Question on Thompson Chain Reference Bible

I watched the Morris Proctor video on the Logos implementation of the Thompson Chain Reference Bible, and I thought it was very interesting. I had a question about it though, for those of you that use it or know about it...

The Marginal Notes will show a Bible reference for a topic that is part of the "chain". The entire chain of bible references can be seen in the Topical Index for that topic. Morris noted, and I see, that some Bible references are bolded - because they are part of the chain. But some references are not - indicating that those are not part of the chain. I have seen online that the printed book looks the same way; this is nothing different instituted in the Logos implementation.

So, why are some bible references not bolded? At first I thought they were not as relevant references. I discounted that idea because, for example in topic 722, Christ called the Son of Man, the unbolded and bolded both have scripture where Christ is specifically called the Son of Man. So both the bolded and unbolded seem equally relevant. What's the difference?

Thanks - and as an aside, I hear in the videos Morris says "Someone sent me a question....", is there a way to do that directly? I couldn't find it.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Rick

I wondered the same thing. My only guess (and this is only a guess) is that the print version only had so much room in the margins and some of them had to be left out in order to have enough room on the page for other chains that had to go on the same page.

mab

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1215851#Comment_1215851

References are usually subject to some sort of priority tier. I've noticed this almost everywhere. You will almost always see certain references because they directly support a given verse. And then you have verses that might mention a topic or subject but not in the same sort of immediate sense.

The broader cross reference like the Treasury of Scripture Knowledge or its successor is invaluable because it's not limited to topics. You should use both.

Don Awalt

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1215851#Comment_1215851

I wondered the same thing. My only guess (and this is only a guess) is that the print version only had so much room in the margins and some of them had to be left out in order to have enough room on the page for other chains that had to go on the same page.

Thanks Rick, I wondered about that too. Not having access to the printed book, it seems like the only difference would be if all the scripture references were bolded or none of them were - indicating all were in the chain. And that would not take up any more room in the printer version?

References are usually subject to some sort of priority tier. I've noticed this almost everywhere. You will almost always see certain references because they directly support a given verse. And then you have verses that might mention a topic or subject but not in the same sort of immediate sense.

Thanks mab, as I said in my OP, it does not seem to be because some references are less direct. To repeat that, in topic 722, Christ called the Son of Man, the unbolded and bolded both have scripture where Christ is specifically called the Son of Man. Another example (there are many), 2222 Macedonia....Acts 19:21 is in the chain, and says "pass through Macedonia". 2 Col 11:9 is NOT in the chain, yet it says "came from Macedonia". Acts 16:9 is in the chain, "a man of Macedonia". 1 Th 4:10 is not in the chain, "throughout Macedonia".

So both the bolded and unbolded seem equally relevant.

David Thomas

Can you indicate the reference where you are seeing a marginal note with some texts bolded?

In the Print KJV Chain 722 looks like.

The Logos version (based upon NKJV) has many more references

722 CHRIST

1. His Humanity
c. Called the Son of Man, Da 7:13; Mt 8:20; Mt 9:6; Mt 11:19; Mt 12:8; Mt 12:32; Mt 12:40; Mt 13:37; Mt 13:41; Mt 16:13; Mt 16:28; Mt 17:22; Mt 18:11; Mt 19:28; Mt 20:28; Mt 24:27; Mt 24:37; Mt 24:44; Mt 26:2; Mt 26:64; Mk 2:28; Mk 8:38; Mk 9:9; Mk 9:31; Mk 10:33; Mk 10:45; Mk 13:26; Mk 14:21; Mk 14:41; Mk 14:62; Lu 5:24; Lu 6:5; Lu 7:34; Lu 9:22; Lu 9:44; Lu 9:56; Lu 11:30; Lu 12:8; Lu 17:22; Lu 18:8; Lu 18:31; Lu 21:36; Lu 22:69; Lu 24:7; Jn 1:51; Jn 3:13; Jn 5:27; Jn 6:53; Jn 8:28; Jn 12:23; Jn 12:34; Jn 13:31; Ac 7:56; Re 1:13; Re 14:14.

See Incarnation, 720.

Frank Charles Thompson, Thompson Chain Reference Bible: Topical Index (Kirkbride Bible Company, 1997), 1706.

It appears the bold in Logos are the same as the KJV original (note exception of Da 7:13), the normal face may be the expanded references that were added later.

The marginal note for Mt 8:20 looks like

From the front matter in the Logos edition of the Topical Index I read:

Bible references in BOLD indicate the Chain Verses of a topic. “M.” means Margin, stating that a marginal listing may differ slightly from the listing found in the Index. The Symbol “{” Denotes a Quoted Red Letter Verse.
For a complete explanation of HOW TO USE The Thompson Chain-Reference Study Bible, and especially the NUMERICAL INDEX, refer to pages xiv and xvii.

Frank Charles Thompson, Thompson Chain Reference Bible: Topical Index (Kirkbride Bible Company, 1997), 1659.

Don Awalt

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1216042#Comment_1216042

Thanks David, at the bottom one can see 722 with the bolded references.

Your reply had a lot of good info, a couple of replies: (1) You said the bold may be expanded references that were added later....can you elaborate? Was this a revision of the Thompson print copy or something else? (2) Yes I saw those comments in the front, unfortunately it just says the bold are in the chain (which implies the non-bold are not, which we knew). The 'M' in Logos shows how that ref # shows up in the margin notes; for example, in the Topical Index 718, the M indicates that 718 in the Margin Notes will show up as 'Christ Exalted', and one can see that below (circled):

722 CHRIST

1. His Humanity

c. Called the Son of Man, Da 7:13; Mt 8:20; Mt 9:6; Mt 11:19; Mt 12:8; Mt 12:32; Mt 12:40; Mt 13:37; Mt 13:41; Mt 16:13; Mt 16:28; Mt 17:22; Mt 18:11; Mt 19:28; Mt 20:28; Mt 24:27; Mt 24:37; Mt 24:44; Mt 26:2; Mt 26:64; Mk 2:28; Mk 8:38; Mk 9:9; Mk 9:31; Mk 10:33; Mk 10:45; Mk 13:26; Mk 14:21; Mk 14:41; Mk 14:62; Lu 5:24; Lu 6:5; Lu 7:34; Lu 9:22; Lu 9:44; Lu 9:56; Lu 11:30; Lu 12:8; Lu 17:22; Lu 18:8; Lu 18:31; Lu 21:36; Lu 22:69; Lu 24:7; Jn 1:51; Jn 3:13; Jn 5:27; Jn 6:53; Jn 8:28; Jn 12:23; Jn 12:34; Jn 13:31; Ac 7:56; Re 1:13; Re 14:14.^{^[1]}

^{^[1]} Frank Charles Thompson, Thompson Chain Reference Bible: Topical Index (Kirkbride Bible Company, 1997), 1706.

David Thomas

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1216053#Comment_1216053

the bold may be expanded references that were added later....can you elaborate? Was this a revision of the Thompson print copy or something else?

from the front matter of my Logos TI

"Updated and Expanded by

John Stephen Jauchen, Th.M., Ph.D., Religion Editor

B.B. KIRKBRIDE BIBLE CO., INC.
INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA
U.S.A.

THE THOMPSON CHAIN-REFERENCE® BIBLE

Using the NEW KING JAMES VERSION

Including all Bible study aids, marginal notes and references, articles, indexes and reference materials except the NEW KING JAMES VERSION and its concordance to the Old and New Testaments

B.B. KIRKBRIDE BIBLE COMPANY, INC.

Previous Editions
Copyright© 1983, NIV; copyright© 1988, KJV; copyright© 1993, NASB
B.B. KIRKBRIDE BIBLE COMPANY, INC.
Copyright, 1903, 1917, 1929, 1934, 1957, 1964, 1982
Frank Charles Thompson

Frank Charles Thompson, Thompson Chain Reference Bible: Topical Index (Kirkbride Bible Company, 1997).

Don Awalt

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1216054#Comment_1216054

Thanks David, so unless I misunderstood your reply, it does sound like the Logos bold scriptural references are original 1964 print edition, and the non-bold are the 1997 update! That seems like a reasonable conclusion to me! If I understand that correctly thanks so much for your help!

Bruce Dunning

So, why are some bible references not bolded? At first I thought they were not as relevant references. I discounted that idea because, for example in topic 722, Christ called the Son of Man, the unbolded and bolded both have scripture where Christ is specifically called the Son of Man. So both the bolded and unbolded seem equally relevant. What's the difference?

I also attended the seminar today and I seem to remember Morris saying that the texts in bold were the beginning and end of the chains. I don't own the resource so I can't confirm this.

NB.Mick

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1216101#Comment_1216101

I also attended the seminar today and I seem to remember Morris saying that the texts in bold were the beginning and end of the chains. I don't own the resource so I can't confirm this.

No, he said they are the original chain that pointed from one margin note to the next in the printed bible (each margin note pointing to the next one) whereas the non-bold texts just were relevant to the concept (thus mentioning it) but not part of the chain. His video was quite clear on this - I own the resource and followed along the webinar.

Bruce Dunning

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1216102#Comment_1216102

I also attended the seminar today and I seem to remember Morris saying that the texts in bold were the beginning and end of the chains. I don't own the resource so I can't confirm this.

No, he said they are the original chain that pointed from one margin note to the next in the printed bible (each margin note pointing to the next one) whereas the non-bold texts just were relevant to the concept (thus mentioning it) but not part of the chain. His video was quite clear on this - I own the resource and followed along the webinar.

Well, there I stand corrected. It shows how easy it is to misunderstand someone when others think it was "quite clear".

David Thomas

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1216055#Comment_1216055

I understand that correctly

[Y][Y]

David Thomas

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1216102#Comment_1216102

they are the original chain that pointed from one margin note to the next in the printed bible

[Y][Y]