Satan and Job

[other one]

3 hours ago, Alive said:

Did Josephus mention them?

Will, it's been a good 40 years since I read his books so I can't quote him, but my memory says yes he did speak of them..... 

[Alive]

2 minutes ago, other one said:

Will, it's been a good 40 years since I read his books so I can't quote him, but my memory says yes he did speak of them..... 

Ya--its been about that long for me, too. I was interested in the history that verifies.

Can't recall the giants.

[other one]

15 minutes ago, Alive said:

Ya--its been about that long for me, too. I was interested in the history that verifies.

Can't recall the giants.

it's hard for me for I've spent months in the past researching where they came from....    I guess it started when we started getting information of the dead sea scrolls.   All that tends to let us know what was written and being read during the time of Jesus being here....   many many things kind of come into better focus when we have an idea of the general knowledge of the time....   unfortunately during those days we didn't have the internet so the information is contained in libraries and books instead of URL's that can be easily shared.    Some firm ideas in my head came from reading dozens of books that I am finding not many people care to spend the time to read...     then you got the KJV and nothing else people that you really can't have a discussion with.

[Alive]

6 minutes ago, other one said:

it's hard for me for I've spent months in the past researching where they came from....    I guess it started when we started getting information of the dead sea scrolls.   All that tends to let us know what was written and being read during the time of Jesus being here....   many many things kind of come into better focus when we have an idea of the general knowledge of the time....   unfortunately during those days we didn't have the internet so the information is contained in libraries and books instead of URL's that can be easily shared.    Some firm ideas in my head came from reading dozens of books that I am finding not many people care to spend the time to read...     then you got the KJV and nothing else people that you really can't have a discussion with.

Yup--many moons ago when I was a young man and as a young pastor, it was expedient to spend time for old-timer preachers. Some of those guys were "if it was good enough for Paul, its good enough for me."

[other one]

1 minute ago, Alive said:

Yup--many moons ago when I was a young man and as a young pastor, it was expedient to spend time for old-timer preachers. Some of those guys were "if it was good enough for Paul, its good enough for me."

Our church as an organization recognizes the NIV as their standard and it drives me crazy.

[Alive]

1 minute ago, other one said:

Our church as an organization recognizes the NIV as their standard and it drives me crazy.

I recall when the NIV first came out and I reviewed it.

Not good, but it one of-- if not the most popular out there. I see it as a 'paraphrase' rather than a 'translation'.

Or a 'version' rather than a 'translation'.

My carry around has been NASB for a whole bunch of years, but when my wife wanted a new one, I suggested the ESV.

[other one]

2 minutes ago, Alive said:

I recall when the NIV first came out and I reviewed it.

Not good, but it one of-- if not the most popular out there. I see it as a 'paraphrase' rather than a 'translation'.

Or a 'version' rather than a 'translation'.

My carry around has been NASB for a whole bunch of years, but when my wife wanted a new one, I suggested the ESV.

I use the ESV on my tablet and phone but the 1972 version of the NASB on my desktop.   I have a copy of BibleSoft's PC Bible Study on my desktop and it has some awesome tools.  I have found over the years that version/translation is the closest to a word for word translation..    Also has both Testus Receptus and Nestle Aland manuscripts in an interlinear thing that lets me look at the original texts for clarity.      That program changed my overall view of several things, but none really important to salvation.

[Alive]

5 minutes ago, other one said:

I use the ESV on my tablet and phone but the 1972 version of the NASB on my desktop.   I have a copy of BibleSoft's PC Bible Study on my desktop and it has some awesome tools.  I have found over the years that version/translation is the closest to a word for word translation..    Also has both Testus Receptus and Nestle Aland manuscripts in an interlinear thing that lets me look at the original texts for clarity.      That program changed my overall view of several things, but none really important to salvation.

I love that last sentence!

I am kind of a tech guy. For quite a few years now, I have used the Accordance Bible software.

The resources I have with it is extraordinary. Just about every translation in various languages as well as the oldest texts and most commentaries, dictionaries, Church Fathers, Church History, sermon, books--on and on. I don't lack for reading materials.

:-)

I can read several side by side including the original and when mousing over a word, the various dictionaries pop up.

 

[Justin Adams]

The free Logos software is also like that and has many cross-references available along with dictionaries. It is interlinear and a good tool. The ESV is good because it uses many original scripts plus the Qumran stuff. A lot of commentaries that do not use Qumran scholarship are a bit dated. The Q-fragments are still being assayed as well, so further light may be shed in the future. It is of interest that Qumran came about after about 1947 - 48. I find that a bit eerie really. It does seem to have been Providential, especially since Israel began to return and the previous naysayers were proved wrong. 

[Alive]

I used Logos before I bought Accordance. That was something like 15 years ago. I am sure it is better now.

There was another--I think called Sword or something like that.

Accordance allows me to build tools, studies and such that become integrated.

I admit to being a tech weenie.

:-)