Thompson Chain Bibles?

[AmericanSamurai]

What is the background on Thompson Chain Bibles?

I made the mistake last time in being too hasty and buying the dispensational Scofield Bible. Don't want to make a similar mistake.

 

[Osage Bluestem]

What is the background on Thompson Chain Bibles?

I made the mistake last time in being too hasty and buying the dispensational Scofield Bible. Don't want to make a similar mistake.

I have one. It's nice. My Grandpa used one as well.

However, I prefer the Reformation Study Bible.

 

[drjean]

• There is very little space to write your own notes in most editions.
• It is very large and cumbersome to carry around.
• The cross references are linked to the topical system and are not as simple and straightforward as those in other reference Bibles.
• The Thompson Bible contains a misleading study on the history of the English Bible, falsely presenting the modern versions as superior to the old Protestant ones and failing to inform the reader of the corruption of the underlying Greek text. The Thompson study on English versions also fails to inform the reader of the corruption of paraphrases such as the Living Bible and the Today’s English Version.
• Thompson had the wrong view of Bible prophecy and this is reflected in his studies. For example, the Thompson Chain Reference Bible views the book of Revelation as history rather than prophecy.

THE THOMPSON CHAIN REFERENCE BIBLE

The Thompson Chain Reference Bible was compiled by Frank Charles Thompson (1858-?) and was first published in 1908. Thompson worked for 31 years on his study Bible, with assistance from his wife, Laura. He was an ordained Methodist preacher with a Ph.D. from Boston University, but at one point in his life he taught on the staff of the L.I.F.E. Bible Institute founded by the Pentecostal, Aimee Semple McPherson (Edith Blumhofer, Aimee Semple McPherson: Everybody's Sister, Eerdmans, 1993). The studies in his reference Bible, though, do not appear to reflect Pentecostal theology except perhaps in very minor ways.

The Thompson Chain Reference Bible has gone through several editions, each one an improvement over the previous one. The 5th edition was published in 1986. It is one of the most complete study Bibles ever published.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

• There is very little space to write your own notes in most editions.
• It is very large and cumbersome to carry around.
• The cross references are linked to the topical system and are not as simple and straightforward as those in other reference Bibles.
• The Thompson Bible contains a misleading study on the history of the English Bible, falsely presenting the modern versions as superior to the old Protestant ones and failing to inform the reader of the corruption of the underlying Greek text. The Thompson study on English versions also fails to inform the reader of the corruption of paraphrases such as the Living Bible and the Today’s English Version.
• Thompson had the wrong view of Bible prophecy and this is reflected in his studies. For example, the Thompson Chain Reference Bible views the book of Revelation as history rather than prophecy.

THE THOMPSON CHAIN REFERENCE BIBLE

The Thompson Chain Reference Bible was compiled by Frank Charles Thompson (1858-?) and was first published in 1908. Thompson worked for 31 years on his study Bible, with assistance from his wife, Laura. He was an ordained Methodist preacher with a Ph.D. from Boston University, but at one point in his life he taught on the staff of the L.I.F.E. Bible Institute founded by the Pentecostal, Aimee Semple McPherson (Edith Blumhofer, Aimee Semple McPherson: Everybody's Sister, Eerdmans, 1993). The studies in his reference Bible, though, do not appear to reflect Pentecostal theology except perhaps in very minor ways.

The Thompson Chain Reference Bible has gone through several editions, each one an improvement over the previous one. The 5th edition was published in 1986. It is one of the most complete study Bibles ever published.

Thank you for this, I too was considering a TCRB, notice the past tense. I think I'll pass. The Bible I want the most atm, is a Super Giant Print NKJV, I have the B&H Super Giant KJV, purchased years ago, gave one to my sister too. I really appreciate larger fonts, so much easier on the eyes. I know not why Broadman & Holman is the only publisher to print Bibles with 18 pt font +.

 

[JM]

It contains covenantal and historicist headings. I like it!

My review from 2009: Thompson Chain | Feileadh Mor

Still waiting for my Westminster Reference Bible to arrive.

 

[AmericanSamurai]

I think that I know enough now that I will pass on this Bible as well.

 

[JM]

AS, I wouldn't be too quick to dismiss the Thompson Chain. It is a good reference Bible and the layout makes it easy to use.

A page looks like this:

As you can see it doesn't contain commentary by the biblical text. All references will be slanted just a little in whatever reference Bible you use but at least this one is slanted toward Protestantism (covenantal and historicist).

Yours in the Lord,

j

 

[AmericanSamurai]

I can't get past the Pentecostal and Aimee Semple MacPherson roots.

 

[JM]

I would be interested in an example of where Thompson was influenced by Pentecostalism.

Still...I look forward to my Westminster arriving. Its chains were influenced by the John Brown's Self-Interpreting Bible.

The Self-Interpreting Bible by John Brown of Haddington - YouTube

A friend of mine preaches from this one, it's a beaut!

Schuyler KJV Reference Bible Review - YouTube

 

[drjean]

Slightly OT : Remember to read special verses in any new version publication...as the 3 main publishers have created versions to not offend Muslims, removing aspects of Jesus as God and Son of God. (Supposedly this was orchestrated through Rick Warren's new "Crislam" religion.)

First, Wycliffe and SIL have produced Stories of the Prophets, an Arabic Bible that uses an Arabic equivalent of “Lord” instead of “Father” and “Messiah” instead of “Son.”

Second, Frontiers and SIL have produced Meaning of the Gospel of Christ , an Arabic translation which removes “Father” in reference to God and replaces it with “Allah,” and removes or redefines “Son.”
​

Here's an article about the new 400th anniversary of the KJV: http://www.nowtheendbegins.com/pages/KJV/400-years-of-the-king-james-bible.htm

 

[nobdysfool]

I like my Thompson Bible. I wish I still had the one I lost in my luggage at Chicago Midway airport some years back. Somebody stole my bag right off the carousel. I lost quite a few irreplaceable things in that bag. The only one that really hurt was my Thompson Bible, which I had used for 30 years, and was full of notes, and insights. I still miss it...

 

[AmericanSamurai]

I decided to just get another Authorized KJV, and maybe a commentary book for all the books of the Bible.

 

[JM]

Details! Which one did you decide on?

 

[Anoetos]

You do know that Allah is Arabic for "God", right? Its the word Arabic speaking Christians use to refer to Him.

 

[AmericanSamurai]

Details! Which one did you decide on?

This one.

 

[drjean]

You do know that Allah is Arabic for "God", right? Its the word Arabic speaking Christians use to refer to Him.

For fear of taking the thread OT I won't give a full comment, just that Christians do not use the name of Allah for the Almighty since the Muslim Allah is NOT the Almighty.

 

[JM]

This one.

Oooooh, ahhhhhhh. Nice.

 

[Osage Bluestem]

I decided to just get another Authorized KJV, and maybe a commentary book for all the books of the Bible.

The KJV is fun for nostalgic reasons but it contains many parts that aren't original or inspired in my view. Plus some passages were just translated badly due to the limitations of the age in which it was built.

 

[AmericanSamurai]

The KJV is fun for nostalgic reasons but it contains many parts that aren't original or inspired in my view. Plus some passages were just translated badly due to the limitations of the age in which it was built.

I also own and read from the ESV and NASB. I do realize that the KJV has its drawbacks as well.

 

[JM]

The KJV is fun for nostalgic reasons but it contains many parts that aren't original or inspired in my view. Plus some passages were just translated badly due to the limitations of the age in which it was built.

Ahhhh, Osage.

The AV is considered not only a good translation but a great translation. The issue comes down to manuscripts. Some believe the traditional biblical text needed tweaking using manuscripts found in the Vatican, monasteries and the Dead Sea scrolls, etc. Others believe the received text, the text most often copied and translated by the church, is fine the way it is.

It is a shame we are in this mess but we are sinners, saved by grace.

jm