Rating: 
Summary: Makes Strong's look STRONG!
Review: First you must have Young's translation of the Holy Bible, written in the late 1800's, for the concordance to be of any use. The translation appears to be nothing more than someone trying to make a name for himself by producing a translation that is as different as possible from the KJV. After reading his prefaces I came away with the impression that he was simply challenging, in a nasty way, the proponents of the KJV. The concordance is just about useless. It is incomplete and not user friendly. For example, as soon as I got it I went straight to Matthew 1:1 to see how useful it would be. Of two very significant words in the Young translation "roll" and "birth," neither were listed in the concordance.
Rating:
Summary: Makes Strong's look STRONG!
Review: First you must have Young's translation of the Holy Bible, written in the late 1800's, for the concordance to be of any use. The translation appears to be nothing more than someone trying to make a name for himself by producing a translation that is as different as possible from the KJV. After reading his prefaces I came away with the impression that he was simply challenging, in a nasty way, the proponents of the KJV. The concordance is just about useless. It is incomplete and not user friendly. For example, as soon as I got it I went straight to Matthew 1:1 to see how useful it would be. Of two very significant words in the Young translation "roll" and "birth," neither were listed in the concordance.
Rating: 
Summary: A huge help
Review: I purchased my first Young's concordance by accident. I was in the process of trying to figure out for myself, which was the most accurate English language rendition of the original Hebrew and Greek scriptures that I could lay my hands on. <That turned out to be the New American Standard> So I went down to a local Christian bookstore, and the only concordance they happened to have in stock was the Young's.
Granted, it is based on the King James Bible, so you sometimes need to refer to one when searching for the Hebrew or Greek word/s that are related to a particular verse. The Young's is comprehensive and extremely easy to use. With the Young's, all you need do is look up the English word you are seeking and then you can see the Hebrew or Greek, all of their inflections, and all of the verses in which they are used, right there.
Strong's also has it's uses, and I have a Strong's as well, but my Young's gets the greater use as it is easier and faster to use than the Strong's, where you have to look up the word, and then look up the Hebrew or Greek according to a reference number. Both concordances are excellent. But I prefer to use the Young's.
Rating:
Summary: Young passes with flying colors.
Review: I purchased my Youngs Concordance while in seminary back in 1976 and it has been in my theological/preaching library ever since. It is a well-used and trusted tool for both sermon preparation and Bible studies. If the test of a reference book is how often one uses it twenty-five years after its purchase, Youngs passes with flying colors. The main strength of this concordance is that it allows those who have no training in the Hebrew and Greek access to these ancient languages. Barely surviving both Hebrew and Greek in seminary, I have found this book to be an invaluable exegetical aid. Is it perfect? Of course not. Can we nitpick and find fault with it? Sure. But if you are looking for a tool to give you access to these ancient languages and which will give you a better understand of the Scripture, it is a good investment. Twenty-five years later, you will still be reaching for it.
Rating:
Summary: Young passes with flying colors.
Review: I purchased my Youngs Concordance while in seminary back in 1976 and it has been in my theological/preaching library ever since. It is a well-used and trusted tool for both sermon preparation and Bible studies. If the test of a reference book is how often one uses it twenty-five years after its purchase, Youngs passes with flying colors. The main strength of this concordance is that it allows those who have no training in the Hebrew and Greek access to these ancient languages. Barely surviving both Hebrew and Greek in seminary, I have found this book to be an invaluable exegetical aid. Is it perfect? Of course not. Can we nitpick and find fault with it? Sure. But if you are looking for a tool to give you access to these ancient languages and which will give you a better understand of the Scripture, it is a good investment. Twenty-five years later, you will still be reaching for it.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent Bible Study Aid!
Review: In my humble opinion, I believe Young's is an excellent aid for anyone who either: 1. Wants to know more about the Bible.
2. Can remember (like I sometimes do) certain words of a verse but not remembering the location of the verse in the Bible. While some folks make more of an issue of the specific Bible translation (KJV, NASB, NIV, etc.) Young uses, I prefer to have the bigger picture in mind (like trying to remember where a verse is located!). I have remind myself that Young's is a Bible study supplement and not a Bible translation. All in all, an excellent and highly recommended supplement to God's Holy Bible!
Rating:
Summary: Consistent word usage from the original language
Review: It is not shocking to see the blatant ignorance of Bob from Ft. Pierce, FL, as too many are misinformed about the way a concordance is to be used. First of all, a concordance, any concordance, is only useful for a specific Bible version. Young's is only useful for the old King James version that first came out in 1611 in England. So Bob is mistaken about having to have Young's translation. Certainly there is nothing nasty about Dr. Robert Young's works. Bob is correct in learning that "roll" and "birth" are in Young's translation: "Matt 1:1 A roll of the birth of Jesus Christ, son of David, son of Abraham." But the King James reads thus: "Matt 1:1 The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham." And another version I have says this: "Matt 1:1 The scroll of the lineage of Jesus Christ, the Son of David, the Son of Abraham." Some document listing the birth record of Jesus seems to be in view here. On page 104 in Young's concordance, under the English word BOOK, in section 6, are listed "Book, roll, (the Greek)" and "biblos" (transliteration of the Greek). Strong's number for "biblos" is 976 (see Strong's concordance). Seventeen occurrences of 976 can be found in the Greek Scriptures. On page 387 in Young's concordance, under the English word GENERATION, in section 4. are listed "Birth, origin (the Greek)" and "genesis" (transliteration of the Greek). Strong's number for "genesis" is 1078. Two occurrences of 1078 can be found in the Greek Scriptures. The reader from Vermont as well as the one from Oklahoma are quite accurate in their reviews. Young's concordance leads one to the consistent usage of the original words. btodd@pe.net
Rating:
Summary: Consistent word usage from the original language
Review: It is not shocking to see the blatant ignorance of Bob from Ft. Pierce, FL, as too many are misinformed about the way a concordance is to be used. First of all, a concordance, any concordance, is only useful for a specific Bible version. Young's is only useful for the old King James version that first came out in 1611 in England. So Bob is mistaken about having to have Young's translation. Certainly there is nothing nasty about Dr. Robert Young's works. Bob is correct in learning that "roll" and "birth" are in Young's translation: "Matt 1:1 A roll of the birth of Jesus Christ, son of David, son of Abraham." But the King James reads thus: "Matt 1:1 The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham." And another version I have says this: "Matt 1:1 The scroll of the lineage of Jesus Christ, the Son of David, the Son of Abraham." Some document listing the birth record of Jesus seems to be in view here. On page 104 in Young's concordance, under the English word BOOK, in section 6, are listed "Book, roll, (the Greek)" and "biblos" (transliteration of the Greek). Strong's number for "biblos" is 976 (see Strong's concordance). Seventeen occurrences of 976 can be found in the Greek Scriptures. On page 387 in Young's concordance, under the English word GENERATION, in section 4. are listed "Birth, origin (the Greek)" and "genesis" (transliteration of the Greek). Strong's number for "genesis" is 1078. Two occurrences of 1078 can be found in the Greek Scriptures. The reader from Vermont as well as the one from Oklahoma are quite accurate in their reviews. Young's concordance leads one to the consistent usage of the original words. btodd@pe.net
Rating:
Summary: Young's Analytical Concordance to the Bible
Review: The concordance is only useful if you have "Young's Literal Translation of the Holy Bible." The bible is nothing more than his attempt to produce a translation as different from the KJV as possible. After reading his prefaces, I got the impression that he had a bone to pick with the KJV and/or was tweaking the proponents of the KJV at the time of his authorship. The concordance is incomplete, not user friendly, and just about useless.
Rating:
Summary: Young's Analytical Concordance to the Bible
Review: The concordance is only useful if you have "Young's Literal Translation of the Holy Bible." The bible is nothing more than his attempt to produce a translation as different from the KJV as possible. After reading his prefaces, I got the impression that he had a bone to pick with the KJV and/or was tweaking the proponents of the KJV at the time of his authorship. The concordance is incomplete, not user friendly, and just about useless.
|
