20 Old Testament Works

Ted Hans said:

Introduction to the Old Testament by R. K. Harrison
(Author) 

This is available in this collection: http://www.logos.com/products/details/3647

T MacLeod said:

George Somsel said:

In L3 the separation of the Penatateuch into its various strands according to Otto Eissfeldt could be displayed in AFAT by color coding.  This hasn't been carried over into L4.  I would like to see that re-instated together with the publication of Eissfeldt's Introduction.

I might have misunderstood you, but I think you can accomplish this with a visual filter:

Whoa! Where'd you get that funky undocumented syntax? Cool! What other keywords besides EissfeldtHexateuch are there? I couldn't even find any references to EissfeldtHexateuch anywhere on the web, let alone on logos.com.

I created a Visual filter exactly like that one, and it doesn't show up on my Visual Filters drop-down menu in any of my Bibles. Are there only certain Bibles where it will work?

I'm using 4.0b Beta 3, so it's possible something is broken.

Todd Phillips said:

It only works with AFAT (The Hebrew Bible : Andersen-Forbes Analyzed Text). You can see the extra tagging in the right click menu in that resource:

Thanks! I have noticed over the years (even prior to L4) that there are certain bits of hidden knowlege about what special features different books have that are not evident from looking at the text. Is there a list somewhere of all the books that have special hidden features? For example, ESV and NASB95 (and some others) have Reverse Interlinear, AFAT has the Eisssfeldt Hexateuch tagging, KJV has Strong's numbers. Which Bibles have Anderson-Forbes morphological tagging, which have Logos Greek Morphology tagging, which have Westminster Hebrew Morphology, which have genre tagging, etc? What special search fields they have (I think these are usually documented in the info panels for each resource), e.g., ESV lets you search on "words-of-christ" but not all Bibles do. Is it only Bibles that have these hidden tags, or do some of the other book types have them too, and if so, what are they?

George Somsel said:

I followed your example faithfully, but it doesn't seem to work for me.  Even in your example above it looks rather funky.  The Color by Eissfeldt in L3 was much better in that it affected only the text and not the background.  I still think they should bring it back.

George, you can use any highlight style you want.  Also, the filter didn't highlight text marked as "Lay" or "Lay (Poetry)", so those sections would stay black, but you could add them to the filter.  (I also needed a space in the "Elohist (Poetry)" value instead of "Elohist(Poetry)" in my example).  And make sure you're looking in the pentateuch...it doesn't work elsewhere. EDIT: It works in the Hexateuch (Pentateuch + Joshua), and Jeremiah is tagged with different set of sources, as well.

How does this look instead?

Oh, and make sure the filter is checked in the resource:

I also had to add a few more items to the filter (Priestly (Poetry); Yahwist (Poetry); "Begegnung"; and "Begegnung" (Poetry) -- I needed the quotes around Begegnung in both cases) in order to cover all of the Pentateuch with coloring. And even then, I found that there are some gaps: a few scattered qophs that are raised above the line that have no Eissfeldt tagging. What are these? They do not appear in BHS. Are they some sort of apparatus? (This is in Genesis 30.)

Sorry, Ted. Looks like we've totally hijacked this thread.[:O]

Todd Phillips said:

It looks like Jeremiah is tagged for sources too.

Joshua, too.

Todd Phillips said:

Rosie Perera said:

Todd Phillips said:

It looks like Jeremiah is tagged for sources too.

Joshua, too.

That would make sense since they are from Eissfeldt's Hexateuch.

Yes, I just figured out that's what that meant after posting about Joshua. At first I thought it has something to do with six different types of source material. I'd only known about JEDP from my seminary studies, and then I found Lay and Begegnung in AFAT, so I thought that made up the six. But you blew that theory out of the water by showing me the panel from the syntax search. So then it finally dawned on me.  Duh:  Pentateuch ~ Hexateuch.  I guess I knew that before but was regressing...

Todd Phillips said:

George Somsel said:

I followed your example faithfully, but it doesn't seem to work for me.  Even in your example above it looks rather funky.  The Color by Eissfeldt in L3 was much better in that it affected only the text and not the background.  I still think they should bring it back.

George, you can use any highlight style you want.  Also, the filter didn't highlight text marked as "Lay" or "Lay (Poetry)", so those sections would stay black, but you could add them to the filter.  (I also needed a space in the "Elohist (Poetry)" value instead of "Elohist(Poetry)" in my example).  And make sure you're looking in the pentateuch...it doesn't work elsewhere. EDIT: It works in the Hexateuch (Pentateuch + Joshua), and Jeremiah is tagged with different set of sources, as well.

How does this look instead?

 

Oh, and make sure the filter is checked in the resource:

It looks better than your previous example.  It's simply too bad that it doesn't appear on my screen.  Of course I know that it only works in the Pentateuch.  You forget that the OT is my field.  When in cemetary I bought Eissfeldt, Bentzen, and numerous other introductions so I'm quite familiar with them.

MJ. Smith said:

George Somsel said:

When in cemetary I bought Eissfeldt

Now this is a typo that can't be resisted ... above or below ground?

I'm sure it wasn't a typo but intentional. I've seen many seminary grads jokingly call it cemetary.

Sorry, my previous post included tags only found in Genesis.

Here is the complete list from Genesis-Joshua (Hexateuch):

• Yahwist
• Yahwist (Poetry)
• Elohist
• Elohist (Poetry)
• Lay
• Lay (Poetry)
• "Begegnung"
• "Begegnung" (Poetry)
• "K" Genealogy
• Covenant value
• Tabernacle value
• Holiness value
• Deuteronomist

Bump.

I bumped this since (a) Ted deserves it, having had his thread hijacked and (2) the hijack being so useful for anyone else.  

AFAT really has a lot of 'stuff' (theoretical source, semantic demain, genre, etc) all of which can be highlighted.