Searching for references in the Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament

It seems that many commentaries and Bible dictionary entry references to books in the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha are in the form 1 Enoch 13:7 et cetera and some of these are appropriatley tagged to link to these texts, but if I try a search in Logos 4 using this format, the books and associated commentaries do not come up.

How should I expect to pull up the text of such a book using the search facility ?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

NetworkGeek

I may not understand what you are trying to accomplish, here I did a "Basic" search for that Enoch verse in my collection of Dictionaries, and I got plenty of hits. Is this what you are trying to do?

Gary O'Neal

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/95166#Comment_95166

I got plenty of hits.

But notice that many of those 'hits' are not for 1 Enoch 13:7.

Dave Hooton

It seems that many commentaries and Bible dictionary entry references to books in the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha are in the form 1 Enoch 13:7 et cetera and some of these are appropriatley tagged to link to these texts, but if I try a search in Logos 4 using this format, the books and associated commentaries do not come up.

To search for bible references try a Basic Search like:-

For more info see http://wiki.logos.com/Search_HELP

However 1 Enoch is not in my Septuagint resources and I had more success with

Todd Phillips

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/95166#Comment_95166

Most Apocrypha references are considered valid Bible references, but Pseudepigrapha references aren't. Bible references are automatically recognized by the search engine, but to search for the Pseudepigrapha references, you need to put them in the form <Pseudepigrapha = 1 Enoch 13.7> , like this:

Or you can right-click on an embedded Pseudepigrapha reference, and select Search Library from the Reference tab:

Also, you can see the Cited By references that are listed as well.

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/95216#Comment_95216

Most Apocrypha references are considered valid Bible references, but Pseudepigrapha references aren't. Bible references are automatically recognized by the search engine, but to search for the Pseudepigrapha references, you need to put them in the form <Pseudepigrapha = 1 Enoch 13.7> , like this:

Wow, that was something I had no idea about. It's not documented anywhere in Search help or on the wiki. The only mention I could find of it was in a list of data types in Help, but that doesn't say what to do with these. We need a new section in the wiki on how to use Data Types in help and whare are the shortcuts for them all.

Here's all we have so far, in http://wiki.logos.com/Search_HELP under 1. References:

General format is <datatype Op reference> eg. <bible = Jn 3:16>, <LN ~26.5>
Op can be ~ intersection (default), =, subset, or superset
Note many types are handled automatically, so <~Jn 3:16> or Jn 3:16 are the same and <G5547>, <H6213> are recognized as Strong’s numbers.
Louw-Nida ranges can be specified as <LN57.125-57.129> or <LN57.125-129>

And here's what the Help file says:

Data Type
Simple Definition: A type of data, a distinct kind or family of information.
Some of the Data Types found in Logos:
• Bible
• Day of Year (for daily devotionals)
• Languages, including English, Greek, Hebrew, Latin, and Spanish
• Greek Strong’s Numbers and Hebrew Strong’s Numbers
• Louw-Nida Semantic Domains
• Nag Hammadi Codices
• Page Number
• Pseudepigrapha
• The Laws of Hammurabi
• Works of Philo

I know the shortcut for Louw-Nida Semantic Domains is LN. But what about all those other things?

And if those are merely "some of the data types found in Logos" is there an exhaustive list somewhere?

Todd Phillips

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/95222#Comment_95222

Wow, that was something I had no idea about. It's not documented anywhere in Search help or on the wiki. The only mention I could find of it was in a list of data types in Help, but that doesn't say what to do with these. We need a new section in the wiki on how to use Data Types in help and whare are the shortcuts for them all.

There's a LOT of data-types. What do you mean by shortcuts? (EDIT: nevermind, I see you mean the short form).

I think the easiest way to find the designation of a data-type is to right-click in the type of text you want to search for references to (i.e., Pseudepigrapha, Josephus, TDNT, Philo, etc, etc, blah blah), and see what data-types are listed on the pop-up menu. Then if you search for that data-type from the menu, you'll see the name along with the canonical format of the data-type reference.

And if those are merely "some of the data types found in Logos" is there an exhaustive list somewhere?

I've seen in the log file a list of all the data-types that are registered in my library. Maybe we should start looking in there.[:)]

Update: there are 1652 data-types registered in my library. [:O] Here's the list from my log: datatypes.txt

David Wilson

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/95216#Comment_95216

Most Apocrypha references are considered valid Bible references, but Pseudepigrapha references aren't. Bible references are automatically recognized by the search engine, but to search for the Pseudepigrapha references, you need to put them in the form <Pseudepigrapha = 1 Enoch 13.7> , like this:

Thanks Todd:

Your help is much appreciated. Useful work around !!

Would probably be more appropriate if the search engine could recognize the reference format that many of the resources use when refering to sections of the Pseudepigrapha such as 1 Enoch 13.7, I expect this would reduce tagging problems.

I find lots of hits for the search window when I do the search, but somehow I had the expectation that typing in the reference would also automatically bring up a text window and a commentary window on the passage, not that they are Bible references, but because the majority of the resources in my Library seem to use that same format when referencing them.

Interesting when you type such a reference here in the forum, the "refTagger" automatically tries to create a link, but cannot find a reference...... [:^)]

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/95216#Comment_95216

Most Apocrypha references are considered valid Bible references,

When I thought I had found a bug with regards to a Deuterocanonical text (Jubilees), Logos responded that until they had a Bible that actually used the book, I should not expect it to be treated as a biblical reference. Another reason for pushing for Coptic Bibles. [:)] There's always the chance that I misunderstood but ...

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/95236#Comment_95236

Update: there are 1652 data-types registered in my library. Here's the list from my log: datatypes.txt

Ughh! So many. It's interesting that my single reference in the Septuagint produces:-

<BibleLXX2 = Enoch 13:7> or <Enoch 13:7> because it is a bible data type +

<Pseudepigrapha = 1 Enoch 13.7> which could be shortened to <Pseud = 1 Enoch 13.7> (can you check?)

Kevin Becker

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/95706#Comment_95706

<Pseudepigrapha = 1 Enoch 13.7> which could be shortened to <Pseud = 1 Enoch 13.7> (can you check?)

I tried the suggested abbreviation in a search and it didn't work. I suppose only the more heavily used data types are given abbreviations (pure speculation on my part).

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/95236#Comment_95236

I think the easiest way to find the designation of a data-type is to right-click in the type of text you want to search for references to (i.e., Pseudepigrapha, Josephus, TDNT, Philo, etc, etc, blah blah), and see what data-types are listed on the pop-up menu. Then if you search for that data-type from the menu, you'll see the name along with the canonical format of the data-type reference.

Yowza! That's a lot of work to get a list of all of these. It's more for curiosity, to find out what I could possibly search for. Much of the learning I do in Logos is through serendipity, i.e., not knowing I could find something and then stumbling upon it delightfully, rather than having in mind something I want to search for and figuring out how to search for it.

Update: there are 1652 data-types registered in my library. Here's the list from my log: datatypes.txt

Wow! Now I'm wondering how to get at some of those through the method you gave me above. All the au+ ones look intriguing, for example. I don't have books in my library by all these authors (and they don't exist in Logos's catalog), so I'm wondering how these data types are used.

Don't worry, I'm not expecting you to answer; it just makes me realize how much there is "under the hood" of Logos that I don't understand the first thing about!

Todd Phillips

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/95715#Comment_95715

Update: there are 1652 data-types registered in my library. Here's the list from my log: datatypes.txt

Wow! Now I'm wondering how to get at some of those through the method you gave me above. All the au+ ones look intriguing, for example. I don't have books in my library by all these authors (and they don't exist in Logos's catalog), so I'm wondering how these data types are used.

Don't worry, I'm not expecting you to answer; it just makes me realize how much there is "under the hood" of Logos that I don't understand the first thing about!

I'm wondering about all those author data types myself. I bet a lot of them are for tagging references in BDAG (and the like) so that when resources for those authors are added in the future, there will already be links from BDAG to those books.

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/95707#Comment_95707

I tried the suggested abbreviation in a search and it didn't work. I suppose only the more heavily used data types are given abbreviations (pure speculation on my part).

It's just that the data type is called "pseud". Why my LXX context menu suggested <Pseudepigrapha = 1 Enoch 13.7> to produce zero results I don't know. Why bother to produce such a reference from Enoch 13.7?

Mark Barnes

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/95909#Comment_95909

I've got a relatively big library (3,500+ resources), and have got nowhere near that many datatypes (probably less than 200 for me). Do you have any idea what might be causing the discrepancy? Does anyone know where datatypes are stored?

Mark