Concordances...

[Paul not the apostle]

Does anyone else see the circular reasoning behind concordances? And the flaw in most Christian usage of them?

The reason that there are multiple definitions (or USES to be more correct) is that the authors of said concordance are letting us know that they are seeing the word used in different ways throughout scripture. The authors would not be including a definition if there were not a verse that was already existing in scripture that used the word accordingly. The authors are NOT saying that the word can be used all those ways at any time for any verse. They are resources for us to use in reference to how words were used in context so that we can determine the best usage for the word in THAT verse. THEY ARE NOT DICTIONARIES. It seems to me like there is a large movement towards using them as dictionaries, replacing words in a Bible verse with the second or third meaning to fit the particular argument. Just because there is a list of meanings in a concordance, does not mean that we can just cut and paste, correct? Just because a word CAN be used as "this or that" does not mean that it should be forced into any particular passage to alter scripture. We need to read the context of the verses and determine that most appropriate context and therefore deduce the proper usage of the word in question.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

 

[CecilW]

Agreed, actually.

"The Word wailed" may be more aliterative and dramatic, but it doesn't pack the simple pathos of "Jesus wept."

Good observation, Paul. I gather you're experiencing a good deal of this particular form of torture?

 

[Tlaloc]

I think it largely depends on the concordance itself and how its used. Purely English based concordances are nice for topical studies, original language concordances are very good for getting the feel for a words usage, exhaustive concordances usually have a great deal of information, there are concordances actually tied to dictionaries. Mind its the use of original language tied concordances that makes the Idios\Heutou pro poly arguments available to show lay people.

To me the term Concordance is pretty broad though, so I'm not exactly sure if I'm disagreeing with your point or talking about something else.

 

[welltan]

Concordances can be a great help, but your point is valid. That is why it is always nice to search more than one concordance or source. It brings various slants to meaning and to intent. And of course context and other scripture positions weigh in. There is no substitute for being able to receive help through the Holy Spirit for a final position on what scripture means.

 

[Tlaloc]

That I agree with Welltan, many councelours help make a good point.

I agree also with Pauls premise that you cant cut and past whatever you want, working with such things properly is time consuming and take a lot of detail.

 

[DrRay777]

Actually Paul, the term 'concordance' refers to the listing of words as found in the Bible translation of that particular concordance. The Strong's concordance is based on the KJV. A concordance MAY be linked to/published with Hebrew, et. al., (OT) and Greek et.al., (NT) dictionaries with the translated words linked to numbers with meanings delineated in the respective dictionaries, as James Strong did. However, some concordances are not published with dictionaries, they are just the list of words.

The meanings of the original words are sometimes subject to some debate, but overall are quite helpful to clarify mistranslations and open understanding as God directs. God has used the Strong's concordance and related Hebrew/Greek dictionaries to reveal many things to me. My teaching entitled, 'Faith is Truth' is one such example. When I was first truly 'captured' by God, I was trying to understand faith. I read a book on faith written by Lester Summerall who was a student of Smith Wigglesworth. After reading the eleven chapter book, I felt that I knew nothing more about faith than when I had started. It was about 2 AM and I cried out to God in frustration because of this and asked Him, 'What is faith?' He simply said, 'Look it up.' So I got out my Strong's concordance and did just that. I immediately saw that faith occurs twice in the Old Testament and some 243 times in the New Testament. From this alone, I clearly I saw it was a new covenant word. In the original Strong's dictionary of Hebrew words, one of the two can be translated as 'truth'. It was from this that God showed me the equation that I have posted elsewhere, but will repeat...

If faith is truth and Jesus said that He is the way, the truth and the life, then...

Faith = Truth = Jesus

and if Jesus is God, (which is why they killed Him) then...

Faith = Truth = Jesus = God

and if God is love, then...

Faith = Truth = Jesus = God = Love,

Thus true, living faith is expressing our love for God and our fellow man by believing EVERYTHING God says and actually doing what God tells us to do, (with His help of course). I would never have understood this concept without the Strong's concordance and linked dictionaries. Now faith seems so straightforward and I can from this revelation understand other scriptures relating to faith in a way that I never did before, thanks to Mr. Strong and his work. I consider the Strong's concordance/dictionaries one of the necessary tools for anyone who really wants to know the Word of God intimately. You are correct in saying that it can be used incorrectly, but for the most part those who are truly enlightened of the Holy Spirit will not do that.

Be blessed,

Dr. Ray