PLEASE BRING THE LUTHER BIBLE 1545 BACK AGAIN

Fernando Tavares Fedumenti · October 2023

Just today it has disappeared all of a sudden,

Bitte wieder Luther Bibel 1545

Jan Krohn · October 2023

There has been a discussion about that Bible in the German forum. It's not the 1545 Luther Bible, but a text from the internet that claims to be that translation. The Bible has already been removed from the Logos store. However, there are now some "real" original Luther translation available. Maybe one of them is what you're looking for.

Das Newe Testament Deutzsch (Septembertestament) | Logos Bible Software

Lutherbibel 1545: Kritische Ausgabe von Bindseil und Niemeyer | Logos Bible Software

Biblia: das ist: die gantze Heilige Schrifft: Deudsch (Luther 1545 Ausgabe letzter Hand) | Logos Bible Software

Jan Krohn · October 2023

Here's a side by side comparison of the fake Luther translation with the real 1522 New Testament.

David Wanat · October 2023

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1273923#Comment_1273923

There has been a discussion about that Bible in the German forum. It's not the 1545 Luther Bible, but a text from the internet that claims to be that translation. The Bible has already been removed from the Logos store. However, there are now some "real" original Luther translation available. Maybe one of them is what you're looking for.

Not knowing German, I've never used the resource and can't read the German forum for myself. Are you saying that this work (which has been in the catalog as long as I've been using Logos) is a phony text? If I've interpreted you correctly, I'm a bit shocked because I would have thought such things would be vetted first.

It makes me wonder what else might be in the catalog with a similar problem.

Jan Krohn · October 2023

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1273945#Comment_1273945

Yes, it's a phony text form the 18th or 19th century. I can't find the thread in the German forum again in which we discovered that that's the case. If I remember right, the text was included in the catalog when Logos was still a small start up, and the vetting process was different back then. That's why it has been pulled. I assume that other resources from that time should also have been re-vetted. At least that's what common sense would demand.