Visual Filters for Names & Personal Pronouns?

I would like to highlight the names and personal pronouns of the family line of Jesus so that as I read the OT I can see which individuals were in Jesus' ancestry. Is there a way of doing this with the visual filter tool? I know the clause tool can detect each person mentioned in the Bible anywhere they are mentioned, but is there a way to apply this to a visual filter? I would also prefer only to highlight the name or pronoun, and not the entire verse or sentence that the person is mentioned. Is this possible?

Thank you!

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Fred Chapman

I played with a couple of things but could not get it to work. There are some on the forums who are Visual Filter guru's who may see this thread and have a solution. I am not sure if this is possible or not. If it is I could not figure it out.

Mark Barnes

Is there a way of doing this with the visual filter tool?

Yes, you can do this in Logos 6, but constructing the filter is a bit laborious.

Open your Bible to Luke 3, or Matthew 1, or wherever you're going to get the line from. (I'll use Luke 3 in my example.)
Create a search (visual filter doesn't have the new autocomplete yet).
Type the name of the first person you want, and select him from the list. Make sure you select the suggestion with the person icon.
Type a comma and space, then do the same of the next person.
For some people, (e.g. Levi), the autocompleter may not suggest the right person. You can encourage it by typing <Person Levi instead. In fact, you may find it quicker to have ", <Person " (without the quotes) on the clipboard.
Note that sometimes spelling can vary (e.g. "Melki" in the NIV is "Melchi" in Logos). If you can't find someone you can always right-click on their name in Matthew/Luke to check.
Repeat a lot [:)].
When you run the search, check all the people in Luke 3/Matthew 1 are highlighted and you haven't missed anyone.

When you're happy with the search, click on the search menu and choose "Save as visual filter".

Mark Barnes

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/651515#Comment_651515

I though this was quite an interesting thing to do, so here's the code for Luke 3.

And these are those in Matthew 1, not already included in Luke.

If you were going to do it 'properly', you'd have to look at the OT ancestor charts to fill in the gaps left by Luke and Matthew.

It highlights more than you'd expect, as it includes all the pronouns:

Mark Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/651533#Comment_651533

Nice job, Mark, and interesting question in the first place. [Y]

Liam

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/651539#Comment_651539

Mark this is excellent! Thanks a ton!

Andrew Batishko

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/651533#Comment_651533

Very cool search, Mark!

Here's my list. It's got 65 people more than Mark's list. I retrieved this by taking all the people listed in Luke 3:23-38 and Matthew 1:1-17. Then I used Relatives data (exposed in the Factbook) to iteratively find all the Parents, Fathers, Mothers, Grandfathers, and Grandmothers of those people.

You can optionally add the following two people depending on whether or not you want to include father-in-laws:

Doc B

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/651533#Comment_651533

I though this was quite an interesting thing to do, so here's the code for Luke 3.

Mark, I think the rest of us should start taking up a love offering and send it to you. You've saved me more time than I can possibly compute, and it hasn't cost me a dime.

As they say on the PGA tour, UDA MAN! [:D]

Doc B

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/653428#Comment_653428

Here's my list

Now the challenge becomes: take the two lists Mark posted and the exhaustive list Andrew posted and come up with a filter that will show them all, but differentiate between the two lists (plus the relative's data).

[8-|]

Andrew Batishko

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/653460#Comment_653460

Here are the items in my list that aren't in Mark's list. There might be a single overlap or duplicate item in there, but I can't seem to spot it.