E.W. Bullinger's Companion Bible Notes
How about adding E.W. Bullinger's notes from The Companion Bible as a Logos book?
It's out of copyright, so you all could ca$h in.
Comments
-
MikeM said:
How about adding E.W. Bullinger's notes from The Companion Bible as a Logos book?
It's out of copyright, so you all could ca$h in.
I've generally found that those who follow the Companion Bible notes are kooks.
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
George Somsel said:
I've generally found that those who follow the Companion Bible notes are kooks.
Boy, are you in for a big surprise.
0 -
George Somsel said:
I've generally found that those who follow the Companion Bible notes are kooks.
George you sure don't like dispensationalist is there more to the story than you are letting on? Confession is good for the soul. Their crime seems to be that they are concerned that you should not be left behind & that you are not part of the Israel of God, who can blame them for that after such attacks from you[:P]. What is wrong with that? what have dispensationalist done to you? The excuse that the devil made me say those comments will not do - resist him and he shall flee from you[:)]
Are you not going outside your speciality which is original language into theology? Leave the dispensationalist alone & stop just talking them around [8] hee-hee woh.[H]
Sir T
Ps I speak as one who is not a dispensationalist but have greatly benefited from their writing i. e Darrell Bock, Dan Wallace etc.
Dell, studio XPS 7100, Ram 8GB, 64 - bit Operating System, AMD Phenom(mt) IIX6 1055T Processor 2.80 GHZ
0 -
Ted Hans said:George Somsel said:
I've generally found that those who follow the Companion Bible notes are kooks.
George you sure don't like dispensationalist is there more to the story than you are letting on? Confession is good for the soul. Their crime seems to be that they are concerned that you should not be left behind & that you are not part of the Israel of God, who can blame them for that after such attacks from you
. What is wrong with that? what have dispensationalist done to you? The excuse that the devil made me say those comments will not do - resist him and he shall flee from you
Are you not going outside your speciality which is original language into theology? Leave the dispensationalist alone & stop just talking them around
hee-hee woh.
Sir T
Ps I speak as one who is not a dispensationalist but have greatly benefited from their writing i. e Darrell Bock, Dan Wallace etc.
I was raised in a church which taught dispensationalism. I practically walked around with a Schofield Reference Bible in my hip pocket. I'm familiar with all of their silly charts. I know how they slice and dice scripture to make it say what they want it to say. No, I'm not outside my field. They make a mockery of scripture. I'm opposed to it because I'm all too familiar with it and have come to see its errors.
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
George Somsel said:
I was raised in a church which taught dispensationalism. I practically walked around with a Schofield Reference Bible in my hip pocket. I'm familiar with all of their silly charts. I know how they slice and dice scripture to make it say what they want it to say. No, I'm not outside my field. They make a mockery of scripture. I'm opposed to it because I'm all too familiar with it and have come to see its errors.
Thanks George for your response i get to know you better - An Anglican who was a dispensationalist, who went to Calvin college/seminary now finds himself on the left. Keep searching for the truth, take care & regards.God BlessSir T… search for truth, hear truth,
learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth,
defend the truth till death.[:D]
- Jan HusDell, studio XPS 7100, Ram 8GB, 64 - bit Operating System, AMD Phenom(mt) IIX6 1055T Processor 2.80 GHZ
0 -
George, can we get a definition of what a kook is? I am a dispensationalist so apparently I am a kook. Just wondering if you or anyone else could shed light on the word so I can understand myself a bit better.
thanks in advance
Mark
0 -
MarkSwaim said:
George, can we get a definition of what a kook is? I am a dispensationalist so apparently I am a kook. Just wondering if you or anyone else could shed light on the word so I can understand myself a bit better.
thanks in advance
Mark
kook■ n. N. Amer. informal a mad or eccentric person.– origin 1960s: prob. from cuckoo.Soanes, C., & Stevenson, A. (2004). Concise Oxford English dictionary (11th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.kook \ˈkük\ n[by shortening & alter. fr. cuckoo] 1960 : one whose ideas or actions are eccentric, fantastic, or insane : screwball———————Merriam-Webster, I. (2003). Merriam-Webster's collegiate dictionary. Includes index. (Eleventh ed.). Springfield, Mass.: Merriam-Webster, Inc.kook (kuːk) n US and Canadian informal an eccentric, crazy, or foolish person [c20: probably from cuckoo]Collins English dictionary. 2006. Previous ed.: 2005.; Formerly CIP. (8th ed., Complete & unabridged ed.). Glasgow: HarperCollins.Dell, studio XPS 7100, Ram 8GB, 64 - bit Operating System, AMD Phenom(mt) IIX6 1055T Processor 2.80 GHZ
0 -
MarkSwaim said:
George, can we get a definition of what a kook is? I am a dispensationalist so apparently I am a kook. Just wondering if you or anyone else could shed light on the word so I can understand myself a bit better.
thanks in advance
Mark
Giving a definition of "kook" is somewhat difficult since it is a somewhat amorphus term which can vary somewhat. I don't think I specifically called dispensationalists kooks though I would certainly admit that they are borderline. What I was speaking of with regard to those who are gung ho on Bullinger's Companion Bible notes is the fact that there are notes relating to a gap theory in which there was supposedly another world before this one. I think there are basically two reasons for this:
1. They need a previous world in order to attempt to explain the fossil record.
2. They are too tied to the AV of scripture and don't understand what the Hebrew actually says. I caught a bit of "Coast to Coast AM" a number of months ago since I was working on something on my computer and didn't feel like getting up to walk across the room to change the station. There was some guy talking about "replenishing" the earth. The only places you will find that is in the AV and, if I remember correctly, the ASV. In Hebrew there is no mention of "replenishing" as though there was something there which then became depleted or destroyed. The Hebrew says "fill the earth." This is the stuff of Bullinger and Coast to Coast AM and is kooky.I should add that there is a group heavily into the internet whose "pastor" broadcasts to his "flock" which expounds this nonsense. It's Shepherd's something-or-other, I forget precisely. It'll probably come to me later. I happened to get into an exchange with a member of this group in an internet forum some years ago and looked at some of their material on the internet -- it has something to do with planting and harvesting (their terms). Totally goofy. This group is heavily into Strong's numbers and his glosses, so now you know part of the reason why I so oppose them.
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
George Somsel said:
I don't think I specifically called dispensationalists kooks though I would certainly admit that they are borderline.
In fairness to George he did not actually mention dispensationalist, i
raised the issue due to previous exchange with him.To my dispensationalist
friends please don't take offence to George's remark as he George can come up
with a lot of kooky remarks - i just don't take him seriously outside of the original
language.[:D] Do ignore his above comments about dispensationalism & the Companion Bible .Sir T
Dell, studio XPS 7100, Ram 8GB, 64 - bit Operating System, AMD Phenom(mt) IIX6 1055T Processor 2.80 GHZ
0 -
George
I am a dispensationalist, but I do not subscribe to the Gap theory. I also am not tied to the AV. I think from what you have written, would you not agree that there are kooks in all groups? Would it not be possible that some might consider you a kook? Some might even say you are arrogant or ignorant. Some might say of you "much learning has made thee mad". Of course some might say that of Bullinger as well. Everyone has their opinion and judgment on others whether they verbalize them or not...
0 -
MarkSwaim said:
George, can we get a definition of what a kook is?
I can't resist butting in. In searching for uncommon creeds, I've found my own standard for kook-dom: someone who believes that the use of text only, text in various colors and sizes of letters constitutes making a point. I believe they have confused a printers' point with a logicians' point therfore allowing me to classifying them as "kooks"
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
MJ. Smith said:
I can't resist butting in. In searching for uncommon creeds, I've found my own standard for kook-dom: someone who believes that the use of text only, text in various colors and sizes of letters constitutes making a point. I believe they have confused a printers' point with a logicians' point therfore allowing me to classifying them as "kooks
Ha,ha,ha very profound MJ, i did not miss that hmmm.
Sir T
"Creation
We believe that the physical universe, the realm of nature, is the visible creation of God. All things created in 6 literal 24 hour days and not by an evolutionary process of eons of time (Genesis 1-2). Properly understood, God's Word (Scripture) and God's world (nature), as two revelations (one verbal, one physical) from the same God, will never contradict each other. "from the Greenburg Church of Christ Creed
However, in finding this I discovered a typo in the text ... an extraneous "creation" after the final period. Trust me - I've frequently been told my mind works in truth tables. If there is a hole in the logic, I'll find it
MJDell, studio XPS 7100, Ram 8GB, 64 - bit Operating System, AMD Phenom(mt) IIX6 1055T Processor 2.80 GHZ
0 -
MJ. Smith said:MarkSwaim said:
George, can we get a definition of what a kook is?
I can't resist butting in. In searching for uncommon creeds, I've found my own standard for kook-dom: someone who believes that the use of text only, text in various colors and sizes of letters constitutes making a point. I believe they have confused a printers' point with a logicians' point therfore allowing me to classifying them as "kooks"
I couldn't agree more. I know of a guy who is a KJOnlyist and has appeared on various forums (including b-greek and b-hebrew though he knows neither) who is continually trying to promote the Textus Receptus who puts various paragraphs in differing colors.
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
MJ. Smith said:
I can't resist butting in. In searching for uncommon creeds, I've found my own standard for kook-dom: someone who believes that the use of text only, text in various colors and sizes of letters constitutes making a point. I believe they have confused a printers' point with a logicians' point therfore allowing me to classifying them as "kooks"
George Somsel said:I couldn't agree more. I know of a guy who is a KJOnlyist and has appeared on various forums (including b-greek and b-hebrew though he knows neither) who is continually trying to promote the Textus Receptus who puts various paragraphs in differing colors.
How ironic George i am surprised that you walked straight into this [:D]
Sir T
Dell, studio XPS 7100, Ram 8GB, 64 - bit Operating System, AMD Phenom(mt) IIX6 1055T Processor 2.80 GHZ
0 -
Ted Hans said:MJ. Smith said:
I can't resist butting in. In searching for uncommon creeds, I've found my own standard for kook-dom: someone who believes that the use of text only, text in various colors and sizes of letters constitutes making a point. I believe they have confused a printers' point with a logicians' point therfore allowing me to classifying them as "kooks"
George Somsel said:I couldn't agree more. I know of a guy who is a KJOnlyist and has appeared on various forums (including b-greek and b-hebrew though he knows neither) who is continually trying to promote the Textus Receptus who puts various paragraphs in differing colors.
How ironic George i am surprised that you walked straight into this
Sir T
Quite deliberately.
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
Thanks for saying all of that, Mark!MarkSwaim said:George
I am a dispensationalist, but I do not subscribe to the Gap theory. I also am not tied to the AV. I think from what you have written, would you not agree that there are kooks in all groups? Would it not be possible that some might consider you a kook? Some might even say you are arrogant or ignorant. Some might say of you "much learning has made thee mad". Of course some might say that of Bullinger as well. Everyone has their opinion and judgment on others whether they verbalize them or not...
0 -
That all being said, I'd still like to suggest that the side column notes and the appendixes of the Companion Bible by E.W. Bullinger be considered for inclusion into the Logos library.
There is a wealth of information in those notes. Not all of them are correct, but then I have never run into a single reference where everything is correct. I happen to find the information useful AND interesting and would like to have it in my Logos library.
Logos and Galaxie software both offer other works by Bullinger for Logos. His work on Figures of Speech Used in the Bible is without peer. I believe that I remember some of Bullinger's work is included in some Logos timeline add-on or something of the sort.
Since the work is out of copyright and is primarily English, one would think that it would be a cash cow for Logos. The "kooks" would come in droves.
0 -
MikeM said:
That all being said, I'd still like to suggest that the side column notes and the appendixes of the Companion Bible by E.W. Bullinger be considered for inclusion into the Logos library.
There is a wealth of information in those notes. Not all of them are correct, but then I have never run into a single reference where everything is correct. I happen to find the information useful AND interesting and would like to have it in my Logos library.
Logos and Galaxie software both offer other works by Bullinger for Logos. His work on Figures of Speech Used in the Bible is without peer. I believe that I remember some of Bullinger's work is included in some Logos timeline add-on or something of the sort.
Since the work is out of copyright and is primarily English, one would think that it would be a cash cow for Logos. The "kooks" would come in droves.
And I might even buy it just to have the happy hunting grounds of the kooks available.
You haven't read my book yet (since it isn't finished) so don't be too quick to judge that everything won't be correct. [:D]
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
George, all though we have not agreed previously and don't expect to now, I would ask that you refrain from disparaging remarks for those who do not agree with you. You are entitled to your opinion and though I may not agree with you I would not wish to call you a "kook" because of your honest beliefs. As a brother in Christ I would hope you would give the same consideration to others. I have yet to meet a man that has obtain a full understanding of the scriptures. You may very well be surprised on the day you meet the Lord to find out what you had right and what you had wrong.
Remember Isaiah 55:9
In Christ,
Ken
In Christ,
Ken
Lenovo Yoga 7 15ITL5 Touch Screen; 11th Gen Intel i7 2.8Ghz; 12Gb RAM; 500Gb SDD;WIN 11
0 -
Mike, I too would be interested in these notes. I have read some of Bullinger's work and it gives one some thought provoking topics of converation.
In Christ,
Ken
Lenovo Yoga 7 15ITL5 Touch Screen; 11th Gen Intel i7 2.8Ghz; 12Gb RAM; 500Gb SDD;WIN 11
0 -
Kenneth Shawver said:
George, all though we have not agreed previously and don't expect to now, I would ask that you refrain from disparaging remarks for those who do not agree with you. You are entitled to your opinion and though I may not agree with you I would not wish to call you a "kook" because of your honest beliefs. As a brother in Christ I would hope you would give the same consideration to others. I have yet to meet a man that has obtain a full understanding of the scriptures. You may very well be surprised on the day you meet the Lord to find out what you had right and what you had wrong.
Remember Isaiah 55:9
In Christ,
Ken
Read http://www.therain.org/appendixes/app146.html from the Companion Bible where he stands the meaning of καταβολή on its head so that it doesn't mean "foundation" but rather "destruction" and tell me that this isn't kooky. This is part of the basis for their contention that there was a world prior to this world and that souls fell in this pre-existent world. They also teach that Eve had sexual relations with the serpent in the account of the Garden so that Cain was the offspring of the serpent. Can you still contend that this isn't kooky? You might want to read the article "Serpent Seed" in Wikipedia.
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
I would like to see the Companion Bible Notes in Logos too!
"And you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free", John 8:32.
"你們必定認識真理，真理必定使你們自由", 約翰福音 8:3.0 -
George Somsel said:
They
Who are THEY? I am a dispensationalist and I dont subscribe to what "THEY" say. By the way, I am not offended by what George has written. I have been on the forum also for a very long time and I am used to George. Like Bullinger, George has wisdom in areas and I appreciate those areas, and like Bullinger and all of us, George has blind spots and opinions that some would consider kooky. George, I would not normally write that on a forum, but as I have written, those of us who know you over time on the forum know your style and just let your comments be what they are. The Bema will bring all to its proper light.
0 -
MarkSwaim said:George Somsel said:
They
Who are THEY? I am a dispensationalist and I dont subscribe to what "THEY" say. By the way, I am not offended by what George has written. I have been on the forum also for a very long time and I am used to George. Like Bullinger, George has wisdom in areas and I appreciate those areas, and like Bullinger and all of us, George has blind spots and opinions that some would consider kooky. George, I would not normally write that on a forum, but as I have written, those of us who know you over time on the forum know your style and just let your comments be what they are. The Bema will bring all to its proper light.
You really should include the context rather than simply one word. I had to go back to look at the context.
Did you read the Wikipedia article?
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
Did you reference a wikipedia article? Sorry but I did not see your reference. I had to look through all the posts and still did not see it. What article are you referring to. You really should include the context rather than simply ask about a wikipedia article [:)]
0 -
MarkSwaim said:
Did you reference a wikipedia article? Sorry but I did not see your reference. I had to look through all the posts and still did not see it. What article are you referring to. You really should include the context rather than simply ask about a wikipedia article
I wrote:
"You might want to read the article "Serpent Seed" in Wikipedia."
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
Thank you George. I just skimmed the article. I am familiar with this teaching, but this teaching has nothing to do with dispensationalism. I therefore do not understand why in the context of the conversation, you are bringing this teaching up. I certainly do not subscribe to it and neither do the many many dispensationalists I associate with.
0 -
MarkSwaim said:
Thank you George. I just skimmed the article. I am familiar with this teaching, but this teaching has nothing to do with dispensationalism. I therefore do not understand why in the context of the conversation, you are bringing this teaching up. I certainly do not subscribe to it and neither do the many many dispensationalists I associate with.
This is the second time in the course of this thread that I have found it necessary to state that I was not calling dispensationalists kooks (just borderline). Ted has also stated the same. Please read what I wrote without inserting any additional thought.
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
Ok. Thanks for making that clearer. Why then would you call dispensationalists borderline kooks? I trust I am not inserting any additional thought here. And I am genuinly asking you.
0 -
George Somsel said:
This is the second time in the course of this thread that I have found it necessary to state that I was not calling dispensationalists kooks (just borderline). Ted has also stated the same. Please read what I wrote without inserting any additional thought.
This is partly my fault in all fairness George did not mention dispensationalism in his comments i was the one who raised it up due to previous exchange. I do not want him to get into the firing line for something he is not actually guilty of so my apologies to all including George. This is George being George - it takes some getting use to, if it was someone else i might take offence but with George i would say our Lord has not finished the work of sanctification on him yet. This thread is beginning to take George's comments seriously which i don't think it should. However some of the issues he raised about the Companion Bible are valid i. e "the gap theory", "foundation" but rather "destruction" & "Serpent Seed". I would not have used his choice of words but one can see what he is getting at, exegetically some (not all) of the comments in the Companion Bible do miss the mark. I have the Companion Bible and i would love to see it in Logos.
Sorry all, due to the time difference between the Uk and America i could not leave my comments earlier. George means no harm, you all will come to find that out as the days goes by so don't take him seriously when he is being light-hearted. I agree not all in this forum knows his style
Sir T
Dell, studio XPS 7100, Ram 8GB, 64 - bit Operating System, AMD Phenom(mt) IIX6 1055T Processor 2.80 GHZ
0 -
Hi Ted
Thanks for your comments but they are unnecessary. I know George as far as the forum goes as well. I have been apart of the ng for many years. I have read with lots of respect George's comments on dispensationalism right before the ng basically shut down due to the forum here. I have written to George on the ng I believe (it may have been a private email but I think it was on the ng) that I highly appreciated his comments even though I did not agree with much of what he wrote. He acknowledged my appreciation. So you see, i dont need time to get used to George. I am used to him. And George should not continuously be defended. I believe he is an adult and can stand on his own two feet.
I also agree with your comments "in all fairness". You have mentioned this before and we do need to be fair (I guess). George DID mention dispensationalism in his last response. He mentioned that he does not think dispensationalists are kooks. Therefore he DID mention it. But he did not stop there. (We who know George knew he would not stop there). He continued and called dispensationalists borderline kooks. I simply asked him what he means by that.
I also need to reinterate that I have not been offended by George at all. Are you, Ted, offended by my continuing to call George on this? George, are you offended that I am calling you on this? Ted, if you are offended, I do not mean to offend you but in all fairness you should not be offended. Ofter all, this is George and this is me. You did mention that the thread is beginning to take George's comments seriously which in your opinion, these comments should not be taken seriously. I am however amazed that you would say that and wonder why you would say that. After all, you do know George and you were part of the dispensationalist exchange that took place prior to the ng going south. So you do know George is serious about his comments.
I just wonder why it is that if anyone else on the forum makes comments of this nature, they should be called on them...but when George makes them we should allow him to offend others (let me explain this comment...I am not offended by his remarks. But I KNOW that his remarks have offended others. I think that is why in the ng there were many observers, but there were not many brave souls who made comments apart from the usual crowd. Make a comment that will cause George to mock the commenter, and the commenter stops commenting.
Once again, I completely understand this thread. And I understand George. He has cleared up the matter after 2 pages of forum writing that he does not think dispensationalists are kooks. Now he just needs to clear up the comment that they are borderline kooks by either explaining what he means by that, are writing that he was joking. We who know George do not expect him to write that he was joking. Nor do we expect an apology. George is George and we love him and we have appreciated his comments so much over the years. I say that without joking. I appreciate him much. But for my benefit and the benefit of others, I call him on his posts because believe it or not, I learn from George. I wont say what I learn. I can only say that I am a dispensationalist and I have kept the email exchange on dispensationalism where he blasts it as a rediculous system for educational and amusement purposes. Will I always be a dispensationalist? Maybe and maybe not. I like many of us (should be all of us) are learning and when we see where we are wrong, we should be willing to change our minds. We study to learn more and grow more.
0 -
George Somsel said:
And I might even buy it just to have the happy hunting grounds of the kooks available.
You haven't read my book yet (since it isn't finished) so don't be too quick to judge that everything won't be correct.
No need to read YOUR book. I have other books from higher authorities that keep me plenty busy. Thanks anyway.
I'm glad that you'd buy a copy of the Companion Bible Notes and Appendixes just to work over the "kooks", if that's what rings your bell. If I remember my Bible correctly, the gate you're supposed to be looking for is small, so I wouldn't be one bit surprised if the "kooks" get it right. Myself, I'm still studying and keeping my eyes open, like I have been for many, many years. If what the "kooks" say lines up with The Word, then I'd have to side with the "kooks" in that particular instance. What doesn't line up gets 86'd. I have a feeling that your book isn't going to help me much with the weeding out of junk to get to truth.. eh? Father's Spirit does a real dandy job of that without your book.
1 Corinthians 1:27 - But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the
wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the
things which are mighty;If the "kooks" look like fools to you, then you'd better remember that God uses whoever He will and He's pretty good at covert activity. I don't know what country you're from, but here in the U.S.A. we have freedom of religion and "kooks" have all the rights everyone else has. Father ALONE is the judge. He might object to you trying to steal His job.
Have a super-duper really boss keen day!!! [:D]
0 -
MikeM said:
I have a feeling that your book isn't going to help me much with the weeding out of junk to get to truth.. eh? Father's Spirit does a real dandy job of that without your book.
I'm glad to hear that you have a fast-track to know the truth. Most of us need to study and think a bit. All you need to do is to drink a few spirits.
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
I certainly don't want to get embroiled in this interchange ... but I would like to recommend a book to all of you, whichever side of the fence you come down on. Unfortunately it's not yet in Libronix.
"An Introduction to Classical Evangelical Hermeneutics" (KREGEL) ed by Mal Couch.
It is well reasoned, well documented, and offers useful points to consider, while also "86'ing" some rather foolish points.
=============
Redeeming the time (Eph.5:16+Col.4:5) ... Win 10, iOS & iPadOS 16
Jim Dean0 -
George Somsel said:
I'm glad to hear that you have a fast-track to know the truth. Most of us need to study and think a bit. All you need to do is to drink a few spirits.
I do study & think. I do, however, feel that Bullinger's work would find a more welcome home in my library than your work would. I'm just considering the source of your book. SInce your book is not completed, perhaps you'll consider this addition:
A horse is a horse of course of course,
And no one can talk to a horse of course.
That is of course unless the horse
Is the famous Mister George!Go right to the source and ask the horse.
He'll give you the answer that you'll endorse
He's always on a steady course.
Talk to Mister George!People yakkity-yak a streak
And waste your time of day,
but Mister George will never speak
Unless he has something to say!A horse is a horse of course of course,
And this one'll talk 'til his voice is hoarse.
You never heard of a talking horse?
Well, listen to this..." I am Mr. George!"
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Take inventory. See how things are going for you today and then again in about a month. And remember, you brought this on yourself.
0 -
MikeM said:
How about adding E.W. Bullinger's notes from The Companion Bible as a Logos book?
It's out of copyright, so you all could ca$h in.
Can we just stop all this name-calling and one-upmanship. Somebody made a suggestion. Whether you or I think it is a good book or a bad book, is irrelevant to the fact that this is a suggestion.
Too many of these discussions are getting hi-jacked these days, to discuss everything from KJV onlyism, to Genesis 1 issues, to Dispensationalism.
At least in the newsgroups we tried to keep our discussions first of all civil and secondly, on topic. The topic is using Libronix. The topic is not whatever theological banjo someone prefers to play. I wish the Logos folks would step in and 'lay down the law' on this. It's getting ridiculous.
Please, let's lay down our verbal weapons, and our theological sensitivities and discuss the software.
Your humble and self-appointed moderator,
Help links: WIKI; Logos 6 FAQ. (Phil. 2:14, NIV)
0 -
MarkSwaim said:
I know George as far as the forum goes as well. I have been apart of the ng for many years. I have read with lots of respect George's comments on dispensationalism right before the ng basically shut down due to the forum here.
This may seem like a strange place to finally make my first post here in the forums but having tried to follow what's going on here now that most of the action has moved from the newsgroup this comment by Mark sums up my second frustration with the move.
If we put to one side the fact that the structure on the forums makes it virtually impossible to follow what's going on unless the posters quote extensively to preserve the context the other major problem is that in moving a 'mature' group to a new loacation and merging it with lots of new users creates a massive amount of background noise as the new bigger group struggles to build a new identity and get to know each other. Whilst I cannot deny that its great to see a lot of new people involved in the discussions as an ex user of the newsgroups I think I'll wait for the dust to settle before I actively commit my time to these forums.
God Bless
Graham
God Bless
Graham
Pastor - NTCOG Basingstoke
0 -
Richard DeRuiter said:
At least in the newsgroups we tried to keep our discussions first of all civil and secondly, on topic. The topic is using Libronix. The topic is not whatever theological banjo someone prefers to play. I wish the Logos folks would step in and 'lay down the law' on this. It's getting ridiculous.
Thanks Rich -
At one point yesterday I was considering leaving the forums entirely because of the bickering - some of which was my own fault. At this point I will not, but I would like the sniping and "bickering" to stop.
Blessings,
Floyd
Blessings,
FloydPastor-Patrick.blogspot.com
0 -
MarkSwaim said:
Hi Ted
Thanks for your comments but they are unnecessary. I know George as far as the forum goes as well. I have been apart of the ng for many years. I have read with lots of respect George's comments on dispensationalism right before the ng basically shut down due to the forum here. I have written to George on the ng I believe (it may have been a private email but I think it was on the ng) that I highly appreciated his comments even though I did not agree with much of what he wrote. He acknowledged my appreciation. So you see, i dont need time to get used to George. I am used to him. And George should not continuously be defended. I believe he is an adult and can stand on his own two feet.
I also agree with your comments "in all fairness". You have mentioned this before and we do need to be fair (I guess). George DID mention dispensationalism in his last response. He mentioned that he does not think dispensationalists are kooks. Therefore he DID mention it. But he did not stop there. (We who know George knew he would not stop there). He continued and called dispensationalists borderline kooks. I simply asked him what he means by that.
I also need to reinterate that I have not been offended by George at all. Are you, Ted, offended by my continuing to call George on this? George, are you offended that I am calling you on this? Ted, if you are offended, I do not mean to offend you but in all fairness you should not be offended. Ofter all, this is George and this is me. You did mention that the thread is beginning to take George's comments seriously which in your opinion, these comments should not be taken seriously. I am however amazed that you would say that and wonder why you would say that. After all, you do know George and you were part of the dispensationalist exchange that took place prior to the ng going south. So you do know George is serious about his comments.
I just wonder why it is that if anyone else on the forum makes comments of this nature, they should be called on them...but when George makes them we should allow him to offend others (let me explain this comment...I am not offended by his remarks. But I KNOW that his remarks have offended others. I think that is why in the ng there were many observers, but there were not many brave souls who made comments apart from the usual crowd. Make a comment that will cause George to mock the commenter, and the commenter stops commenting.
Once again, I completely understand this thread. And I understand George. He has cleared up the matter after 2 pages of forum writing that he does not think dispensationalists are kooks. Now he just needs to clear up the comment that they are borderline kooks by either explaining what he means by that, are writing that he was joking. We who know George do not expect him to write that he was joking. Nor do we expect an apology. George is George and we love him and we have appreciated his comments so much over the years. I say that without joking. I appreciate him much. But for my benefit and the benefit of others, I call him on his posts because believe it or not, I learn from George. I wont say what I learn. I can only say that I am a dispensationalist and I have kept the email exchange on dispensationalism where he blasts it as a rediculous system for educational and amusement purposes. Will I always be a dispensationalist? Maybe and maybe not. I like many of us (should be all of us) are learning and when we see where we are wrong, we should be willing to change our minds. We study to learn more and grow more.
Hi Mark,
I know it is hard to believe but i really was not directing my post to you as earlier on you made your position clear. Me offended by you taking George to task, a fellow News grouper who knows him well please feel free. My comments were more directed to those who may not know George & i should have made that more clearer. I do agree that some of his comments may have the effect of stopping others from participating so the need on my part to inform those who do not know him not to take him seriously. I really do believe this is a misunderstanding Mark of what i was trying to do, i certainly was not trying to defend George or be his spokesman. My concern was that the conversation did not degenerate into something else - i was trying to put things in context. Did i understand what you were up to - yes and i have no problem with that. I hope this helps to throw light on my position, others may just have to learn from experience that George does write with a sharp pen. If i thought rebuking, telling off would work with George as it would with most people then fine. Somehow i don’t see that as having any effect on him, my point is why waste one’s time when he will only annoy one with his uncharitable remarks/ response. I wish George was more refined in his comments but he is not. Am i therefore saying you should not respond to him as one who knows him, PLEASE do & i would enjoy it! But for others i think they may just miss the point. To beat George in his game one must get down to his level and be like him, somehow i don’t think most would want to go down that road (Becoming like what you are trying to correct)
Regards Mark, if you still want to discuss this go to the Newsgroup when you will find my email and drop me a line.
Ted
Dell, studio XPS 7100, Ram 8GB, 64 - bit Operating System, AMD Phenom(mt) IIX6 1055T Processor 2.80 GHZ
0 -
JimDean said:
"An Introduction to Classical Evangelical Hermeneutics" (KREGEL) ed by Mal Couch.
Thanks Jim Dean for this suggestion. Perhaps it would be good to put this as a second suggestion to have in Libronix if possible. I think we all could benefit from books in Libronix that help us all to understand better the various theologies. I know we have some already, but the more the better. Especially at a time in history when the church at large is (for good or evil) attempting to be one again, these types of books could be very beneficial in Libronix.
Ted, thanks for your response. I am in agreement with it. If anyone thinks I have been uncivil in these exchanges, please forgive me. But at the same token, please point out where I have been uncivil.
George, I have said previously, I very much appreciate many of your suggestions, comments and help.
0 -
Richard DeRuiter said:
At least in the newsgroups we tried to keep our discussions first of all civil and secondly, on topic. The topic is using Libronix. The topic is not whatever theological banjo someone prefers to play. I wish the Logos folks would step in and 'lay down the law' on this. It's getting ridiculous.
Rich
I seem to remember a number of rather testy exchanges on the newsgroups also. Other than that, I agree with your post wholeheartedly.
Jack
0 -
MikeM said:
A horse is a horse of course of course,
And this one'll talk 'til his voice is hoarse.
You never heard of a talking horse?
Well, listen to this..." I am Mr. George!"
It's unfortunate that you only got to be one part of a horse.
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
MJ. Smith said:MarkSwaim said:
George, can we get a definition of what a kook is?
I can't resist butting in. In searching for uncommon creeds, I've found my own standard for kook-dom: someone who believes that the use of text only, text in various colors and sizes of letters constitutes making a point. I believe they have confused a printers' point with a logicians' point therfore allowing me to classifying them as "kooks"
Guess that makes me a "kook" too. But then almost every map in Libronix must be made by kooks.....hmmm. And lots of charts made by Wayne House & Tyndale Publishing & Rose Publishing & so on.
My early training in the graphic arts running offset presses makes me appreciate options more than the plain vanilla text reader.
[<:o)].....[pi].....[C].....[um]...[B]....[&]....[O]
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
Ted/Mark,
I also appreciate both of your comments regarding George and from the ng they are very accurate. It is best to take the high road where George is concerned for no one here will change George. Only God can change George's heart, so the best approach is to hold George up in prayer.
In Christ,
Ken
In Christ,
Ken
Lenovo Yoga 7 15ITL5 Touch Screen; 11th Gen Intel i7 2.8Ghz; 12Gb RAM; 500Gb SDD;WIN 11
0 -
Kenneth Shawver said:
Ted/Mark,
I also appreciate both of your comments regarding George and from the ng they are very accurate. It is best to take the high road where George is concerned for no one here will change George. Only God can change George's heart, so the best approach is to hold George up in prayer.
In Christ,
Ken
Every Blessing Ken.
Ted
Dell, studio XPS 7100, Ram 8GB, 64 - bit Operating System, AMD Phenom(mt) IIX6 1055T Processor 2.80 GHZ
0 -
Richard DeRuiter said:MikeM said:
How about adding E.W. Bullinger's notes from The Companion Bible as a Logos book?
It's out of copyright, so you all could ca$h in.
Can we just stop all this name-calling and one-upmanship. Somebody made a suggestion. Whether you or I think it is a good book or a bad book, is irrelevant to the fact that this is a suggestion.
Too many of these discussions are getting hi-jacked these days, to discuss everything from KJV onlyism, to Genesis 1 issues, to Dispensationalism.
At least in the newsgroups we tried to keep our discussions first of all civil and secondly, on topic. The topic is using Libronix. The topic is not whatever theological banjo someone prefers to play. I wish the Logos folks would step in and 'lay down the law' on this. It's getting ridiculous.
Please, let's lay down our verbal weapons, and our theological sensitivities and discuss the software.
Your humble and self-appointed moderator,
You're absolutely correct. When I started this thread, all I was interested in was suggesting that the Notes and Appendixes of the Companion Bible by E.W. Bullinger be considered as a possible Logos resource. I've used the printed work here for years and I find it to be a very valuable resource.
The first response that I got from anybody was a generalization that affixed the label of "kook" to anyone that used this work. Then I was told that I'd be better off buying a non-existent book authored by the person calling me (and others) a "kook". Sometimes I don't like to play doormat for people like this.
I use Bullinger's Figures of Speech Used in the Bible and his work Number in Scripture extensively in my studies - as do I use the collation of the Massorah by C.D. Ginsburg and Ginsburg's Massoretico-Critical Edition of the Hebrew Bible, the Septuagint, BHS, and like works. I find Bullinger's scholarship to be very high in quality, but I do not happen to agree with him on every point. The man was obviously blessed in his work though.
I'd still like to see the side column notes and appendixes from the Companion Bible offered as a Logos resource. I'd also like to see Ginsburg's collation of the Massorah and Ginsburg's Massoretico-Critical Edition of the Hebrew Bible included as resources as well. Those Massorah notes are VERY valuable, and I'm rather surprised how overlooked they are by today's scholars. Both of these works are also out of copyright, so Logos should be able to produce them for perhaps less than some other works that are under copyright.
The Massorah would probably require a new font to be added to Logos though, as all of the various crowned letters that the masoretes used are included in that work - and I've never yet located a font that will display any of these.
0 -
George Somsel said:MJ. Smith said:MarkSwaim said:
George, can we get a definition of what a kook is?
I can't resist butting in. In searching for uncommon creeds, I've found my own standard for kook-dom: someone who believes that the use of text only, text in various colors and sizes of letters constitutes making a point. I believe they have confused a printers' point with a logicians' point therfore allowing me to classifying them as "kooks"
I couldn't agree more. I know of a guy who is a KJOnlyist and has appeared on various forums (including b-greek and b-hebrew though he knows neither) who is continually trying to promote the Textus Receptus who puts various paragraphs in differing colors.
george, (small "g")
Who might that be?
It is hard to imagine you are referring to anyone but me since I am one of the few who ever used the color options in the forums
Your characterizations are false, & nothing more than personal attacks. (KJV, TR, knowledge of Greek, -NEVER posted re:Hebrew)
"There was a certain man who fell among thieves..... "
Since all the old timers appear to tolerate your constant belittleing
and borderline vulgarities, I don't expect them to rebuke you now.Lots of Priests & Levites in these forums, I'm just lookig for the Samaritans.
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
Matthew C Jones said:George Somsel said:MJ. Smith said:MarkSwaim said:
George, can we get a definition of what a kook is?
I can't resist butting in. In searching for uncommon creeds, I've found my own standard for kook-dom: someone who believes that the use of text only, text in various colors and sizes of letters constitutes making a point. I believe they have confused a printers' point with a logicians' point therfore allowing me to classifying them as "kooks"
I couldn't agree more. I know of a guy who is a KJOnlyist and has appeared on various forums (including b-greek and b-hebrew though he knows neither) who is continually trying to promote the Textus Receptus who puts various paragraphs in differing colors.
george, (small "g")
Who might that be?
It is hard to imagine you are referring to anyone but me since I am one of the few who ever used the color options in the forums
Your characterizations are false, & nothing more than personal attacks. (KJV, TR, knowledge of Greek, -NEVER posted re:Hebrew)
"There was a certain man who fell among thieves..... "
Since all the old timers appear to tolerate your constant belittleing and borderline vulgarities, I don't expect them to rebuke you now.
Lots of Priests & Levites in these forums, I'm just lookig for the Samaritans.
I find it rather curious that you take this as a personal attack on you. This seems to be the problem with much of what results in "flame wars" on the forum -- everyone seems to think that they are the one's being criticized. If you will trouble yourself to read what I wrote, you will in the first place I was making light of the whole matter by colorizing my reply contrary to my usual custom. Secondly, you will note that I specifically referenced someone who appeared on various forums "including b-greek and b-hebrew." To the best of my knowledge you have never been on either. If I had meant you, I am not too shy to say so. It's time for you to quit looking for a fight. If you choose to reply, I will put you on notice beforehand that I have no intention to respond further.
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
Matthew C Jones said:
Since all the old timers appear to tolerate your constant belittleing and borderline vulgarities, I don't expect them to rebuke you now.
Actually I think you'll find that a number of the old timers do regularly comment when they feel that George has posted something that could be perceived as offensive both here on the new forums and on the previous news group. Personally I respect George's opinion and his right to express it but I definitely wish he was gentler sometimes.
Matthew C Jones said:Lots of Priests & Levites in these forums,
Now I assume this was meant as a global personal attack on and false characterisation of the old timers (can we actually be old timers on forums this new?) am I offended? No!
Matthew 5:39
God Bless
Graham
Pastor - NTCOG Basingstoke
0 -
Matthew C Jones said:
Since all the old timers appear to tolerate your constant belittleing and borderline vulgarities, I don't expect them to rebuke you now.
11The discretion of a man makes him slow to anger,
And his glory is to overlook a transgression
The New King James Version. 1982 (Pr 19:11). Nashville: Thomas Nelson
11 A man’s wisdom gives him patience; it is to his glory to overlook an offense
The Holy Bible : New International Version. 1996, c1984 (electronic ed.) (Pr 19:11). Grand Rapids: Zondervan..
Proverbs 23:9 Do not speak to a fool,
for he will scorn the wisdom of your words
Proverbs 20:3 It is to a man’s honor to avoid strife,
but every fool is quick to quarrel
Proverbs 12:16 A fool shows his annoyance at once,
but a prudent man overlooks an insult.
Proverbs 15:18 A hot-tempered man stirs up dissension,
but a patient man calms a quarrel.
Proverbs 16:32 Better a patient man than a warrior,
a man who controls his temper than one who takes a city.
Proverbs 14:29 A patient man has great understanding,
but a quick-tempered man displays folly.
1 Corinthians 13:4
4 Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud.
1 Corinthians 13:5
5 It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs.
1 Corinthians 13:7
7 It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.
Ephesians 4:2
2 Be completely humble and gentle; be patient, bearing with one another in love.
Ephesians 4:32
32 Be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving each other, just as in Christ God forgave you.
Colossians 3:12
12 Therefore, as God’s chosen people, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience.
Colossians 3:13
13 Bear with each other and forgive whatever grievances you may have against one another. Forgive as the Lord forgave you.
Hebrews 12:14
14 Make every effort to live in peace with all men and to be holy; without holiness no one will see the Lord.
1 Peter 2:23
23 When they hurled their insults at him, he did not retaliate; when he suffered, he made no threats. Instead, he entrusted himself to him who judges justly.
1 Peter 3:9
9 Do not repay evil with evil or insult with insult, but with blessing, because to this you were called so that you may inherit a blessing.
Romans 12:18,21
18 If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone.
21 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.
Dell, studio XPS 7100, Ram 8GB, 64 - bit Operating System, AMD Phenom(mt) IIX6 1055T Processor 2.80 GHZ
0
