NET Bible Reverse Interlinear

I'm finding the NET Bible a fantastic, fresh, accurate english translation that really gets me reading with a new level of intensity. I find myself frustrated doing in depth study with it in Logos because it doesn't have the Reverse Interlinear. One of the great parts is the translator notes... seems like those would make it much easier to get the RI done faster and more accurately

Shalom,

Mike

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Rich DeRuiter

I'm finding the NET Bible a fantastic, fresh, accurate english translation that really gets me reading with a new level of intensity. I find myself frustrated doing in depth study with it in Logos because it doesn't have the Reverse Interlinear. One of the great parts is the translator notes... seems like those would make it much easier to get the RI done faster and more accurately

Shalom,

Mike

You may be interested to know that the Lexham English Bible (a Logos project) is being headed up by one of the key people on the NET project. I know it's not the NET, but the LEB is a very literal translation that is a great Bible for study.

But I do agree that an NET rev int would be a great addition to the list of other rev ints.

NYSERVANT

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/130357#Comment_130357

I love the NET bible and I too would love to see a reverse interlinear for this too. I find myself having this my key text but when I need to do a word study I have to open the NASB or something else.

Chris Echols

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/198167#Comment_198167

I too would love to see a NET reverse Interlinear. This may sound heretical, but I'm not a big ESV fan...

George Somsel

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/291160#Comment_291160

I too would love to see a NET reverse Interlinear. This may sound heretical, but I'm not a big ESV fan...

No, it doesn't SOUND heretical; it IS heretical. Down with interlinears. Quit pretending you know the original languages and actually learn them or simply acknowledge that you don't know them and rely on competent and reliable people who do know them.

Mike Aubrey

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/291160#Comment_291160

This may sound heretical, but I'm not a big ESV fan...

Why would it? The ESV is nothing more than a glossed over RSV with a few conservative, calvinist tweaks.

JT (alabama24)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/291162#Comment_291162

Quit pretending you know the original languages and ... simply acknowledge that you don't know them and rely on competent and reliable people who do know them.

I don't know the original languages and rely upon George to set me straight. [;)]

George Somsel

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/291169#Comment_291169

Quit pretending you know the original languages and ... simply acknowledge that you don't know them and rely on competent and reliable people who do know them.

I don't know the original languages and rely upon George to set me straight.

See, you are relying now on Egypt, that broken reed of a staff, which will pierce the hand of anyone who leans on it. Is 36.6

DMB

I like NET because when they get into a tough translational pickle, their translation notes literally admit selection based on theology.

Wow. How refreshingly open.

Of course, one then wonders, exactly 'whose' theology? And so I tend to stick with a literal translation (another one shipping this month, by the way).

Yesterday, I accidentally ended up on Tabor's site and a page where he was defending Westcott, noting that the ESV had brought back all the Western 'non-interpolations'. (I hope I didn't misquote him).

EDIT: Actually I DID misquote him ... the ESV added back many of the LUKE non-interpolations.

JT (alabama24)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/291188#Comment_291188

Denise -

Do you have a link to the webpage you were reading?

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/291191#Comment_291191

Tabor's comments on Westcott / RSV / ESV:

http://www.bibleinterp.com/opeds/tabor_357913.shtml

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/291162#Comment_291162

Quit pretending you know the original languages and actually learn them or simply acknowledge that you don't know them and rely on competent and reliable people who do know them.

There is not a binary distinction between not knowing the languages and knowing the languages. It's a continuum of progression from the first to the second. Using interlinears can be an impetus to want to learn a language. Some people find that using interlinears for a time actually helps them in the learning process, especially early on. Once they've learned the languages (using other tools as well, of course: lectures, books, videos, memorizing paradigms, memorizing vocab, practice translating, etc.), they can abandon the crutch of the interlinear. Your stance is like telling a kid: "Down with training wheels. Quit pretending you know how to ride a bicycle and actually learn or simply acknowledge that you don't know how and rely on your parents to tow you in one of those carriage thingies behind their bikes."

Furthermore, competent and reliable people who do know the languages make interlinears. So relying on them can include using the interlinears they produce.

Keep Smiling 4 Jesus :)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/291191#Comment_291191

Likewise long for "The NET Bible" reverse interlinear so could use Logos Greek Morphology visual filters.

Noticed disciples and behold translate imperatives. In Matthew 28:19 Go translates an aorist participle while baptizing and teaching translate present participles. In Matthew 28:20, observe translates an infinitive while am translates present tense.

Thankful for reverse interlinear tagging that allows same visual filter to be used in original language and English.

Ideally hoping for "The NET Bible" with reverse interlinear tagging in New and Old Testaments.

Keep Smiling [:)]

MJD

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/291197#Comment_291197

Quit pretending you know the original languages and actually learn them or simply acknowledge that you don't know them and rely on competent and reliable people who do know them.

There is not a binary distinction between not knowing the languages and knowing the languages. It's a continuum of progression from the first to the second. Using interlinears can be an impetus to want to learn a language. Some people find that using interlinears for a time actually helps them in the learning process, especially early on. Once they've learned the languages (using other tools as well, of course: lectures, books, videos, memorizing paradigms, memorizing vocab, practice translating, etc.), they can abandon the crutch of the interlinear. Your stance is like telling a kid: "Down with training wheels. Quit pretending you know how to ride a bicycle and actually learn or simply acknowledge that you don't know how and rely on your parents to tow you in one of those carriage thingies behind their bikes."

Furthermore, competent and reliable people who do know the languages make interlinears. So relying on them can include using the interlinears they produce.

Nicely put Rosie...

But, I think I will quiet using reverse interlinear, I will just post my questions on the forum and let George do his handiwork...[Y]

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/291197#Comment_291197

Some people find that using interlinears for a time actually helps them in the learning process, especially early on.

I haven't kept up on the literature but when I was in grad school we'd make a distinction between learning a language so you could think in the language (best done with no transliteration or translation) and learning a language so you could translate/muddle your way through texts - dual language dictionaries, transliteration, interlinear glosses for class ... all fair game. Either way went light on memorized paradigms in favor of practice, practice, practice of similar sentences running through the paradigms until you "absorbed" the paradigm by sight or sound.

Glosses/interlinears do have a long and rich history ... some of the earliest Anglo-Saxon translations appear as glosses. But interlinears/glosses are for those not truly comfortable in both languages ... or to make George happy shall we say that are parallels between written interlinears and spoken pidgins?[:P] Okay, I know I can't defend that statement but I needed to throw George a bone.[:D]

George Somsel

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/291207#Comment_291207

Okay, I know I can't defend that statement but I needed to throw George a bone.

Ruff, ruff.

Douglas

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/291162#Comment_291162

[quote]

I sometimes wonder why you bothered to invest in Logos at all. A print copy of the original languages would have seem to have been more profitable to you altogether. Just a thought.

George Somsel

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/291209#Comment_291209

I sometimes wonder why you bothered to invest in Logos at all. A print copy of the original languages would have seem to have been more profitable to you altogether. Just a thought.

Obviously you haven't given it much thought.

Space saving
Portability
Linking between resources saving time searching for the proper location

I'm sure that if I spent a bit more time I could come up with a number of other reasons without ever once considering reverse interlinears.

EDIT: P.S., You should also note that I didn't mention flowers cascading down the screen when I open the program though I should have included the ability to add notes to resources (and delete them if I decide they weren't appropriate without messing up the resource) and, of course, the various search options. But most of all, there are the Word Find puzzles that let me risk losing my notes.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/291209#Comment_291209

A print copy of the original languages would have seem to have been more profitable to you altogether.

Logos makes it much easier for George to deal with the multiple versions of the "original languages". I'm sure he would be ecstatic if you could give him a print copy of the original manuscript so that all that matching / comparing / pondering was unnecessary.

I sometimes wonder why you bothered to invest in Logos at all.

George may be a favorite curmudgeon but he keeps making one point that needs to be heard by many on the forum - that a little Greek or Hebrew is a dangerous thing when you start "playing linguist." There is a big difference between being a student of Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic etc. and being an expert in the language. Some Logos users, including some on the forums, who are students mistake themselves for experts ... and Logos tools can be used to further that delusion. Yes, sometimes George goes too far in his campaign and yes, the warning applies to things other than language but Logos should come with a sign. Think of it like the warning on the passenger side rear view mirror (things may be closed than they appear) - WARNING: WITH LOGOS, YOU MAY APPEAR MORE KNOWLEDGEABLE THAN YOU ACTUALLY ARE.

George Somsel

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/291225#Comment_291225

George may be a favorite curmudgeon but he keeps making one point that needs to be heard by many on the forum - that a little Greek or Hebrew is a dangerous thing when you start "playing linguist." … WARNING: WITH LOGOS, YOU MAY APPEAR MORE KNOWLEDGEABLE THAN YOU ACTUALLY ARE.

Thank you for stating my point quite clearly (and I include myself).

Douglas

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/291225#Comment_291225

I think it is rather humerous that the forefront ideas George mentioned are no different than a $10 Bible software (in a Literal sense), could have saved a Pretty penny . The things of which MJ speaks , refers to the modern debate among scholars. (who's right?) There are basics that can be agreed upon generally, textually, But Doctrinally, our "Faith" has been split into so many fine hairs I am surprised that this forum has stayed as competent as it has, humbly speaking. Personally speaking, if a sound Spiritual Foundation is received at the Beginning of ones confession, it will be found to enable more of an easiness, in "weeding" through the tares of modern study. Again, the study, before the understanding, I think, breeds a Pharisee , knowing "everything", carrying "nothing". (This also includes, leaving that which was "once" understood, for that which is "new".

All of these denominational or "Faith" divisions, I believe cultivate a sense of pride. "I'm right" , in effect luring believers to follow a "Sect" of Christianity rather than Truth. All growth is continuous, whether you are doing anything or not, your habits (good or bad) are emboldening you (a subtle lurking dagger at times). So the sect that was once intriguing, being partly right will one day be the "whole truth" for you. This will for most cause the fiery search for truth (with an edge) to quietly dull. Pitifully, leaving an empty vessel, with beautiful writing on it.

Douglas

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/291225#Comment_291225

A print copy of the original languages would have seem to have been more profitable to you altogether.

Logos makes it much easier for George to deal with the multiple versions of the "original languages". I'm sure he would be ecstatic if you could give him a print copy of the original manuscript so that all that matching / comparing / pondering was unnecessary.

An original is not necessary with Amazon.com.

Not, offended, but minimally touched by not just Georges' presentation, but the aura itself wherever it may present itself. (I'm right your wrong, get with it.) Instead of, offering suggestive solutions to the problem (not the Person), producing positive fulfillment in the gap of truth presented.

George Somsel

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/291239#Comment_291239

All of these denominational or "Faith" divisions, I believe cultivate a sense of pride. "I'm right" , in effect luring believers to follow a "Sect" of Christianity rather than Truth. All growth is continuous, whether you are doing anything or not, your habits (good or bad) are emboldening you (a subtle lurking dagger at times). So the sect that was once intriguing, being partly right will one day be the "whole truth" for you. This will for most cause the fiery search for truth (with an edge) to quietly dull. Pitifully, leaving an empty vessel, with beautiful writing on it.

And Saturday slept late.

JT (alabama24)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/291225#Comment_291225

There is a big difference between being a student of Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic etc. and being an expert in the language. Some Logos users, including some on the forums, who are students mistake themselves for experts ... and Logos tools can be used to further that delusion. Yes, sometimes George goes too far in his campaign and yes, the warning applies to things other than language but Logos should come with a sign. Think of it like the warning on the passenger side rear view mirror (things may be closed than they appear) - WARNING: WITH LOGOS, YOU MAY APPEAR MORE KNOWLEDGEABLE THAN YOU ACTUALLY ARE.

True. This is also true in all areas of study. There is one God and I am not Him!

Douglas

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/291255#Comment_291255

And Saturday slept late.

lol, I apologize, I am obviously less educated

George Somsel

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/291264#Comment_291264

There is one God and I am not Him!

Sexist ! [:D]

Douglas

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/291264#Comment_291264

There is a big difference between being a student of Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic etc. and being an expert in the language. Some Logos users, including some on the forums, who are students mistake themselves for experts ... and Logos tools can be used to further that delusion. Yes, sometimes George goes too far in his campaign and yes, the warning applies to things other than language but Logos should come with a sign. Think of it like the warning on the passenger side rear view mirror (things may be closed than they appear) - WARNING: WITH LOGOS, YOU MAY APPEAR MORE KNOWLEDGEABLE THAN YOU ACTUALLY ARE.

True, I do love your Explanation and Warning lol, If you put this on "UserVoice I would certainly vote for it. One thing I noticed when I first received Logos is the potential of "original Language study" to make a way for people to
discover new doctrines, and become worse than just Paul vs. Apolos. My Experience is that if People understand the Morals of God (a.k.a. Ten Commandments") you can find True Doctrine in most any version, easily discerning Spiritual from carnal. Rather than surpassing our Professors in the gathering of knowledge to impress our neighbors, since pure doctrine is our highest goal (Finding out the Word to Do it).

[quote]

True. This is also true in all areas of study. There is one God and I am not Him!

Alabama, you are one of the humbler ones

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/291272#Comment_291272

I've always been a bit uncomfortable with the concept of 'trust the experts'.

When I take my car in for work, I'm entrusting it to 'the experts'. When I take my car to my local mechanic, he shakes his head sadly. Obviously my having followed the advice of 'the experts' has been a big mistake.

When I go to the doctor, one says 'hey, no problem ... this is pretty normal'. My other doctor frowns, kind of shifts her weight around, and says 'Well, .... '

When I read the original greek and then see the variation in translations, what? It's certainly not difficult to see there's a problem; just compare commentaries. My present reading of Westcott is absolutely fabulous, since he's often willing to admit, he hasn't a clue.

But even more important, much of the logic that goes into the translations is badly flawed. They take word usage from one century, and apply it to another century (OT). They wiggle around on other similar languages (in the same century maybe??). It's not that unusual where there's actually no word comparison, so they just guess (with a note at the bottom of course: 'we guessed!!').

In the NT, one commentator bounces over to the LXX; another moves into the papyris; another jumps into the pseudepigrapha. These are all experts and all completely confident (confident they're right and the other fellow is not). Then they all gang up on Philo or Josephus, since probably among thousands of writers, that's the only 2 left.

And in this world of 'complete confidence', as with getting your car fixed, one is concerned with eternal life. A minor issue of course.

I just wish 'the experts' were periodically be up front about the significant amount of assumptions they use, and the guesswork that occurs quite often.

Interlinears for me anyway are just an automated way to 'start checking'. Prior to Logos, I didn't have any.

Douglas

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/291285#Comment_291285

"We haven't heard that there be any 'Eternal Life'" - Oh, wait...wrong translation...Oh I found one! Wait this one says there is only annihilation if I sin, might as well enjoy the good life now, since there is not much to lose. It is so easy without a foundation to get confused. So, I start at the top. One God (namely YHWH). Then I go to his rules. The Ten Commandments. Then go go to the expression of those rules (i.e. The NT and the prophets). and Then last but certainly not least I go to the Correction if those rules are not followed (i.e. Judgements of Israel and those of the NT that were corrected). If this were not enough due to my failings in grasping so far, I go to the restoration of forgiveness if I mess up (not excluding the fact that it starts with Jesus b/c of Adam.)

If a person is to find "another God" his rules will certainly bring discontentment of the inner parts, and if one is able through self delusion to avoid this, his victory will without fail be limited due to the True God's laws. I have found (both in Scripture and life) that problems found in life do not necessarily identify a problem with your faith, but if you are "Moved" by them your problem is self evident. (might be trivial for this convo.)

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/291285#Comment_291285

Interlinears for me anyway are just an automated way to 'start checking'.

My personal opinion is that some Greek and Hebrew (and historical linguistics) is useful so that one can follow the scholars' arguments ... which is far different than engaging in the argument. And, yes, you can make educated (if not necessarily correct) decisions as to which scholar makes the most sense. Logos is very useful for this.

Daniel Radke

I'll add my voice to this discussion by stating that I would love to see a NET Bible reverse interlinear too.

Douglas

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/291443#Comment_291443

I'll add my voice to this discussion by stating that I would love to see a NET Bible reverse interlinear too.

[Y] [Y]

Bohuslav Wojnar

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/291424#Comment_291424

Interlinears for me anyway are just an automated way to 'start checking'.

My personal opinion is that some Greek and Hebrew (and historical linguistics) is useful so that one can follow the scholars' arguments ... which is far different than engaging in the argument. And, yes, you can make educated (if not necessarily correct) decisions as to which scholar makes the most sense. Logos is very useful for this.

[Y]

Bohuslav Wojnar

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/291443#Comment_291443

I'll add my voice to this discussion by stating that I would love to see a NET Bible reverse interlinear too.

Yes, I second that [Y]

P.S. Of course I agree with both George and MJ warning. Keeping that in mind RI can be a good starter to get to the Word Study etc.

Peter Keay

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/291641#Comment_291641

Big +1 here.

Schumitinu

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/417112#Comment_417112

I'd like to bring this up to our attention again. Looking at this forum entry there are a number of people that wait for the NET reverse interlinear of the OT and the NT. This forum goes back a few years already. I too would love to have it. And I have learned if we don't voice it we will not get it!

Does anybody know whether this request is on logos.uservoice.com? If so could you provide the link here so we can vote?

Schumitinu

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/620941#Comment_620941

Please vote here:

https://logos.uservoice.com/forums/42823-logos-bible-software-5/suggestions/6342637-add-net-reverse-interlinear-for-ot-and-nt

Thank you!

Josh

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/621075#Comment_621075

Please vote here:

https://logos.uservoice.com/forums/42823-logos-bible-software-5/suggestions/6342637-add-net-reverse-interlinear-for-ot-and-nt

Thank you!

Added some votes. [Y]

Myke Harbuck

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/130357#Comment_130357

You may be interested to know that the Lexham English Bible (a Logos project) is being headed up by one of the key people on the NET project. I know it's not the NET, but the LEB is a very literal translation that is a great Bible for study.

I agree. The LEB is a solid translation. I have enjoyed getting to know it better over the last couple years.

But I do agree that an NET rev int would be a great addition to the list of other rev ints.

I concur! Would love to see a NET RI....the NET is a very solid trans. as well; it was the first trans. that I really dug into when I became a Christian. I stumbled upon it on Bible.org.

Caleb S.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/848533#Comment_848533

I also would like to see a Reverse Interlinear for the NET Bible. It would be useful for comparing translations using the new Text Comparison tool, as well as in the Exegetical Guide, et. al.