Intermediate New Testament Greek: A Linguistic and Exegetical Approach (Hardcover)

by Richard Young (Author) "The primary reason for taking a course in New Testament Greek is to use it as a tool to interpret the biblical text in a..." (more)
Key Phrases: deep structure clause, kernel clauses, deep structure verb, New Testament, Jesus Christ, Holy Spirit (more...)

Editorial Reviews

Product Description

Intermediate New Testament Greek helps students learn to use their knowledge of Greek in the exegesis of the New Testament. It accomplishes this goal by augmenting traditional grammar with insights from modern linguistics.

About the Author

Richard A. Young is a graduate of Arizona State University (B.S.) and Bob Jones University (Ph.D.). He is the author of Healing the Earth.

Product Details

• Hardcover: 308 pages
• Publisher: B&H Academic (October 26, 1994)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0805410597
• ISBN-13: 978-0805410594
• Product Dimensions: 9.3 x 6.3 x 1 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.5 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.5 out of 5 stars See all reviews (6 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #506,911 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

7 of 7 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Positive Review of Intermediate New Testament Greek, March 2, 2001

By	Kevin Woodruff (Chattanooga, TN) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

Richard Young has a superb job of giving the student of the Greek New Testament a grammar that is a worthy successor to Dana and Mantey. Although it is not as massive as Daniel Wallace's Greek Grammar: Beyond the Basics, Young's treatment is an ideal choice for one who is seeking to use his Greek to interpret the New Testament. Using a linguistical model, Young goes beyond the traditional approaches of sentence-based studies of the surface structure of the Greek language. He presents a broader picture of communication that examines both the language of the Greek New Testament and how its meaning is influence by its literary and situational contexts. A must-have for anyone wishing to do exegesis.

5 of 5 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Refreshing Linguistic Perspective, April 14, 2003

By	M. P. Williams (Clemmons, NC United States) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

As a former undergraduate student of Dr. Young's in my early years, I found this volume a good representation of his cognitive style. He is foremost a remarkable Scholar. He is also a remarkable pragmatist. His text illustrates a caveat in Western thinking between traditional grammarians and those who spoke vulgar Greek in daily life. After Hebrew, Aramaic, Syriac and two ancient north Egyptian dialects, (Sahidic and Coptic), I have come to many of the principle conclusion of his book, (albeit 20 years later). To divorce the force of "meaning" from it's internal idiomatic and external forms of expression is to miss the force of a language altogether. Why do ALL modern Greek grammars do this? Simply put, it is a fear of crossing traditional lines. Dr. Young never cared so much for tradition as as he did for an accurate representation of fact. Whether Dr. Young cites the Sharp rule on anarthrous nominatives on the Johannan paradox misses the point of linguistic-historical harmony of meaning in a most narrow view. It also utterly missed the point of this book.

Had I used this volume in my graduate studies at Oxford, I would have "stood close shoulders" with most of my lecturers.

This volume should be on every shelf in every Greek professors library in the world. Failing this, a great volume of meaning shall be lost by even the most astute Greek students/scholars of vulgar Greek.

11 of 14 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars Useful in some areas, but not the best for your money., December 24, 2001

By	Shawn W. Gillogly "DenSem Grad" (Denver, CO United States) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

This is not the grammar one should first reach for in most areas. Daniel Wallace's grammars hold pride of place out of those that are most current. When one compares this grammar to those, there are reasons why this should not be preferred over Wallace.

1) Young has an interesting, and odd, tendency to list only the English translation of passages that aremeant as a Greek grammatical example. thus one has to find the passage to see if his usage is accurate.

2) He changes terminology from that which is commonly used by other scholars. thus one has to get used to his own (idiosyncratic) usages and then compare them against the "normal" usages.

3) He often included exegetically debated texts as his prooftexts for particular usages, and then does not say that they are debatable.

All of these devalue the usage of this grammar. Also he follows speech act theory very closely. which means he not only sees the aorist as not having a time aspect, but rarely sees time aspect mattering in tense at all. However, one should consider the fact that an author in any language can use a verb in an alternate tense to make it more vivid or to bring about a point. This does not invalidate a rule, because one has to know the normal usage to expect the abnormal one.

Where this grammar is most useful is in preposition and conjunction usages. His compiled lists of common usages for conjunctions and prepositions save frequent trips to the lexicon. They also represent the one area of clear superiority over even Wallace's "Beyond the Basics."