a question from an Accordance User

The one who wouldn't be contacted could have a turn off switch. I still stay by my statement. I for me, I don't want to share my email here. But the users could contact me if Logos would allow.

Through Faithlife, they can.

Which confirms my statement about the controlling.

What would I like to see?

I would like to see a new, original language library/basepackage line that excludes theological works, and theological commentaries. But, something that includes Oringal language texts, Masorah, morphological databases, syntatical databases, lexicon/dictionaries, apparatuses, grammars/syntax, exegetical commentaries, commetaries for translators: Maybe something like this:

• OL Starter
• OL Bronze
• OL Silver
• OL Gold
• OL Platinum
• OL Diamond
• OL Portfolio
• OL Collector’s Edition

Or it could even be spreated into a Greek and Hebrew/Aramaic tracks or lines.

I believe the type of package Logos used to provide with the Original Language Library was excellent (although it was limited to one level). It was a well-curated package that was highly focused, ensuring that users didn’t need to purchase a top-tier package to obtain a decent one with original language texts and tools.

In the past, whenever someone asked me which library they should get, I thoroughly enjoyed being able to recommend tightly curated packages like the SESB 3 and the Logos OL package. However, it’s challenging to find a decent base package/library that focuses on original languages and exegesis at logos.com. It’s puzzling that Logos offers more resources than enough to create multiple levels of original libraries/base packages, yet they don’t have one when smaller companies with far less resources do.

Grace and Peace,

Brian

A lot of this is covered in the Academic packages though it doesn’t exactly have a specifically original language focus. I enjoy the Academic packages as they’re fairly well rounded. It would be nice to see a Greek package or a Hebrew specific package similar to how some of the competitors have.

What resources would you like to see in these packages that aren’t contained in the Academic packages?

@BKMitchell wrote:

It’s puzzling that Logos offers more resources than enough to create multiple levels of original libraries/base packages, yet they don’t have one when smaller companies with far less resources do.

I am puzzled too, and therefore I have wondered from time to time who are the original language voices in the team these days that push on the development map with this focus, and of course this would be pertinent to configuring OL packages as well.

You mentioned it before (I believe in this thread) and it did cause me to wonder with Heiser going home, and Rick Brannan no longer being on staff, who are the OL voices within FL?
Does FL list their current staff anywhere? I know they list the leadership staff but I don’t recall seeing any page where they list all employees or contractors?
It seems inconsequential, but it would be nice to know who at FL is working on OL resources and datasets, or if there is any plans for development in those areas. I subscribe to Max, and if there’s no OL work being done, I don’t see the sense is being on Max rather than Pro for the time being.
Maybe someone from Logos can chime in and let us know if there is any OL work on the roadmap, without having to be specific or spoil anything.

And for what it's worth, OL feature enhancements and additions that do not require web access or AI, ie: ones that will be included in Fallback license in 2 years.

When I entered seminary, I was able to purchase an Original Languages library. I think it was called the Biblical Languages library. At the time I think it was only available to seminary students. It was useful and added some good grammars and biblical language tools. I can't remember if it was v5 or v6, but sometime around that time. I haven't seen a replacement for it in years, but I personally enjoyed it back then and still get use out of the content from it.

@Nathan Parker , sort of makes my eyebrows raise to hear you come here to talk about the value you see in Logos in your current job…

There's nothing to make anyone's eyebrows raise. It was a purchase I made years ago when I first entered seminary, years before I ever had my current job. I don't even think that particular item is available for anyone to purchase anymore, but at the time, it was useful to me.

You have kind of already answered your own question. As you have stated the Academic packages do not have a specifically original language focus, and what I would like to see is a library/package that does have an Original language focus (like Logos used to have) nothing more nothing less.

I would like to be able to point people to a streamlined logos library focused on the original language and texts. Currently no such library exist in Logos, and I end up having to point people else where.

Since, there are  Anglican, SDA, Pentecostal, Methodist, Reformed, Lutheran, Baptist, Orthodox, Messianic, Catholic Verbum and so on packages, why can't there also be an OL package?

@BKMitchell wrote:

I would like to be able to point people to a streamlined logos library focused on the original language and texts. Currently no such library exist in Logos, and I end up having to point people else where.

I don't remember in recent times when we have seen anything new directly related to OL studies. For example, we have recently had our first looks at the following:

Sermon Planning Manager:

AI Powered Bible Search:

The new era was launched with AI of course - Smart Search and Summaries. I fully get why Logos needed to get on this bandwagon and it has been a value add in my workflows.

We also got Factbook Refinements, Dynamic Toolbar, Sermon Builder and Bible Study Builder and of course we have this new shiny forum with the web app and mobile apps continuing to move forward.

So lots being worked on and I hope one of these days we will see some new developments for OL studies.

@Nathan Parker , sort of makes my eyebrows raise to hear you come here to talk about the value you see in Logos in your current job…

I think I first met Nathan here years ago - was it Mallard Computer? He's been a multi-platform and Bible tech user for a long time.

Hi @Donovan Palmer,

Ya, he for sure has, and that is of course fine. It had just made my eyebrows raise hearing him in his current position drawing everyone's attention to the resources Logos has which Accordance doesn't. (btw, you don't appear to be multi-platform anymore, as I couldn't find you over there).

Nathan's in a tough spot, which I guess is understandable. But people seem to get on his case whether he says anything positive or negative about either. I suppose it comes with the territory of having one foot in both camps.

I agree OL is not packaged well. Basically, I add up Academic Pro (Logos/Verbum) to Verbum Biblicum (sp?), and the the Orthodox series which picks up early translations. Widely spread out.

Also, Logos staff have posted in Accordance … I think helpfully.

Sad but true. Nathan owns both products and this is not an either-or competition. I promote the advantages of both Logos and Accordance and hope they both do well. As of today, neither one can replace the other. For original language study I would still say Accordance, but Logos has great value in its features as well. I support both.

I agree to a point that need revenue to keep things updated and improving. However, it seemed to me that Logos was mainly focus on getting the revenue from book sales and biannual program updates. I thought that was a nice way to do it.

Logos could still continue to offer the 2-year fallback license, and I hope they do, but not just to us Logos 10 FFS owners. I still see the value of having offline features and I hope many others do as well. A proper balance to somewhat satisfy everyone can be found and I hope will be.

I still own (and love) Accordance and hope it moves to a new place of strength. I respectfully withdrew from the forum when I felt the new owner did not share my values in how the community was being facilitated. I have no issue with the Nathan and would not rule out rejoining again in the future. It’s not a grudge thing or even a protest, but rather where I decide to contribute my time. To be fair, I have had a few moments in this community and even wrote Bob, who was very gracious in hearing me out and sharing his point of view. I really respected that.

It’s all good…Accordance as software, Nathan as admin… and there are a number of us dual platform users because we are certified nuts when it comes to Bible study! 🤪

@DMB I never saw the packages that way before, but that is a brilliant observation! 💥

@Steven MacDonald I think that is a fair statement. What I think gave Accordance the cutting edge lead was people like Roy Brown who was a Biblical scholar himself. I would watch him on webinars and always learn things because his passion for original languages was reflected in the design of the software and resources. I credit Accordance, more than Logos for my own journey in original languages because of that.

This has been my question at Logos, but it also applies to Accordance. Where are the scholars who are influencing the direction of the development roadmap? The webinars I recieve in my email from Logos are for note taking, Inductive Bible Study, etc. This is all good for the wide customer base of Logos. But there seems to be a paucity of engagement on Original Languages. It could be argued to go elsewhere for this, but wouldn’t it be better for some of it to come from the platform we are using because it is hard baked into the design of what they are trying to equip us to do?

OK. I wax on. I know this is only one POV. Yet, if you look at the death of Bibleworks and the rise of lots of other freeish options, there is a clear place to motor forward on Original Langiages. I hope Logos and Accordance make space in their strategy for this while reaching for other markets. 💁🏻‍♂️

Just my thinking but 'original languages' is a wide space. Everything from 'received' usage (mainly Accordance/Bibleworks) to broader metrics (semantics, cognate resources, interpretive use, etc) … Logos mainly.

Although I use Accordance, Logos has more OL resources for a wider view. Granted the Targums in Logos only recently other than CAL, and badly dribbling out on Syriac.

I think the space is ripe for someone to do really cool things with the text comparison tool. The Logos tool is very long in the tooth, and even yesterday someone posted a feedback idea on incorporating AI into it.

I also think there is room to look at a tool dedicated to LXX - Hebrew and Greek studies. I started to play with this concept earlier this year, but ran out of steam. Maybe in 2025. 🫤

I'm probably wasting Kristin's thread, though I feel like the subject is appropriate.

Accordance now has several sales (as does Logos). But strolling thru the Accordance store, there stood the Encyclopedia of Hebrew Language. I assume it's recent (wants 14, which I'm still on 13). Should I throw in the towel and get it. The issue is Faithlife commitment to OL (!). EHL has been on Logos prepub, highprice, reduced price, doubled price, and years going on years. No communication, no nothing. Then I notice Tov's Hebrew (Logos lost theirs). And the Masora Thesaurus (not too distant from a CitedBy in Logos).

I'm sorely tempted; take my chances. The basic question is where's Logos going? Obviously I'd prefer Logos.

On my Mac I have both installed 13 and 14. It opens in 13 with no problem.

Probably was back when I was CEO of Mallard Computer. Feels like a lifetime ago!

It's true I've been a Bible tech user for a long time (my only regret is I didn't start sooner!). In seminary, my professors' use of tools were divided among three major apps (some used one, others used another, and some used another), so I amassed large libraries across them all during seminary (although Wordsearch has merged). I do consider myself a bibliomaniac and a "tape worm" of bookworms. :-) When it comes to Bible study materials, I feel richer than Elon Musk.

Thank you, Fabian. Maybe I can read it before Accordance might disappear!

To purchase there helps them. Also to purchase V. 14.

I have 13 installed of issues in 14 with TLG file import and some other user import stuff. For all other tasks I use 14.

@DMB if you're referring to The Encyclopedia of Hebrew Language and Linguistics (4 vols), it's currently in production for Logos and will be available soon (I don't have an exact release date yet).

I can assure you that Logos is committed to original language studies, and there are individuals on our staff who are well steeped in them. At the recent ETS & SBL conferences in San Diego, I met with a number of publishers, including Brill who publishes the Hebrew resource above, and we will continue to be adding new original language content to the platform. Moreover, this is a growing area as we continue to partner with an increasing number of schools and seminaries.

I agree and Nathan has handled it well…. Sadly it appears a form of Tribalism exists in the Bible Software universe - some can't understand being able to be in both camps, as maybe they both have value in the long run…. Some can't handle anything other than positive remarks about the Tribal Chief they support….

Rick, bless your heart! I was hoping at some point, you or staff would chime in. Even this morning on my walk, I was thinking, well, ok, Accordance, sigh. And I'm sure this Accordance-thread folks will be happy to read your answer (expertise and future development/resources). Whoo hoo!!!

Thanks Rick. That is fantastic news and I can’t wait for these new original language resources to be released! Very exciting! 😁👍

I was going to post a new thread about how OL seems dead on Logos. It doesn't get much love on sales; features are dead on the platform (discourse tools not upgrades for ages, while BibleArc and others appear and grow, just for one example); and resources are low. For someone who viewed Logos as the 'future' of OL studies, I'm terribly disappointed.

But I hope this is really good news and some hope. Features, on the other hand, seem to be lost. Everything is now for 'preachers' and research (with all the power and capabilities of Logos) seems dead as feature updates, which is a waste of capabilities. But new direction ($$$) seems fixated on 'preachers' and 'power-user preachers' seem to be calling the shots. Used to have more academics developing things and writing for Logos. Now it seems like a thing of the past. Hope I'm wrong.

At least more resources…

And let's not forget Tablet and Phone app. Dead as dead can be in development and features, even after the promise of subscription and quicker development etc.

Didn't the subscriptions just start within the last couple months? Seems a little unreasonable to expect major new features already.

I am excited about the possibility of better original language tools. As a preacher, I spend a lot of time in the original languages. I think that will benefit vastly more users than just those focused on academic work.

@Rick Mansfield (Logos) is a rock star. 🌠

Don't agree with that, brother. Main reason is exactly forums and news. It's all about 'preacher tools'. There is usually (or used to be) a lot of discussion and the exchange of opinions for new features, which is good and was always a positive mark for Logos. For a long time, nothing on the OL front. So, it's reasonable to think that there are no updates (big or small) in the near feature. Or at least the OL team is not as 'talkative' or sharing ideas as others.

The thing about subscription is exactly the promise of faster developments. Can't see it coming for research tools if there's no discussion. And also Tablet improvements etc. So, as far as it's possible to know, subscriptions are improving certain areas faster, but others are dead.

And let's not forget the CEO's 'vision' about a tool for preachers and all the talk. It seems naive to think it's not a 'new company vision' that is driving all focus to some tools, features and resources.

Again, I hope I'm wrong and welcome comments. But all the usual clues about OL development are not there, and the others are. So…

God bless.

Do the devs make a habit of publicly discussing unreleased features on the forums? Honestly, I hope that's not how the process works, but I haven't been around long enough to know for sure.

Yes, and below is just one example. I actually like that they get feedback. My only problem is the sole focus on preaching tools these days.

@Mateus de Castro wrote:

I was going to post a new thread about how OL seems dead on Logos. It doesn't get much love on sales; features are dead on the platform (discourse tools not upgrades for ages, while BibleArc and others appear and grow, just for one example); and resources are low. For someone who viewed Logos as the 'future' of OL studies, I'm terribly disappointed.

I share this concern, at least to the point that there has been little in recent years to make one think that OL is part of the future roadmap.

But if Rick M. says he is out working the publisher network, I am confident we will see some movement on more recent resources. 😎

There is also a thread giving a preview on a 'Smart Search' for the Bible.

I totally get the AI focus. Makes a lot of sense… so, just waiting for OL's turn in this new era! 😏

Yes. Especially when there's a promise in there about 'regular feature upgrades' or some-such. And only some areas are getting those.

Still hoping to see more offline features as well.

You touched on an important topic. Why is Logos assuming you are either a "preacher", or an "academic" ie: one who studies the original languages? Many are both and I dare say that is the ideal for those who can.

This would make sense, well only if they care to give the LFL customers a reason to want to go past two years

That's what bothers me. It seems too focused now. I love most of those features, but I could use other kinds as well. Just not holding my breath.

Does, this mean that we may be seeing a new Logos OL library or basepackage in the future?

I agree with you 100% that Logos seem to assume that it's users or Preachers and academics but I am not so confidence that Logos assumes people are doing original language studies. Notice, Logos no longer sells an OL library or basepackage.

Obviously just guessing, but I doubt an OL package. They probably view the greek/hebrew libraries as 'enough'. And more guessing, I'd suspect it has more to do with the marketplace (colleges/seminaries) instead of Logos per se … Accordance is sort of the canary in the mineshaft. But if more OL resources are in the future, that'd be fine (I hope we're talking more than grammars etc). Akkadian comes to mind very quickly (cognate to hebrew resources). Also Accordance has some nice ones, not in Logos.