Bible Software in the Classroom

by Jul 14, 2008Uncategorized3 comments

My teachers didn’t go through school with Bible software. Yours probably didn’t either. If you’re a seminary student (my target audience for this blog), that means you’re part of the first generation of students to have the power of BibleWorks at your fingertips not only for papers but for class time—even personal devotions.

Who’s going to be your model for how you use Bible software? I almost answered, “Your model shouldn’t be a Logos salesperson.” But then I remembered my respected friend Phil Gons and his good tech knowledge and advice… I think what my first thought was driving at, though, is that there are few people (in my experience) who both 1) know and use and love Bible software and 2) openly speak of its dangers. I aspire to be one of those people (and I’m not saying you aren’t one, Phil!).

With that aspiration in mind, I ask you to make a connection for yourself. Please read this post if you missed it a few days ago:

…you’ve simply got to read this piece on the blog medium’s message by Andrew Sullivan, or at least this summary, which would lead you to this article on PBS, which might lead you to this one in the NY Times. UPDATE: And here’s the Atlantic article that started Sullivan on this tack. (HT: Andy Naselli).

Now, how can the experiential insights of Andrew Sullivan, et al., be applied to our use of Logos, Accordance, and BibleWorks? Feel free to comment, my blog readers. Both of you.

Read More 

Review: Why I Preach from the Received Text

Review: Why I Preach from the Received Text

Why I Preach from the Received Text is an anthology of personal testimonies more than it is a collection of careful arguments. It is not intended to be academic, and I see nothing necessarily wrong with that. But it does make countless properly academic claims, and...

The First Thing I Ever Wrote That I Still Have

This is so random, and I don't know who would care—but I just stumbled across the very first document I saved in what ultimately became my Dropbox/Academics folder. It was an exercise I wrote for an English class in high school. I was 16 and 3 mos. What I find...

A Little Help for Your Charitableness from Kevin DeYoung

A Little Help for Your Charitableness from Kevin DeYoung

There are few figures on the national evangelical scene that I like and trust more than Kevin DeYoung. I think he nails the balance between, on the one hand, graciousness and fairness and charity and, on the other (can anything be on the other hand from...

Review: The Power Broker, by Robert Caro

Review: The Power Broker, by Robert Caro

The Power Broker: Robert Moses and the Fall of New York by Robert A. Caro My rating: 5 of 5 stars Robert Caro is fascinated by power. He has given his life to exploring how it is gained and kept. And in Robert Moses, the subject of this epic book, power looks like the...

Leave a comment.

3 Comments
  1. James

    I definitely feel the rub about the hyperlink mindset. I can read posts on GReader all day, but I’m finding myself needing to apply extra discipline when I read a paper book.

    On your question, Mark, about the blog-defined mindset applying to the use of BW, Logos, et al, to Scripture studies, I think there are some dangers to guard against.

    One is the danger of subconsciously equating Google searches with word searches. We google a phrase and assume that we now have all the available information on the topic. Word studies of that depth are only part of the theological study – much more can be gained for concept studies. As much as I love BW7, nothing it offers comes close to reading and re-reading the passages under consideration for detail.

    Another danger is the easy searchability that comes from electronic library materials (yes, that can be a danger!). A heavy reliance on “search function” research puts the reader in jeopardy of basing conclusions on snippets of others’ conclusions – without reading or understanding the work that went into their writing. It’s the danger of laziness – letting someone else do the analysis & synthesis and grabbing bits of their conclusions without bothering to check their data or process. (Plus, you learn a lot more when you are forced to read the other pages around the “necessary” portion of your commentary!)

  2. dtjohnso

    Sullivan’s point is helpful although he seems to offer little beyond an update of Postman’s thesis in “Amusing Ourselves to Death.”

    To an extent, general magazine articles on Bible software are as unhelpful as sales pitches. Another general comparison of BW, Accordance and Logos perpetuates the fallacy that somehow the three all “do the same thing” and still continue to exist independently in the Bible software market, a narrow market with small profit margins.

    More specific articles demonstrating specific exegetical procedures with a given software package can be helpful, but it’s hard to get much use from those unless it actually illustrates something I’m trying to do at the moment.

    Usually specific articles are more helpful when I have a task I’m trying to accomplish already and am looking for a solution. I’ve probably actually learned more about software this way than I’ve ever retained from software demo sessions or generic articles comparing software packages.

  3. battlesman

    If I would have not read the comments on this post, I would have written exactly what James wrote.

    For my Sunday service sermons this summer I have purposefully started each sermon with my open Bible (non-reference, non-study bible) and a blank sheet of ruled paper (they actually still make sheets of paper still that aren’t on Microsoft Word!). That way I am simply noting the context and story-line before I dive into the Greek/Hebrew or commentaries.

    It ain’t a perfected system, but I find it helps me when sermon prepping.