I was trying to do a Bible Word Study on the word "Azazel", but when I type in the word it disappears and Logos replaces it with the word "azaz".
Can anyone reproduce this on their system?
Geo,
The easiest way that i use to find words in the BWS is to locate them in a Bible and use the Right-Click menu
1. Locate your word in your Bible, then right-click on the word
2. In the pop-up right-click menu on the right side click on Lemma.
3. Then on the left side of the menu click on Bible Word Study.
4. Then the BWS window should open to your word
EDIT: no it does not work in a new BWS if i type Azazel in English, i suspect that the English word in not in the BWS list that L4 uses.
EDIT: no it does not work in a new BWS if i type Azazel in English, i suspect that the English word in not in the BWS list that L4 uses
I suspect it depends on the resources one has -- Azazel was one of the choices in my BWS!
i am sure you are probably right, i have the Scholar's package and this is what shows up for me
I was trying to do a Bible Word Study on the word "Azazel", but when I type in the word it disappears and Logos replaces it with the word "azaz". Can anyone reproduce this on their system?
Here's something you might find of interest which won't show in BWS — If you have Charles' Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha, paste it into your command bar.
logosres:chaspot;ref=Pseudepigrapha.1_En._8.1;off=7
If you have Charlesworth, do the same with this
logosres:otpseud01;ref=Pseudepigrapha.1_En._8.1
It is found in the Dead Sea Scrolls Study Edition (English) here
logosres:brdssseen;ref=DSSSE.4Q180_Frag._1:6
or in Hebrew here
logosres:brdsssehe;ref=DSSSE.4Q180_Frags._2$E2$80$934_ii:3;off=-394
Thanks for the workaround, but your method can be a problem if you don't know where the word is in the Bible (or even IF it is in the Bible)!
For example, I mostly use the NASB, but the NASB translates the Hebrew word "azazel" to "scapegoat". So you won't find the word "azazel" in the NASB. But the ASV doesn't translate the word and leaves it as "azazel". So it will really depend on which translation you use (and a strong memory) to use your method. But I appreciate your help.
Thanks for the help. I had wondered the same thing, but then I found that if I used the method suggested by Mr. Clark (above), there were many resources that had an entry for the word "Azazel", including the Harper's Bible Dictionary, Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary (both the Tenth and Eleventh Editions), Nelson's New Illustrated Bible Dictionary, The Exhaustive Dictionary of Bible Names, Collins Thesaurus of the Bible, and the New Nave's Topical Bible.
If I type in "az", I get a lot more choices than that, including Azaliah, Azaniah, Azarel, Azariah, Azaryahu, Azaz, Azaziah, Azbuk, Azekah, Azel, Azgad, Aziel, Aziza, Azmaveth, Azmon, Aznoth-tabor, Azor, Azotus, Azriel, Azrikam, Azubah, Azzan, and Azzur.
Here's something you might find of interest which won't show in BWS...
Thanks for those tips. I have the Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament, but I don't have the other resources that you listed. I had heard that Azazel might have been one of the fallen angels and had read Enoch before, but didn't put the two together.
The ESV or NRSV uses the word Azazel, I believe, so you might want to use that resource to find the word.
Thanks. At this point, I have figured out a few workarounds.
But I would still like to know why the Bible Word Study doesn't allow me to search for that word. If I can't search for this one word, how many other words are missing?
Is this what you want?
The strange thing is that it appears in the A-F Analyzed Text and 4Q23 in a straight search but not in BHS. On the other hand, if you click on the Hebrew form in the silly diagram in BWS, it will take you to the location in BHS. Perhaps that has something to do with prioritizing, but I don't understand its failure to appear in a bible search though it does list the Lexham Interlinear [must decontaminate my keyboard now].
I don't understand why this doesn't work correctly on my Bible Word Study either.
I can find "azazel" in a regular search and then right click on it and it will take me to a word diagram.
Why doesn't it take you to there in a Bible Word Study?[:^)]
But I would still like to know why the Bible Word Study doesn't allow me to search for that word.
I've always felt that a BWS should list all Bible words from Bible Dictionaries (not just words that are in my bibles). Because we both have Harper's Bible Dictionary and it's the definition that is important EVEN if the word doesn't appear in one of the Reverse Interlinears used in Translation, Hebrew Words, Greek Words.
Consider the so-called Topic Search (Basic Search of All Text in Entire Library). If you perform one for Azazel you'll find the "Logos Controlled" bible dictionaries in the TOPIC section; which will include Harper's!
Anyway, I found that the BWS vocabulary is dependent on your preferred Bible being a Reverse Interlinear i.e. as long as you prefer ESV or NRSV then Azazel will appear (it won't appear for the NLT because its OT does not have the Interlinear). So the next step is to make sure that the Definition section includes a good collection of bible dictionaries (type:encyclopedia will get them).
EDIT: no it does not work in a new BWS if i type Azazel in English, i suspect that the English word in not in the BWS list that L4 uses I suspect it depends on the resources one has -- Azazel was one of the choices in my BWS!
Likewise Azazel was a choice in my BWS (Scholar's Platinum plus more). Also found "The NET Bible" has interesting Azazel footnote for Leviticus 16:8
Keep Smiling [:)]
Anyway, I found that the BWS vocabulary is dependent on your preferred Bible being a Reverse Interlinear i.e. as long as you prefer ESV or NRSV then Azazel will appear (it won't appear for the NLT because its OT does not have the Interlinear).
Ding, ding, ding. We have a winner! [:D]
I originally had my preferred Bible set to the NASB. But when I changed the preferred Bible to the ESV, the list of words in BWS changed and the list displayed "Azazel".
But this means that the BWS is not as useful as it could be, since it will depend on the preferred Bible.
I've always felt that a BWS should list all Bible words from Bible Dictionaries (not just words that are in my bibles).
Before I started this thread, I thought that the BWS including ALL of the words in ALL of my books. In other words, it acted like an index. Boy was I wrong!
As you stated, it seems that the BWS will only include the words from the current preferred Bible. I agree that only including words from ONE Bible in the BWS doesn't make much sense to me. I have dozens of Bibles in my Logos library. It would make much more sense (IMO), and be more powerful, to include the words from all of the Bibles in someone's collection.
So the next step is to make sure that the Definition section includes a good collection of bible dictionaries (type:encyclopedia will get them).
I'm not sure what you mean by this. Could you please clarify?
So the next step is to make sure that the Definition section includes a good collection of bible dictionaries (type:encyclopedia will get them). I'm not sure what you mean by this. Could you please clarify?
The Definition section's default collection is All Resources, but a collection of your own Bible Dictionaries is more efficient, especially if you don't want the prime definition to come from Merriam-Webster, Collins or COED English Dictionaries (type:dictionary).
Ha! I KNEW it. Yes, it took literally years of sleuthing. Careful analysis of the syntactical patterns in his thread contributions. The proposed anger and seemingly over-stated knowledgeability.
And there the answer was ... George has NOT hidden his interlinears!
Ha! I KNEW it. Yes, it took literally years of sleuthing. Careful analysis of the syntactical patterns in his thread contributions. The proposed anger and seemingly over-stated knowledgeability. And there the answer was ... George has NOT hidden his interlinears!
Most of them. I think the Lexham interlinear came out later (or perhaps I simply missed it, but it's in the BWS).
This seems to be a Windows issue. I have about 20 Bibles prioritized higher than my first interlinear, and about 25 before my first reverse interlinear, and I still don't have any problem doing a BWS for Azazel directly from the box.
Anyway, I found that the BWS vocabulary is dependent on your preferred Bible being a Reverse Interlinear i.e. as long as you prefer ESV or NRSV then Azazel will appear (it won't appear for the NLT because its OT does not have the Interlinear). This seems to be a Windows issue.
This seems to be a Windows issue.
We'd better report that bug to the MAC development team....or maybe we need to report it as a bug to the Windows Development team!
I have about 20 Bibles prioritized higher than my first interlinear, and about 25 before my first reverse interlinear, and I still don't have any problem doing a BWS for Azazel directly from the box.
fgh: What is the 1st Bible in your prioritized list?
Anyway, I found that the BWS vocabulary is dependent on your preferred Bible being a Reverse Interlinear i.e. as long as you prefer ESV or NRSV then Azazel will appear (it won't appear for the NLT because its OT does not have the Interlinear). This seems to be a Windows issue. I have about 20 Bibles prioritized higher than my first interlinear, and about 25 before my first reverse interlinear, and I still don't have any problem doing a BWS for Azazel directly from the box.
fgh,
I testet it on my Win7 only by choosing a non-interlinear-bible, which doesn't have Azazel in its text either (NIV 84) as preferred bible and also prioritizing it over the ESV. This setup works without a problem, although if it was preferred bible and/or prioritization it should give the results GeoPappas describes:
So I'm not sure, whether the preferred bible selection really is the case in point (maybe Dave could elaborate - if so, this should definitely be added to the wiki page about choosing a preferred bible). Even with NIV 84 as preferred bible, de-prioritization of all RI bibles and bibles that contain Azazel as a word and with pointing the Definition section to a collection of fictional books - i.e. deliberately misconfiguring everything so that no information will be returned by the BWS - I couldn't force the BWS to shorten the word list and take out Azazel:
No idea how GeoPappas did this or how the screenshot with only two AZ-words earlier in this thread was made.
Swedish! (Bibel 82)
(But like I hinted at, and most people here know by now, I'm on Mac.)
fgh: What is the 1st Bible in your prioritized list? Swedish! (Bibel 82) (But like I hinted at, and most people here know by now, I'm on Mac.)
I don't see right now how this should be a Win vs. Mac problem.
So I'm not sure, whether the preferred bible selection really is the case in point (maybe Dave could elaborate - if so, this should definitely be added to the wiki page about choosing a preferred bible). Even with NIV 84 as preferred bible, de-prioritization of all RI bibles and bibles that contain Azazel as a word and with pointing the Definition section to a collection of fictional books
With NIV as preferred. It doesn't contain Azazel
With NLT as preferred. It does contain Azazel but in non-Interlinear OT.
With ESV as preferred. It does contain Azazel but in an Interlinear OT.
With NIV as preferred. It doesn't contain Azazel With NLT as preferred. It does contain Azazel but in non-Interlinear OT. With ESV as preferred. It does contain Azazel but in an Interlinear OT.
Dave: I get the same sort of results. The BWS list changes depending on the preferred Bible.
Wonder if advanced prioritization affects BWS word list ? changing NIV to Top preferred Bible after many advanced Bible prioritizations, unable to replicate:
I'm not sure if this matters, but I changed my Preferred Bible by doing it from the Home Page:
Every time I change the Preferred Bible, it will change my list of choices.
One thing I have noticed is that if I don't erase the search text ("azaz"), then the list will stay the same. But if I erase the search text and start over, then a new list will appear.
We'll take a look at the issue.
A request to broaden the auto-complete matches for BWS word entry beyond those found in the preferred Bible has been submitted previously. I have added a link to this thread in the existing case. Thank you.
A request to broaden the auto-complete matches for BWS word entry beyond those found in the preferred Bible
Melissa,
It is not a request as BUGS have been identified wrt words in the Preferred bible e.g. Azazel is listed for the NET bible but why is it not listed for NLT?
Answer is No; changing NKJV (with Old Testament Reverse Interlinear) to Top preferred Bible (via Library Prioritize) allows replication:
Changing Preferred Bible from Home Page places chosen Bible as first resource in Library Prioritize list (and removes any advanced prioritization for that resource since not needed when chosen Bible is first prioritized resource).
A request to broaden the auto-complete matches for BWS word entry beyond those found in the preferred Bible Melissa, It is not a request as BUGS have been identified wrt words in the Preferred bible e.g. Azazel is listed for the NET bible but why is it not listed for NLT?
My understanding is that the current design is limiting the results to only valid terms for the user's top reverse interlinear Bible. However, with your example, I do see that although the NET Bible is not an RVI, when it is the preferred Bible "Azazel" does come up in the auto-complete list, which is unexpected, but does not come up when the NLT is preferred, which is expected.
The word "Azazel" is not found in the text of the NASB95, which is why it doesn't come up when that RVI Bible is preferred.
I have included your examples in the existing case.
