Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 40

Thread: Wish List for 7+

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    149

    Thumbs up More add-on support

    I'd like to see more along the lines of us being able to make our own dictionaries and lexicons in the forthcoming version of BibleWorks.

    please.


  2. #22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by richardsugg View Post
    I think it would be great if you could collapse the resources in the resource summary tab. I've attached a screenshot to demonstrate. With so many lexicons, grammars, and user modules, this would be very helpful in finding what I'm looking for.
    This is an awesome suggestion. It would increase the usability of the Resource Summary Tab 100 fold.

  3. #23

    Default Strong's Dictionary

    I would really like to see the addition of Strong's definitions as a lexicon. It would be great if you could choose to see the Strong's definitions in addition to the ones BibleWorks provides in the Word Analysis tab.

    Thanks

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    149

    Default Strong's Dictionary

    Quote Originally Posted by Chris Evarts View Post
    I would really like to see the addition of Strong's definitions as a lexicon. It would be great if you could choose to see the Strong's definitions in addition to the ones BibleWorks provides in the Word Analysis tab.

    Thanks
    I'll second this one. I use the Strongs all the time and I have to fire up other software to access it. This would be WONDERFUL to have available in BibleWorks.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    149

    Default Smith's Bible Dictionary

    I'd like to see Smith's Bible Dictionary included in BibleWorks. Just about every other piece of Bible study software out there has it (many programs have it with the illustrations - which I'd also like) and I use this a lot in preparing Bible studies for students. Please, do try to include this. Please. It's good material.

  6. #26

    Default State of the art?

    What's with all the interest in 19th-century resources? I know they're in the public domain, but come on...

    Chris

  7. #27

    Default

    I have to agree. With BDB, etc -- why would anyone need or want Strong's? With ISBE, why Smith's?
    Dan Phillips
    Books:Web presence:
    tfo+[]l;w> hw"hy> tr:AT-ta, vArd>li Abb'l. !ykihe ar"z>[, yKi

    s `jP'(v.miW qxo laer"f.yIB. dMel;l.W

  8. #28

    Default BDB and ISBE?

    ...how about HALOT, BDAG and ABD?

    Chris

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    149

    Default Older Works

    I fail to understand why people would take the time to bother themselves to question the validity and usefulness of older works that they haven't taken the time to look at or use themselves.

    Our church happens to make use of both the Stongs and the Smiths in our Bible studies that are passed out to students and have done so for years. These works are solid. I understand that other works are available. This doesn't change the fact that the Strongs and Smiths are equally useful, and quite a lot easier for people that don't spend 25 hours a day in Bible study to pick up and use. We prepare lessons with references to both the Strongs and Smiths so that everyone in the church can buy these two books in physical format (or we give them to them) and check out the studies themselves. Not everyone in church has a set of ISBE on the shelf and many don't own computers. Most wouldn't have a clue what HALOT was.

    Perhaps if the means were available for me to incorporate the Stongs and Smiths into BibleWorks on my own then I would not have to ask BibleWorks to consider adding them. Then I could hoard them for myself and not bother to share them with people that turn up their nose at valid works because they are OLD.

    Perhaps you need a new Bible. Last weeks version is old news. What's it to you if I ask for a feature that you yourself don't use? I don't complain because the NIV is in BibleWorks, do I? I haven't made use of the Young's Literal Translation and I'm not up here whining about it being included in BibleWorks.

    I did not know that when requesting works to be added to BibleWorks that I had to run my request past the self-appointed committee for their scorn.

    Any more questions?

    Have a nice day.

  10. #30

    Default Let's be clear

    Let's be clear... a lot of information in any 19th century Bible dictionary is flat-out wrong. You don't have to "study the Bible 25 hours a day" to know that.

    As for Strong's... whatever. Also outdated. BibleWorks offers significantly better resources.

    These facts need not offend you.

    Chris

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •