IVP Dictionary of the Later New Testament and its Developments

https://www.logos.com/product/4892/dictionary-of-the-later-new-testament-and-its-developments

Its frustrating that this excellent book (and related set) is so lacking in links to the resources it mentions! For a resource to speak so frequently of writings of the church fathers and then list a whole bunch of references with no links is such a tease. Any one else think this should have a little TLC? In fact this set in general needs attention, since the other New testament books also frequently mention works from the Nag Hammadi or the Pseudepigrapha etc, which is like taking someone right to the point of a discovery and then forbidding you to see the context of that reference.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Francis

I just checked one article for references to the church fathers and although I have practically all the resources that are referred to, you're right, the references are not linked.

Since the integration of the library is one of the selling points of Logos, I agree that this needs to be taken care of.

John Kaess

Yes, the linking in the IVP Dictionaries is not done as well as most Logos resources are. This needs to be worked on because the IVP Dictionaries are extremely useful resources and highly regarded, but the linking is substandard.

John

Rick Ausdahl

https://www.logos.com/product/4892/dictionary-of-the-later-new-testament-and-its-developments

Its frustrating that this excellent book (and related set) is so lacking in links to the resources it mentions! For a resource to speak so frequently of writings of the church fathers and then list a whole bunch of references with no links is such a tease. Any one else think this should have a little TLC? In fact this set in general needs attention, since the other New testament books also frequently mention works from the Nag Hammadi or the Pseudepigrapha etc, which is like taking someone right to the point of a discovery and then forbidding you to see the context of that reference.

I agree! Such links and tagging are typically one of the major selling points of Logos resources and justification for the higher pricing for resources than is often found in other Bible apps. And this is definitely the type of resource that could benefit in a big way from such links.

And yet, this is one resource for which Faithlife does NOT have the typical paragraph extolling the benefits of Logos resources-- that paragraph that begins with the sentence: "In the Logos edition, this volume is enhanced by amazing functionality." So maybe they never intended major linking/tagging in this resource. Definitely unfortunate if that's the case, but...

James Taylor

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/909693#Comment_909693

this is one resource for which Faithlife does NOT have the typical paragraph extolling the benefits of Logos resources-- that paragraph that begins with the sentence: "In the Logos edition, this volume is enhanced by amazing functionality." So maybe they never intended major linking/tagging in this resource.

I noticed that as well, but I'm not sure it's that intentional because the OT volumes do have links to ANE texts etc. so maybe this one will get an update sometime...

UPDATE: Just ran a concordance on a few volumes and was surprised by the results, there are tons of linked refs to secondary sources, I still don't understand why there are some many which are not linked in the original volume under question above though...

Look at a comparison of the linked references...

Here is the concordance from the IVP Dictionary of the Later New Testament and Its Developments

Here is one from an OT volume on the Pentateuch from the same set.

Here's one on the Background of the NT from the same set...

Mark Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/909693#Comment_909693

This is a volume IVP produced quite a while ago. At the time it probably was pretty well linked to existing FL resources. The times have changed and there are many more links that could be made.

FL has stated that it is expensive to go back later and add tags to older resources after new resources with new links come out. They have done it and do it occasionally, but I believe that is still their practice.

I'd love to have all my resources updated with all existing links made active. Unless FL figures out how to fund such an effort, I don't ever expect that to happen. Would users pay for this? I wonder.

However, there are some resource that are more important than others. High level dictionaries are among those on my list, so I'd love to see the IVP dictionaries updated.

Dan Francis

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/909699#Comment_909699

It may do well for Logos to mark in their description lower levels of tagging than our normal resources or possibly writing a review stating that and perhaps say 5 star resource, tagging levels draw it down to 3 stars.

-dan

Sean

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/909701#Comment_909701

It may do well for Logos to mark in their description lower levels of tagging than our normal resources

Yes. They should do this. Part of the problem is that the customer has no idea what they are getting in terms of tagging & links until they purchase and download the resource. I've been very disappointed a couple times buying books in the era of L6 & 7 only to discover they're much older resources with poor linking.

But I'm also of the mind that if they promote an older title on sale--like they frequently do with this set--they should take some effort to update it to current Logos era standards.

ADDITIONALLY: It's not only with older resources. I've bought a few resources on pre-pub in the last couple years that lacked links to older titles already in the Logos catalog. FL seems to be particularly allergic to linking to Harnack's History of Dogma which is quoted, well, everywhere in older theological works.

We need to stop making/accepting excuses for this.

or possibly writing a review stating that and perhaps say 5 star resource, tagging levels draw it down to 3 stars.

I have done this and will continue to do so in the future.

Simon’s Brother

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/909701#Comment_909701

From what I have seen from FL over the years I would be very surprised to see this level of direct openess from FL. I would be very happy for them to prove me wrong.

It may do well for Logos to mark in their description lower levels of tagging than our normal resources or possibly writing a review stating that and perhaps say 5 star resource, tagging levels draw it down to 3 stars.

-dan

James Taylor

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/909699#Comment_909699

High level dictionaries are among those on my list, so I'd love to see the IVP dictionaries updated.

Agreed, I don't expect every single resource to have the same level of detail, but this set was expensive ($330.00), and the other volumes I checked all have significantly more links than this volume.

Dave Palmer

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/909699#Comment_909699

This is a volume IVP produced quite a while ago. At the time it probably was pretty well linked to existing FL resources. The times have changed and there are many more links that could be made.

FL has stated that it is expensive to go back later and add tags to older resources after new resources with new links come out. They have done it and do it occasionally, but I believe that is still their practice.

I too have been frustrated by missing links to resources that I know I own, and would love for Logos to provide a means for Community Tagging. As each of us find missing links to resources we could supply them for the benefit of others. In my opinion this would take the value of Logos to another level.

EastTN

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/909741#Comment_909741

I too have been frustrated by missing links to resources that I know I own, and would love for Logos to provide a means for Community Tagging. As each of us find missing links to resources we could supply them for the benefit of others. In my opinion this would take the value of Logos to another level.

I think this would be an excellent solution. I imagine it working much the way typo reporting works. An option would be provided for users to supply a link, and periodically Logos could review them and issue an update with improved linking. It would reduce Logos' cost for updating resources, and give them a better product, while at the same time helping users.

Gordon Jones

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/909755#Comment_909755

I too have been frustrated by missing links to resources that I know I own, and would love for Logos to provide a means for Community Tagging. As each of us find missing links to resources we could supply them for the benefit of others. In my opinion this would take the value of Logos to another level.

I think this would be an excellent solution. I imagine it working much the way typo reporting works. An option would be provided for users to supply a link, and periodically Logos could review them and issue an update with improved linking. It would reduce Logos' cost for updating resources, and give them a better product, while at the same time helping users.

[Y]

Sean

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/909755#Comment_909755

I think this would be an excellent solution. I imagine it working much the way typo reporting works. An option would be provided for users to supply a link, and periodically Logos could review them and issue an update with improved linking. It would reduce Logos' cost for updating resources, and give them a better product, while at the same time helping users.

This idea has been brought up several time and has merit. However:

Some of these resources have hundreds of missing links that would be incredibly tedious for any sort of community linking effort to fix. FaithLife should have automated tools for fixing them--and should do so.
I'm not willing to do work for free that I've already paid FaithLife to do.

PetahChristian

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/909784#Comment_909784

FaithLife should have automated tools for fixing them--and should do so.

Yes, not only for resources, but even for store issues.

Surely a technology company like FL could automate not only detection and fixing of issues, but even minimize human error. E.g., "This publisher permits dynamic pricing. Are you sure you don't want to enable it for this collection you're adding to the store?"

It may be cheaper in the short run to rely on customers to report "Collection X needs dynamic pricing," or "Resource Y needs to be unbundled," but it would 1) constantly require new waves of customers to take over for those who grow weary of freely doing it, and 2) require employees to fix what automation could have detected and fixed earlier and faster.

Mark Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/909784#Comment_909784

I'm not willing to do work for free that I've already paid FaithLife to do.

HMM. I haven't heard this before. What do you mean?

Do you mean that for the lifetime of the resource you expect your purchase of it to cover all possible future linking upgrades so that it perpetually up-to-date at no extra cost?

Sean

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/909788#Comment_909788

I'm not willing to do work for free that I've already paid FaithLife to do.

HMM. I haven't heard this before. What do you mean?

Do you mean that for the lifetime of the resource you expect your purchase of it to cover all possible future linking upgrades so that it perpetually up-to-date at no extra cost?

I explained my expectations clearly in my earlier post in this thread and in the many other posts I have written on this subject.

No, I don't expect every resource to be perfectly maintained in perpetuity come what may. For many resources, that obviously would be a losing proposition, and FL is entitled to make its own cost-benefit judgments. (For example, a while back I bought an obscure but delightful small work of theology that I'm sure probably moves only a few units per year. It cost a few dollars; links were terrible but I'm fine with that given the price and obscurity.)

I do think it is reasonable to be alerted if a resource is older and not properly formatted. FL thinks so too. I can't find the post but at one point a staff member suggested putting date Logos produced the resource on the product info page, but they haven't taken any steps towards providing that information in the web store. (The copyright is irrelevant for discerning this; besides, a new customer wouldn't be aware of the problem: "Well, this was produced during the Libronix era, so the linkage will be scanty.")

I do expect that if a resource goes on sale frequently and FL is going to be generating new revenues from it, it should be reviewed to ensure that the claims made about it being a "high quality electronic book" are justified. At a certain threshold of missing linkage, a resource fails to meet that claim. To their credit, FL sometimes does go back and update such resources--though again it's unpredictable and inconsistent.

I do expect a resource that comes out in the L6/L7 era to have all possible links to older titles in the catalog. Christus Victor, released a year ago (2016), does not. Yes, I did pay them for that; no, I would not be willing to somehow submit error reports/link the resource manually for free for the resource to be improved. In cases like this, I would reject either of these hypothetical responses from FL:

"Sorry we didn't include all the possible links in this resource when we made it; here's a tool so you can add them yourself."
"Sorry we didn't include all the possible links in this resource when we made it; give us $X more and we'll add them."

I post about this problem whenever the subject comes up because, as the Christus Victor example (and it's not the only one) shows, FL has still not taken this issue seriously, taken steps to ensure that going forward new resources are linked to everything in the existing catalog, nor addressed customer concerns like the original poster of this thread has raised.

Glenn Crouch

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/909790#Comment_909790

I do expect that if a resource goes on sale frequently and FL is going to be generating new revenues from it, it should be reviewed to ensure that the claims made about it being a "high quality electronic book" are justified. At a certain threshold of missing linkage, a resource fails to meet that claim. To their credit, FL sometimes does go back and update such resources--though again it's unpredictable and inconsistent.

I think this is quite a reasonable expectation.

JT (alabama24)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/909788#Comment_909788

Do you mean that for the lifetime of the resource you expect your purchase of it to cover all possible future linking upgrades so that it perpetually up-to-date at no extra cost?

Depending on what you mean by "perpetually," one could argue that this is the case now. FL does update the resources, and when they do, the users get the free updates. Of course, this is expensive and there isn't as much financial incentive to make updates to resources which most users who are inclined to make such a purchase have already done so.

Mark Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/909790#Comment_909790

I do expect a resource that comes out in the L6/L7 era to have all possible links to older titles in the catalog. Christus Victor, released a year ago (2016), does not. Yes, I did pay them for that; no, I would not be willing to somehow submit error reports/link the resource manually for free for the resource to be improved.

OK. That makes sense. Thank you for clarifying.

EastTN

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/909784#Comment_909784

This idea has been brought up several time and has merit. However:

Some of these resources have hundreds of missing links that would be incredibly tedious for any sort of community linking effort to fix. FaithLife should have automated tools for fixing them--and should do so.

I'm not willing to do work for free that I've already paid FaithLife to do.

It would certainly be incredibly tedious for any one person, or small group of people, to do. My guess is that's the problem FaithLife is running into. They have a huge catalog, and even with automated tools it's likely a challenge to keep up.

I see it very much like reporting typos. I'm paying for correct text - but that's not always what I get. It can be infuriating. I got particularly torqued a while back when I was taking a Hebrew class, and kept finding typos in the Hebrew text of the verses the workbook had us translating. Typos are bad enough in your native tongue, when they're in a language you're just starting to learn they can throw you for a real loop. But what'cha gonna do? I kept reporting them in hopes of helping some other student down the road. (And, to be fair, the resource has been updated since I took the class.)

I'd do the same thing with links if it were as easy as reporting a typo. If I have to look up the reference anyway, and it were just a couple of clicks to report it, why not?

Gordon Jones

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/909890#Comment_909890

I'd do the same thing with links if it were as easy as reporting a typo. If I have to look up the reference anyway, and it were just a couple of clicks to report it, why not?

I agree with you. We know that Logos ought to link everything but, if it were easy to do, I'd be happy to report a non-active reference just like I'm happy to report typos.

Glenn Crouch

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/909890#Comment_909890

I'd do the same thing with links if it were as easy as reporting a typo. If I have to look up the reference anyway, and it were just a couple of clicks to report it, why not?

Agreed - I try to religiously report typos - and if missing / broken links were as easy to report, I would do that as well.

Simon’s Brother

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/909947#Comment_909947

For broken or missing hyperlinks I use the report typo tool. It's not perfect and you can't submit the correction in a useful format but in the comment field I state why I am submitting report.

I would happily use a proper tool if availble in the software for reporting link problems but am not holding my breath. This conversation comes up every once in a while and so far no steps taken by FL. An optimist will say we are one conversation closer to FL actually doing something so let's run with that for now.

PetahChristian

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/910163#Comment_910163

For broken or missing hyperlinks I use the report typo tool. It's not perfect and you can't submit the correction in a useful format but in the comment field I state why I am submitting report.

Reporting missing links is the best first step, even if the tool we presently have isn't designed for that.

An optimist will say we are one conversation closer to FL actually doing something so let's run with that for now.

Hyphenation eventually got fixed. I do believe that the more bug reports we file, the more likely that issue will rise to the top and (eventually) get addressed.

I also think that FL has a lot of experience with adding links, and they probably have a better understanding of what works best in the long term. Many of our ideas may sound good, but might not be practical or sustainable or cost-effective from their perspective.

Kyle G. Anderson

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/910206#Comment_910206

Dictionary of Later New Testament and Its Developments is an older title and many of the links were simply unavailable at the time. I can look into getting it and the rest of the series updated.

When it comes to updating new old titles we tend to focus on titles that are popular (i.e. they're used frequently and a larger number people of own them) and could benefit from an update. By "benefit" I mean they're old enough where there is a benefit from new tagging or there are a large number of typos. The books with a large number of typos tend to be resources that were OCR'd in the mid-2000s.

Please feel free to request titles to be updated. We do use user suggestions as an impetus for resource updates.

As far as conveying when a book was made, one idea kicked around was posting a resources electronic publication date. This would convey when the resource was made. If and when a resource was given the full update treatment we could bump the electronic publication date.

James Taylor

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/910236#Comment_910236

Dictionary of Later New Testament and Its Developments is an older title and many of the links were simply unavailable at the time. I can look into getting it and the rest of the series updated.

Thanks Kyle, I would imagine many users of these high level dictionaries will benefit from this. They're often included as readings in the Mobile Ed courses as well, so there is reason to think it will be well recieved.

Francis

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/910236#Comment_910236

Please feel free to request titles to be updated. We do use user suggestions as an impetus for resource updates.

[Y]

Mattillo

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/910236#Comment_910236

Dictionary of Later New Testament and Its Developments is an older title and many of the links were simply unavailable at the time. I can look into getting it and the rest of the series updated.

When it comes to updating new old titles we tend to focus on titles that are popular (i.e. they're used frequently and a larger number people of own them) and could benefit from an update. By "benefit" I mean they're old enough where there is a benefit from new tagging or there are a large number of typos. The books with a large number of typos tend to be resources that were OCR'd in the mid-2000s.

Please feel free to request titles to be updated. We do use user suggestions as an impetus for resource updates.

As far as conveying when a book was made, one idea kicked around was posting a resources electronic publication date. This would convey when the resource was made. If and when a resource was given the full update treatment we could bump the electronic publication date.

I would suggest the MNTC on Hebrews could use a look. I remember when I used it a while back I found 5 or so typos all in the span of a chapter or two. I submitted typos on these but haven't seen any updates on that resource or the others I found in I Don't Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist.

Mark Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/910236#Comment_910236

When it comes to updating new old titles we tend to focus on titles that are popular (i.e. they're used frequently and a larger number people of own them) and could benefit from an update. By "benefit" I mean they're old enough where there is a benefit from new tagging or there are a large number of typos. The books with a large number of typos tend to be resources that were OCR'd in the mid-2000s.

I understand the logic of popular, but significant is also important.

Texts likely to be used academically should be significant enough to merit updating when needed. Resources that abound in references are probably also significant. Dictionaries, modern commentaries, grammars, lexicons, and academic monographs would be significant to me, even if not particularly popular.

As far as conveying when a book was made, one idea kicked around was posting a resources electronic publication date. This would convey when the resource was made. If and when a resource was given the full update treatment we could bump the electronic publication date.

I think this is a good idea. I hope you'll implement it.

James Taylor

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/910236#Comment_910236

Dictionary of Later New Testament and Its Developments is an older title and many of the links were simply unavailable at the time.

that is a logical explanation but it seems that it may not be the case in this instance... there were two previous volumes in the NT series and one of them "Jesus and the Gospels, 1st edition" is loaded with links (obviously relative to the amount of sources which are being cited), the other early volume "'Paul and his letters" is also missing tons of links from Pseudapigrapha, Dead Sea Scrolls, Nag Hammadi, Talmud, Church Fathers etc., see the concordance images below. The first is from DLNTD..then the two previous volumes...

*Note that was the 1st edition of Jesus and the gospels released in the 90's

Kyle G. Anderson

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/910242#Comment_910242

Dictionary of Later New Testament and Its Developments is an older title and many of the links were simply unavailable at the time. I can look into getting it and the rest of the series updated.

When it comes to updating new old titles we tend to focus on titles that are popular (i.e. they're used frequently and a larger number people of own them) and could benefit from an update. By "benefit" I mean they're old enough where there is a benefit from new tagging or there are a large number of typos. The books with a large number of typos tend to be resources that were OCR'd in the mid-2000s.

Please feel free to request titles to be updated. We do use user suggestions as an impetus for resource updates.

As far as conveying when a book was made, one idea kicked around was posting a resources electronic publication date. This would convey when the resource was made. If and when a resource was given the full update treatment we could bump the electronic publication date.

I would suggest the MNTC on Hebrews could use a look. I remember when I used it a while back I found 5 or so typos all in the span of a chapter or two. I submitted typos on these but haven't seen any updates on that resource or the others I found in I Don't Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist.

I'm fully aware of MNTC. It's not just Hebrews but most of the series that needs updating. Unfortunately there are some mitigating circumstances preventing it from happening right now. I'd really like to see this one updated.

Dictionary of Later New Testament and Its Developments is an older title and many of the links were simply unavailable at the time.

that is a logical explanation but it seems that it may not be the case in this instance... there were two previous volumes in the NT series and one of them "Jesus and the Gospels, 1st edition" is loaded with links (obviously relative to the amount of sources which are being cited), the other early volume "'Paul and his letters" is also missing tons of links from Pseudapigrapha, Dead Sea Scrolls, Nag Hammadi, Talmud, Church Fathers etc., see the concordance images below. The first is from DLNTD..then the two previous volumes...

By "older title" I meant time of production at Faithlife. Jesus and the Gospels received a subsequent updating--thus the expanded tagging. As far as I know, that has never happened with DLNTD.

James Taylor

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/910251#Comment_910251

Jesus and the Gospels received a subsequent updating--thus the expanded tagging. As far as I know, that has never happened with DLNTD.

Understood, can you please include Paul and his letters to be considered in this update. It seems those are the only two volumes are aren't sufficiently linked. Thanks!

Kyle G. Anderson

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/910253#Comment_910253

Jesus and the Gospels received a subsequent updating--thus the expanded tagging. As far as I know, that has never happened with DLNTD.

Understood, can you please include Paul and his letters to be considered in this update. It seems those are the only two volumes are aren't sufficiently linked. Thanks!

Yes I will.

Mattillo

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/910251#Comment_910251

Dictionary of Later New Testament and Its Developments is an older title and many of the links were simply unavailable at the time. I can look into getting it and the rest of the series updated.

When it comes to updating new old titles we tend to focus on titles that are popular (i.e. they're used frequently and a larger number people of own them) and could benefit from an update. By "benefit" I mean they're old enough where there is a benefit from new tagging or there are a large number of typos. The books with a large number of typos tend to be resources that were OCR'd in the mid-2000s.

Please feel free to request titles to be updated. We do use user suggestions as an impetus for resource updates.

As far as conveying when a book was made, one idea kicked around was posting a resources electronic publication date. This would convey when the resource was made. If and when a resource was given the full update treatment we could bump the electronic publication date.

I would suggest the MNTC on Hebrews could use a look. I remember when I used it a while back I found 5 or so typos all in the span of a chapter or two. I submitted typos on these but haven't seen any updates on that resource or the others I found in I Don't Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist.

I'm fully aware of MNTC. It's not just Hebrews but most of the series that needs updating. Unfortunately there are some mitigating circumstances preventing it from happening right now. I'd really like to see this one updated.

Dictionary of Later New Testament and Its Developments is an older title and many of the links were simply unavailable at the time.

that is a logical explanation but it seems that it may not be the case in this instance... there were two previous volumes in the NT series and one of them "Jesus and the Gospels, 1st edition" is loaded with links (obviously relative to the amount of sources which are being cited), the other early volume "'Paul and his letters" is also missing tons of links from Pseudapigrapha, Dead Sea Scrolls, Nag Hammadi, Talmud, Church Fathers etc., see the concordance images below. The first is from DLNTD..then the two previous volumes...

By "older title" I meant time of production at Faithlife. Jesus and the Gospels received a subsequent updating--thus the expanded tagging. As far as I know, that has never happened with DLNTD.

Any thoughts on when the MNTC might get an update Kyle sir? Months or years

Sean

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/910236#Comment_910236

As far as conveying when a book was made, one idea kicked around was posting a resources electronic publication date. This would convey when the resource was made. If and when a resource was given the full update treatment we could bump the electronic publication date.

This would be a small step forward, but it still places the burden on the customer to know the unspoken implication: if it's an older electronic publication date, the links may be fewer. Those of us who have been around a while, and burnt a few times, will realize that; new customers won't.