Better Bibles Blog has moved. Read our last post, below, and then
click here if you are not redirected to our new location within 60 seconds.
Please Bookmark our new location and update blogrolls.

Tuesday, August 15, 2006

ESV Reverse Interlinear

Learn more about the ESV Reverse Interlinear from yesterday's post on the ESV Bible blog. You can download a pdf file of its preface and introduction. The post includes an extensive description of what a reverse interlinear is and its benefits.


At Tue Aug 15, 08:26:00 AM, Blogger Peter Kirk said...

From this preface:

"One does not have to look very far to find scholars knowledgeable in the original languages who have abused Greek grammar for theological purposes. How could we determine which scholars should be banned from reading the Greek New Testament?"

Indeed. There are examples of exactly that within the ESV translation itself, as discussed previously on this blog, although probably from ignorance rather than a deliberate intent to mislead. So, if anyone is to banned, the list should include the ESV translation team.

But the preface continues:

"I am of the opinion that the more people who read or dabble in Greek the better."

I agree. So I won't call for a ban, just for readers to be seriously cautious about reading ESV.

At Tue Aug 15, 09:06:00 AM, Blogger R. Mansfield said...

A reverse interlinear wouldn't interest me, but it's probably worth mentioning that this past Spring, Zondervan also released its own reverse interlinear, which is actually a second edition of William Mounce's NIV English-Greek New Testament. The book has been retitled, Interlinear for the Rest of Us: The Reverse Interlinear for New Testament Word Studies (ISBN: 0310263034).

Undoubtedly, potential customers would probably buy whichever interlinear has the translation they favor, as the contents are mostly the same. But one advantage that I noted in the Zondervan edition over the Crossway offering is that the Greek text in its normal order is included at the bottom of the NIV Interlinear. This is significant in my opinion because it raises the concept of a reverse interlinear beyond merely being a word study tool for those who don't know Greek. Instead, it becomes an aid in learning Greek itself. Indeed, on Mounce's own website, he has positioned the Interlinear for the Rest of Us as a "Level 2" instrument in acquiring a working knowledge of the NT Greek.

Mounce also offers an excerpt from Philippians for download on his website.

As I said, I'm not in the market for either of these volumes, but if the seminary library has/gets both of them, maybe I can do a better side-by-side comparitive review sometime soon on my blog.

At Tue Aug 15, 11:09:00 AM, Blogger anonymous said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

At Tue Aug 15, 12:39:00 PM, Blogger Peter Kirk said...

Zondervan have of course committed themselves NOT to withdraw NIV and replace it with TNIV. And whoever said they don't stand by their commitments? But I must say I am surprised that they are not pushing TNIV more than NIV. Perhaps they are waiting for the furore about TNIV to die down, as indeed it has done to some extent. One journal issue is little compared with the stream of invective which has been seen in the past, and the tone of the journal seems to be more moderate than was material published a year or so ago, when statements like "The efforts of the CBT to produce an accessible translation of the Scriptures are laudable." would not have been made.

At Tue Aug 15, 12:52:00 PM, Blogger R. Mansfield said...

Anonymous (when do we get to know your real name?),

I think you've raised some very valid points. I have been frustrated, too, with some of the marketing at Zondervan and have said so before on my blog and here.

The more I use the TNIV, the more I like it, and all the arguments of the detractors have been quite unpersuasive in my opinion; and I hate to say this, but I find the anti-TNIV rhetoric unscholarly and worse, uncharitable. But the anti-TNIV crowd certainly likes to appeal to the layperson (i.e., the average Bible-buying consumer) with huckster-like charges such as "the TNIV is the feminist Bible," "the TNIV is taking the maleness out of the Bible," "the TNIV is the politically correct Bible," "the TNIV is neutering the masculinity of Jesus," when all such charges are absolute nonsense. And I've yet to find a non-academic who can articulate why the TNIV is supposedly undesirable.

I don't really disagree with your thoughts above, and I certainly empathize with your frustration because I feel it, too. However, there are a few things to point out:

(1) The ESV has a four year headstart on the TNIV. We forget that the TNIV was only released in its entirety in 2005. The ESV was released in 2001. So, the small number of editions of the TNIV is somewhat understandable. Although I think there is a mistake in not making more traditional looking bindings for use in the pulpit and other instructional contexts. I finally found a XT Larger Print thinlin (black leather) that I felt comfortable stepping in front of a group with, but there are still some major gaps in the lineup. I do think the introduction of the TNIV Study Bible--which is actually the most recent study Bible from Zondervan now--is a HUGE nod from Zondervan that it is still backing the TNIV. But I would like to see a few other editions as well. I would like to see the traditional looking leather bindings that Cambridge UK has for the TNIV (these are not available in the U.S.). And I would like to see a wide-margin TNIV like Zondervan's wide-margin NIV and NASB offerings. If I could get a wide-margin TNIV for note-taking, I might just be ready to make the TNIV my primary Bible for use in public. You heard it here first.

(2) Complaints about Zondervan's TNIV website ( and IBS's TNIV website ( seem legitimate. If you click on the products link at, you see the lineup for the Fall, but it was LAST FALL (2005). The TNIV rebate download is actually for the NIV and expired in February! I did get an email from Tom Dean, head of Bible marketing at Zondervan, the other day saying that would be updated soon and would be promoting the TNIV Study Bible. That's good news.

The TNIV blog is run by IBS, not Zondervan, but I'm just as frustrated as anyone else that it hasn't been updated since December. Crossway has really set the bar high for how a blog of this nature should be done with the ESV blog. As for the TNIV blog, I've contacted IBS at least three times encouraging them to update it, including giving them positive ideas for entries and even offering to take over the blog myself for free!

(3) Regarding something like the Archaeology Bible (which is an extremely nice study Bible in my opinion), I would speculate that the choice for translation has more to do with the main editors’ preferences. Duane Garrett is one of the main editors, and if I'm not mistaken, he's not a fan of the TNIV. So, I believe this is the main factor in this instance, not a slight to the TNIV on Zondervan's part.

(4) "Zondervan's ongoing commitment to the NIV" is nevertheless a problem, and undoubtedly a catch-22 for them. The NIV is a huge seller for them, and to simply cut it off would no doubt hurt them financially (something to which they also have to answer to their parent company, HarperCollins). But in the long run, I believe this promise to the critics to keep the NIV selling alongside the TNIV is an unwise one, and they are their own worst and biggest competitor. You're right that the updates to the NASB and NLT have replaced their predecessors. Of course, it wasn't done overnight. The older editions were phased out. But Zondervan isn't phasing the NIV out. I have no doubt that when Tyndale made the tough decision to kill the original Living Bible in all editions except the venerable green hardback, it hurt them financially momentarily. But in the long run it has led to the NLT being the number four selling translation in CBA stores. I know Zondervan made a promise to keep the NIV alive, but I think they ought to take a nod from Tyndale and kill everything except the old brown hardback of the NIV. This would keep their promise intact, but let the TNIV begin to take over. Over the next two to three years, every NIV edition could be shifted over to the TNIV. Yes, it’s a gamble, and yes people would cry and scream, but if they don’t do it, I don’t know if the TNIV will ever rise to its place of prominence where it should be.

So what can be done ?
I propose a number of things.

1. Make your support and wishes known to IBS and Zondervan. There are contact forms at both sites. I've found them very responsive to my questions and suggestions (well, at least Zondervan is; IBS has ignored me lately). If you want the TNIV blog back up and running, tell them so at the IBS contact form. If you want to see the TNIV released in certain editions, let them know through Zondervan's contact form. And most importantly, let them know you support them. If you've ever worked for any company, especially in any customer service role, you know that often the critics are the most vocal and make the most noise. This can lead to a distorted view that most people do not like what you're doing when usually this isn't the case. I have no doubt that the TNIV translators, publishers, and marketers get very discouraged by all the negative rhetoric. Be sure to let them know something positive.

2. Be sure to counter negative or inaccurate impressions wherever you see them. I don't agree with every translational decision made by the TNIV committee, but I'll be the first to defend them from the nonsense that I usually see on the web or in conversation. I've even created a tniv blogwatch rss feed using Google's blog search. If someone says something unfounded about the TNIV on the internet, I will be on their site. This isn't as big of a task as you might think. I only started doing this during the summer and most of the anti-TNIV rhetoric has died down from a year ago (evidently, only the CBMW can't seem to let it go). Although I decided not to go back and counter posts older than late-June/early July, I was surprised at how often people make unfounded statements and just get away with it. I'm not going to let this happen anymore if I can help it.

3. I would like to see an unofficial Pro-TNIV blog created that is used not only to promote the good things in the TNIV, but to counter the negativity in some circles, especially where it's found on the internet. World Magazine ran an anti-TNIV blog for over a year that included some of the most petty criticisms I've ever seen--even criticisizing Zondervan because they did things like offer rebates (which they do all the time for all their Bibles). I would like to see a pro-TNIV blog counter every one of those issues raised on the World blog. I'd like to see the articles in the CBMW journal countered. New TNIV products like the TNIV Study Bible could be reviewed. A lot of the kinds of positive blogs about translators and such that was done at one time on the original TNIV blog could be posted. I think it would be important to follow a few guidelines. (A) In defending the TNIV against its detractors, it would be important to not stoop the level of some anti-TNIV critics by making personal comments, ad hominem attacks, or questioning motives (you see a lot of this on World's Stealth blog). (B) In defending the TNIV, I don't think it would be necessary to put other translations down. Yes, there are some translations that I don't feel are as of the same quality as others, but if it speaks God’s message to someone, let that person read it. Granted, comparisons would have to be made with other translations, but if we degrade the entire Bible translation as a whole, we've stooped to the level of some of those who defame the TNIV. (3) All responses to criticisms should balance a scholarly level of writing so as to be taken seriously, but at the same time should not be so academic that it wouldn't be accessible to the non-specialist.

I've thought about doing this by myself for a while now, but I don't have the time to do it alone, and also because of my current context, it might not be politically to my advantage. But I would be willing to partner with a handful of others.

I guess my suggestion is that if the TNIV is to proceed, then we can't necessarily depend on Zondervan and IBS to do everything. There has to be a grassroots movement, too. Thoughts? Questions? Comments? Rebuttals?

At Tue Aug 15, 01:17:00 PM, Blogger anonymous said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

At Tue Aug 15, 01:54:00 PM, Blogger R. Mansfield said...

Anonymous, a few more responses...

The use of singular "they" is admittedly annoying to me, too. The fact that I have a degree in English only makes it worse. However, I felt the same way about retaining masculine universals at one time, and gradually came to accept the fact that our language is changing. To me, the TNIV's use of plural pronouns for singular antecedents is the only genuinely controversial aspect of the TNIV, and it has nothing to do with theology. It's strictly controversial in regard to formal English grammar. I can live with that since most of the NT was not written in overly formal style to begin with, and therefore, I'm willing to give into this change, too (although I'm still marking it in error on my students' papers until their grammar books say otherwise). Your use of "annoying" probably says it best, but it's growing on me and I find myself talking that way regularly.

I like the NRSV and REB, too. In fact, I wrote a review of the REB not too long ago and stated that in regard to its literary elegance it spoke to me more than any other translation. But I don't feel that it's going to be as effective as the TNIV in communicating God's message to the current generation--this is, IF we can get past all the artificial controversy.

As for the Archaeological Study Bible, it sounds like you have looked at it more than I have. I don't actually own a copy, though I will probably pick one up eventually. Two things attracted me to it. Some have complained about the layout being too busy, but I thought it was innovative and a fresh change of pace for a study Bible. I like the use of color which is growing more and more common thanks to the use of computers for layout design. When the Bible was first printed five or so centuries ago, it had more color on the pages than in the average Bible today. A little color in something like a study Bible goes a long way (but I don't mean words of Christ in read which I do NOT like). Secondly, I was attracted not so much to the archaeology itself as to the background information. I know that it's called the Archaeological Study Bible, but it seems to be so much more than that. I always use a good bit of history when I teach or preach on a text because I find most people have an interest and it keeps folks from thinking that the Bible was written in a vacuum. I have no doubt that all of the information in the ASB is also elsewhere in my library, but I thought it might be a good quick reference to keep on my desk eventually. I was not aware of the Rosetta Stone issue that you mention. I hope you have alerted Zondervan to this so that they can fix it in future printings. And maybe I'll just hold off on buying one until then :-)

At Tue Aug 15, 02:01:00 PM, Blogger Suzanne McCarthy said...

Interlinear Bibles give people the false impression that they have learned a little Greek. I have yet to meet anyone else who studied Greek for years without ever seeing an English translation for what they were reading, as I did. (Yes, I am using the singular they! Sorry Anon)

What do we have for this? Theologians who contributed to the Colorado Springs Guidelines now taking back their words. Isn't there a term for practising a profession without the necessary qualifications!

And those same men explicitly prohibit women from teaching in a seminary!

And, yes, I too can still read a translations like the KJV and appreciate that man is generic. But generic man cannot be neutered, so lets not fool ourselves that today the translators of the ESV think of man as generic.

At Tue Aug 15, 03:49:00 PM, Blogger Peter Kirk said...

Anon, this is not supposed to be a pro-TNIV blog, nor an anti-ESV one, despite appearances sometimes!

Rick, if you want to set up a pro-TNIV blog, I might be prepared to partner with you on it, but I too have limited time for this - I have been spending far too much time blogging recently, and my translation work is getting behind.

At Tue Aug 15, 08:49:00 PM, Blogger R. Mansfield said...

Thanks, Peter. Let's think about it some more, and see if others would be interested in contributing as well. I think we would need a number of contributors to pitch in.

At Tue Aug 15, 08:56:00 PM, Blogger G. D. Grubbs said...


As you have mentioned the NRSV and REB again, why did you write in an earlier comment on another post that you would not recommend the NRSV to anyone as a devotional Bible, except maybe to an atheist?

Does this mean you generally prefer the REB for that purpose?

I suppose it would be assumed that you would consider the TNIV as inappropriate because of bad English, but do you prefer the use of any of the easy reading versions for children?

At Tue Aug 15, 10:57:00 PM, Blogger anonymous said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

At Tue Aug 15, 11:11:00 PM, Blogger Wayne Leman said...

Rick, if you want to set up a pro-TNIV blog, I might be prepared to partner with you on it, but I too have limited time for this - I have been spending far too much time blogging recently, and my translation work is getting behind.

Peter and Rick, besides this blog, which is dedicated to examining different English Bible versions as carefully and truthfully as possible, there is another blog which was specifically set up to counter the many accusations made against the TNIV. I consented to contribute to it, but no one else did, or stayed active. And I could not keep up with it due to the fact that I can't allow blogging to replace my day job, which has a mountain of Bible translation responsibilities.

If you would like to resurrect that blog, I'm sure that its host would welcome that.

At Wed Aug 16, 12:11:00 AM, Blogger anonymous said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

At Wed Aug 16, 02:41:00 AM, Blogger Peter Kirk said...

Wayne, thanks for reminding me about Pat Gundry's blog. I too agreed to contribute, but never did! Yes, maybe it would be a good idea to resurrect it. But am I right in thinking that Pat Gundry is related to Stan of Zondervan? If so, there are some interesting connotations here.

At Wed Aug 16, 04:06:00 AM, Blogger Joe said...

I am neither a Greek nor a Hebrew scholar, and that is a gross understatement.

However, I do enjoy reading and studying from interlinear works, as I often find them helpful for understanding in the moment.

I read and enjoyed the information in the link, and thank you for it.

I'n not certain that it will make a Greek scholar of me, though.

At Wed Aug 16, 04:31:00 AM, Blogger Ilag said...

And just why do you feel uncomfortable about -

* The Bible is the inspired, inerrant Word of God.

* There is one God, the Creator of all things, who exists eternally in three persons--Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

* Jesus Christ is fully God and fully man; he died on the cross, rose from the dead, ascended to heaven, and will come again.

* Salvation is by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone.

If it is No 1 that troubles you then you have no Bible anyway.

If it is No 2-4 then you are probably in trouble anyway.

At Wed Aug 16, 05:43:00 AM, Blogger R. Mansfield said...

Wayne said: Peter and Rick, besides this blog, which is dedicated to examining different English Bible versions as carefully and truthfully as possible, there is another blog which was specifically set up to counter the many accusations made against the TNIV. I consented to contribute to it, but no one else did, or stayed active. And I could not keep up with it due to the fact that I can't allow blogging to replace my day job, which has a mountain of Bible translation responsibilities.

Yes, Wayne, I used to check in regularly on the site you mention, but a week or two ago, I took it off my list because it was never updated. The only thing I don't like about that blog (if I were writing for it myself) is the name because what I would envision doing is much broader in scope than just gender accuracy issues (although that's certainly a major issue). Regardless, while I've thought about starting a new site quite often, at the same time--like you--I have enough responsibilties of my own to keep me busy (I have a dissertation to write!) and I spend too much time blogging and reading blogs as it is. The other option is to merely keep doing what I am doing on my own blog which is positive enough for the TNIV (and other translations) added to the mix of my own rather random interests. I was asleep at the wheel a year or two ago when World's Stealth blog nonsense was active. If it were still active today, I would probably jump in with a pro-TNIV blog without hesitation.

At Wed Aug 16, 07:47:00 AM, Blogger Wayne Leman said...

Peter asked:

But am I right in thinking that Pat Gundry is related to Stan of Zondervan?

Yes, Peter, you are right in your thinking. They are related by marriage, to each other.

At Wed Aug 16, 08:14:00 AM, Blogger M. J. Mansini said...

...I have been spending far too much time blogging recently, and my translation work is getting behind.

I hope you aren't on somebodies payroll! ;D high school required everyone to learn modern foreign languages or Latin -- or both -- and, in comparison to Latin or Russian or Chinese or even Spanish, the KJV is piece of cake...

Agreed. I learned Japanese... KJV was easy compared to that. Shakespeare was a different story, and Milton's English is so artificial that it makes me want to puke...

At Wed Aug 16, 08:24:00 AM, Blogger G. D. Grubbs said...

Anon, I appreciate all of the information you gave about the ASB. I didn't specifically ask for it, but it does shed some light on a study bible that I did buy in hardcover because I thought it may contain some helpful points of view on critical vs traditional issues, and that is the way I tend to view some of the articles in it. I don't necessarily see a schizophrenic attitude towards the issues, but more of an explanation of critical issues, and reasons why we can't take those theories as necessarily proofs of questionable texts. It somes off very conservative (to me), but does not impress me as far as the scholarship, because like you, it didn't take me long to find errors (like writing centuries instead of millenia when the latter was intended - see definition of Neolithic period on 2085).

The ASB just appears to take all of the information that has come forward by more modern scholarship, and critique it in the light of traditional interpretations, and show it is all basically about what you believe, because in the end neither position has particularly solid proof for their position. Like the theory of evolution, one can posit all sorts of information that seems convincing, yet cannot convince everyone to believe in evolution, because no one present was actually there; most of the "scientific" statements end up looking like reasoned speculation to a discerning eye, but still just speculation.


I was seriously wondering about what you meant about NRSV being more for an atheist, mainly because it seems to be one of the more serious versions that could be considered in lieu of the TNIV or NLT or whatever other translation that claims to be more gender-accurate. Should I just assume you mean that the NRSV is translated with a generally lower view of scripture in comparison with other translations? That may explain Psalm 22.16 in the NRSV. I still cannot figure out where they get shriveled from.

I would love to take up this conversation away from this blog, but since you are anonymous, that may not be possible. :(

At Wed Aug 16, 09:46:00 AM, Blogger R. Mansfield said...

Whaddaya has been updated. Not an overhaul, mind you, but at least it's been updated to reflect the TNIV Study Bible.

At Wed Aug 16, 10:19:00 AM, Blogger anonymous said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

At Wed Aug 16, 01:10:00 PM, Blogger G. D. Grubbs said...

Anonymous said:
Well, if it gave reasons, I would be more satisified; instead, it too often simply makes a Fundamentalist assertion in the final paragraph of a mini-essay with no support at all. This is what I called above conclusatory assertions; without understanding the chain of reasoning of the author, it has the opposite effect: the expository portion (where the critical section was being presented) seems more compelling than the Fundamentalist conclusion. Ironically, the ASB increases doubt.

I agree with that assessment, and I didn't mean they were necessarily valid reasons, which is why I have gradually gone into a less fundamental mode of trying to seek the reasoning behind the reasons. Generally, there is nothing but "believe this or else." There is strong discouragement of questioning things, and that grates against my nature, I guess. It more gives me the impression that the evidence will not stand up under questioning, and I happen to be of the opinion that no matter what your beliefs, they should withstand the most rigorous questioning. If they don't, well...

Your view on the NRSV (and Ps 22.16) makes better sense with your elaboration.

At Wed Aug 16, 01:45:00 PM, Blogger Peter Kirk said...

Rick, thanks for the tip about There is also an announcement of the forthcoming Today's Devotional Bible, from Zondervan, with the TNIV text and devotional readings (sadly not available here in the UK). So Zondervan does still seem to be promoting TNIV.

At Wed Aug 16, 01:50:00 PM, Blogger Peter Kirk said...

Anon wrote:

"The KJV does not transmit the rough language of Paul or the Semitic language of some of the other books -- in the hands of the translators, they all become elegant and plain speaking with a tone largely uniform with the rest of the Christian Scriptures. Still KJV does capture the poetry and mysticism.

It is this unworldly, poetic aspect which I believe inspires devotion.

Maybe. But if this "unworldly, poetic aspect" is not in the original texts, at least of Paul as you explain, does it have any place in a translation? It may inspire devotion, but if it is devotion to something not in the original, is that proper Christian devotion, or idolatry?

At Wed Aug 16, 02:27:00 PM, Blogger anonymous said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

At Wed Aug 16, 02:36:00 PM, Blogger anonymous said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

At Wed Aug 16, 04:03:00 PM, Blogger Peter Kirk said...

Thanks for your recommendation of Nabakov's Alice. I do read some Russian, but sadly not enough to appreciate stylistic niceties. But then I am not very good at appreciating them in English either, which is perhaps why I am not a fan of KJV!

At Wed Aug 16, 08:20:00 PM, Blogger anonymous said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

At Thu Aug 17, 04:03:00 AM, Blogger R. Mansfield said...

Anonymous said, "I don't think the proliferation of translations is good for religious unity."

In spite of how much I enjoy reading and comparing translations, I have to agree. At one time the issue over "which Bible" was Catholic vs. Protestant. Then it turned into liberal vs. conservative. Now conservatives themselves argue over Bible translation. In the year 3006, each believer will be required to render his or her own translation and we can fight over the Bible on an individual level.

"Assuming any Evangelical translation leaving out the Deuterocanon is automatically disqualified as a universal translation (since it ignores the canon of the majority of Christians worldwide), there seem to be only three serious contendors for universal translations: the AV, the RSV, and the NRSV."

Regarding translations with deuteroncanonicals, the only recent conservative translation to include them has been the New Living Translation. And as much as I like the NLT, I am doubtful that Christendom will rally around it. Interestingly, the recent Renovare Bible used the complete NRSV to target Catholics and Protestants together. Their promotional materials describe why the deuterocanonicals have value even for non-Catholics (I agree). Sadly, I noticed recently that there are separate Protestant and Catholic editions of the Renovare Bible coming out later this year. So much for unity around a Bible.

Scot McKnight, over at the Jesus Creed blog, a few months back started a discussion about the possibility of a TNIV with the deuterocanonicals, and surprisingly, a large number of non-Catholics seemed open to it. But third party discussion doesn't mean that the IBS would do it.

At Thu Aug 17, 09:21:00 AM, Blogger Peter M. Head said...

I find this Reverse Interlinear concept pretty strange. Especially coming from the ESV side of things. Essentially the concept seems to be that the ESV english is the base [sacred?] text: 'the word order of the English translation is untouched'; while the actual Greek text of the NT can be re-arranged at will: 'the Greek words are rearranged to correspond with the English'. This brand new improved Greek text of the NT (improved to follow the word order of the ESV) is then recommended as a text in its own right: 'there is nothing prohibiting someone from ... growing accustomed to reading the greek lines as well'. (Preface, xv).
I confess to being gobsmacked that anyone with a conservative view of the Greek text would countenance this.

At Thu Aug 17, 10:40:00 AM, Blogger R. Mansfield said...

Peter M. Head said, I confess to being gobsmacked that anyone with a conservative view of the Greek text would countenance this.

This is exactly why I think the NIV Reverse Interlinear that I referenced WAY BACK near the top of this discussion is a better choice than the ESV edition. The NIV Reverse Interlinear also includes the Greek text in its correct order at the bottom of the page.

Of course, ultimately, the average user of a reverse interlinear is not going to be an advanced reader of the Greek NT. These kinds of books are mainly for folks without a working knowledge of the Greek to do word studies. With care and discernment, I don't begrudge anyone that. Before I ever went to seminary and studied Greek, I regularly used a Hebrew Greek Key Study Bible (NASB edition). Looking back on that, I feel like I learned quite a bit at that level, and I don't remember (from my perspective now) ever really abusing my limited level of knowledge. It was primarily just for my own purposes. These kinds of tools can often be good starting points, but for others, they will be as far as they go.

At Thu Aug 17, 10:43:00 AM, Blogger Wayne Leman said...

Peter Head wrote:

I find this Reverse Interlinear concept pretty strange.

Me too, Peter.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home