Original Languages Study

I love what Logos can do in researching the Biblical texts in the original languages! Here is how to set up this kind of layout if you want to try it:

1. Set your Double Click Action to SEARCH INLINE and your Triple Click Action to Look Up

2. Then, from your Tools menu, open Collections:

3. Then create a collection of your favorite Hebrew Lexicons and then create a collection of your favorite Hebrew theological dictionaries and make sure you click Show in Parallel Resources!:

3. Then, from the tools menu, select Collections and create a collection of your favorite Hebrew lexicons and then create a collection of your favorite Hebrew theological dictionaries. Make sure that you select Show in Parallel resources:

4. Then open your favorite Bible and select the Multiple Book View and add the Lexham Hebrew Bible and Ralf's Septuagint with Logos Morphology:

Here are some screenshots of the Greek new testament layout that I created that is comparable to what I created for the old testament:

Bravo! This is outstanding! I will be looking at this to compare my current workflows to yours.

Thanks for sharing!!

Doc B

Great post of a method.

Someone should turn this into a Wiki entry.

My own are slightly different...I keep an SBL and a NA28 apparatus on tabs as well as Comfort's NTTTC. I also keep a second copy of my primary bible set to receive hyperlinks so I don't lose my place. (I'm not Hebrew-fluent so mine are Greek-only.)

Nice work.

Jonathan Huber

Good stuff, Brian!

Mark Allison

Thanks for sharing Brian! I agree that Logos blows away Accordance for original language research in many areas. I think a lot of Accordance users disparage Logos because they haven't taken the time to learn the intricacies of a new interface. So far, I haven't found anything that Accordance can do that I can't do in Logos. And there are several things I can do in Logos that Accordance will literally never be able to do.

DMB

So far, I haven't found anything that Accordance can do that I can't do in Logos. And there are several things I can do in Logos that Accordance will literally never be able to do.

Smiling, but maybe you haven't used Accordance much (joking). I have a monster Logos OL investment, but still hit Accordance daily. One of my recent favs is the Targum mapping. Similarly, the Cambridge LXX apparatus, and Vetus Latina. Many more.

My own are slightly different...I keep an SBL and a NA28 apparatus on tabs as well as Comfort's NTTTC.

I was thinking about this the other day. In my NA28 texts, I can hover over to get apparatus information, and it made me wonder if it would be beneficial to look at adjusting how this fits into my layout configuration.

I also keep a second copy of my primary bible set to receive hyperlinks so I don't lose my place. (I'm not Hebrew-fluent so mine are Greek-only.)

This is a very good idea... hmmmmm... that would reduce some friction. I'm going to play with this.

I do like the left hand side of @Brian's layout where he has some target tabs, running alongside a group of linked tabs on the right. Hard for me to articulate, but it's almost a workflow that has parallel tracks, rather than a circular track to my current layout. I was engaged in a convo in another thread with @MJ earlier about her use of the term text-centric that might factor into this as well. I'll probably start a fresh layout based on Brian's layout and have a play.

Everyday is a school day!

Mark Allison

One of my recent favs is the Targum mapping. Similarly, the Cambridge LXX apparatus, and Vetus Latina. Many more.

Yes, it definitely depends on your specific use case as to whether or not Logos will work for you. I've worked with the Accordance Targums wordmap a lot, but only in development and not for research. I really hope Accordance will keep the ball rolling with the project. I'm not sure they've pushed any updates since I left. And I had the choice of taking Latin or working with the only computer in the building when I was in high school. I made the right decision, but now the only Latin I know is found on US currency (and maybe a couple of other random phrases) :-)

The targums wordmap is nice in Accordance, but it only covers genesis-deuteronomy. I would love to see Logos morphologically tag the multivolume aramaic english bible series and the targums project so that we can perform some neat word searches with those and see the percentage differences in those texts in the text comparison tool. That would be very cool.[H]

You can also search for all of the kethiv and qere readings in the lexham hebrew bible as well and see the highlights of those readings in the information panel:

These are really outstanding @Brian!

Matt Hamrick

Any layout I make I always open a Bible and duplicate it it for sending links to it. It's a practice you should incorporate in any layout you do where you are using a bible.

John

Since migrating from Accordance, I have been blown away by how Logos is miles ahead of Accordance in studying the Biblical texts. Here is just one example of a layout that I have created for studying the Old Testament. I took my inspiration from BibleWorks that I used to use before I tried Accordance. Check it out:

Thanks for taking the time to post this. I also am a former (and current [:)]) Bibleworks user. I also have Accordance, but am not proficient with it.

What this shows is that Logos has capability equal to or beyond what other programs offer. It also shows the need to become a power user and take advantage of all of the available training which are available to make the most of the Logos software.

I hope to have the time in the future to dive in to Logos and learn it more completely.

You mentioned the Heiser training, which I have always thought were terribly overpriced on Logos. This leaves me with a question, what is the best training available for this type of original language work in Logos? Does the MP seminars take you this deep? I was actually looking at a couple of different third party sources of training also. But it would be good to get feedback from people who have been through the training already [:)]

I subscribe to MP seminars and I have Michael Heiser's learn to use hebrew with logos. All of this training plus being a former Accordance user has paid massive dividends in learning to do these searches and diving deeper into logos. I highly recommend taking the time to go through this type of training because it all connects. Now I'm going through the syntax training videos in wiki and you tube and more dots are connecting.[Y]

Since migrating from Accordance, I have been blown away by how Logos is miles ahead of Accordance in studying the Biblical texts.

I run both Accordance and Logos from my notebook computer so screen real estate comes at a premium if you know what I mean. So, I am wondering:

Question: how does one go about splitting up some these mega layouts and turn them into more managable tabbed work spaces, with labels?

Hey BKMitchell,

Good question, it took me a while to learn and get adjusted to how to do layouts in Logos and I'm still learning. I had to go through a lot of trial and error to get this layout the way I wanted it to look. My laptop has a large screen so this one fits perfectly:

Since you have limited screen space, I would recommend focusing on what's most important to the kind of work that you are wanting to do and saving that as a layout on your notebook. I can use all of this on my laptop but if I were in your shoes, I would pick out the most important panels and save that as a layout. Maybe what you don't use as much, make a layout of those panels and save that to use less often would be my recommendation.

Maybe what you don't use as much,

Well, I think I use just as much, but not on one screen at one time.

Rather, I would probably have divided into name tabbed spaces, so I can jump back and forth between different searches andor studies. So, I am still trying to figure out how to do that.

I had to go through a lot of trial

That line of thought rings true for me! Logos is powerful, but it can be challening to figure out how to do things.

For example I would like to search on vowel points patterns and instead of using consonants would like to have wild cards in their place. I am sure logos can do it, but I still have yet to figure it out.

anyway thanks for the recommendations

https://feedback.logos.com/boards/logos-desktop-app/posts/ability-to-create-tab-groups

Question: how does one go about splitting up some these mega layouts and turn them into more managable tabbed work spaces, with labels?

This is a limitation that has driven me nuts for years. There are some feedback items to vote on if you wish:

https://feedback.logos.com/boards/logos-desktop-app/posts/rename-tabs

https://feedback.logos.com/boards/logos-desktop-app/posts/allow-multiple-application-instances

Floating windows help, but there are limitations. i.e. if you click a link, it will send you to your main layout to open up the guide, tool or resources. (you can click and drag though to stay in the floating window)

In my opinion, the gap between laptop screens and multiple desktop screens is bigger than it has ever been, so having some of these options to build layouts (a.k.a workspaces in Accordance) would be very useful.

This is a limitation that has driven me nuts for years. There are some feedback items to vote on if you wish:

Yes, thank you! I placed my vote on all the items.

Michael Atnip

Miles ahead? I followed your setup, and yes, there are some things that Logos can do that Accordance cannot. But I can do so much more with the multiple workspaces in Accordance that Logos cannot. With a triple monitor setup, that was the killer for me when I gave both software a run. I do 90% of my work with the competition because of the limitation on having one layout open at a time.

And, lot of what you do here is actually as easy or easier for me with the live click in Accordance. And the text comparison in the competition has the the tagging in it.

So, like Chevy, Ford, Dodge, they all can get you there (if you know how to drive them). Probably none of them would be "miles ahead" of the competitors. Maybe yards or feet. [;)]

But thanks for sharing this; It is very helpful. I think I will find it useful and, who knows, maybe some day I will get to liking it more than the competition. So far, I am not convinced.

MJ. Smith

But I can do so much more with the multiple workspaces in Accordance that Logos cannot. With a triple monitor setup, that was the killer for me when I gave both software a run. I do 90% of my work with the competition because of the limitation on having one layout open at a time.

I suspect this is a matter of familiarity with the software and having developed habits around it. Logos users often use multiple monitors with different floating windows on different monitors. The primary difference is that the full collection of monitor layouts is drawn together under a single layout - opened and closed as a single unit while, as I understand it, Accordance users are used to having these as separate layouts opened and closed as independent units.

There are Logos users who would prefer the Accordance approach and those who prefer the Logos approach; I suspect the same is true in Accordance. But brush away the noise and one finds little difference in functionality, only in how one achieves it.

Speaking for myself only, one aspect that made me turn towards Logos rather than Accordance is the ease with which the Bible text is left "pure" rather than being an active workspace. Not that this is difficult in Accordance but rather it is counter-cultural. Mind you my distaste for the multi-colored visual filtered Bibles shown in many Logos screenshots are just as counter-cultural to me.

I totally agree with you MJ.[Y] In transitioning from Accordance to Logos, I'm still learning and adjusting to the functionality of Logos but I am enjoying the journey of discovering all that Logos can do in studying the Scriptures in the original languages. There are some things that I miss in Accordance that Logos can't do yet, but I am discovering day by day so many more things that Logos can do that Accordance simply can't do. Mark Allison is right, 5 years ago Accordance led the way in the study of original languages. But what a difference 5 years are in the world of Bible software development. It's all about staying on the cutting edge of software development and these past five years are exhibit A on the difference in direction between Accordance and Logos. Logos is moving forward and growing while listening to their customers' needs and Accordance is bleeding customers and censoring feedback while staying stagnant in development. This is why so many former Accordance users like myself are here now at Logos and excited about Bible software again.[H]

I am discovering day by day so many more things that Logos can do that Accordance simply can't do.

Hello Brian Leathers, If you do not mind please share some of things especially as releated to Original language research. For example what kinds of queries can run on Hebrew texts in Logos that I can't do else where?

There are Logos users who would prefer the Accordance approach and those who prefer the Logos approach; I suspect the same is true in Accordance. But brush away the noise and one finds little difference in functionality, only in how one achieves it.

My main struggle with the Logos approach of floating windows is that their behaviour is different than the main workspace. (i.e. links) I have adapted to this, but my main use case of floating windows is that when I am working in a text or tool, I sometimes want to 'pop it out' from amongst the other tabs, so that I can focus in on it. Keyboard commands are brilliant for this, because you can move around very quickly and drill down into that pane. (This use case is a lot different than attempting to use a floating pane as an extension of resources in a multi-screen environment.)

Michael Atnip

But brush away the noise and one finds little difference in functionality, only in how one achieves it.

Yes, the "noise" from recent Accordance-to-Logos converts needs to be discerned. The functionality of the two are neck-and-neck, with one ahead here, the other there. The other "noise" has to do with dissatisfaction with perceived mismanagement. If we can keep these two aspects separated, then we will probably not make claims about being "miles ahead" or that one or the other software is seriously handicapped. I find not having multiple workspaces a major "handicap" for my workflow, but my workflow is not the only one, and may not be the best if I knew of others.

Bible software has hit a plateau in development, with little foreseeable major advances in the near future. Tweaks and improvements? Yeah ... but like image manipulation software (think Photoshop and such), not much new has really happened in the last few years other than AI integration. Maybe I am wrong about any major breakthroughs in Bible software; I am not a prophet, just giving a very subjective opinion. :-)

MJ. Smith

Bible software has hit a plateau in development, with little foreseeable major advances in the near future. Tweaks and improvements?

You may be right but there are many useful features from other text analysis and data mining tools that could be brought into Bible software that would greatly enhance the visual logic capabilities.

The functionality of the two are neck-and-neck, with one ahead here, the other there. The other "noise" has to do with dissatisfaction with perceived mismanagement.

Like you and many others, I have paid for the privilege of being a big fan of Accordance. In my head, it is a bit hard to separate what is possible in my use case with the direction management is taking the company. So, I have hard time creating a dichotomy in my mind, because I am frustrated at management's performance to deliver syncing for some years now, when the reality is that this is standard technology in many apps and is not exactly cutting edge.

Ok, this reflects one small element of my use case of increasingly relying on mobile technology to study on the fly, but it also represents a passion that I have that Accordance should be working on other technologies by now. This is in addition to resource development. In the last month we have had Galaxie Journals and Master Collection updates drop in Logos, and I have no confidence that we will see Galaxie updates any time soon in Accordance.

Of course, if all I want to do is do the type of textual studies I have always done, solely on the desktop with a few updates here and there, I would have nothing to complain about right now.

I do think more is possible and I do wish them well. I am not burning my licenses just yet because it is an amazing piece of software.

Bible software has hit a plateau in development, with little foreseeable major advances in the near future. Tweaks and improvements?

I have wondered the same thing, but I look at things that I would like to see more development and imagination on. So for example, in the last few days there has been dialogue about taking the text comparison tool further. https://community.logos.com/forums/t/224904.aspx

Also, could the Logos Bible Study platform be a bit more open to interfacing in a contextual way with complimentary studies in Biblical and extra Biblical materials through features such as sharing highlights with Readwise? There are materials out there that will never ever appear in Logos and platforms like ReadWise can help bridge the gap. https://feedback.logos.com/boards/logos-desktop-app/posts/send-highlights-to-readwise or even allow the import of materials formatted in PDF or ePub? https://feedback.logos.com/boards/logos-desktop-app/posts/request-a-facility-to-add-pdf-and-epub-books-directly-into-logos-please I have been pretty passionate about keeping external and internal linking in Logos as part of the strategy going forward, so we can link our thinking, no matter which pieces of software we are employing in our overall research workflows. https://community.logos.com/forums/t/224537.aspx?PageIndex=3

From a historical Christianity point of view, I think there is more to be done in mining the resources and datasets we have on a number of fronts, such as allowing users to more easily navigate Biblical interpretation from over the years https://feedback.logos.com/boards/logos-desktop-app/posts/bible-interpretation-choices-at-a-glance or allowing users to focus on specific era studies, such as this feature suggested around the Church Fathers. https://feedback.logos.com/boards/logos-desktop-app/posts/collection-church-fathers-categorized.

Some church traditions would also be better served to allow for greater ease of study according to their approach to the church calendar. https://feedback.logos.com/boards/logos-desktop-app/posts/revive-liturgical-ribbon or a Confessional Bible study filter https://feedback.logos.com/boards/logos-desktop-app/posts/confessional-bible-study-filter

I'd also like an improved Atlas Guide https://feedback.logos.com/boards/logos-desktop-app/posts/add-atlas-resources-to-atlas-guide-section and for the Bible Atlas revamped with a greater ability to build your own layers and fundamental things like alternative spellings addressed: https://feedback.logos.com/boards/logos-data-sets/posts/accept-known-alternate-spellings-for-place-names-in-atlas Images and multimedia are the same: https://feedback.logos.com/boards/logos-mobile-app/posts/resource-view-improve-image-viewing-support I am a big fan to Biblical Archaeology, so I am hopeful they will return to this at some point because in the early days of Logos this was quite popular. https://feedback.logos.com/boards/logos-data-sets/posts/archaeology-data-set I am still grieving over the day we lost BAR!

Of course, AI predictive technologies adds an additional and exciting overlay to all of this. If am comparing the translation of Biblical texts, what if the software recognises that I am leaving out some key comparisons in some commentaries, therefore giving me a prompt 'Also Consider...'

With this new business model, I would hope to see Logos be very mindful in what really brings value and addressing long standing things in the software that need revised. I also hope to see some imagination, like we are seeing around AI. (How about rebuilding from the ground up a new, more powerful notetaking tool, which has AI highlighting other notes you should cross link to or further resources you might consider consulting?)

I am writing as someone who uses the software every day, so you may be correct, we are at a plateau, like a wordprocessor, where 90% of the users use 10% of the features. If this is the case, and due to a lack of competition and vision Logos becomes bloated with useless stuff, their subscription model will likely highlight what people think when they vote with their feet. Time will tell.

I have been blown away by how Logos is miles ahead of Accordance in studying the Biblical texts.

Hey Brian! I am all ears! Please elaborate more on this statement.

I am very, very curious! For example what kinds of morpho-syntactic Hebrew searches can I run in Logos that are miles ahead of the competition (in this case Accordance).

Hey BKMitchell,

I apologize for making such a brash statement. My excitement and zeal got the better of me and I apologize. For the type of work and searching that I like and need to do, Logos works better for me is much more intuitive and user friendly than Accordance. Two years of frustration with Accordance 14 and the numerous bugs and lack of response in fixing numerous errors in their software led to my overzealous outburst at finally having Bible software that functioned the way that I needed it to. Once again I apologize and if Accordance works for and does what you need it to do, I'm happy for you. I am finally happy to have a Bible software program in Logos that does what I need it to do. I do miss some searching capabilities in Accordance, like vowel searches for example that I am hoping Logos will offer, but I will enjoy and appreciate what Logos does give me for now.

Michael Atnip

Hey BKMitchell,

I apologize for making such a brash statement. My excitement and zeal got the better of me and I apologize. For the type of work and searching that I like and need to do, Logos works better for me is much more intuitive and user friendly than Accordance. Two years of frustration with Accordance 14 and the numerous bugs and lack of response in fixing numerous errors in their software led to my overzealous outburst at finally having Bible software that functioned the way that I needed it to. Once again I apologize and if Accordance works for and does what you need it to do, I'm happy for you. I am finally happy to have a Bible software program in Logos that does what I need it to do. I do miss some searching capabilities in Accordance, like vowel searches for example that I am hoping Logos will offer, but I will enjoy and appreciate what Logos does give me for now.

[Y]

Here is what I just found in Logos about searching with vowels in Hebrew:

Just getting started using some of these search commands and I have already tried searching for the "interrogative He" for instance and so far so good.