So this is strange...

I have a few BHS resources...then I get the Reformed base package and this little oddity shows up in my library.

Vincent already gave us a rundown on why we should all be hiding our BHS resources in favor of BHW, so why include this in this brand new package? And what makes it different...besides the oddball Spanish description? Can someone elaborate? Is it because it lacks a morph set?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

George Somsel

Vincent already gave us a rundown on why we should all be hiding our BHS resources in favor of BHW, so why include this in this brand new package? And what makes it different...besides the oddball Spanish description? Can someone elaborate? Is it because it lacks a morph set?

It appears that it may be the original BHS resource though I can't be sure—I think, however, it had morphology. As to the Spanish description, Logos is trying to break you in slowly since, if the current administration has it's way, we will soon be annexed to Mexico.

Keep Smiling 4 Jesus :)

Can someone elaborate?

Suggest adding tag "deprecated" => http://community.logos.com/forums/p/81118/567920.aspx#567920 then have option to hide resource.

Keep Smiling [:)]

David Paul

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/596225#Comment_596225

I just don't understand why they are including this in a new base package.

Todd Phillips

This confused me too. It doesn't have any morphology, and it also has an older copyright than all my other BHS editions with morph (WIVU, WHM 4.2, WHM 4.18). Seems like a mistake all around. I wonder if the BHS WIVU is actually included in the packages, or if this one took its place by accident. (I can't tell since I already had all the recent BHS editions before I purchased Reformed Bronze.)

fgh

Why is this in Suggestions? If you want an answer, I would think it should be in Reformed, or possibly L5.

David Paul

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/596243#Comment_596243

Because I suggest they answer my question. [:P]

HJ. van der Wal

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/596244#Comment_596244

What is the support info?

I have one BHS without morphology in my library. This resource was part of the Compubiblia collection and has the following support info:

LLS:1.0.200

2012-03-21T21:13:52Z

BHS.logos4

Seems like a mistake all around.

George Somsel

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/596612#Comment_596612

What is the support info?

I have one BHS without morphology in my library. This resource was part of the Compubiblia collection and has the following support info:

LLS:1.0.200

2012-03-21T21:13:52Z

BHS.logos4

Seems like a mistake all around.

Assuming that you have more recent Hebrew bibles, I would recommend that you hide that one.

NB.Mick

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/596612#Comment_596612

What is the support info?

I have one BHS without morphology in my library. This resource was part of the Compubiblia collection and has the following support info:

LLS:1.0.200

2012-03-21T21:13:52Z

BHS.logos4

I have the same resource - mine must have come with something other than compubilia. The resource info is Spanish. According to the preface:

This edition of the Hebrew Bible is a reproduction of the Michigan-Claremont-Westminster text (MCWT, version 2.0, 1994). The MCWT is based closely on the 1983 edition of Biblica Hebraica Stuttgartensia (BHS). As of version 2.0, however, MCWT introduces differences between the editions, based on new readings of Codex Leningradensis b19A (L).

That explains the joint copyright: Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (Stuttgart: German Bible Society; Westminster Seminary, 1990).

Since it's without morphology and I won't be able to appreciate the textual insights from Westminster's work, I have put the tag deprecated on it nevertheless.

NB.Mick

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/596234#Comment_596234

This confused me too. It doesn't have any morphology, and it also has an older copyright than all my other BHS editions with morph (WIVU, WHM 4.2, WHM 4.18). Seems like a mistake all around. I wonder if the BHS WIVU is actually included in the packages, or if this one took its place by accident.

I think that's probably the case. I had a tag on my other BHS versions and this one is untagged, so I assume I got it with Lutheran Silver (last update date somwhat fitting with my purchase) which is supposed to contain BHS/WIVU.

Probably a mistake since the latter's filename is WIVUMORPH.logos4 whereas what we got is called BHS.logos4 (wonder if the dynamic pricing calculator now charged me not only with ECF, but with BHS also). Those who previously had no BHS are impacted, since they lack the morph codes and the WIVU integration.

David Paul

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/596625#Comment_596625

I put this in the Suggestions category so that Logos would chime in as to whether this is a mistake or not. I agree that it seems to be a mistake. Someone should respond with an explanation--either admit the mistake or explain why an obsolete resource was deliberately included in these recent packages.

HJ. van der Wal

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/596619#Comment_596619

I would recommend that you hide that one.

Actually, that's precisely what I did in Logos4. After reading this thread I decided to (temporarily) unhide it and today Logos5 downloaded an updated resource file for this outdated BHS. [^o)]

Strange...

NB.Mick

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/596634#Comment_596634

I put this in the Suggestions category so that Logos would chime in as to whether this is a mistake or not. I agree that it seems to be a mistake. Someone should respond with an explanation--either admit the mistake or explain why an obsolete resource was deliberately included in these recent packages.

But this forum is notorious for not getting responses from Logos!

I crossposted to Lutheran and maybe we'll see what other users and the Logos product manager say. You might do the same for Reformed, if you want.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/596648#Comment_596648

While I don't expect responses in this forum, it is a 3 day holiday in the US. Should we allow the Logos guys and gals a bit of time off?

Gabe Martini (Faithlife)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/596665#Comment_596665

It looks like the Spanish edition of BHS (LLS 1.0.200) was both listed and included in a few Lutheran and Reformed base packages; likely a mistaken holdover from an older Logos v5 build.

We will work to ensure these sorts of confusing errors don't pop up in the future.

By the way, we now have comparison charts live for these at our Base Packages page on Logos.com, so hopefully that provides better visibility.

Gabe Martini (Faithlife)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/596813#Comment_596813

For anyone that bought Lutheran Bronze–Gold, you should've received this BHS-WIVU. You likely didn't. We'll update the SKU to include that text, as expected, and it should roll out soon. All future purchasers (after today) shouldn't be affected.

I'll hopefully have the product pages and comparison charts updated by EOB, as well. Thank you for your patience!