How to Use Strong's Concordance and What to Use Instead 

It sounds like what you're saying is "Use what you know, lest you fall into unintentional error." And that's perfect advice.

Wishing this didn't sound like empty fanboyism but I love the videos you produce and like every one I watch. Particularly I am happy for the confidence they have given me in modern English translations and bible study tools since I just won't spend the time to become a passable student of the original languages. Thank you for quality information and presentation; your efforts are much appreciated.

IMHO the most needed tool for Bible study for most people is simply a good English dictionary. With the rise of home-schooling, this seems to be less of a problem than in the past, but in my experience, too often, too many people simply have terrible vocabularies. Great video, as usual, and one of the better commercials for Logos! 🙂

Thank you for this (and the article). Another problem similar to cringy uses of Strong’s is when people take a word from an English translation, especially the Amplified Bible's expanded nuances, look it up in an English dictionary, and then try to pick and apply a Webster's or Oxford's definition which they like for that word and try to fit it into the passage, which can turn a verse on its head. Nothing is perfect, and most people probably mean well. Hopefully people will become more educated in the process and tools of exegesis, hermeneutics, grammar, etc. Thank you for your part in contributing to that end. Blessings!

Lots of excellent recommendations. Thanks Mark! Yes, I have the slower printed forms of many of those sources. A habit I started long before computers and internet. Though I do have quite a few electronically, I still end up falling back on the printed page anyway. oh well. One source not mentioned that I truly recommend is “The Ante-Nicene Fathers.” There you can read the way many of the words were used and how applied in those early Christian days, closer to the first century Christians. There is a modern-day tendency to change or revise the definitions of words in the newer sources, something to be on guard for. One example; the greek word “Monogenes” has flip-flopped over the centuries, as Wayne Grudem’s “Systematic theology” shows. Many modern translations even totally remove “only begotten” from John 3:16. Strong’s definition is much closer to what the Ante-Nicene Fathers believed ‘monogenes’ meant. But, yes, we can do well in getting a much clear enough understanding of the scriptures simply by using multiple English bibles.

Thanks Mark. This was helpful. As someone who is trying to learn Greek on my own, I think I'm starting to understand the warnings that you're highlighting in this video more and more. It's fun learning, but at the same time very challenging and oh so humbling. I think it's greatly increased my appreciation and respect for those who have dedicated their lives to the pursuit of biblical languages.

You can get a kjv and a nasb with the strongs added in verse by verse. Very helpful for someone that's beginning with a KJV.

Thank you for the video, this is much needed today regarding how over-used the Strong's Concordance is today. I noticed something just a few days ago and it showed up in this video. It is pertaining to the verse you referenced at the very end of this video, there is quite a difference in the interpretation of the translators in 2 Thessalonians 1:11 when it comes to whose good pleasure are we talking about: "Wherefore also we pray always for you, that our God would count you worthy of this calling, and fulfil all the good pleasure of his goodness, and the work of faith with power:" (AV) "Therefore we also pray always for you that our God would count you worthy of this calling, and fulfill all the good pleasure of His goodness and the work of faith with power," (NKJV) "To this end also we pray for you always, that our God will count you worthy of your calling, and fulfill all your good pleasure for goodness and the work of faith with power," (LSB) "To this end we always pray for you, that our God may make you worthy of his calling and may fulfill every resolve for good and every work of faith by his power," (ESV)

Excellent advice! I use the NASB, ESV, NET, CSB and NLT for more in depth study. Of course having a Logos Reformed Portfolio library helps too. Forgot to also list the LSB version.

12:54 "Ride the sacred cow of original language usage through the slaughterhouse of linguistic fallacies." This is why I come to this channel. I'm dead. Someboy put this on a t-shirt.

FINALLY, this video has been a long time coming. Thank you!

Crossway has come out with their own ESV Exhaustive Concordance. I have a physical copy, although I haven't read the introduction yet. It doesn't use Strong's numbering system at all, but rather an English word, language identifier, and then (optionally) a variant identifier within that. So in Hebrews where it quotes Psalms saying, "I swore in my anger they would never enter my rest," rest is listed as REST[G3] (rest, Greek, third entry). In the Psalms, the same word is listed as "REST[H4]" (rest, Hebrew, fourth entry). In any event, given what's available now, I'm somewhat surprised they bothered to create this. EDIT: How has someone like you not reached 10K subscribers?

Oh man! I’ve done this and continue to fall into this trap! Thank you for the warning. I’ll be adding exegetical fallacies to my reading list. Once again I find myself challenged and helped by your videos. Thank you brother.

This was hard to swallow I’m guilty of everything you mentioned 😭

I’m thinking Mark is a bit of a genius in ways many people don’t realize. Excellent video production combined with really valuable information and still able to get plugs in without, “turning people off”. That’s hard to do these days as many people will move on and/or discount things once they see a product plugged. Yes, I know there isn’t any ill intent. Keep em’ comin’.

Thank you for this video and love your "set," the sounds of outside help me keep me on track listening. Saw you on Shawn's RU-vid and happy I did! Very helpful and love your style of teaching. Thanks again.

Mark, thanks for the excellent video, just what I was looking for.

Thank you so much for this video... I use some of the resources you just mentioned...

Great video! When I was an undergrad at UT Martin, I was quite careless with Hebrew and Greek during small group Bible studies, especially with free app Bibles that used the Strongs numbers. When I went to seminary, I learned how to better use the languages. I'm really glad you mentioned Carson's "Exegetical Fallacies". It's an indispensable book that every pastor needs to read before preaching another sermon.

Great video Mark, very informative.

All those references sound like alternate guitar tunings.

Thank you Brother Mark 🌹🌹⭐🌹🌹

Thanks again,Mark

Thank you 🙏

Thank you, Mark.

Thanks for this video. I use the Logos Basic word study tool jf I need look up a word. A concordance is only useful if it's keyed to the translation you're using I believe and since I don't make a regular use of the KJV, a Strong's concordance wouldn't be of great value to me. With the Logos Basic along with a few other niceties, you get (as you'd know) a very good dictionary (that you reference here), a very good study Bible notes and a very good English translation of the Bible. One of the great about the Faithlife Study Bible notes is that they work with most of the major English translations as far as know. Every now and again, I will make use of the NET notes. By the way, the background is breathtaking. Wow. God's creation is so beautiful, I can't understand why people want to destroy it.

l use strongs for its numerical referencing system.That l have in my electronic tools. l use them as a quick way to look things up. I totally agree with you about derived meaning from context.Hence, l have multiple study bible's from different versions which make things interesting.

As a teen, I had the Key Hebrew-Greek Study Bible, which provides the Strong’s number for many of the more important words, as well as the dictionaries appended. It was a KJV and therefore I used it primarily to understand archaic English usage and words!

Mark--thanks for this video. YES! A lot of Bible students mis-use Strongs. I personally use the New International Dictionary of Old/New Testament Theology & Exegesis, Even though i do not know Hebrew or Greek, there is enough thorough information for HEB/GRK words that you come away with a good understanding of the word and how it is used intra and extra Bible. I do wish you would have mentioned Wm. Mounce's Expository Dictionary of OT and NT words. Such a wonderful tool! It uses the G&K Numbering system, which tie into the NIDOTTE and NIDNTTE. These along with some good study Bibles (CSB/ESV/HEB-GRK Word Study/TCRB/NET) can give you a great library which will help you to more fully understand Scripture and the words found within its pages. Thanks for all you do! I appreciate the fact that you were transparent about working for LOGOS SOFTWARE.

I remember when I first learned about the Strong's Exhaustive Concordance. People were crazy about using it to study the scriptures. We didn't have computers or internet back in the early 1980's. Books were the only resources for sermon writing and bible study. Finally in 1985 I was able to afford a Strong's Exhaustive Concordance. A Christian bookstore was having a massive sale and my heart jumped when I saw the lowered price on the book. I purchased it and was on cloud 9 for weeks.

Thank you Dr Ward. As always, your video is informative, compelling, measured, rational, beautifully crafted and edifying to the body of Christ. "and you may actually do better than someone who likes to ride the sacred cow of original language usage through the slaughterhouse of linguistic fallacies" - this was pure gold!

This is gold

Something that's amazing about the Bible is that the more important a concept is, the more space it gets. It's said i many ways, in many of the books in the Bible, how to get saved, for example. And then a well made translation is good enough that a honest heart will be able to understand without knowing the language of the original manuscript.

7:53 Verse likely quoted: Psalm 44 verse 14 NLT (formal): You have made us the butt of their jokes; they shake their heads at us in scorn. NASB (functional): You make us a proverb among the nations, A laughingstock among the peoples. KJB: Thou makest us a byword among the heathen, a shaking of the head among the people. (Ironic given normally NLT is highly interpretive, and NASB highly literal.)

Thank you for helping me accept and embrace that I am a Bible nerd. (Probably also a nerd in general...) Lord, help me use this as a gift from you where it can be a blessing and put it away where it would be distracting or divisive.

I use strongs mostly to do topical studies. For instance a study of "throne". I found that there are 3 instances of your throne is made of. 2 instances where it says God's throne is made of the law and 1 instance of mercy. The easiest seat to make is 3 boards nailed together. 2 legs of law and a seat of mercy.

There is now a 21st century Strongs Concordance. Which has been out a for a few years now. The authors recognised the mistake of the root word theory, which you correctly pointed out. Now the Strongs uses a context meaning. When you read the introduction, it reads, they are researching the 21st century one.

I love Louw and NIda.

Hey bro Mark, can you make a video on using the BDB.

'putting gold on the surface of the ground as it were' ❤

Another potential pitfall would be reading an uncommon gloss into a passage or falling for a false friend (for example, reading "inspiration" from Job 32:8 into another passage). For finding glosses I prefer to use resources that actually show the number of times a gloss is used so I don't fall into this.

One of my pet peeves is when someone has a dream-look at the clock-its 1238 and go and see what it says in Strong's-which then is used to legitimise their dream.

Knowing the purpose and limitations of a biblical reference is key to using it wisely and not pressing it beyond what it is intended to teach the user.

I do not hear anyone speak of the Thompson Chain-Reference Bible. Yet I have found it very useful. :--}>

Help me which is right exhaustion concordance kjv excalty very honest.😮

Excellent video, thanks. Could you recommend a good biblical hebrew grammar book.

Mark, I don't see the link to the free copy of your book, "The Complete Beginner's Guide to Biblical Greek'. Where is it?

What is the best version of Logos for a layperson Sunday School teacher with limited resources?

Excellent video, Mark. But tell me, how do you define, as you say, "evangelical perspectives"?

Since this video is on concordances and how to use them; this Greek to English pronoun issue might be interesting to you. This is from a mid 1800s book concerning the pronoun "we" in 1Cor 15:51 and 1Thess 4:15&17. You may agree or not, it is entirely up to you. But it is an interesting small study on this usage. A friend of mine found this and sent this to me. Concerning the Pronoun "WE" in 1 Cor. 15:51 & 1 The. 4:15 by Alpheus Crosby in his 1850 book "The Second Advent" (pp. 55-56) In relation to people claiming Paul was using this pronoun loosely to refer to whoever may still be around at some distant future return of Christ, Mr. Crosby penned the following points: 1. [To hold to such] is at variance with the natural interpretation of the passages. If a pastor, in addressing his people, either from the pulpit or by letter, should use such expressions as "We shall not all die," "We who are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord," etc., would he not be understood as believing in the speedy coming of Christ? And had the Corinthians or Thessalonians any reason for understanding the apostle differently? 2. It greatly diminishes the force and significance of these passages. *3. It isn't consistent with the emphasis belonging to "we" in those clauses in which it has been printed [in the Greek] in small capitals. In these clauses, the pronoun is expressed in the original so that, according to a familiar law of the Greek language, it must be emphatic and used in marked contradistinction. The form of expression in 1 The. 4:15 & 17 is peculiarly strong: "We who are living, who are surviving." And... *4. The loose view makes the apostle's consolation to the Thessalonians little more than mere mockery, because they were sorrowing for their departed friends. He attempted therefore to comfort them by saying, "We who are living, who are surviving till the coming of the Lord, shall not precede or have any advantage in point of time over those who are asleep." What peculiar mode of consolation, to say the least, if the apostle and those whom he was addressing supposed that they might all lie in their graves beside their friends thousands of years before the coming of the Christ! But if they were looking for the speedy appearance, triumph, and reign of their Savior..., while some were fearing that their friends who had died too soon would not be present to take part in the glories and joys of these events, then how natural, appropriate, and forcible does every word of the apostle become!

Galatians 5:1 from Takanot

I wish BDAG wasn't $165 in Logos... I learned Strong's in seminary. BDAG looks nice.

We've got to talk about the fact that you are wearing a jacket that looks quite warm in early August. Is it really that much cooler in Washington than Georgia?😂

On my list, but my advice is always, if you don't know Greek, use three good commentators (preferably from different eras and positions) who do.

Looks like you are walking in front of a giant and very high tech green screen! :)

Six of those 47 words ("shalt", "thee", "thou", "thy", "unto", and "ye") are words modern English no longer uses.

Guys, this is a little off topic, but I value all ya'lls input. The native Americans were isolated for the most part from the other continents for a very long time after the writing of the New Testament..... if we assume that the KJV only position that the scripture is preserved perfect for each generation is true, then it must not require everyone to be able to necessarily access it..... So once we conclude that not everyone must have access to it, we know that the number would simply be some people.....or perhaps one....or not accessed at all, as long as it was available for a person to access it. Say because some guy in an Egyptian desert had it sitting on his shelf, right beside his camel. So if im wrong, please tell me how the TR was available to native Americans generation in the 2nd century? Or 3rd, or 4th, or 5th, or 6th, or 7th, or 9th........

I like to use the Webster's 1828.

I would emphasize, too, that even if you learn how to properly use and work with the etymologies of a word, Strong's will still lead you wrong simply because, quite often, the etymologies in Strong's are just wrong.

I am, to be fair, more likely to use Cruden instead of Strong.

I used to use Strongs in the late 80s..Bible College Days. Thank goodness not any more..it was put in the thrash where it belongs.

I would like to repost this on my channels to show people how to use Strong's Concordance and not how to. I would give all credit to you, I just believe it would help some of those who follow a certain RU-vid pastor who claims to be a prophet and the Angel of the Church of Philadelphia. He literally uses Strong's to "prove" hidden meanings in the Bible and to control members of his cult. All of his members utilize Strong's in the same manner that he does.

Just me saying writing some some areas but have you ever been in do you know how Kingdom and how they live in the kingdom and how one word in Greek can mean several words in English light blue words that we say are totally different even even even even even even in the times that we live in in I totally so I would like to know what a certain word mean in Greek in those times like a certain word mean different and this time even though the dictionary say hey it mean this but we have our own way of saying things

My damn self bought a strong or the strongest or whatever Concordia and don't have a King James Bible 😮 that's crazy been having this book since 2020 never got a King James Bible yet but will be trying to find me on line for free the Mormons have one but I don't think I should get a Mormons Bible

My grandfather passed down his Strong's, Vine's and Thayer's. After hearing your caution regarding Strong's, what is your studied opinion about these other two resources?

So, use the "free" version of Logos

Feed me, Seymour!

I followed a RU-vid “pastor” who uses Strongs to support his heretical doctrine. He has “discovered” the fallen angels “Elohim” created the earth. He shows Genesis 1 as the fallen angels, Genesis 2 is the Lord God “forming man”…. We are all fallen angels who have been placed here on earth to learn to “turn it upside down” to see the truth…He also uses The Strongs to discern numbers he receives to see what “message” the Lord is telling him. Sadly he has about 17,000 followers. I am no longer one. Prime example how a man can misuse, abuse and end up in major error using Strongs.

Regarding 10:32 and forward. Your dismissal of the viability of a biblical hermeneutic of incorporating concordant passages militates against the unity of Scripture, where every individual part derives its meaning from the whole, and the whole derives its meaning from Christ. Such cross-contextual synthesis is foundational for the comprehension of Sacred Scripture, as is evidenced by the whole tradition embodied by the Church Fathers. There are indeed both literal meanings to the biblical text (each word in its own proper context) as well as deeper or "hidden" or spiritual senses to the text to be mined. And the tracking of Strong's numbers throughout the corpus is extremely valuable to this latter endeavor. Let us recall that the Word of God is written by God Himself through human agency. Therefore its riches will always exceed the capacity of the human intellect, while still abundantly nourishing the soul with its evident, literal sense. In our day, Natural Language Processing has stumbled upon this truth: you will come to know a word by the company it keeps. Limiting the horizons of understanding to one particular, biblical context inevitably fragments -- and does not recognize the unity of -- the Word of God. In other words, brother, your self-imposed restriction radically truncates what can be learned of God's Word and thus of Our Lord Jesus Christ Himself. For example, you use the Greek eleutheroō (G1659) to make your case. And yet, John 8:32 means BOTH freedom from sin (within its local context) AND freedom from the multitude of OT religious prescriptions (cross-contextual). Whereas you may be tempted to maintain that the latter is eisegesis and hence erroneous, St. Paul teaches that "the power of sin is the law" (1 Cor 15:56). And so that both meanings can be said to be contained within the one verse (Jn 8:32). It is true that the cross-contextual reading of Sacred Scripture can be abused (as can the spiritual sense in general); yet this sense of Scripture retains its validity, while also raising the ominous specter of the very real need for an authority extraneous to the individual. And perhaps this is the underlying reason why so many Protestants find themselves tenaciously clinging to the literal sense to the exclusion of all else.

Strong's concordance really isn't that great, take the word Cain, how on earth would someone who doesn't know Hebrew know to look up the word Qayan for the meaning? If anyone can recommend a concordance or dictionary that is English to Hebrew instead of a Strong's concordance that's Hebrew to English then that would be great.

Let the Holy Spirit lead you into all truth. Compare scripture with scripture. Isa 28:9 Whom shall he teach knowledge? and whom shall he make to understand doctrine? them that are weaned from the milk, and drawn from the breasts. Isa 28:10 For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little.

Resources are the enemy of KJV onlyism, unless they produce it themselves. And at it's very core, KJV onlyism frequently contains an element within it, that makes it a sin, for them to be wrong. They equate what they believe to be absolutely true, and to question that truth, or even contemplate that they are wrong, is considered to be doubting God, and questioning him....which is then sin. Therefore, they cannot question themselves, or what they believe about the scripture, because that is questioning and doubting God. Therefore it is a sin, for them to question themselves, meaning it's a sin for them to be wrong. Which is why (some of them) they can only use their own resources.

Unusual claims require unusual evidence. This only tells you how to go farther down the rabbit hole.

Immersionists tend to derive their arguments from the etymology of the word "baptism" than the actual usage of the term as a rite.

It should be noted that this is not how you use the Strong's Concordance.

This channel seems like a stumbling block. Like....the entire mission is a stumbling block.

While I appreciated your shout out Mark, the truth is I am not sure if I actually agree (100%) with your video I have to be honest, I never recommend people untrained in the languages to go to ANY of the 'standard' original language resources (grammars/lexicons/etc.) For years I used to send my students to BDAG and Lpue and Nida and the like I would spend (roughly) three weeks teaching them the tools Going through the fallacies etc (more on this later) After about ten years of teaching and being in Christian higher education and such my conclusion is this: Except NIDOTTE and NIDNTTE or the abridgged version by Verbrugge everything else is almost a waste of time for non lnanguage students I think Louw and Nida, BDAG etc is simply too much (even for most of my seminary students, even though I still require them to use, after all, it's seminary, etc) I have even more issues with DCH/HALOT than I do with BDAG and Louw and Nida Even BDB is not really that highly recommended anymore *I prefer students use TWOT In brief, for most people, I wish they would use the NLT Study Bible with built in word study tools and in line citation of the original and then just use Verbeugges abridged work of silvas second edition of the the dictionary accompanied with NIDOTTE Everything else is making them drink water from a fire house Did it for years Don't really anymore Alongside the above, not to be belligerent, but I find for most people Moises Silvas Biblical Words and their Meaning is a much better use of their time than Carson's Exegetical Fallacies (I prefer students use Baxter's book actually which is for pastors) My former office buddy and I used to debate the pros and cons for years He ALWAYS assigned Carson and I preferred students to read Silva All that being said, however, I do think that there is value in what you are saying In truth, why don't you make more mention of the following volumes - they seem to be more in line with what your're proposing The Biblical Hebrew Companion for Bible Software Users: Grammatical Terms Explained for Exegesis by Michael Williams The Biblical Greek Companion for Bible Software Users: Grammatical Terms Explained for Exegesis Paperback - Sept. 27 2016 I am also a HUGE fan of the following books as well Hebrew for the Rest of Us, Second Edition: Using Hebrew Tools to Study the Old Testament by Lee M. Fields Greek for the Rest of Us, Third Edition: Learn Greek to Study the New Testament with Interlinears and Bible Software by William D. Mounce In sum, I think that your expectations for people just aren't in alignment with my experience teaching students perhaps your experience is different - but I would be hard pressed to say that that is true Any thoughts or comments about all this?