I am looking to see which concordance is best for the NIV Bible 1984 edition.
Not quite the answer I was looking for, but my response is, I am sticking with the NIV. This NIV is for the Celebrate Recovery program that I am part of.
Sorry to have had to blow your bubble on that one!
Just so that you will know.....Any commentary or other Biblical reference work produced for commercial sale that uses the New International Version must obtain written permission for the use of the NIV text.
Also, the NIV completely deletes many, many, many verses from the original.
If you search for Acts 8:37 in the NIV you will read,..........
36As they traveled along the road, they came to some water and the eunuch said, "Look, here is water. Why shouldn't I be baptized?"
38And he ordered the chariot to stop. Then both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water and Philip baptized him.
Verse 37 is completely gone. Some people will counter that fact by stating that it is in the footnotes. When you are reading your Bible do you look at the footnotes after every verse? Do you say "I am reading verse 3 so let me look below and see if something in verse 3 is missing."?
I don't have time to list them all, you can do that if you with, but here is Matt. & Mark.
Matthew 12:47 -- removed in the footnotes
Matthew 17:21 -- COMPLETELY removed.
Matthew 18:11 -- COMPLETELY removed.
Matthew 21:44 -- removed in the footnotes
Matthew 23:14 -- COMPLETELY removed.
Mark 7:16 -- COMPLETELY removed.
Mark 9:44 -- COMPLETELY removed.
Mark 9:46 -- COMPLETELY removed.
Mark 11:26 -- COMPLETELY removed.
Mark 15:28 -- COMPLETELY removed.
I have heard all of that before. I will still use my NIV and yes, I do look in the footnotes on every page that I read.
If you are not going to recommend the best concordance for my NIV bible, then please do not answer in this thread anymore as you have no useful information to give me that I will actually use.
I did, you didn't like it......to bad. You could have said............Thanks but no thanks, instead of the curt answer you did give.
I would probably have a backup translation available that matches better with Strong's or Vine's to use when you want to look something up or dig deeper. The NIV is good for reading and getting a good general idea, but I don't like using it for the same type of thing I'd use a concordance with. There are also some good resources online that you could pair up fairly well. I think most people here wouldn't use the NIV in this way, so I wouldn't expect to find anyone who has much experience with it. However, I've been surprised before.
I am sorry for that curt answer, I am rather short with everybody these days as I am under a tremendous amount of stress. My wife's multiple sclerosis flared up on her and she has been house bound for a couple weeks, and I have had to lift her all day long to get to the bathroom, bed, the couch... etc. Plus take care of our daughter. We have help coming in, but it's only once a week when a physical therapist comes in.
It's not that I didn't like the answer, I truly have no use for the information you gave. I have heard it all before and after doing my own research came to the conclusion that I will continue to use the NIV.