guess Christian authors / publishers should not get paid for their work. They should give it away for free.

I’ve used Logos since Logos 5. I was introduced to it through seminary. There is currently no other Bible study tool that is as powerful and advanced as Logos. If you don’t need the horsepower, stick to e-sword.

It’s best if software specifically designed to assist Christian ministry is free and open source, prioritizing access over profit, even if this is not a biblical requirement.

Says who? Stop ripping off the laborer! I see he tries to rebut this response here. Sorry, not buying it.

So the premise of the article is that 1) the company is evil because looking at negative glassdoor reviews from disgruntled employees is a great resource to determine whether a company is evil or not, and 2) profits and capitalism are terrible.

So the premise of the article is that 1) the company is evil because looking at negative glassdoor reviews from disgruntled employees is a great resource to determine whether a company is evil or not, and 2) profits and capitalism are terrible.

I wouldn't frame the article that way. The author is part of a Christian app development team who's purpose statement reads: "Our purpose here is to highlight and exalt the radical generosity of God’s heart, confront the commercialization of Christianity, and promote the biblical teaching that ministry should be supported but never sold." All the developers are dedicated to "confronting the commercialization of Scripture."

The article's major premise is that Logos uses a for-profit business model and is no longer owned by Christians. The minor premise is that Scripture forbids profiting in any way from the Scriptures. Therefore, Logos is violating Scripture by profiting from the sale of Bible study resources.

If you read through the Selling Jesus website, you'll see they oppose copyrights on Bible translations, charging for biblical counseling, charging for Christian conferences, charging for a seminary education, charging for any Christian resource, etc. Everything about Christianity and Christian ministry should be free.

It would be interesting to examine the argument against selling a Bible-focused service as the means of funding it. Seems like that would be a hard case to make. I haven’t a chance to dig into that.

Where there is value, there is cost. So the question on that part is just what is ethical for recovering the costs?

It’s obvious to anyone who uses Logos for even five minutes that they are not just selling Bibles. An enormous amount of work has gone into developing tools and integrations and syntheses and so on. It’s an analysis tool. So—admitting I haven’t read the case against profiting on that yet—one obvious counterargument is “We’re not profiting off the Bible; we’re profiting off of our work on tools for analyzing the Bible.”

But sometimes I run into Christians who think there is something inherently evil about profit, or at least something inherently tainted about it. I don’t know if the Selling Jesus folks are in that camp. When I’ve seen that attitude, it was an unexamined assumption, and if you challenge it, they have a hard time explaining why enjoying the fruits of one’s labors or even accumulating a fortune to take care of your kids and grandkids should be seen as unethical or ugly in some way.

Well, human greed is ugly, sure. But earning a profit and saving up are not inherently greedy things to do.

And the Gospels show that you can be poor, and not earning a profit, and still be greedy.

The reality is that since we do not know what tomorrow holds, earning a surplus when you can is just wise—preparation for when you can’t. But can it be motivated by greed? Sure. But it can be motivated in ways antithetical to greed.

So… no I don’t fault Logos (or its parent company) for earning a profit. I’m more concerned about how the secular factors might hinder the product and, indirectly, the people and ministries that use it.

So… no I don’t fault Logos (or its parent company) for earning a profit. I’m more concerned about how the secular factors might hinder the product and, indirectly, the people and ministries that use it.

I agree with your concern. It will interesting to see the development path for Logos go forward. They have transitioned to a subscription model, so you now have to pay them an annual renewal to keep your application up to date with the latest features. There are certain features / resources that they make available to you that aren't available to those who don't sign up for the subscription. However, they've said that the resources you've purchased will always be available regardless if you sign up for the subscription.

I never purchased a curated library from Logos. So, most of my resources are handpicked Greek or Hebrew lexicons and grammars, systematic theologies, and lots of commentaries. I do subscribe to their academic journals, so I have access to both the historical and up-to-date scholarly journals covering theology and biblical studies.

Overall, I've been very pleased with Logos. It is expensive, but honestly using it is like having a research assistant at your fingertips. Like I said earlier, there is nothing close to it for Bible study or research. To expect someone to develop a Bible study / research tool this advanced and content rich for free is really comical.

The developers themselves on Selling Jesus acknowledge it is impractical to create a public domain / open source app like Logos. If you don't have content, it's of little worth. If you want content, you have to get permission / pay royalties to publishers. Like it or not, that's how it works. So, you find someone who's willing to pay the bill to develop the app and supply the content, then give the final product away for free. Or, you ask the users of the app to pay for the content and the continued development and support of the app.

Of course, if you believe this model violates Scripture, then you're left with e-sword and whatever is in the public domain. E-sword was my Bible study software before I went to seminary. It's good. But it's very limited in content.

Yeah, I wouldn't call Logos profiting from the commercialization of Scripture. Anymore than I would call purchasing a paperback commentary as commercialization of Scripture. I think people can go too far in this line of reasoning. I am holding in my hand my Biblical Hebrew study cards for my MDiv. They are manufactured by Carddia a for-profit, secular owned company. Is that wrong? I do agree that for profit will generally provide better material and product. Non-profit only succeeds when there is sufficient passion, resources and donations. It also does nothing to address greed. There are CEO's of non-profits who make more than $5M a year off of their position. There are CEO's of for profit companies that make no annual compensation. The idea that profit is wrong, is pervasive in the radical left ideology, especially within the younger generation, curious what drives this group of people, because typically you don't see it as a strong statement in the right leaning conservative evangelical sphere. Greed, yes. Profit? Not so much.

Yeah, I wouldn't call Logos profiting from the commercialization of Scripture. Anymore than I would call purchasing a paperback commentary as commercialization of Scripture.

Their position is that as long as you don't charge for said paperback commentary, you're Scripturally okay. Of course, you can ask for donations for the paperback commentary; but, you can't require someone to pay you for it. That's when it becomes a violation of Scripture.

Their position is that as long as you don’t charge for said paperback commentary, you’re Scripturally okay. Of course, you can ask for donations for the paperback commentary; but, you can’t require someone to pay you for it. That’s when it becomes a violation of Scripture.

Except the laborer is worthy of his (or her) hire. Biblically you cannot expect people to work and not get paid for it. And writing is work, as is editing, typesetting, proofing, artwork, etc.

Except the laborer is worthy of his (or her) hire. Biblically you cannot expect people to work and not get paid for it. And writing is work, as is editing, typesetting, proofing, artwork, etc.

This is true, except when it comes to work related to the Scriptures or Christian ministry. Then, you should do the work without expectation of payment, relying only on the freewill donations of Christians.

If you ask for remuneration for your work, then you are guilty of peddling the gospel and selling Jesus.

I can't speak for the folks at Selling Jesus, but I've heard this position articulated before. The argument isn't that workers should not be paid for their labor but that the church should support the work by paying the laborers and making the resources available free of charge to the user.

pvawter,

I am wondering if they understand the entire economic model? The church isn't doing it for free. Members of the church are paying tithes and offerings out of their income. That goes into the church, which while not necessarily for profit, is paying individuals (staff, pastors....) a wage to do the work. In addition, the church is paying for profit institutions money to fulfill the work. For example, if the church builds an app, they are paying a staff member or a 3rd party company to build the app. They may also pay for profit companies like amazon to host the app. Now they may give the app away for free to others, but in essence it isn't really free. It is just not being paid by the user. Instead it is being paid by the congregants or the members of that church. Essentially a socialist model :). But even in that model, for profit companies are getting money and the members of the church are having to pay for profit companies to provide the services. In the end it is the same, it is just where you are punting the costs and the profit. Now granted the church may not be commanding the salary levels or the profit margins that a for profit may be doing, but that is just related to magnitudes, the structure is still the same. Lastly, when you build something, you also need to maintain it and continually develop it. This is where freeware or church developed items struggle, because the cost to maintain and improve upon it often dwarfs the initial costs and/or the capability of the church to fund it. This is often times why freeware may be good enough, but oftentimes is not great. Logos has gotten a profit, but significant development continues to go into year after year, and that level of work is costly. It also requires larger funds and institution to negotiate deals for that content to be in Logos, which is often outside the purview or capabilities of a local church. I get there concern, but also recognize that there needs to be a balance and being too "black or white" is not as helpful.

This is true, except when it comes to work related to the Scriptures or Christian ministry. Then, you should do the work without expectation of payment, relying only on the freewill donations of Christians.

If you ask for remuneration for your work, then you are guilty of peddling the gospel and selling Jesus.

I assume this is tongue in cheek. But the reality is that everything (except taxes I suppose) is a free will donation. You are free to buy something or not. You are not free to simply take it without paying for it, or at least without someone paying for it and gifting it to you. There are a lot of companies I don’t donate to because I have no interest in what they would give me in exchange. That’s the way things work.

The argument isn’t that workers should not be paid for their labor but that the church should support the work by paying the laborers and making the resources available free of charge to the user.

A church is free to do that and some do, including, perhaps most notably Bethlehem and Desiring God who make all of Piper’s works available for free. And Piper was pretty famous for not making much money from his writing. But such things are gifts. The end user has no right to expect such a thing. And in many cases the church can’t really practically manage something like this.