bible-truths.com/forums

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Forum related how to's?  Post your questions to the membership.


.

Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: strongs concordance  (Read 8177 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

samuel3

  • Guest
strongs concordance
« on: August 21, 2008, 02:37:19 PM »

Why is it we put so much confidence in our interpretation of the word in the strongs concordance, and not let Gods inspired word teach.  Does not the word tell us to rightly divide the word, so there is a right way to divide and a wrong way to divide. I believe the word is inspired by God hes the author of it right. So what im saying is dont draw all your conclusions and interpretations of words from a strongs that is not inspired by god,this can be very misleading. What would some people do without their strongs concordance? 
Logged

mharrell08

  • Guest
Re: strongs concordance
« Reply #1 on: August 21, 2008, 02:56:22 PM »

 ???

Wouldn't you want to find out why people use it before telling them not to use it?
Logged

carol v

  • Guest
Re: strongs concordance
« Reply #2 on: August 21, 2008, 02:58:27 PM »

Hey Samuel and welcome to the forum. I don't think too many of us here put all our eggs in the Strong's basket. Ray, in a lot of his studies, points out some inaccuracies in Strong's. It is not the end all or be all of understanding the word. Strong's has taken on some false doctrines in its translation of a few words.

However, I have no clue about the Hebrew or Greek languages so Strong's is a useful tool. It works great incorporated into esword. But if it weren't for the Spirit I wouldn't even understand the Bible in English.

I agree with what you say but I think you are preaching to the choir here. I might argue the point that Strong's isn't God-inspired though. It's not God-inspired in the same way as scripture but I do believe in God's sovereignty and that He has inspired many to produce great tools for our use in study. I certainly believe He inspired many monks to painstakingly spend their lives reproducing the scriptures while at the same time NOT giving them all truth. I can't even imagine all the painstaking work that went into Strong's Concordance. It gives me brain freeze.

Look forward to your continued posts. How did you come to Bible-Truths?

Carol
« Last Edit: August 21, 2008, 03:02:45 PM by carol v »
Logged

samuel3

  • Guest
Re: strongs concordance
« Reply #3 on: August 21, 2008, 03:18:19 PM »

Im not saying not to use it, the reason we use it is understand the definition of a word more clearly which can be helpful. But it  also can be misleading. Alot of arguments stem from the definitions of words.
Logged

Linny

  • Guest
Re: strongs concordance
« Reply #4 on: August 21, 2008, 03:31:04 PM »

Samuel, I think we are all in agreement with that here. We use it as a tool recognizing it is not perfect just as our KJV is not perfect. We ask for God's discernment when we study.
Welcome to the forum.
Linny
Logged

Samson

  • Guest
Re: strongs concordance
« Reply #5 on: August 21, 2008, 04:52:08 PM »

Why is it we put so much confidence in our interpretation of the word in the Strong's concordance, and not let Gods inspired word teach.  Does not the word tell us to rightly divide the word, so there is a right way to divide and a wrong way to divide. I believe the word is inspired by God hes the author of it right. So what I'm saying is don't draw all your conclusions and interpretations of words from a Strong's that is not inspired by god,this can be very misleading. What would some people do without their Strong's concordance? 

Hello Samuel,

                    I understand what you are saying, but I've known many people who just read the bible, insisting that their translation is the most accurate or it's the " right " one, especially the Older Versions of The King James, I work with a guy like that and he can quote many Scriptures, but doesn't realize or doesn't want to realize that many mistakes and wrong translations of certain Greek words have crept in. I have a Bible Dictionary, it's not Strong's, but as an example, whenever I look something up and the Author puts their explanation of something beyond what the primary meaning of a Greek or Hebrew word means, I take it with a grain of salt. A good example of this is found in Ray's Article at the front page of this Site: IS EVERLASTING SCRIPTURAL, in response to some wanna be Bible Scholar and this involves the Greek Word Aion and it's adjective Aionios. He shows the history of this word and explains it's Hebrew equivalent Ohlam or Olam showing it never meant forever, Eternal or Everlasting until sometime in the second Century C.E. If we just Read the Bible, sticking stubbornly to one particular translation, like the man mentioned earlier, that I work with, how would we know about Hades, Gehenna, Tartarus, if it's always rendered Hell, Hellfire; or tha the true meaning of Kolasin rendered punishment is chastisement or the pruning of the Luzurian tree and is not forever, only temporary and meant for our discipline with a view to our improvement.

                         If I wasn't attempting to study the true meanings of Bible Greek Words, at least in my case, I might not have found my way here. That's one of the causes leading to my choice, especially considering that Ray shows the meaning of Greek and Hebrew words explaining thoroughly with ample proof. Of course my being here is All God's Will, but God put the desire in me to know these truths, that's what I consistently prayed to him, prior to finding this Site, " Please reveal to me the true understanding of your word. " The main problem with sources outside the Scriptures is that they go beyond the primary meaning of these Hebrew and Greek words, then proceed to say, this word can also mean this, but when we dig deeper and Ray helps us in this, we find that these other meanings were added later. The Hebrew Word Ra is translated Calamity in many Bible Translations at Isaiah. 45:7, but it's supposed to be translated Evil, as Ray explains, there is another Hebrew word that's translated Calamity and it isn't Ra. If it was supposed to be Translated Calamity, the Hebrew word RA wouldn't be used there.

                         These are just some of the examples that might help you, my apologies if I rambled on too much, but I know of so many people in my life who just read the Bible and still believe in Hellfire, Free Will and Eternal Punishment and they write Ray all the time.

                                        Hope this helps and may God guide and direct your efforts.

                                             Kind Regards, Samson.
Logged

carol v

  • Guest
Re: strongs concordance
« Reply #6 on: August 21, 2008, 05:13:34 PM »

Great example of words Samson. One of my favorites is the study of the Greek word "appollumi" which I think is Strong's #622 and #684 derived from it. With a quick use of esword and Strong's number system we quickly discover that this one word is used for destroyed, lost and perished. Just this discovery alone wipes out half the orthodox Christian arguments that God will eternally "destroy" any of us.

Mat 10:28  And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy 622 both soul and body in hell.

Luk 19:10  For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost.622

Samuel, none of us here believe that we get any understanding at all without the Spirit and that we should always rightly divide the Word comparing spiritual with spiritual. BUT, Strong's is a very useful tool.

You seem to have come to the forum with a chip on your shoulder. Have you read Ray's work? If you had you would see that we already know that Strong's has flaws and can be misleading. As I said above, you are preaching to the choir here.
Logged

samuel3

  • Guest
Re: strongs concordance
« Reply #7 on: August 21, 2008, 06:15:34 PM »

No i got no chip on my shoulder im just talking honestly about whether our confidence is in the word or a some man. Ray bases alot of his definitions by what the strongs says which is misleading.  All im saying is stay in the word its pure.
Logged

Dave in Tenn

  • Administrator
  • Bible-Truths Forum Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4131
    • FaceBook David Sanderson
Re: strongs concordance
« Reply #8 on: August 21, 2008, 07:25:27 PM »

The words used in the original languages ARE pure.  God inspired them one by one.  Words are defined by their usage, and Strong's major value is in more quickly enabling us to find where these words are USED in scripture (in the original languages) so we can better understand how God intended us to understand them.

Translations are NEVER pure.  You simply cannot translate massive amounts of text from one language into another without making choices.  The Greek, for example, had at least three words for love.  All three are translated 'Love' into English, though their meanings are at least shades different.  Good translators do their best in this foreign language of English to attempt solid translations.  Concordant versions attempt to apply the same rigor in ALWAYS translating the same Hebrew or Greek word or phrase the same way.  But Theology can and does creep into these translations, and some are translating a translation.

Go to www.babelfish.com and try to translate a sentence from English into German into French and back into English again and see what happens. 

Language itself is not pure, but evolves over time...often very quickly.  English in particular is not very 'pure'.  Why else is Shakespeare so difficult to understand on the surface?  His audience 'got it'.  We have to study it.

Whatever gets us closer to the very Words that GOD chose is a good tool, though any tool is dangerous in the hands of an untrained or careless worker.

Strong's is simply a 'snapshot' of evolving 'usage' in the KJV of the Bible.  But it's a good tool to help us get to the pure word of God in the original languages.  Other translations do a better job in the English of OUR time.  None are perfect, nor can they be.         
Logged
Heb 10:32  But you must continue to remember those earlier days, how after you were enlightened you endured a hard and painful struggle.

Kat

  • Guest
Re: strongs concordance
« Reply #9 on: August 21, 2008, 07:31:19 PM »


Quote
All im saying is stay in the word its pure.

What Word is that Samuel?  Do you think the translations we have are pure?  If you do not read Hebrew and Greek then you don't have a pure word of the Scripture.  I think that is where all these false teachings we have come from, just a few mistranslated words.  That is why Ray goes to such great lengths to find what is in the 'original' transcripts. He does not go solely by what he reads in the Strong's concordance, he uses other sources too.  But it is only by the Holy Spirit's guidance that he is able to learn these things or the church would have figured out some of these things.  Our confidence is in God and God has provided Ray as a teacher.  If the spirit of Christ is within then it will guide you to who you should believe.

1John 4:4  You are of God, little children, and have overcome them, because He who is in you is greater than he who is in the world.
v. 5  They are of the world. Therefore they speak as of the world, and the world hears them.
v. 6  We are of God. He who knows God hears us; he who is not of God does not hear us. By this we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of error.

If you do not believe what Ray teaches, that's fine, but we prove all things and are confident this is the truth.

mercy, peace and love
Kat

Logged

samuel3

  • Guest
Re: strongs concordance
« Reply #10 on: August 21, 2008, 09:30:47 PM »

Hers a word for you Kat.  Ray says that freewill is a myth.  Yet today i opened up the book and poof there is the word FREEWILL IN THE BIBLE many times. So the word is wrong and Ray is right?
Logged

KristaD

  • Guest
Re: strongs concordance
« Reply #11 on: August 21, 2008, 09:43:47 PM »

The user agreement says:
This is not the place to decide if you agree with the teaching of L.Ray Smith, but a place you can retreat to when you do.

This forum is primarily a place for people of a like mind to fellowship, and secondarily to discuss and question what they learn on bible-truths.com.

If you seriously disagree with Ray, please email him directly.

If you come here to teach us, please take your teaching elsewhere.

This is the second person this week to come here NOT in agreement. I am personally not coming here to debate with people about what I believe, I can do that (and have to do that) everywhere else. If someone does not see the truth in the scriptures we can do nothing to convince them, we can only pray. It is futile to argue with these people and we are not supposed to have to defend our beliefs here.
Logged

Dave in Tenn

  • Administrator
  • Bible-Truths Forum Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4131
    • FaceBook David Sanderson
Re: strongs concordance
« Reply #12 on: August 21, 2008, 09:52:01 PM »

Freewill appears in the OT 17 times in the KJV.  In 16 of those occurences, it is translated from a single Hebrew word and part of a 'phrase' in English "Freewill Offerings".

When Ray is talking about 'Free Will' he is talking about a Doctrine.  He's not talking about 'Freewill Offerings'.  "Freewill Offerings" is the translation of the pure word of God.  If a man built a doctrine around the use of the word "freewill" in the scripture, he'd be pretty lame.  These are offerings which were not compulsory under the law.  We all make choices, including whether to give or not give.  Ray teaches that these choices are not without cause and can't be made otherwise.  That's hard to grasp for many, but born out of Scripture.  Making a 'Freewill Offering' is one of those choices, but doesn't 'prove' a larger Doctrine of the Churches that Man has a Free Will.

I hope that helps.



      
« Last Edit: August 21, 2008, 09:54:56 PM by Dave in Tenn »
Logged
Heb 10:32  But you must continue to remember those earlier days, how after you were enlightened you endured a hard and painful struggle.

carol v

  • Guest
Re: strongs concordance
« Reply #13 on: August 21, 2008, 09:52:31 PM »

Samuel, I'm not Kat and she really is the best at answering this stuff but the only time you see "freewill" in the Bible is in the freewill offering. It does not mean free will in the sense Ray is talking about in his article about God's Sovereignty. It is a "voluntary" offering. Ironically, you could probably use your Strong's in esword to search the Hebrew word used for "freewill" in this case and learn a lot.

Have you actually studied all the scriptures that Ray points out about God's Sovereignty. And Ray is not the only one teaching this so if you would like others, please pm me. We are not all sheep that believe everything Ray says is right because Ray said it. I could tell you several things I disagree with him on but God's Sovereignty certainly isn't one of them. The Myth of Free Will is a great article in my opinion.

You sound so angry, Samuel. I think you should study quite a bit more...but I'm sure Kat will have a great response based on research. I'd look it up for ya but I have to go cook dinner and I don't think you really want an answer as much as an argument.
Logged

carol v

  • Guest
Re: strongs concordance
« Reply #14 on: August 21, 2008, 09:55:21 PM »

Well said Krista.
Logged

Linny

  • Guest
Re: strongs concordance
« Reply #15 on: August 21, 2008, 09:56:17 PM »

Oops Samuel, I think you have possibly broken one of our chatroom rules. I believe that when you have disagreement with Ray, you are to email him directly rather than fight it out with us  :-\ but until you are gently reminded by a moderator,  I did a KJV search for freewill as well.

I found all but one to be regarding freewill offerings which simply mean:
nedâbâh
ned-aw-baw'
From H5068; properly (abstractly) spontaneity, or (adjectively) spontaneous; also (concretely) a spontaneous or (by inference, in plural) abundant gift: - free (-will) offering, freely, plentiful, voluntary (-ily, offering), willing (-ly, offering).


And one time it was:
nedab
ned-ab'
(Chaldee); corresponding to H5068; be (or give) liberal (liberally): - (be minded of . . . own) freewill (offering), offer freely (willingly).


I don't know how you took these verses to disprove Ray's teachings.

It is common sensable to me that if you believe in an All-Knowing God Who's will cannot be thwarted, then you cannot also believe in the free will of man who then could indeed thwart the will of God and leave Him in the dark. The two concepts simply cannot exist together.
Logged

dewey

  • Guest
Re: strongs concordance
« Reply #16 on: August 21, 2008, 10:07:12 PM »

Hi, Samuel

I don't believe that you have read enough of Ray's teachings to be making statements like you're doing.  If you had, you would plainly see that man does NOT have free will. Nor will he ever.  May I suggest that you take a break and read Ray's teachings on free will?  And then come back and post what has been exposed to you by the truth that Ray puts on paper via the Holy Spirit.  And while you're at it, next time you post give me some scripture where man has free will.  I need to read it for myself.  And give me more than one scripture.

In the Spirit, love ya

Dewey
Logged

samuel3

  • Guest
Re: strongs concordance
« Reply #17 on: August 21, 2008, 10:15:00 PM »

Yes it was a freewill offering meaning your will is free . God has given to man a freewill to will as he pleases. God wills that all men be saved, is that going to happen NO. the will of God is that we submit or yield our will which is our soul to his word. its that simple.  The word says in Romans LET NOT sin reign in your mortal body.  Why does sin reighn?  Because we let it, we yield to it, with our freewill.  This is so simple to understand if you have ears to understand the simplicity that is in christ!!!
Logged

Craig

  • Bible-Truths Forum Member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4282
  • There are two kinds of cops.The quick and the dead
Re: strongs concordance
« Reply #18 on: August 21, 2008, 10:23:36 PM »

Samuel3 won't be posting with us anymore.

Craig
Logged

winner08

  • Guest
Re: strongs concordance
« Reply #19 on: August 21, 2008, 10:30:56 PM »

Thank God for small miracles. This went on long enough. Thanks Craig.
                               Darren
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
 

Page created in 0.084 seconds with 27 queries.