Helping others select Bible Study Software

The first question is always: "How do you currently study the Bible?"
In brief, the individual goes through the process they currently use,
demonstrating which tools they currently use:
* An individual whose personal Bible study has been limited to reading a
verse at random from the NIV(1995), has different requirements from one
who studies the Bible using the BHS4 and NA26;
* An individual who studies the Bible chronologically, requires a
different set of tools, than the individual who studies the Bible "by
theological doctrine". NIV Chronological Study Bible 2014
ISBN:978-1401680114 versus  The Disciples Study Bible 1988 ISBN: 1558190147);
* An individual that is going both deaf and blind, has a different set
of requirements, than one who has neither visual nor audio impairments;

The next group of questions is about the basis of their current
theological outlook. A theology built on the writings of John Calvin,
is irrelevant to both the individual who views the Bible through The
Book of Concord, and the individual whose builds their theology from
The Five Articles of Remonstrance. Consequently, with one exception
(^1), only if an individual specifically requests material that
challenges their doctrine, and practice, will I point to resources that
conflict with their belief-system.

The third group of questions relates to material that the church(es)
that they currently attend uses. Whilst this is mainly on Bible
translations, hymnals, commentaries, and small group material also comes
into play.

By way of example, if the "official" translation of the church they
attend is NIV (2011), then including only The Orthodox Study Bible
(2008) in their Bible software resources will hinder the individual in
following the passage being studied.

In helping people select Bible software, I won't impose my theology onthem. Unlike the Baptist (1879), in Emo Philips story,
The original version is at ) I won't push the Baptist (1912) over the rail.

If you are Baptist (1879), I will demonstrate only the material
appropriate to that branch, and omit Baptist (1912) content.

If your theology is that there are 13 books on the New Testament, and
the Tanakh is no longer on force, I'll demonstrate software that
contains only those thirteen books. [This is Marcian Christianity.] For an
adherent of the Orthodox Tawahido Church, I'll demonstrate software that
contains the Narrower Cannon, in Ge'ez, or English. I haven't found any software that contains the Broader Cannon.

Digital Bible study tools do not work for everybody:
* At BibleTech 2010, Bob Pritchett said that 70% of the packages Logos sold, were, within three months, shelfware;
* If your only electronic device is the X-Box, and your personal Bible
Study looks like a clip from a sermon by Melissa Scott, then pen and
pencil is your best option;
* Some translations/versions of the Bible are not currently legally
available in any digital format. As such, those who exclusively use
those versions, will find pen and paper to be more appropriate for their
specific needs and requirements;
* In some instances, material that an individual uses in their Bible
study, is out of their financial reach, when licensed in digital format;

^1: For various reasons, where available, I include English language
editions the following material as "core works":
The Book of Common Prayer English 1662, 1892, 1928, 1979;
The Book of Concord: Lutheran Church German 1580;
* Institutes of the Christian Religion: John Calvin French 1536;
* The Christian System: Alexander Campbell English 1871;
* The Philokalia: St. Nikodemos of the Holy Mountain & St. Makarios of
Corinth (Greek 1782)(Church Slavonic 1793);
The Pure Cambridge Edition of the King James Version of the Bible;
* The Masoretic Text (Hebrew, not English translation);
* The LXX (Greek, not English translation);
* Textus Receptus (Greek, not English translation);
* Clementine Vulgate (Latin, not English translation);
* Concordances for each Bible;
* Strong's Dictionary;
* Treasury of Scriptural Knowledge;
* Webster's Dictionary (1828);

No comments: