Is the bound concordance a dead bible study tool?

[Michael Ballai]

I still have all my hardcover concordances that I bought years ago. I still use the ones in my study bibles from time to time, but I am beginning to think that there's almost no need for them now that you can run a search.

Anyone still make heavy use of one?

[karl kleinpaste]

Notwithstanding Labrock's concerns, already I find nearly no use in bound-paper Bibles, and although I have actually generated a few static concordances for use with my Bible software, it definitely seems very true that software search functions have essentially annihilated the utility of a concordance as such.

That said, I still have several printed Bibles and a Strong's Exhaustive on my shelves. I don't currently have the imagination to envision a crash of civilization so severe that I can't boot my laptop, but anything's possible. Besides, the paranoid live longer. :-)

So I keep dead-tree resources, but I use them ever so seldom. They're an insurance policy that I expect never to have to file a claim against.

[Chad Gibbons]

I don't have a laptop. My exhaustive concordance is heavily worn.

[michel gilson]

Dear Chad There still is a place for the exhaustive concordance.I still get much use out of mine.It is a trusted old friend.All my best Michel

[Harry]

There is nothing better than a book.

[JL Vaughn]

As long as you read a paper Bible, you will need a paper concordance.

Both may disappear soon. The people I know who use Kindle love it.

[James Gibbons]

Outside of a dog, a book is man’s best friend. Inside of a dog, it’s too dark to read.

[James Gibbons]

karl kleinpaste said:

Notwithstanding Labrock's concerns, already I find nearly no use in bound-paper Bibles, and although I have actually generated a few static concordances for use with my Bible software, it definitely seems very true that software search functions have essentially annihilated the utility of a concordance as such.

That said, I still have several printed Bibles and a Strong's Exhaustive on my shelves. I don't currently have the imagination to envision a crash of civilization so severe that I can't boot my laptop, but anything's possible. Besides, the paranoid live longer. :-)

So I keep dead-tree resources, but I use them ever so seldom. They're an insurance policy that I expect never to have to file a claim against.

Digital study tools are great. I find paging through the concordance to be tedious, especially as my eyesight gets worse. But a digital Bible is another subject all together.

I find the context to be very important. The order of the books. The immediate context of a verse. Digital Bible makes it very easy to query for a verse, or even a word. This makes it harder to look at context beyond a couple of verses…and much easier to violently snatch a verse out of context.

[Rey Reynoso]

I don't use my old concordances much any more since the computer shaves down the search time in both english and original languages. Heck, you can even do a search based on a specific tense--something you couldn't really accomplish with a concordance.

I won't get rid of the paper stuff though since sometimes I find it exceedingly easy to go to the shelf and open to a highlighted note.

[Rey Reynoso]

I actually found it easier to view context digitally. I remove chapters and verse and allow the text to stand in paragraphs without annoying headers or dividers.

James Gibbons said:

karl kleinpaste said:

Notwithstanding Labrock's concerns, already I find nearly no use in bound-paper Bibles, and although I have actually generated a few static concordances for use with my Bible software, it definitely seems very true that software search functions have essentially annihilated the utility of a concordance as such.

That said, I still have several printed Bibles and a Strong's Exhaustive on my shelves. I don't currently have the imagination to envision a crash of civilization so severe that I can't boot my laptop, but anything's possible. Besides, the paranoid live longer. :-)

So I keep dead-tree resources, but I use them ever so seldom. They're an insurance policy that I expect never to have to file a claim against.

Digital study tools are great. I find paging through the concordance to be tedious, especially as my eyesight gets worse. But a digital Bible is another subject all together.

I find the context to be very important. The order of the books. The immediate context of a verse. Digital Bible makes it very easy to query for a verse, or even a word. This makes it harder to look at context beyond a couple of verses…and much easier to violently snatch a verse out of context.

[Jason]

I think the bound concordance will still be used in the future.
I have one under the podium at both churches I pastor just in case something additional hits my mind and I cannot recall the exact reference.

[Michael Ballai]

I'm finding that I do better if I periodically pull away from the computer in my study--remove all the peripheral electronic distractions. Simply sitting with the bible, a legal pad and a pen and letting the Word speak for itself. The computer is a sort of Cuisinart bible processor. Efficiency alone doesn't make for sound exegesis and it's no replacement for hearing from God.

[Jason]

Michael,
I do the same from time to time. I like to get my Bible, a pen, a legal pad, a cup of coffee, and get in my Cracker Barrel rocking chair on the porch and meditate.

Michael Ballai said:

I'm finding that I do better if I periodically pull away from the computer in my study--remove all the peripheral electronic distractions. Simply sitting with the bible, a legal pad and a pen and letting the Word speak for itself. The computer is a sort of Cuisinart bible processor. Efficiency alone doesn't make for sound exegesis and it's no replacement for hearing from God.