Why I bought Logos not Accordance

If you’re a Bible College student, minister, or just generally interested in purchasing some top quality Bible software for Mac – then I suggest you read this post alongside this post from two days ago. Buying Bible software, especially if you’re a student, is a big budgetary decision. Thanks to a job I lined up over the college break I was in a position to spend some money on some software that’ll hopefully make Greek, Hebrew, and essay writing a little less arduous this year.

The Situation

My wife and I are both studying full time at Bible College (Queensland Theological College). We are both, predominantly, Mac users. We both have iPhones. And one of the other pre-conditions in my negotiations with my wife re taking a job over summer was that if the new iPad looks good, I’ll get one. So finding software that plays nice with Macs and their offspring was a factor. I also have a desktop PC at home that I don’t use as much as I used to. But that I still like. Especially if I’m playing with any design stuff.

So right off the bat I ruled out BibleWorks – because I wanted a native solution. I don’t like parallel operating systems or emulators. I don’t know why. It just seems to add an extra degree of difficulty.

The Hive Mind

I didn’t want to make a purchase decision of this magnitude on my own. I don’t like the idea of buying anything without some idea of what I’m getting my hands on. My church history lecturer has probably the world’s biggest brain. And he recommended Logos. He’s not the computer geek type (though he does run Logos on his netbook, iPad, and office computer – he only got the iPad at Christmas time). He had no complaints about speed. Because he is a real person, not somebody who wants everything at the tip of their fingers immediately. My college principal uses Accordance, he’s a Mac man, and it was chosen for him by the tech guru at Tyndale House, where he was previously employed. He’s very happy with it – and says, alongside his Diogenes Greek software, the program has significantly reduced the time taken to conduct language work (and he works a fair bit in that sphere – his PhD involved research into just about every extant written work from Corinth and Alexandria (and this was BC – before computers)). So that’s one all. My friend Jeremy Wales also uses Logos, and his brain is almost as big as our church history lecturer’s.

Not content with these recommendations from friends who used one, or the other, I put the call out to Facebook and Twitter. I love Web 2.0. I got a great string of responses from both. The Twitter responses were particularly in favour of Accordance because the @accordance account retweeted my tweet. Here are some notable tweetsponses:

  • @nm_campbell I tried both but rather Accordance. I just wish Accordance worked better on a PC. But on a mac -Accordance!
  • @nm_campbell I’ve had Accordance for years and love it. Developers are very active in the community and quick to listen to user requests.
  • @nm_campbell If working in original languages, @AccordanceBible hands down. If not, depends on your needs.
  • @nm_campbell I assume you have a Mac. Whatever you decide, be assured that you will not make a mistake if these two are your choices.
  • @nm_campbell accordance is better for getting into the text (faster too). Logos is better if you want tons of books and commentaries.
  • @nm_campbell went with @AccordanceBible because it was what I needed: fast and without a ton of stuff I never use. Both are good though.
  • (from @accordancebible) @nm_campbell we’re also going to be in Brisbane for a training seminar May 9th. Great opp to learn from the best http://t.co/h4kZ6hR
  • @nm_campbell using Acc since 5.x(?) & used Logos in Seminary. Hate Acc’s UI, but LOVE results. Indispensable: it’s like having X-ray vision!
  • @nm_campbell you may want to check out this forum post. Users chiming in on the reasons they chose @accordancebible http://t.co/3xbXWGh
  • @nm_campbell in case you haven’t read it, this piece is good, too: http://t.co/EQs1H8I

Happy campers. Nobody really has anything negative to say about either product. Which is a good sign. Accordance has a good rep for being amazingly speedy. And both companies seem to have embraced social media marketing in a big way. I was in no way prepared for what happened next. But first. To the responses on Facebook.

  • We went with Accordance. Has been stress-free thus far.
  • Whatever you decide, buy the biggest library you can on first purchase.It’s the incremental pieces where it gets expensive. Buying Greek and then Hebrew (for example) is much dearer than getting them all in one hit.
  • I can’t comment on accordance. But with Logos you need to start with scholars at a minimum for original languages study, lower levels come with only very low level tools and supporting databases for this type of work. Original Languages library is also ok, but it is limited in breadth of resources e.g. no commentaries so hence scholars is a better starting point. The negative side of base scholars is while it has breadth for a more general purpose library it is limited in grammars etc and you need to go for silver scholars to pick up the broad range of grammars etc
    Logos also has an iPhone 4 app, and a Android App is under development so you can access the majority of your library on the go ( a few publisher’s were holding out on licensing rights for users to access both on computer and mobile platforms). Logos also has a web platform under development so you can access your library from any terminal that has access to the internet ( http://biblia.com/ ). No extra charge for access your library from either of these platforms. Logos also allows you to use your library from either MAC or Windows, you don’t have to pay to switch between platforms.
    And of course there is also an iPad app as well which you can access your library from… And they do offer the option of a 12 month payment plan on your purchase so you don’t have to pay for the full package all in one hit…
    A couple of blogs I know that do comparisons between these pieces of software are:
    http://bibleandtech.blogspot.com/
    http://www.biblicalexegesis.org/
  • Depends what you want it for. Accordance was made for language work, and works better than Logos at that. Logos was made initially for reading online, so does that better. Both added the other option but do their native task best. I generally hate reading books on the computer, but you have a kindle so might not be an issue. In terms of books I much prefer when sermoning to have a heap of commentaries out lying everywhere for comparison. Plus, any books should last the extent of my ministry. I don’t care about digital storage in this instance. That is all.
  • It’s worth considering how commercialized logos is, too: the app’s homepage, their emails, their twitter feed are all pushing more resources all the time.If you struggle with self-control on book purchases, this could be unhelpful.I’ve found logos to be easier and more intuitive to work with, but there’s a new version of accordance I haven’t tried yet: maybe it’s easier.
  • It’s worth chatting to the sales people at accordance – they’re very helpful, and can give you an idea around current and upcoming titles.
  • Bible Works was the rage when i was at college. has it fallen out of favour?
  • Bibleworks is still kicking strong, but to run on a MAC you need to use virtualization software. Logos and Accordance run native on MAC. Bibleworks and WORDSearch are now just starting to work together, with modules now being to developed to run on both platforms (only 6 resources so far). Bibleworks is great for OL but lacks the breadth and depth of Logos, so they are clearly looking for a way to address that , which is also indication of how far Logos has come in its OL tools and databases, that Bibleworks now feels they need to expand their business model beyond being OL.

These two strings of responses gave me a lot to think about. And at that point I turned to my trusty steed. This blog. To see if any of my readers had any advice, or experience. And wow. When I said that both companies have embraced marketing via social media in a big way. I mean it. Very sharp. Reps from both Accordance and Logos joined the discussion to make sure that any of the misconceptions created by any of the previous comments from users were cleared up. And, in an even more impressive step, Dan from Logos emailed me with some personalised (and very Godly) advice. He basically sold the other guy’s product. Here’s a snippet (he said he would prefer me not to post his whole email).

“All I can say about the choice is, why choose? Why not get what you need from both? Even if you decided to go with Accordance, Logos has over 12,000 titles that you could pick and choose from. Our software engine is free, so you can just buy the titles you want.”

I think that’s an incredible example of graceful sales and marketing. He basically, in that paragraph, has encouraged me not to blow my money on stuff I won’t use, and suggested I go with the other guy as well. Which, in a bizarre way, was probably the biggest factor in my decision to use Logos exclusively at this point. It’s quite possible that I’ll decide I want a faster language tool and end up getting a hold of Accordance. It has a very enthusiastic fan base.

But the conversation in the comment thread is enlightening – and I think highlights the real problem I had with Accordance. Accordance is designed for the Mac. By all accounts it is intuitive to use and seamless in its implementation. Its website is not. Its website looks like the software is designed for the PC. I made the comment in the last post that the Logos website looks like a product designed for PC and marketed for Mac, while Accordance is the other way around. It is just really difficult to intuitively figure out how to add bits and pieces to the package, and clunky looking. There are a lot of misconceptions going around about Accordance – as evidenced by the times their company rep stepped in to correct misinformation in that thread. Even for Accordance users. And I think part of the problem is that information is so much harder to come by on their website. Neither site is perfect at this point, and the signal to noise problem of throwing my search out to everybody and being influenced by their answers may have made the process of finding information more difficult. But in order to find out whether I could install the software on my wife’s laptop as well as my own was a matter of finding an answer to that specific question in the FAQ section (which I admittedly found pretty easily by typing licensing into the search box – though the answer on that page suggests that if both of us are studying full time we both have to buy licenses, but I got a different vibe in the comments on my post). There’s no obvious statement about licensing restrictions anywhere on any of the product pages, which would have made the process a little simpler. I made a couple of comments about Logos being more extensible in the meta of that last post – which others disagreed with. But I ran a couple of little tests – looking to add specific books, or commentary series to the software – and here are the results of my query (looking for commentaries by Ben Witherington III): Accordance v Logos – in both cases I simply used the search box on the site. I’ve switched over to digital distribution (ok, I still like the tangibility of a book – but the convenience of digital means I’m buying many more resources electronically – if either of theses platforms offered some sort of Kindle support I’d be absolutely sold, though an iPad with Kindle and Logos installed will fix all of that).

Why I ultimately chose Logos

Rick from Accordance did a great job in the comment thread allaying concerns I had about the Accordance platform. Some of my initial objections to Accordance (licensing for both Robyn and I across all our computers, the availability of other resources, and the nature of the program – ie that it wasn’t just a language tool that had tacked on a library). I essentially decided that Logos and Accordance were both equally viable products. Offering a great service to people wanting to study the Bible.

These were the factors in my decision, all other things being equal:

  1. Price – I was convinced by the wisdom of friends who suggested going for the biggest bundle I could afford in the initial purchase, and Logos offers a 30% discount, which mean that the Silver Scholars package came within the ball park of the rack price for the Accordance bundle I was looking at, and the rack price for the base level Scholars pack in Logos.
  2. Technology – In the end having a PC to throw in the mix with two Macs was a factor. I could have used an emulator on my PC, but I just don’t want technologically clunky solutions. Especially when it comes to support issues. Having a third party piece of software as a middle man is no fun.
  3. Upgradability – I am convinced that Logos’ strength as a distribution channel for further works is greater than Accordance’s (I’m convinced Accordance is faster and better suited to the Mac environment it’s designed for).
  4. Marketing. Logos wins the marketing war. And I’m a marketer at heart. I switched to Apple for its aesthetic as much as for the technology. Form just edges out function for me. And that’s a personal preference.

I want to thank both David and Rick from Accordance, and Dan from Logos for the way they carried out the conversation here, and for taking an interest in seeing students like me get the software that suits. And I’d urge you to read their comments and make your own decision when it comes to these products on careful research, and thinking about your needs. That was the best, and most consistent, advice I received in the process.

 

 

Bible Study Software: To buy, or not to buy, and if to buy, which to buy

Accordance, or Logos. That is the question.



One of the perks of having slaved away over a hot computer over the holidays in my holiday job (more on that later) is that I can afford to invest in some Bible study software that will hopefully make my attempts to grapple with Greek, Hebrew, and essay writing, a little bit easier.

There are three options out there (fourth if you include just using the interwebs).

I’ve basically ruled out BibleWorks – because getting it to work on a Mac requires clunky parallel operating systems and I pretty much flat out refuse to do that – why would I go back to an inferior operating system? If I were a Windows user I may well go with it – because it has the benefit of being a cheap and easy language parser. But, because I’m a superficial marketing driven purchaser I can’t get past the ugly website and shoddy looking, WIndows 95esque user interface.

Next option, by price, is Accordance – and specifically the Scholars Premier + Library Premier option, currently on special for $599. Now. Accordance is designed for Mac. But I don’t like its website. It was designed for language work, and kind of tagged on the library stuff later. Twitter loves it. I put a call out yesterday and almost every response I got (possibly because the @accordance account retweeted my tweet) was in favour of Accordance.

 

The option I’m currently leaning towards is Logos. Logos just looks schmick. And it has multiplatform support in built. And the ability to add module after module of good stuff. Accordance has modules as well – but it doesn’t have the same publishing base (as far as I can tell) that Logos obviously offers. The base level Scholars pack is $629. It just looks schmick too. And as a marketer I like that. It looks like a Bible software package marketed by Apple, rather than made for Apple.

 

My college principal, a Mac user, uses Accordance, while possibly the widest reading lecturer at college uses Logos. Both have suggested their product of choice is a good choice.

Should I flip a coin?

Some helpful links if you’re facing this decision:

Arthur wrote a good little post pondering the merits of these packages here. There’s a lot of bloat – but the bloat might be useful if ever I do decide to pursue further study (a possible option in my mind).

This Ligonier comparison is worth a read too.

Lord of the Rings as a loser’s history

The task of writing history goes to the victors – so we can be sure Lord of the Rings is full of pro-Gandalf bias and pretty much dismiss anything it says about hobbits, wizards or elves. They’re the real bad guys. The invaders and the oppressors of Middle Earth. What you’ve read is just propaganda. So here’s the alternative history – written by a Russian named Kirill Eskov, this guy named ymarkov wrote an English translation (here’s a PDF).

Ring-Wraiths
Image Credit: Flickr
Here’s an excerpt.

“Should our reader be minimally acquainted with analysis of major military campaigns and examine the map of Middle Earth, he would easily ascertain that all actions of both new coalitions (Mordor-Isengard and Gondor-Rohan) were dictated by merciless strategic logic, undergirded by Mordor’s dread of being cut off from its food sources. Through Gandalf’s efforts the center of Middle Earth turned into a highly unstable geopolitical “sandwich” with Mordor and Isengard the bread and Gondor and Rohan the bacon. Most ironic was the fact that the Mordor coalition, which wanted nothing but the preservation of the status quo, was in an ideal position for an offensive war (whereby it could immediately force its opponents to fight on two fronts), but in a highly unfavorable one for a defensive war (when the united opponents could conduct a blitzkrieg, crushing foes one by one).”

Salon.com has a review of the book.

The elves are the bad guys. Gandalf is basically Hitler. Here’s some more from the book.

“To make a long story short: the situation was highly unfavorable, but we have managed, at the cost of all those sacrifices, to shield the Mordorian civilization, and it had made it out of the crib. Another fifty, maybe seventy years, and you would have completed the industrial revolution, and then no one would’ve been able to touch you. From that point on the Elves would’ve dwelled quietly in their Enchanted Forests, not getting in anyone’s way, while the rest of Middle Earth would’ve by and large gotten onto your path. And so, realizing that they were about to lose the contest, the wizards of the White Council decided on a monstrous move: to unleash a war of total destruction against Mordor, to involve the Elves directly, and to pay them with the Mirror.”

“They paid the Elves with the Mirror?!”

“Yes. It was absolute madness; the head of the White Council himself, Saruman, a foresighted and prudent man, fought this plan to the last, and quit the Council when it was adopted after all. The Council is now headed by Gandalf, the architect of the ‘final solution to the Mordorian problem.’”

“Wait, which Saruman is that? The king of Isengard?”

“The same. He formed a temporary alliance with us, since he understood right away what those games with the denizens of the Enchanted Forests mean to Middle Earth. He used to warn the White Council for the longest time: ‘Using the Elves in our struggle against Mordor is akin to burning down the house to get rid of roaches.’ And that’s exactly how it came out. Mordor lies in ruins, and the Mirror is in Lórien, with the Elvish Queen Galadriel; soon the Elves will brush the White Council away like crumbs off the table and rule Middle Earth as they see fit.”

Happy Birthday Link

The Zelda franchise is 25 today. Did anybody else play the NES version? It was awesome. It had a gold cartridge. So many hours of my childhood were spent searching for the 8th and 9th labyrinths (I never found them. This was before internet walkthroughs).

GeekDad and the Technologizer have more.

Zelda was the first game to offer a saved game facility, thanks to that little onboard battery.

There are some songs that you hope are a joke…

I think this is the Pokemon theme song? Maybe? Just because of the “got to save them all” line.

Just awful.

Playable Angry Birds Cake

Firstly, the concept of a playable cake, in itself, is pretty cool. But look at this….

Thanks to Amy, who sent me this video.

Westboro v Anonymous

This is just too cool for school. The Internet’s favourite hackers (well, if the internet is an anti-social teenage boy who likes playing WoW) Anonymous have turned their ire towards the Phelps family Christianity’s favourite “they’re crazier than me” church.

This could get interesting. They wrote an open letter (posted in full at Jesus Needs New PR).

“We, the collective super-consciousness known as ANONYMOUS – the Voice of Free Speech & the Advocate of the People – have long heard you issue your venomous statements of hatred, and we have witnessed your flagrant and absurd displays of inimitable bigotry and intolerant fanaticism. We have always regarded you and your ilk as an assembly of graceless sociopaths and maniacal chauvinists & religious zealots, however benign, who act out for the sake of attention & in the name of religion…

Being such aggressive proponents for the Freedom of Speech & Freedom of Information as we are, we have hitherto allowed you to continue preaching your benighted gospel of hatred and your theatrical exhibitions of, not only your fascist views, but your utter lack of Christ-like attributes…

ANONYMOUS cannot abide this behavior any longer. The time for us to be idle spectators in your inhumane treatment of fellow Man has reached its apex, and we shall now be moved to action. Thus, we give you a warning: Cease & desist your protest campaign in the year 2011, return to your homes in Kansas, & close your public Web sites.

Should you ignore this warning, you will meet with the vicious retaliatory arm of ANONYMOUS: We will target your public Websites, and the propaganda & detestable doctrine that you promote will be eradicated; the damage incurred will be irreversible, and neither your institution nor your congregation will ever be able to fully recover. ”

Them’s fighting words. So Westboro Baptist responded.

Westboro’s websites are now down. Time to break out the popcorn.

What do you call a segway with one wheel?*

It has been some time since my last Segway post. My name is Nathan Campbell and I’m a gyroscopaholic.

This one only has one wheel. And is slimlined.

Nice. Though I have about zero percent chance of successfully riding one.

Via Cool Hunting

* These guys called it a solowheel. Boring.

For Mitch, my brother-in-law…

My brother-in-law Mitch takes great pride in not reading this blog. He’s only interested in “real” websites by “qualified” people. Or something. I think he knows it’s awesome and addictive and he deliberately avoids it. This might be more like it.

Sadly, he’ll read this because his name is in the title.

Via Gary’s blog.

Serendipity via message in a bottle

This is an amazing story.

British man Richard Morwood discovered his girlfriend was the same girl whose message in a bottle he answered 30 years ago. Mandy English was just 13 when she hurled the note requesting a pen pal into the sea during a 1979 school visit to Scotland.

Two years later, Morwood – then just six years old – spotted the glass bottle on the beach and sent a reply by postcard. English never wrote back, but while sorting through keepsakes last week, she found the 1981 card and realised its sender had the same name as Morwood, her boyfriend since June.

This has been all over the actual news, and it’s not on snopes (after a cursory glance). So I’m going to believe that it’s true. Because skepticism is depressing.

Samurai v Shadow

My new week’s resolution was to post less YouTube.

This video killed that almost straight away.

Bonus. This Wolverine v Hand graphic novel/video thing is cool.

Wolverine Vs The Hand from Gary Shore on Vimeo.

Both are from one cool thing a day.

Awesome coffee tour

Five cafes. 11 shots. One chemex. Three friends (and me). One morning. Crazy times.

Here’s a slideshow.

I’ll be reviewing the tour and a couple of the cafes individually over at thebeanstalker.com tomorrow. In the meantime – you should order some beans off me.

Here’s a photo my friend, coffee companion, and photographer extraordinaire Steven Tran took of me at Veneziano Caffe in West End.

Liveblog: The King of Limbs: My first listen

Sometimes all-caps are ok. King of Limbs is out early. Get it. Got it. Good. Lets talk (in the comments).

Slight language warning on this one… sadly it’s the line that made me choose this song to accompany this post.

“You want me, well come on and break the door down.”

Here’s my liveblog of the first listen to King Of Limbs (a title that sounds a little bit like a Stephen King novel):
Track 1: Bloom
Opens with weird rhythm. By the middle of the track the beat is starting to sound a little like raindrops on a tin roof or something. Not as listenable as early Radiohead, but typical of anything post Hail to the Thief (and by that I mean In Rainbows and Thom Yorke’s The Eraser. The raindrop effect is a little emphasised towards the end where the sound is dramatically similar to actual rain. Albeit electronic rain.

Track 2: Morning Mr Magpie
Guitars. Actual guitars. Possibly looped on something computeresque. It sounds like a proper song. Robyn says it sounds like they put an ADHD kid on the drums. Better than Bloom. I reckon. Sounds like a bit of theremin in the background. Guitar riff at one point reminds me of one of my favourite Radiohead songs. I Might Be Wrong. Though, I might be wrong.

So far it sounds like the album is set in a creepy garden.

Track 3: Little by Little
More guitars, slightly Beck-like drums. A little bit acoustic. Moving closer towards “radio single” territory. But still not quite there. Still a bit of weirdness. Sounds like some of the instruments are kitchen implements.

“Little by little, by hook or by crook… I’m such a tease and you’re such a flirt”

Very layered. I like this one best of the three. So far. I think. So does Robyn.

Track 4: Feral
Almost immediately reminds me of Like Spinning Plates. But, Like Spinning Plates performed by a DJ having some sort of fit.

This album, so far, is probably the love child of Amnesiac and In Rainbows. Neither of which are my favourite Radiohead albums – but both of which have their place. I liked it better when Radiohead were angsty loners desperate to be loved. Not self-assured loners determined to be weird.

Track 5: Lotus Flower
Robyn asks “have you played much Radiohead to me” – I have to confess “not much, but I’ve played a lot more of their old stuff than their new stuff” – because it’s true. I’d much rather play the stuff that I don’t have to explain liking than the stuff I do. We sing their old stuff on SingStar. That’s not going to happen with this album yet. But this song is nicer. Possibly single material. It’s not going to get the Sports Tonight airplay that Muse does – I think suggestions that Muse are a wannabe Radiohead are long since dead.

This song is much, much, nicer. Almost pleasant. Robyn says “they all sound the same”… this one is Bjork meets Sigur Ros.

You can watch the official clip for Lotus Flower on YouTube (which to me suggests this is the single). Thom Yorke dances like a crazy man.

When you click through to watch that on YouTube it only has 310 views. So you feel like one of the early, special, few. But it has more than 5,000 likes. Methinks something is amiss.

Track 6: Codex
Some keys. Nice. And wind chime sounds. More keys. Space age keys. A little haunting. And then an Oasisesque lyrical opening. Yorke’s voice almost sounds like Liam Gallagher in that song he did with Death In Vegas (Scorpio Rising) {youtube link}… for about a second. Robyn says “this one belongs closer to the realm of music. I really like it. Best track so far.

Track 7: Give Up The Ghost
We’re back in the garden. Birdsongs. Acoustic guitar. With rhythmic slaps. Closer to the category of “easy listening” than anything else so far. Lilting and haunting. Ghosty. Which I guess fits with the title.

Track 8: Separator
Hard to define. Much less sonically busy than the other tracks. Perhaps more optimistic.

“If you think this is over then you’re wrong”

One can only hope that they are talking about their career.

Summing up: This could well be a horror album (like a horror movie) – not a horrible album (though there are people who think that horror movies are by nature horrible). The title, and the tone of the first few tracks, is, as I mentioned, a little Stephen King. As is the graphic on the album website.

It’s a challenging album – full of the stuff that makes people not like Radiohead, but also showcasing why it is that they’re a polarising force and the verdict isn’t unanimous. Yorke’s voice is enthralling. They have the ability to create a mood and a reaction like no other band I’ve ever heard. Unless “fairy floss pink” is a mood – in which case U2 is blessed with similar abilities.

When the final track clicked over in iTunes and “My Iron Lung” started playing – I’ve got to admit – I miss the old Radiohead. But the new Radiohead is still better than 90% of the music being produced these days anyway. So I’ll stick with what they’re giving rather than sticking with nothing at all.

The King of Limbs reminded me of the only Stephen King book I’ve actually read.

Hitchens teaches a liberal minister the true meaning of the word Christian

I’ve said before that Christopher Hitchens’ treatment of Christianity is a little shoddy. He is guilty of creating a straw man Christianity out of the very worst of “Christian” behaviour and setting it on fire in beautifully vitriolic prose. He is, I think, the most dangerous of the nu-atheists because he is so articulate and personable. He’s more appealing than Dawkins, I think, because he demonstrates a sense of humour.

Here, in this article, he is interviewed by a Unitarian minister, Marilyn Sewell, who wants to know if he doesn’t like Liberal Christians as much as he doesn’t like fundamentalists…

Sewell: The religion you cite in your book is generally the fundamentalist faith of various kinds. I’m a liberal Christian, and I don’t take the stories from the scripture literally. I don’t believe in the doctrine of atonement (that Jesus died for our sins, for example). Do you make and distinction between fundamentalist faith and liberal religion?

Hitchens: I would say that if you don’t believe that Jesus of Nazareth was the Christ and Messiah, and that he rose again from the dead and by his sacrifice our sins are forgiven, you’re really not in any meaningful sense a Christian…

Read my full take on this, and some more interesting bits from the interview, over at Venntheology.

Censoring John 3:16

The Superbowl. Watched by millions. For the ads. American Football is a commercial juggernaut. They pause play for ads (they do this in Aussie Rules too). The Superbowl regularly features big budget advertising blockbusters. They don’t necessarily steal the show. But they go close.

This year a group of Christians decided they wanted a slice of the Superbowl action. So they produced an ad, and booked a slot, and the broadcaster decided to turn the ad down. They didn’t want anybody being offended by a religious ad. And this is in a nation that prides itself on its Christian heritage.

Here’s the ad.

There’s not a lot in there that’s offensive. It’s pretty clever. The website is nice. The ad, at the time of writing, has been viewed by 300,000 people (approximately) on YouTube – a far cry from the millions who would have tuned in on the day, but at least the producers are getting some benefit for their efforts.

This, friends, is why we shouldn’t be kicking up a stink and trying to get atheist bus ads pulled. What goes around comes around. If we’ve got truth on our side – what have we to fear from other voices being heard in the marketplace of ideas so long as we can put our side of the story out as well. Now we may not be able to do either – because if they can’t show an ad like that in America, what are the chances of similar decisions being made by TV networks in the rest of the world?

Here’s a New York Times article on the fiasco which again goes to show that the ad wasn’t wasted – when was the last time a major newspaper ran a verse from the Bible as the second par of a news story?

The ad’s producer Larry Taunton had this to say about his motives:

“Corporate America uses its creativity and millions of dollars to come up with 30-second blasts to get you to buy a beer or Coke or tennis balls… Last year, as I began to reflect on this, I thought, ‘If I had 30 seconds to speak to a billion people, what would I say?’”

What would you say?