I noticed that the 1900 Pure Cambridge KJV does not have strongs numbers in the newly rebuilt files for L3, are these comming later? Also there is an error in Gen 1:1 with a link to hebrew on the first word "In"
This is an ---I don't know---- bump!
But you might also phrase this question in the L3 forum!
Use the Report Typo ... feature for the text in Gen 1:1 and expand the problem in the Comments box.
Sorry, I should have posted in L3. Mainly just wanting to know the future plans for the 1900 KJV.
We're moving to reverse interlinears instead of Strong's Numbers, which are really just numeric proxies for Greek and Hebrew words anyway. We may add a Strong's line to reverse interlinears, but we strongly feel you're better off using the original language words.
Fantastic - I had been absolutely baffled by the use of Strong's numbers. Although given how limited my Hebrew is, I should have been thrilled to see something familar - Arabic numbers!
Please do not abandon Strong's Numbers. Not everyone has the time, patients, or ability to compare foreign language words, but most anyone can compare numbers quickly.
They are also quick links to other books content on the same topic.
I have used them for many years, and would sure miss them.
We may add a Strong's line to reverse interlinears
[Y]
Please do not abandon Strong's Numbers. Not everyone has the time, patients, or ability to compare foreign language words, but most anyone can compare numbers quickly. They are also quick links to other books content on the same topic. I have used them for many years, and would sure miss them.
This describes me perfectly. I agree - please bring them back.
Jim D.
Strong's Numbers fans will be pleased to know that the L3 anomalies between NASB95 Strong's and KJV Strong's have been resolved in L4 - see http://community.logos.com/forums/p/5010/39338.aspx. What it means is that you should avoid using the NASB Dictionaries for Strong's numbers.
