Exegetical summaries and the handicap with BAGD/BDAG

This new blog promotes Exegetical Summaries and I actually like the series, have all of them, and use them occasionally.

https://blog.logos.com/2017/09/scholars-disagree-consult-exegetical-summaries/

One problem is that the Bauer's dictionary links are to BAGD, and I have BDAG which is newer.

The easiest solution would be to give BAGD to BDAG owners.

The second could be something like new links or some sort of link redirection filter.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Whyndell Grizzard

I agree BAGD would be the easiest solution or cross link BAGD references to the reference in the newer BDAG version.

It is extremely annoying having to look up material manually.[:@]

John Kaess

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/921795#Comment_921795

I also agree. I would be happy with either proposed solution, but since i also own all the exegetical summaries and i've recommended them to others, i'd appreciate Logos working on this problem soon.

John

Matthew

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/921804#Comment_921804

Faithlife would have to get permission from the publisher to give BAGD away for free, even if it was only to those who already own BDAG. Would LOVE to be proved wrong, but I don't see that happening.

Joseph Turner

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/921807#Comment_921807

I agree with you. I just posted the following under the blog post:

One of the problems with these which was brought up in the forums is that they reference BAGD (as do a plethora of Logos resources), but Logos only currently offers BDAG. I do not believe that BAGD should be offered for free for those who own BDAG because it is technically a different work, and I understand that offering BAGD could create confusion and present a loss of revenue for the publisher because people may get it instead of BDAG (accidentally or not). I also would not like to see references to BAGD redirected to BDAG because they are technically different resources, and the information could have changed between the versions.

I suggest that Logos should offer to sell BAGD to anyone who purchases BDAG. It could come in a separate bundle with BAGD/BDAG and dynamic pricing. This way, people who have already purchased BDAG can still get BAGD with the dynamically priced bundle.

David Paul

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/921819#Comment_921819

The thing that burns me is that I used to have BAGD when I first started with Logos, but after starting a new account, I lost it. I have the disk but have no way to access it anymore.

Joseph Turner

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/921820#Comment_921820

The thing that burns me is that I used to have BAGD when I first started with Logos, but after starting a new account, I lost it. I have the disk but have no way to access it anymore.

If you've ever installed it on an account with an email address they should be able to link the accounts, even if you have a different email address now. BAGD is on their servers, so it will download once the accounts are linked.

Rick Brannan (Logos)

Hi folks.

One problem is that the Bauer's dictionary links are to BAGD, and I have BDAG which is newer.

I know it's not the answer everyone is looking for, but the Lemma in Passage feature (if you're a Logos Now subscriber) has the side-effect of lemmatizing all of your commentaries including the Exegetical Summaries. That data is available in the context menu (you can keylink/lookup, but you can't search on the data). So you could keylink off of the relevant Greek word and hit BDAG pretty easily. Or any other lexicon you routinely keylink to for that matter. Many times, linking by lemma is actually more accurate than linking by a page number (as is done to BAGD).

James Taylor

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/921823#Comment_921823

Many times, linking by lemma is actually more accurate than linking by a page number (as is done to BAGD).

Nice work-around Rick, thanks!

Whyndell Grizzard

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/921833#Comment_921833

Many times, linking by lemma is actually more accurate than linking by a page number (as is done to BAGD).

Nice work-around Rick, thanks!

Yes- but it totally ruins the use of popups and the articles are not exactly the same- so still prefer to have access to BAGD.

Veli Voipio

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/921819#Comment_921819

I suggest that Logos should offer to sell BAGD to anyone who purchases BDAG. It could come in a separate bundle with BAGD/BDAG and dynamic pricing. This way, people who have already purchased BDAG can still get BAGD with the dynamically priced bundle.

Sounds good [Y]

Many times, linking by lemma is actually more accurate than linking by a page number (as is done to BAGD).

This works, thanks Rick.

I also think it could be possible to make the software to pick up the word αρχη and then pick up BAGD 1.c. and point to BAGD accurately and to BDAG quite accurately. It won't be exactly same as the BAGD text, but if we cannot get BAGD anyway, that solution could make sense. (If a miracle happens, and we'll be allowed to buy BAGD, the user can use the multiple resources feature to add BDAG beside it to get the maximal value)

Donovan R. Palmer

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/921823#Comment_921823

Rick - how do you have an Exegetical Summary for John 1-9? I don't have this in my collection and have not been able to find it on the Logos website either...

Ted Hans

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/921999#Comment_921999

Rick - how do you have an Exegetical Summary for John 1-9? I don't have this in my collection and have not been able to find it on the Logos website either...

see here https://www.logos.com/product/138251/exegetical-summaries-series-upgrade Exegetical Summaries Series Upgrade (4 vols.)

Bobby Terhune

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/921999#Comment_921999

It was in a recent 4 volume upgrade

https://www.logos.com/product/138251/exegetical-summaries-series-upgrade

Donovan R. Palmer

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/922003#Comment_922003

Thanks! I had missed that!

Veli Voipio

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/922005#Comment_922005

This newest one has links to BDAG [H]

https://www.logos.com/product/150109/an-exegetical-summary-of-acts-1-14

John Kaess

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/921823#Comment_921823

Rick,

My Logos Now subscription expires in 5 months. I've purchased the extended feature set in Logos 7, but it does not include the Lemma in Passage dataset. I'd appreciate it if Logos would consider making this dataset available for purchase for those who have decided not to continue with the subscriptions of Logos Now or Fathlife Connect. Short of making BADG available for purchase, this seems the best solution to those who own the Exegetical Summaries series, and is completely within the realm of things Logos can do on its own without approval by a publisher.

John

Rick Brannan (Logos)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/972475#Comment_972475

Hi John.

I'd appreciate it if Logos would consider making this dataset available for purchase for those who have decided not to continue with the subscriptions of Logos Now or Fathlife Connect.

I've passed this along.

Short of making BADG available for purchase,

My guess is that the publisher is the entity that prevents BAGD from being sellable, and that we (Logos/Faithlife) no longer have a license to this edition.

Bobby Terhune

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/972481#Comment_972481

Rick,

Several years ago I called the publisher and they told me that they would have no problem relicensing BAGD to Logos. If this is still the case, I don't know.

Leo Wee Fah

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/972481#Comment_972481

Hi John.

I'd appreciate it if Logos would consider making this dataset available for purchase for those who have decided not to continue with the subscriptions of Logos Now or Fathlife Connect.

I've passed this along.

+ 1

Leo Wee Fah

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/972493#Comment_972493

[Y]