Looking up texts in Pseudepigrapha, Apocrypha etc

In BDAG under σφραγίζω no 3 is a reference to TSol 14.2.

How do you recommend me looking up a reference like this? I know its in Charlesworth's book, but can I type in a reference in the Command Bar? (like typing "Jos Ant 1.1"). Some links to extra-biblical books are tagged, but I need a simple way to look up references when no tags are available or if I do want more research.

TestSol or TSol, I get no reference in the Command Bar.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Don Awalt

Yes, to me too it seems BDAG is not tagged correctly on these links, it goes to its own Glossary and does not respect any Library prioritizations, "Send links here", or anything I can figure out. It may be because there is not an index for that book in the Pseudepihrapha, as there are for others. So there is not a clean way to bring up that reference explicitly that I can see. Someone else may be able to clarify.

FYI You can do a search like <Pseudepigrapha = TSolomon 14:2> and find instances of this reference in your library, for what that's worth.

Francis

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/637420#Comment_637420

It is referenced in Old Testament Pseudepigrapha like this: Testament of Solomon 1.1 but typing this in the Logos search box does not invoke OTP. There is a problem there. I have submitted the reference in BDAG as a typo.

Francis

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/637447#Comment_637447

I have also placed a new post with BUG in the subject and a cross-reference to this thread to alert Logos to the problem of references not working in the command window when otherwise clearly indicated in owned resources.

Mark Barnes

How do you recommend me looking up a reference like this? I know its in Charlesworth's book, but can I type in a reference in the Command Bar? (like typing "Jos Ant 1.1"). Some links to extra-biblical books are tagged, but I need a simple way to look up references when no tags are available or if I do want more research.

You can type non-Bible references in the command box if you know the resource. So you can type pseudepigrapha to Test Sol 14:2.

You don't need to spell out the full resource name, as you can see, - just enough for Logos to find it. Make sure the resource is in the top five entries listed in the command box, before you type the keyword "to".

If you don't know the resource, you're going to have to search your library in the normal way.

Mark Barnes

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/637420#Comment_637420

Yes, to me too it seems BDAG is not tagged correctly on these links, it goes to its own Glossary and does not respect any Library prioritizations, "Send links here", or anything I can figure out. It may be because there is not an index for that book in the Pseudepihrapha, as there are for others.

It's simply that the Testament of Solomon wasn't available in Logos when the Logos version of BDAG was produced.

Francis

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/637511#Comment_637511

Why do PsSol and 4 Esdr work in the command box then? They are not included in the deutero-canonical books as far as I know.

Ken McGuire

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/637518#Comment_637518

Because they are in the Apocrypha for the NRSV and RSV, and so are in the Bible datatype.

Logos is a BIBLE study application and so will easily recognize BIBLE references. To make other references work in PB's (where most of my experience is with this side of things), or reading lists, Logos has to be told what type to use for the reference. I figured that this was also the case for the Command Box.

Some quick testing showed that typing "logosref:Tertullian.Apol." in the command box takes me to my default edition of Tertullian's Apology. Likewise, this works with the Pseudopigrapha datatype. logosref:Pseudepigrapha.Levi takes me to the Testament of Levi. logosref:Pseudepigrapha.2 Bar to 2nd Baruch.

I admit that it is a lot of extra typing, but it can work.

Francis

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/637523#Comment_637523

Because they are in the Apocrypha for the NRSV and RSV, and so are in the Bible datatype.

I have both of the Bible translations you mention, and I had actually checked there already before your post, 4 Esdras and Psalms of Solomon are not part of the deuterocanonical apocrypha (unless I am missing something). In fact, OTP is the only resource that comes up with them in my library.

Ken McGuire

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/637563#Comment_637563

I was wrong on Psalms of Solomon. It is instead the Logos LXX that has it... logosres:logoslxx;ref=BibleLXX.PsSol

With regards to 4 Esdras, I think I was thinking of what the NRSV calls 2 Esdras, which is sometimes called 4 Esdras (Vulgate I think). When I type "4 Esdras" in command box, I get NRSV 2 Esdras, or rather the first 7 chapters of it.

Anyway, those books are included in at least some Bible datatypes, and so Logos automagically handles it.

MJ for years has begged for better handling of the various canon definitions, and certainly the way I described above of going directly to a reference is not user friendly...

Francis

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/637574#Comment_637574

So, we all agree it needs to be fixed. Logos has long ceased to be just a basic Bible program. Its ambition to be the premier research tool for biblical research requires that these standard references be standardized indeed in the software's functionality.

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/637563#Comment_637563

I have both of the Bible translations you mention, and I had actually checked there already before your post, 4 Esdras and Psalms of Solomon

2 Esdras is also known as 4 Ezra (AYBD). Logos will convert 4 Esdras or 4 Ezra references to 2 Esdras and thus align with REB and NRSV; which do not 'list' that book but do recognise 4 Ezra as referring to 2 Esdras.

Ps Sol is a Septuagint book not in NRSV/REB.

They all fall under the Logos bible datatype.

Mark Barnes

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/637576#Comment_637576

So, we all agree it needs to be fixed.

I don't agree it needs to be fixed, I agree that it would be nice if it was improved.

As others have said, references that belong to the Bible datatype can be opened directly from the command box. That includes all these works: https://wiki.logos.com/Logos_Bible_Book_Names

I would imagine the main problem with accepting any datatype in the command box will be performance. The more the command box can do, the slower it will be. Already everything I type in there has to be checked against title/author names in my library, Logos commands, and Bible references. If it also needs to be checked against Pseudepigrapha references, Church Fathers references, TDNT reference, Louw-Nida references, Strongs Numbers, and the hundreds of other datatype references, it's going to be as slow as molasses.

Francis

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/637598#Comment_637598

So, we're back to the age-old question: why do we keep on waiting so much time for repeated sessions of indexing when in the end, doing this kind of job is apparently bound to cause a major lag? Isn't it precisely what indexing is supposed to circumvent?

Dan Francis

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/637587#Comment_637587

2 Esdras is also known as 4 Ezra (AYBD).

Yes and no... It's slightly more complex than that but probably best surmised by HarperCollin's Study Bible.

The book we know as 2 Esdras is made up of three works:4 Ezra, an apocalypse by a Jewish author (chs. 3–14), and two independent Christian supplements, 5 Ezra (chs. 1–2) and 6 Ezra (chs. 15–16). Esdras, the Greek form of the Hebrew name Ezra, is the seer who receives seven visions in the main portion of the book. The pseudepigraphical author writes as if he were the Ezra who figures in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah. --Harper Collins Study Bible

-Dan

Mark Barnes

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/637609#Comment_637609

Isn't it precisely what indexing is supposed to circumvent?

No. Indexing speeds up searching.

What you're suggesting involves interpreting, then searching. It's the interpreting bit that will be slow.

Logos supports a very wide range of input data for references. So you can type Ps Sol 14:1, PsSol 14:1, PsSol 14 1, Ps Sol 14.1, PsSol 14.1, PsSol 14 1, Psalms of Solomon 14:1, Psalms of Solomon 14.1 or Psalms of Solomon 14 1, and all are valid. That's a good thing, right?

But there are a few hundred reference types. Most many 'books' within the reference type. And most, like the example above, accept data in half-a dozen formats. That's an awful lot of possibilities to check.

So if I type Ps Sol 14:1, without telling Logos what reference type it is, Logos has to cycle through every possible datatype, and say to that datatype's interpreter. Do you understand this input? That's several hundred checks to make, in addition to the library searching, on every keypress.

I'm not saying it can't be done, but I am saying that it would require a lot of thought effort to optimise it sufficiently to be useful.

HansK

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/637510#Comment_637510

You can type non-Bible references in the command box if you know the resource. So you can type pseudepigrapha to Test Sol 14:2.

You don't need to spell out the full resource name, as you can see, - just enough for Logos to find it. Make sure the resource is in the top five entries listed in the command box, before you type the keyword "to".

If you don't know the resource, you're going to have to search your library in the normal way.

Thanks Mark and others for clarification. The searching should be improved.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/637518#Comment_637518

Why do PsSol and 4 Esdr work in the command box then? They are not included in the deutero-canonical books as far as I know.

Psalms of Solomon in:

(possibly) Nicephorus' list
Innocent I's list
Peshitta (often)
Rahlfs LXX

4 Esdras (Latin) = 2 Esdras (LXX) and as such is quite common.