Results 1 - 8 of 8
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | All Strong's numbers for the King James | Bible general Archive 2 | DocTrinsograce | 139357 | ||
My eyes are so bad I haven't looked at a *real* Strongs Exhaustive Concordence in a long time, though I have two not 10 feet away from me. The one I use with my computer just has the G and the H. By the way, Brother Ed, do you know anything about this guy Strong? There is no biography of him online that I've ever been able to find. There used to be saying, "Young's is for the young, Crudens is for the crude, but Strong's is for the strong!" :-) Niether here nor there really, just cute. :-) |
||||||
2 | All Strong's numbers for the King James | Bible general Archive 2 | EdB | 139365 | ||
James Strong, LL.D., S.T.D, was a former professor of exegetical theology at Drew Theological Seminary. It is said that he spent more than thirty-five years preparing his landmark concordance. The Strong’s Concordance was first published in 1890. Nelson Publishing which supplies a very brief bio claims the Strong's remains the most widely used concordance and dictionary of Bible words from the King James Version of the Bible. It should be noted that Dr. Strong was compiling a concordance and ‘NOT’ a dictionary or lexicon as many people attempt to use the Strong’s concordance for. Dr. Strong indexed every word in the Bible and assigned a number to them. His numbering is considered the standard and is used extensively in other works. At the end of his concordance Dr. Strong then supplied the actual Hebrew/Greek word and a very ‘Brief’ definition and then a list of all words the King James translators translated from this particular Hebrew/Greek word. The Strong’s definitions and lists of words are after the fact. In other words Dr. Strong gave the definition for the Hebrew of Greek that fit the meaning of the word the King James translators had chosen to use. In some cases the definition supplied in Strong’s is not the complete definition of the original language word or carries a meaning the original never intended to project. A student doing a word study should always refer to a Greek or Hebrew dictionaries for a complete and total understanding. New “complete” / “exhaustive” / etc. Strong’s are coming to the market that correct much of this, but a word to wise is, to still use a good Hebrew/Greek Dictionary to gain a full understanding of the meaning of the word. Doc as for your little ditty "Young's is for the young, Crudens is for the crude, but Strong's is for the strong!" I remember hearing it but I can’t recall the exact implications. I suspect it was probably created by the ‘King James only’ people. Since Young had his own translation, Crudens was critical of the King James translation and Strong’s seemed to back the King James translators choice of words. Before anyone jumps all over me, by saying this I do not mean to infer the King James is in any way an inferior translation. |
||||||
3 | All Strong's numbers for the King James | Bible general Archive 2 | DocTrinsograce | 139367 | ||
Hi there, brother Ed! I appreciate your post! Very informative. In retrospect I suspect that "ditty" does, indeed, have the roots that you suggest. I've used both Young's concordence and even his "literal transalation." I've used Cruden's, too. I found Strong's the most useful, though, but that is probably because I tend to use KJV quite a bit of the time. By the way, my wife got me a fine (very large print) ESV for my birthday. I'm finding that they seem to have a good balance between formal and functional translation. I'm also kind of leaning toward the ESV because they don't seem to have a monetary motive... although that reveals, perhaps, more of a personal bias on my part more than on anyone else. Thank you, again, for your post. In Him, Doc |
||||||
4 | All Strong's numbers for the King James | Bible general Archive 2 | EdB | 139369 | ||
Doc I agree with you on ESV and I'm finding more and more people are making the switch. At one time it was my intention to go that direction but I like my deity pronouns capitalized and ESV doesn't do that. Yet! EdB |
||||||
5 | All Strong's numbers for the King James | Bible general Archive 2 | DocTrinsograce | 139374 | ||
I like that too... but I'm seeing a lot of Godly men *not* capitalizing deity pronouns. I'm wondering if I'm just hanging on to an anachronism. What finally persuaded me regarding the ESV was a statement that I read on sound exegesis: "We are not in the business of finding something unique in scripture. If that is our motivation then it is most likely rooted in pride." (Ouch! I had to confess that quickly!) Then I remember how the Puritans had a disdain for fancy language when it came to the instruction of the Word. (Although by today's standards the way they talked sounds fancy.) They emphasized the plain, straightforward simplicity of the truth of God. (Not that they didn't recognize that there are some "hard sayings" and difficult concepts in scripture.) Anyway, it occured to me that that was part of what was bothering me about the ESV. It sounded *too* simple to me. Perhaps my love of the KJV was rooted in pride at being able to understand the complex and arcane (to modern ears) language. The one advantage that I do miss in having the KJV be the standard is the familiarity of it. My friends and I joke around about how a short phrase from scripture can elicit whole sermons of ideas. (For example if you say, "even Solomon" or "whosoever will.") Having a standard alows an economy of verbiage when writing or reading about the Bible. On the other hand, people look at me funny when I unconsciously say, "Look at the sky, it sure is lowring!" :-) In Him, Doc |
||||||
6 | All Strong's numbers for the King James | Bible general Archive 2 | EdB | 139376 | ||
Doc You said, "I like that too... but I'm seeing a lot of Godly men *not* capitalizing deity pronouns. I'm wondering if I'm just hanging on to an anachronism." I think it is respect, you and I are from the old school where respect was earned and carefully shown. Today respect is expected by rarely ever earned and due to laziness even more rarely shown. God is due the respect of capitalization and I intend to continue to show it for all of eternity. EdB |
||||||
7 | All Strong's numbers for the King James | Bible general Archive 2 | DocTrinsograce | 139380 | ||
I believe you are right. When I even see the word "God" printed on a page, I tend to have this sense of "bowing the head" in deference for His authority. When I see a pronoun for one of the Persons of the Trinity that is not capitalized, it causes a twinge of angst. I am not certain how I learned this sense of deference and respect. But I believe I see it reflected in the scriptures and in the writings of the faithful throughout history. Sometimes I despair of teaching this attitude. The old Divines described our God best when they wrote summarized Scripture with "The Lord our God is but one only living and true God; Whose subsistence is in and of Himself, infinite in being and perfection; Whose essence cannot be comprehended by any but Himself; a most pure spirit, invisible, without body, parts, or passions, Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; Who is immutable, immense, eternal, incomprehensible, almighty, every way infinite, most holy, most wise, most free, most absolute; working all things according to the counsel of His own immutable and most righteous will for His own glory; most loving, gracious, merciful, long-suffering, abundant in goodness and truth, forgiving iniquity, transgression, and sin; the rewarder of them that diligently seek Him, and withal most just and terrible in His judgments, hating all sin, and Who will by no means clear the guilty. "God, having all life, glory, goodness, blessedness, in and of Himself, is alone in and unto Himself all-sufficient, not standing in need of any creature which He hath made, nor deriving any glory from them, but only manifesting His own glory in, by, unto, and upon them; He is the alone fountain of all being, of Whom, through Whom, and to Whom are all things, and He hath most sovereign dominion over all creatures, to do by them, for them, or upon them, whatsoever Himself pleaseth; in His sight all things are open and manifest, His knowledge is infinite, infallible, and independent upon the creature, so as nothing is to Him contingent or uncertain; He is most holy in all His counsels, in all His works, and in all His commands; to Him is due from angels and men, whatsoever worship, service, or obedience, as creatures they owe unto the Creator, and whatever He is further pleased to require of them." Now... if I could learn to convey *that* maybe those that hear me speak would begin to understand. I'm a long way from succeeding, though. In Him, Doc |
||||||
8 | All Strong's numbers for the King James | Bible general Archive 2 | EdB | 139383 | ||
Well said!!!! EdB |
||||||