As someone who relies on Logos for original language study without knowing Ancient Greek, I depend heavily on accurate morphological tagging. A significant drawback is when the software's tagging obscures morphological ambiguity, effectively making an interpretive translation choice for the user without their knowledge.
In Acts 13:48, the Greek word behind 'appointed' (τεταγμένοι, lemma τάσσω) is tagged strictly as passive. However, the morphological form of the Greek perfect participle is identical for both the middle and passive voices. Tagging this exclusively as passive is an exegetical decision by the database creators, not a purely morphological one.
This tagging choice carries tremendous theological weight. If the voice is understood as middle, it yields a drastically different translation, such as: 'and as many as had set themselves to eternal life believed.'
I recognize this forum is not for theological debate. The issue here is data transparency. The morphological database should reflect the actual ambiguity of the Greek form (e.g., tagging it as Middle/Passive) rather than enforcing a specific interpretation. This correction is necessary so that users engaged in careful study can see the available morphological options and decide for themselves which translation best fits the context.
