Bible study tips

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

john832

Senior Member
May 31, 2013
11,363
185
63
#41
Thank YOU! I have downloaded and tried e-sword again yesterday thanks to you.
I tried to use it 3-4 years ago but back then I still found Bible software and sites like Blue Letter Bible kinda graphically overwhelming... so I looked into Strongs' directly when I needed it. This is much better now I think I can use it. :)
E-Sword is my favorite.
 
C

ChristIsGod

Guest
#42
Bless GOD!!!
 
Jul 22, 2014
10,350
51
0
#43
Everybody is different. I have Esword for my Ipad. It's alright. I prefer using:

1. Biblehub for reading (Including the comparing the KJV with other Modern Translations).

2. BlueLetterBible for word searches and for looking at the Hebrew & Greek on occasion.

3. OpenBible.info (Cross Reference Search) for cross references because it provides a ton of cross references.

4. Warren W. Wiersbe's Bible Complete Commentary (OT/NT) on rare occasion when I am seeing what a Pastor says (On some occasions, I do not agree with him; But overall his commentary is the best of the commentaries out there in my opinion).

5. Google Internet Search for basic researching. I won't jump at believing the first article I read to provide an explanation for a text. I am careful to examine multiple views on it and pray about it. Sometimes God will direct me to study a certain word or text for days (Until I feel it glorifies Christ and I feel it is correct by the Spirit and the context).
 
Last edited:
C

ChristIsGod

Guest
#44
Here I read from the last page back to pg 2 to your reply to me, Jason.

Though I stay with the KJV - I cannot say as you believe that it's inerrant. The Textus Receptus is the closest to inerrancy as you'll find. As I said before- Lexicons are nothing more than Greek Dictionaries.
Strong's is not a Lexicon. That's where the mistakes come in. He listed as "definitions" only the words that the KJV used for those Greek words, so it's more like a concordance than dictionary and his method was backwards.
You don't check the Greek wording by how the KJV translators translated those words -- that is backwards.

That's about all that I feel to say on the Original language that the writers of the New Testament used.
 
Jul 22, 2014
10,350
51
0
#45
Here I read from the last page back to pg 2 to your reply to me, Jason.

Though I stay with the KJV - I cannot say as you believe that it's inerrant. The Textus Receptus is the closest to inerrancy as you'll find. As I said before- Lexicons are nothing more than Greek Dictionaries.
Strong's is not a Lexicon. That's where the mistakes come in. He listed as "definitions" only the words that the KJV used for those Greek words, so it's more like a concordance than dictionary and his method was backwards.
You don't check the Greek wording by how the KJV translators translated those words -- that is backwards.

That's about all that I feel to say on the Original language that the writers of the New Testament used.
Many problems in what you said here. First, the Greeks did not leave dictionaries explaining the difference between Greek and English. Scholars who wrote various Lexicons did not claim their findings were inspired. I can create a Lexicon, too. Doesn't mean it is God's Word or true, though.

Second, it was not just James Strong who created his concordance. Many of his colleagues were involved in working in on it.

Third, have you ever heard of Strong numbers? That is what a Lexicon is.

Fourth, not interested in debating the KJV as the inspired Word of God at this time. I already provided many reasons to back up my position of which you can check out at the link I provided in recent post on that topic.
 
Jul 22, 2014
10,350
51
0
#46
Many problems in what you said here. First, the Greeks did not leave dictionaries explaining the difference between Greek and English. Scholars who wrote various Lexicons did not claim their findings were inspired. I can create a Lexicon, too. Doesn't mean it is God's Word or true, though.

Second, it was not just James Strong who created his concordance. Many of his colleagues were involved in working in on it.

Third, have you ever heard of Strong numbers? That is what a Lexicon is.

Fourth, not interested in debating the KJV as the inspired Word of God at this time. I already provided many reasons to back up my position of which you can check out at the link I provided in recent post on that topic.
Fifth, never said I don't check the Hebrew and Greek words at all. I sometimes check Lexicons. I use Strong's Lexicon at Blue Letter Bible. Although, you can use Strong's Lexicon at other websites.

For example: One recent example I discovered that the Strong's Lexicon was totally useless. The English word "saved" in in 1 Timothy 2:15 within the Strong's Lexicon does not give one the proper definition. Actually, the proper definition is "set apart", "set aside", or "reserved." The KJV Dictionary Online uses the word "reserved"; And many believers hold to the belief that "saved" means "set apart" or "set aside."

In other words, Lexicons are not some "super secret code key" to the truth of God's Word.
 

SoulWeaver

Senior Member
Oct 25, 2014
4,889
2,534
113
#47
Actually, the proper definition is "set apart", "set aside", or "reserved." The KJV Dictionary Online uses the word "reserved"; And many believers hold to the belief that "saved" means "set apart" or "set aside.
Psalms 4:3 But know that the LORD hath set apart him that is godly for himself: the LORD will hear when I call unto him. :)
 
C

ChristIsGod

Guest
#48
I didn't plan to come back for replies, but this is truly important, Jason.


The problem with Strong is Not the fact that he numbered each word to make it easier for everyone else to find a word - or find a verse by just remembering one word of it -- but it's the fact that -
he Didn't Define words but Used the way that the KJV men translated the Greek words from the TR over 400 yrs ago. /o:


Earlier I was referring to the Strong's Concordance that most people are aware of. His little "dictionary" that's in the back of that book, that was in microscopic print back in the 70's - is definitely a good 'Concordance' and a God send that every word is numbered - but in the back of the Strong's Concordance, we find Strong's "dictionary" and it is not a Lexicon. He only defines a word by how the KJV used/translated the words.
As I said eaelier, that was his mistake - by calling what's at the back of his Concordance a "dictionary" and your mistake if you call that a Lexicon.


As I've said before, good Lexicons are multi-volumed sets and they 'are' Greek Dictionaries. YES, the ancient Greek is well known enough to be able to know how each Greek word was used, and so those words can be well defined. We have enough books written by other authors/philosophers/historians, etc. of that time period of about 300 years before Christ until well after, to know how to interpret that Greek.

Knowing the Greek and it's grammar is how we came up with what is truly being said and how one discerns doctrine. That's how we got our basic tenets of faith, Long ago. By the most exact language in history.



The KJV used the Textus Receptus to translate the Greek into Archaic English and because they used the Textus Receptus, that's why I've stayed with the KJV, despite that it is not inerrant, as the Textus Receptus is much more so and that's why those guys used it to come up with their KJV over 400 years ago. But the language doesn't do the Greek 100% justice.

There are times when reading the numbered version, you'll see that the KJV will give only one number for up to 3 words, so that they had to use their own words to add to the original 'one word' to say what they wanted it to say.



Regarding doctrine, etc... as you can see from just this very-very small example below ...

Using just the e-sword....


John 3:16 ForG1063 GodG2316 soG3779 lovedG25 theG3588 world,G2889 thatG5620 he gaveG1325 hisG848 only begottenG3439 Son,G5207 thatG2443 whosoeverG3956 believethG4100 inG1519 himG846 should notG3361 perish,G622 butG235 haveG2192 everlastingG166 life.G2222

GNT-TR+ John 3:16 ουτωςG3779 ADV γαρG1063 CONJ ηγαπησενG25 V-AAI-3S οG3588 T-NSM θεοςG2316 N-NSM τονG3588 T-ASM κοσμονG2889 N-ASM ωστεG5620 CONJ τονG3588 T-ASM υιονG5207 N-ASM αυτουG846 P-GSM τονG3588 T-ASM μονογενηG3439 A-ASM εδωκενG1325 V-AAI-3S ιναG2443 CONJ παςG3956 A-NSM οG3588 T-NSM πιστευωνG4100 V-PAP-NSM ειςG1519 PREP αυτονG846 P-ASM μηG3361 PRT-N αποληταιG622 V-2AMS-3S αλλG235 CONJ εχηG2192 V-PAS-3S ζωηνG2222 N-ASF αιωνιονG166 A-ASF


Strong's - G4100 - pisteuō - From G4102 [faith]; to have faith/believe/commit/put trust in


Under the Dictionaries section of the e-sword - "RMAC" -

V-PAP-NSM
Part of Speech: Verb
Tense: Present
Voice: Active
Mood: Participle
Case: Nominative (subject; predicate nominative)
Number: Singular
Gender: Masculine


The e-sword doesn't define the grammar but if you have a book or source that does - A "Present Active Participle" shows "Continuous action".... so the KJV 'should read' ... "whosoever is continuously believing in Him...."

The fact that the Strong's only give the definition of the "root" of words and not the exact word with it's Grammar is also what causes problems in debates.


So - that one word from just one verse makes a large difference in Doctrine these days - as some are depending on their one-time prayer of faith in Him --- yet, through-out the N.T. we see that we are to "continue in the Faith".

Thayer gives a bit more of a definition of pisteuō ...


1) to think to be true, to be persuaded of, to credit, place confidence in
1a) of the thing believed
1a1) to credit, have confidence
1b) in a moral or religious reference
1b1) used in the NT of the conviction and trust to which a man is impelled by a certain inner and higher prerogative and law of soul
1b2) to trust in Jesus or God as able to aid either in obtaining or in doing something: saving faith
2) to entrust a thing to one, i.e. his fidelity
2a) to be intrusted with a thing



If we interpret "continuously believing" as "believe", as those that believe "easy believism" do -- we see that we should get back to interpreting His Word with the Language that HE Used for His Own Words.

That's a very miniscule example of what this conversation is about and those that understand the language will understand -- but those that are KJV-Only or anti-the-language that the NT was written in, by the Apostles, for a GOD given reason will only continue to argue.

If you weren't a Brother, I would continue to argue as well.
 
Jul 22, 2014
10,350
51
0
#49
I didn't plan to come back for replies, but this is truly important, Jason.


The problem with Strong is Not the fact that he numbered each word to make it easier for everyone else to find a word - or find a verse by just remembering one word of it -- but it's the fact that -
he Didn't Define words but Used the way that the KJV men translated the Greek words from the TR over 400 yrs ago. /
Yes, Strong's Concordance (Based off the KJV) today includes the added Lexicons (Hebrew and Greek) from the Greek Textus Receptus for the New Testament; Some today (Like myself) call it the Strong's Lexicon because it is integrated together on several websites (Google: "Strong's Lexicon" and scroll down to the fourth link).

People today use programs such as Esword see an integrated Strong's Concordance and Textus Receptus Greek Lexicon or Westcott and Hort Greek Lexicon.

In majority of all your Modern Translations are based off of the Westcott and Hort Greek text. They were not even real believers but they were involved in the occult.

Earlier I was referring to the Strong's Concordance that most people are aware of. His little "dictionary" that's in the back of that book, that was in microscopic print back in the 70's - is definitely a good 'Concordance' and a God send that every word is numbered - but in the back of the Strong's Concordance, we find Strong's "dictionary" and it is not a Lexicon. He only defines a word by how the KJV used/translated the words.
Yes, I mostly use Strong's Lexicon (i.e. Strong's Concordance with integrated Lexicons) on Blue Letter Bible. I am aware of Strong's Concordance. I gave a huge hard cover copy of one that I gave to my Mom a long time ago (That is still in her library of books).

Knowing the Greek and it's grammar is how we came up with what is truly being said and how one discerns doctrine. That's how we got our basic tenets of faith, Long ago. By the most exact language in history.
I am all for Hebrew and Greek word studies... IF and only IF... you don't change or ignore the text in the English; And IF.... you don't require it as the ONLY WAY to understand the Bible. See, if you believe that way, then you have just condemned many believers history who did not have the luxury of having access to James Strong's Concordance and or to a Greek Lexicon.

For who guides you into all truth? Is it a Greek Lexicon with a Strong's Concordance? No. It is the Spirit that guides us into all truth. How did the Spirit guide people into all truth before Strong's Concordance and before people had access to Lexicons?
 
Last edited:
K

Kerry

Guest
#50
So what doe's the little poor boy in Mexico do?
 
Jul 22, 2014
10,350
51
0
#51
So what doe's the little poor boy in Mexico do?
Currenly there is a recent translation in Spanish that is endorsed by KJV proponents.

Now, that said, the world language (i.e. international language) today is not Spanish but it is English. Just google "what is the world language?" In other words, just as Greek was once a "world language" whereby the Scriptures were available perfectly, it is the same today. For I can say, "what abouta third world language that a little boy spoke in some remote village during the writing of the Greek back during the time of Paul"? What did he do? See, my point is that the majority of the world had a perfect Word of God being spread to it while the gospel went out in different languages. For to assume that every language or every translation says the same exact thing would not be true. For they can't all be the perfect Word of God. There is only one perfect Word.
 
Last edited:
K

Kerry

Guest
#52
Currenly there is a recent translation in Spanish that is endorsed by KJV-onlyists.

Now, that said, the world language (i.e. international language) today is not Spanish but it is English. Just google "what is the world language?" So just as Greek was once a "world language" whereby the Scriptures were available perfectly, it is the same today. For I can say, what about "a third world language that a little boy spoke in some remote village during the writing of the Greek back during the time of Paul"? What did he do? See, my point is that the majority of the world had a perfect Word of God being spread to it while the gospel went out in different languages. For to assume that every language or every translation says the same exact thing would not be true.... AND they can't all be the perfect Word of God. There is only one perfect Word.

wow just wow and again wow and one more time wow.
 
K

Kerry

Guest
#53
You know what Paul taught in his deepest theology and I meant he was well taught and in line to be High preist. But when he met Jesus, he threw it all away and only taught the cross.
 
Jul 22, 2014
10,350
51
0
#54
wow just wow and again wow and one more time wow.
I hope someday God will get you to say .... wow .... about His divinely inspried preserved Word for our day. For would you still be thinking this way back in the time of the Old Testament? Would you be doubting a perfect Word available to you even back then? What about the Ten Commandments? Would you be like... Now wait a minute, Moses probably wrote those tablets... It wasn't actually the finger of God doing it.
 
Sep 16, 2014
1,666
100
48
#55
This may be a long shot question... but I really wanna get into my bible and start looking past the face value of it.
The first mistake of disciples of Christ is to try getting past the face value of Jesus.
 
Jul 22, 2014
10,350
51
0
#56
I hope someday God will get you to say .... wow .... about His divinely inspried preserved Word for our day. For would you still be thinking this way back in the time of the Old Testament? Would you be doubting a perfect Word available to you even back then? What about the Ten Commandments? Would you be like... Now wait a minute, Moses probably wrote those tablets... It wasn't actually the finger of God doing it.
See, this is the type of debate that I was hoping to avoid. Folks are judging me for having too much faith in God's Word. But do you realize that the Scriptures say I will be judged by the Word? If the Word was corrupt in some way, then how can I be accurately judged by it?

Think about it.
 
Jul 22, 2014
10,350
51
0
#57
The first mistake of disciples of Christ is to try getting past the face value of Jesus.
Yes, I agree. I initially had a hard time understanding the Kenosis vs. the Hypostatic Union. I did a lot of soul searching and praying to find the answer on this.
 
Last edited:
Jul 22, 2014
10,350
51
0
#58
Yes, I agree. I initially had a hard time understanding the Kenosis vs. the Hypostatic Union. I did a lot of soul searching and praying to find the answer on this.
After endlessly reading internet articles for days, I still was not getting anywhere. But I still kept praying for God to help me. This video was the answer to my prayers on that topic.

[video=youtube;0XZPHTZvXXo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XZPHTZvXXo[/video]
 
K

Kerry

Guest
#59
I hope someday God will get you to say .... wow .... about His divinely inspried preserved Word for our day. For would you still be thinking this way back in the time of the Old Testament? Would you be doubting a perfect Word available to you even back then? What about the Ten Commandments? Would you be like... Now wait a minute, Moses probably wrote those tablets... It wasn't actually the finger of God doing it.

Jesus said that Moses saw my day and rejoiced. No need to get hostile I love you brother. Paul said I have determined to know nothing save Christ and Him crucified. The NT is all about Christ whether it is in Greek or Hebrew or German or Latin or Spanish or English. The Gospel is the Cross.

What does it profit to know the Hebrew or Greek? so you can boast of your knowledge and speak with words of wisdom. Paul said I come not with excellent words but with Power and that meaning the cross. Paul went to Athens and tried to convince them with His knowledge and it didn't happen, He left there and went to Corinth and stated I have determined to know nothing save Christ and Him crucified and established a large church and nothing in Athens. If we try to understand God with our intellect we fail. Theology is an attempt to know God and decipher Him and bend Him to our will.

It is simply the cross and a 5 year old can understand it. We make it complicated.
 
Jul 22, 2014
10,350
51
0
#60
Jesus said that Moses saw my day and rejoiced. No need to get hostile I love you brother. Paul said I have determined to know nothing save Christ and Him crucified. The NT is all about Christ whether it is in Greek or Hebrew or German or Latin or Spanish or English. The Gospel is the Cross.

What does it profit to know the Hebrew or Greek? so you can boast of your knowledge and speak with words of wisdom. Paul said I come not with excellent words but with Power and that meaning the cross. Paul went to Athens and tried to convince them with His knowledge and it didn't happen, He left there and went to Corinth and stated I have determined to know nothing save Christ and Him crucified and established a large church and nothing in Athens. If we try to understand God with our intellect we fail. Theology is an attempt to know God and decipher Him and bend Him to our will.

It is simply the cross and a 5 year old can understand it. We make it complicated.
Exactly! It is all about Jesus Christ and the gospel. That is why I was trying to avoid this type of debate that causes divisions. I have no desire to study Hebrew or Greek at this time. If I were to study another Biblical language it would be ancient Hebrew later down the road to Christ's glory and not my own. But currently, there is no real pressing need for me to learn ancient Hebrew.