• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

KJVO and the Strongs Concordance

Status
Not open for further replies.
rockytopva

rockytopva

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I taught Sunday School and attended one year in a Freewill Baptist church. As a going away present they gave me a King James Version Open Bible, in which is my Bible of choice. I wasn't long reading until I saw the need for a Strongs Exhaustive Concordance with Hebrew and Greek dictionaries.

I don't criticize other versions but am in hopes that they have had someone like James Strong put together a Concordance for them. I also do not know any who are so KJVO that they are against other versions. But for me I like my KJV Open Bible and am ready to buy my third. My main issue is with the cover wanting to come off and fall apart.
 
C

Crimson12

New Member
Also not KJVO but close to a TRO. But love the Open Bible have you ever read from Dake Bible? I really like it because it like a Bible with 2 or 3 dictionaries.
 
37818

37818

Well-Known Member
rockytopva said:
I taught Sunday School and attended one year in a Freewill Baptist church. As a going away present they gave me a King James Version Open Bible, in which is my Bible of choice. I wasn't long reading until I saw the need for a Strongs Exhaustive Concordance with Hebrew and Greek dictionaries.

I don't criticize other versions but am in hopes that they have had someone like James Strong put together a Concordance for them. I also do not know any who are so KJVO that they are against other versions. But for me I like my KJV Open Bible and am ready to buy my third. My main issue is with the cover wanting to come off and fall apart.
Click to expand...
I have used the Strong's Exhaustive Concordance as a main Bible study tool since 1968. I have since required a NASB exhaustive concordance for the 1977 edition. And a NIV exhaustive concordance for the 1984 edition. AIT for words not Greek or Hebrew.
 
Salty

Salty

20,000 Posts Club
Administrator
37818 said:
I have used the Strong's Exhaustive Concordance as a main Bible study tool since 1968. ...
Click to expand...
I have had the Strong's.... for years - but doesnt help me much now - my eyesight for small font - just is not good enough - even if I use a magnifying glass

So the Blue Bible is a big help
 
Deacon

Deacon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
How to use Strong’s Concordance is one of the things I teach people as they begin learning how to study the Bible.
Strong’s is limited to the KJV, but other versions have a concordance that fits their needs.
It is a basic tool, there are better ones to use as a person desires to learn more.

Strong’s has many shortcomings.
1) it’s no dictionary - vocabulary is limited and as a lexicon it simply stinks! Learn the Greek and Hebrew alphabets and use a real lexicon. If you use an internet version it may link to one.
2) it is not to be used like a Amplified Bible, it’s not a pick a choose what word you like. The concordance shows how word ARE TRANSLATED not how they can or should be translated (there’s a fine distinction). I would suggest using a Strong’s concordance in combination with other versions to expand the vocabulary/meaning of the word you search.

Modern computer programs are offered online and more advanced programs can be purchased that are specific to each version (I use Logos Bible Software).

Rob
 
Truther

Truther

Member
rockytopva said:
I taught Sunday School and attended one year in a Freewill Baptist church. As a going away present they gave me a King James Version Open Bible, in which is my Bible of choice. I wasn't long reading until I saw the need for a Strongs Exhaustive Concordance with Hebrew and Greek dictionaries.

I don't criticize other versions but am in hopes that they have had someone like James Strong put together a Concordance for them. I also do not know any who are so KJVO that they are against other versions. But for me I like my KJV Open Bible and am ready to buy my third. My main issue is with the cover wanting to come off and fall apart.
Click to expand...
I am sola scriptura(KJVO).

The Strongs concordance, etc, is a booby trap for the pure word of God.

It is specifically designed to redefine the Bible and open it up to closet redefinitions.
 
Reformed1689

Reformed1689

Well-Known Member
rockytopva said:
I taught Sunday School and attended one year in a Freewill Baptist church. As a going away present they gave me a King James Version Open Bible, in which is my Bible of choice. I wasn't long reading until I saw the need for a Strongs Exhaustive Concordance with Hebrew and Greek dictionaries.

I don't criticize other versions but am in hopes that they have had someone like James Strong put together a Concordance for them. I also do not know any who are so KJVO that they are against other versions. But for me I like my KJV Open Bible and am ready to buy my third. My main issue is with the cover wanting to come off and fall apart.
Click to expand...
Yes it has other versions as well. However, using a Strongs Concordance and thinking you can do in-depth study with that leads to many an error.
 
Truther

Truther

Member
37818 said:
Can you give one example of this problem?
Click to expand...
Yes, pretty much every Sunday. The preacher reads from the Bible, says "The Bible says this, but here in our concordance, the word also means this, this and this".

This is exactly what I mean what Strongs has done to the Bible and has become a "secondary, back up Bible" for ministers.
 
37818

37818

Well-Known Member
Truther said:
Yes, pretty much every Sunday. The preacher reads from the Bible, says "The Bible says this, but here in our concordance, the word also means this, this and this".

This is exactly what I mean what Strongs has done to the Bible and has become a "secondary, back up Bible" for ministers.
Click to expand...
That absolutely does not show anything wrong. You did not give one example of a "booby trap for the pure word of God." Alleging how, does not make it so.
 
Truther

Truther

Member
37818 said:
That absolutely does not show anything wrong. You did not give one example of a "booby trap for the pure word of God." Alleging how, does not make it so.
Click to expand...
I just did.

I teach the Bible without a "side book" to help redefine the words that the KJV translators "did not quite get across".

You know, how Strongs is used to "add a little extra meaning" to the Bible words?

Who are these guys that debunked the KJV, anyway?

This is subversion.
 
Reformed1689

Reformed1689

Well-Known Member
Truther said:
I just did.

I teach the Bible without a "side book" to help redefine the words that the KJV translators "did not quite get across".

You know, how Strongs is used to "add a little extra meaning" to the Bible words?

Who are these guys that debunked the KJV, anyway?

This is subversion.
Click to expand...
Now the KJV translators weren't perfect either. Cut that junk right now.
 
37818

37818

Well-Known Member
Truther said:
I just did.

I teach the Bible without a "side book" to help redefine the words that the KJV translators "did not quite get across".

You know, how Strongs is used to "add a little extra meaning" to the Bible words?

Who are these guys that debunked the KJV, anyway?

This is subversion.
Click to expand...
You still did not give one example. And I have used a Strong's Exhaustive Concordance to study and use my KJV over 50 years. And I still use the KJV as my preferred translation.
Your allegation is nonsense.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top