Quote:
Originally Posted by stumped
i don't want to turn this into a religiou debate, but after googling some more re concordances
the idea seems to be that the concordance is a list of important stuff + a cross reference to where name A actually = name B ?
Different concordances make different choices as to what is important
its not clear ( to me yet) if the concordances are typically produced by the folks who also masterminded that bible edition / translation, or if they get added much later.
so we have e.g. the famous A.V. / King James bible , commissioned of course by King James in 1603, finished ~50 years later, but I don't recall him commissioning a matching concordance at the time ?
seems that a later concordance could introduce an "editors" take on what's "important", and so someone who simply want to self-study the bible ( having negotiated the minefield of what edition to go with ) is arguably better of with machine generated, neutral search results for where words / phrases occur
|
What? Since when does a concordance include or exclude based on the editor's view of what's important? Wouldn't that make it an
index?
Forget religion. Let's just tackle this as we would
any book.
And again,
WHY would you block the reader's access to it?
Hitch