# Thompsons Chain Reference and Westminster Reference Bible



## Gavin

Both reference Bibles make use of "Scripture interprets Scripture".
Has anyone made a comparison from a Reformed point of view? 
Any other suggestions of Reformed reference Bibles?

Personally I am attracted to the large print of the Westminster Reference Bible, not that I have poor eyes but for late night reading


----------



## Scott1

The Thompson Chain reference is a superb study Bible.

The chain system allows you to take one verse and "chain" related verses through the whole of Scripture, Old and New Testaments.
That is probably what they mean by "Scripture interprets Scripture."
The system does so without commentary, men's opinions mixed in, stories, etc. so it is a more "influence free" way to study.

Nothing wrong with commentaries, per se. Especially good, biblical reformed commentary.

But really, our first discipline is to read the Word of God, asking the Holy Spirit to illuminate our understanding as we do.


----------



## sevenzedek

I have had my eye on the Westminster Study Bible for awhile now. The concept for this bible was drawn from John Brown's Self Interpreting study bible. The WSB has 200,000 cross references! Very impressive. There is nothing like it on the market. Compare that to Thompson's 100,000; most of which must be accessed in the supplemental material in the back of the bible rather than in the column where it is needed most. One disadvantage to the WSB is that the references are not categorized by subject (I think) while the TCR does have them categorized. The TCR is more akin to a study bible. The WSB is a reference bible proper. I only wish TBS included Brown's commentary, but they didn't because it goes against their mission statement and purpose as a bible publisher/re-distributor. For what its worth, I was able to locate Brown's study bible in PDF form online. To have a reprint of this, if a publisher ever got around to it, would be no small treasure. It packed to the max with helps and such!

Anyone have a round tuit?

It is funny that you would start a thread on this very topic. I have been in the throws of whether or not I should put down $80 for it sooner than later.


----------



## sevenzedek

* WSB = WRB et al.


----------



## PaulMc

I have just bought a Westminster Study Bible and am very pleased with it - nicely presented, easily readable, and of course plenty of references. I would recommend it.
I also have John Brown's original Self-Interpreting Bible with his commentary in which is great, but no quite as practical for taking anywhere as it is an old iron-clasp massive family Bible!


----------



## sevenzedek

PaulMc said:


> I have just bought a Westminster Study Bible and am very pleased with it - nicely presented, easily readable, and of course plenty of references. I would recommend it.
> I also have John Brown's original Self-Interpreting Bible with his commentary in which is great, but no quite as practical for taking anywhere as it is an old iron-clasp massive family Bible!



Wanna trade the hard copy of Brown's Bible for the PDFs?

No?

Well, you never know unless you ask.


----------



## Jeff Burns

sevenzedek said:


> The WSB has 200,000 cross references! Very impressive. There is nothing like it on the market. Compare that to Thompson's 100,000; most of which must be accessed in the supplemental material in the back of the bible rather than in the column where it is needed most.



I'm confused, why does this site say they WRB has "over 80,000 references" and this site say "over two hundred thousand"? Which is it?


----------



## sevenzedek

Jeff Burns said:


> sevenzedek said:
> 
> 
> 
> The WSB has 200,000 cross references! Very impressive. There is nothing like it on the market. Compare that to Thompson's 100,000; most of which must be accessed in the supplemental material in the back of the bible rather than in the column where it is needed most.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm confused, why does this site say they WRB has "over 80,000 references" and this site say "over two hundred thousand"? Which is it?
Click to expand...


Call TBS and they will give you the bottom line.


----------



## sevenzedek

I just called TBS. They said 80,000 was a mis-print. There really are 200,000 cross-references in the WRB.


----------



## sevenzedek

I just ordered the WRB from evangelicalbible.com. Its on sale on that website for $65.


----------



## Gavin

It looks like a quality Bible. I read that it would be semi yapp. Isn't semi yapp a slight extension of the cover edges?


----------



## sevenzedek

Gavin said:


> It looks like a quality Bible. I read that it would be semi yapp. Isn't semi yapp a slight extension of the cover edges?



The yapp is the extension of the cover beyond the book block.

When I get mine in the mail, I will be sure to post it in Acquisitions. Might be here tomorrow. Evangelicalbible.com is only about 1.5 - 2 hours down the road from me.


----------



## reformedminister

I have been using the Thompson Chain for over fifteen years. In my opinion it is the best reference Bible I have ever owned and used. I love it so much I bought one several years ago on sale and left it in the packaging until this year. I keep my old one in my pastor's study at church. The WRB looks impressive so I just ordered one from evangelicalbible.com. I hope I love it just as much. The TCR will be hard to beat!


----------



## sevenzedek

reformedminister said:


> I have been using the Thompson Chain for over fifteen years. In my opinion it is the best reference Bible I have ever owned and used. I love it so much I bought one several years ago on sale and left it in the packaging until this year. I keep my old one in my pastor's study at church. The WRB looks impressive so I just ordered one from evangelicalbible.com. I hope I love it just as much. The TCR will be hard to beat!



Cool! Now we can be a part of the Puritan Board Westminster Reference Bible Club. And the KJV Club too. Let us know what you think about it. The bible; I mean.


----------



## sevenzedek

The mail man was very nice to me today! I just received my copy the WRB about ten minutes ago. I think it is the perfect size. Not too big. Not too small. However, it is larger than my Windsor Metrical. The leather cover is smooth but not shiny; a little rigid (they used a thicker board), but it opens nicely and lays open nicely; very flexible spine. The text looks just like the Windsor. It has four ribbons (two red; two black) and sixteen unlined bible paper pages in the back for notes. The smell is great and it looks like a high quality bible. And with over 200,000 cross-references, I am a very happy camper!


----------



## Gavin

Some time ago, I found a leather bound TCR at the second hand shop, but, being an NIV and having a friend that struggled with his KJV I gave it to him. Now recently I found yet another Leather bound TCR KJV from the 60's (for $5) in good condition - hence the questions. 
But I'm not so into the illustrative charts though and yet maybe given time I will learn to appreciate them. I think my friends newer version has more charts and illustrations, but he's quite happy with it. 
Mind you , I don't think he was aware that there were other versions other than the Kings James, not that he's from a King James vacuum, its just the way he is.


----------



## Ask Mr. Religion

sevenzedek said:


> The mail man was very nice to me today! I just received my copy the WRB about ten minutes ago. I think it is the perfect size. Not too big. Not too small. However, it is larger than my Windsor Metrical. The leather cover is smooth but not shiny; a little rigid (they used a thicker board), but it opens nicely and lays open nicely; very flexible spine. The text looks just like the Windsor. It has four ribbons (two red; two black) and sixteen unlined bible paper pages in the back for notes. The smell is great and it looks like a high quality bible. And with over 200,000 cross-references, I am a very happy camper!


Mine must be on a boat coming across the Atlantic. Still waiting. Sigh.


----------



## sevenzedek

Gavin said:


> I think my friends newer version has more charts and illustrations, but he's quite happy with it.



I think I remember reading somewhere that the TCR was updated to include more material.


----------



## sevenzedek

Ask Mr. Religion said:


> ]Mine must be on a boat coming across the Atlantic. Still waiting. Sigh.



From where did you order it?


----------



## reformedminister

sevenzedek said:


> reformedminister said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have been using the Thompson Chain for over fifteen years. In my opinion it is the best reference Bible I have ever owned and used. I love it so much I bought one several years ago on sale and left it in the packaging until this year. I keep my old one in my pastor's study at church. The WRB looks impressive so I just ordered one from evangelicalbible.com. I hope I love it just as much. The TCR will be hard to beat!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cool! Now we can be a part of the Puritan Board Westminster Reference Bible Club. And the KJV Club too. Let us know what you think about it. The bible; I mean.
Click to expand...


Sounds good to me! I hope my mailman is nice to me by Saturday perhaps?


----------



## Jeff Burns

sevenzedek said:


> The mail man was very nice to me today! I just received my copy the WRB about ten minutes ago. I think it is the perfect size. Not too big. Not too small. However, it is larger than my Windsor Metrical. The leather cover is smooth but not shiny; a little rigid (they used a thicker board), but it opens nicely and lays open nicely; very flexible spine. The text looks just like the Windsor. It has four ribbons (two red; two black) and sixteen unlined bible paper pages in the back for notes. The smell is great and it looks like a high quality bible. And with over 200,000 cross-references, I am a very happy camper!



I'll be very interested in a review in a month or two! I've told my wife and others that I believe a Bible with cross references is the best study Bible you can buy. I never dreamed of one with 200k+ references! So, my interest is, will the majority of them be accurate and worthwhile? Or will they be like too many in the reference Bibles I currently own that you look at and think "Yea, there's a couple of similar words here, but I have no idea how the editors thought these two texts were related!" With over 200k my fear is that there would be a few more helpful ones, but the vast majority would fall into that later category of just leaving one puzzled at the supposed connection.


----------



## Gavin

I think that's where a chain or topical referencing system has an advantage, however a chain of references could 
also be subject to bias.


----------



## GulfCoast Presbyterian

I asked my parents for a "real" bible of my own for my birthday when I was 12, having used a GNFMM or whatever was around as a "hand me down" until then. My father got me a B.B. Kirkbride bound, sewn, maroon "corinthian" leather, red letter KJV Thompson chain. I used that bible daily until Hurricane Katrina got it, so it must have been right at 30 years old, completely limp from use, but with no loose pages, cracks in the boards, etc. I have never seen a better binding on a bible, and still long for all the notes from my childhood and college, when I questioned everything, and tried to jot all the answers in the margins. I would trade several R.L. Allans to have that old Thompson chain again.


----------



## Ask Mr. Religion

Jeff Burns said:


> I'll be very interested in a review in a month or two! I've told my wife and others that I believe a Bible with cross references is the best study Bible you can buy. I never dreamed of one with 200k+ references! So, my interest is, will the majority of them be accurate and worthwhile? Or will they be like too many in the reference Bibles I currently own that you look at and think "Yea, there's a couple of similar words here, but I have no idea how the editors thought these two texts were related!" With over 200k my fear is that there would be a few more helpful ones, but the vast majority would fall into that later category of just leaving one puzzled at the supposed connection.


Received the Westminster KJV Bible today...Saturday! Well made, sewn bindings, thick goatskin leather with a thicker board that I like, but still acceptable. Bible lays flat no matter where opened. 200,000 cross-references, of which I think around 80K are from the Cambridge set and remainder from Brown's of Haddington efforts.

On Luke 24:27, the following cross references appear:

Ge 3:15, 22:18; 26:4; 49:10
Ex 25-30, 35-40
Le 1-16
Num 21:9, 24:17
Deut 18:15-19
Psalm 2, 8, 16, 22, 69, 72, 45,132
Is 7:14, 9:6,7, 35:3-8, 11:1-10, 40:10,11, 42:1-7, 49, 50, 52, 53, 61:1-6
Jeremiah 23:5,6, 30:21, 31:22, 33:14-16
Ezekiel 34; Ezekiel 37:25
Daniel 2:44, 9:24-27
Micah 5:2-4
Zec 3:8,9, 6:12, 13, 9:9, 11:13, 12:10, 13:7
Ho 11:1
Mal 3:1-3, 4:2
Hag 2:7, 
Luke 24:44, 45
John 1:45
Acts 3:33, 10:43, 26:22

A sample of what such a wealth of scripture interpreting scripture can bring.


----------



## Ask Mr. Religion

sevenzedek said:


> From where did you order it?


Directly from the TBS site.


----------



## Ask Mr. Religion

sevenzedek said:


> Gavin said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think my friends newer version has more charts and illustrations, but he's quite happy with it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think I remember reading somewhere that the TCR was updated to include more material.
Click to expand...

The NKJV from Kirkbride is the only one with all the chains completed and some updated charts, pixs.


----------



## cwjudyjr

Have enjoyed this thread! 

I like the fact that The Spirit of the Reformation NIV Study Bible has the confessions.

Is there an ESV Bible that has the confesssions in it available?


----------



## Gavin

Nope, other than the Schyler Bible.
I think a number of people have been hampering Bible publishers to include this feature , but for some reason its a closed door.

Mr Mark Bertrand writes in one of his blogs hereunder:

"The second love-it-or-hate-it feature, much more significant than the imprinting, is the inclusion of the ecumenical creeds and a selection of Reformation-era confessions of faith. For years, whenever Bible publishers have asked what features I'd like to see in an edition, the one suggestion I've repeated over and over is the inclusion of creeds and confessions in the back. To my mind, this is a "help" that actually helps, because gives access the church's tradition of interpretation. Traditionally, this material would have been placed inside a hymnal, but singing from a hymnal is about as popular with today's evangelical as elevating the host was in Puritan New England.

Before the Schuyler Bible, the only edition I could recommend to people curious about, say, Nicene orthodoxy or the Reformation era theological consensus (or lack thereof) was the Spirit of the Reformation Study Bible. Now there's a slimmer option. Unlike the SRSB, the Schuyler doesn't index the creeds and confessions with the Bible text, so you won't find marginal notes in Ephesians 1 directing you to a section in the Westminster Larger Catechism or vice versa. Also, the Schuyler omits the Three Forms of Unity, perhaps the most important of the Reformed standards, which consists of the Belgic Confession, the Canons of Dordt, and one of the few catechisms I'm aware of which is the subject of a rap song, the Heidelberg --- Bible Design and Binding "

I would really like this feature with any good reference Bible


----------



## Pilgrim

PaulMc said:


> I have just bought a Westminster Study Bible and am very pleased with it - nicely presented, easily readable, and of course plenty of references. I would recommend it.
> I also have John Brown's original Self-Interpreting Bible with his commentary in which is great, but no quite as practical for taking anywhere as it is an old iron-clasp massive family Bible!



When I first heard of the Westminster Reference Bible project, I got the Self-Interpreting Bible. (I've got one whole set (4 vols) and then 2 additional ones. If someone wants the 2 volumes, PM me.) But in order to use it regularly, I'll have to have the 4 vols. re-bound. The most common editions found today, from roughly 100 years ago, also included the work of a few subsequent editors over the course of many years. From what I can tell, the devotional type summary of every chapter are about the only notes of which I am confident are the work of Brown himself. The others have the initials of the editor at the end of the note.


----------



## Pilgrim

sevenzedek said:


> The mail man was very nice to me today! I just received my copy the WRB about ten minutes ago. I think it is the perfect size. Not too big. Not too small. However, it is larger than my Windsor Metrical. The leather cover is smooth but not shiny; a little rigid (they used a thicker board), but it opens nicely and lays open nicely; very flexible spine. The text looks just like the Windsor. It has four ribbons (two red; two black) and sixteen unlined bible paper pages in the back for notes. The smell is great and it looks like a high quality bible. And with over 200,000 cross-references, I am a very happy camper!



I'm looking forward to getting this too. I was almost giddy when I saw the Evangelical Bible price too.  I should hope it's bigger than the Windsor. With 200k x-refs, it would be unreadable otherwise! Is the text larger than the Windsor or the same size? It looks to be basically the same font in the pics. 

On their FB page, Evangelical Bible says they are considering giving the WRB the Schuyler treatment as well.


----------



## Pilgrim

GulfCoast Presbyterian said:


> I asked my parents for a "real" bible of my own for my birthday when I was 12, having used a GNFMM or whatever was around as a "hand me down" until then. My father got me a B.B. Kirkbride bound, sewn, maroon *"corinthian" leather,* red letter KJV Thompson chain. I used that bible daily until Hurricane Katrina got it, so it must have been right at 30 years old, completely limp from use, but with no loose pages, cracks in the boards, etc. I have never seen a better binding on a bible, and still long for all the notes from my childhood and college, when I questioned everything, and tried to jot all the answers in the margins. I would trade several R.L. Allans to have that old Thompson chain again.



So they made Bibles with fine Corinthian leather too? 

[video=youtube;E_HMIN0nGl0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_HMIN0nGl0[/video]


----------



## cwjudyjr

sevenzedek said:


> The mail man was very nice to me today! I just received my copy the WRB about ten minutes ago. I think it is the perfect size. Not too big. Not too small. However, it is larger than my Windsor Metrical. The leather cover is smooth but not shiny; a little rigid (they used a thicker board), but it opens nicely and lays open nicely; very flexible spine. The text looks just like the Windsor. It has four ribbons (two red; two black) and sixteen unlined bible paper pages in the back for notes. The smell is great and it looks like a high quality bible. And with over 200,000 cross-references, I am a very happy camper!



Does the WRB have the Confessions?


----------



## sevenzedek

Pilgrim said:


> sevenzedek said:
> 
> 
> 
> The mail man was very nice to me today! I just received my copy the WRB about ten minutes ago. I think it is the perfect size. Not too big. Not too small. However, it is larger than my Windsor Metrical. The leather cover is smooth but not shiny; a little rigid (they used a thicker board), but it opens nicely and lays open nicely; very flexible spine. The text looks just like the Windsor. It has four ribbons (two red; two black) and sixteen unlined bible paper pages in the back for notes. The smell is great and it looks like a high quality bible. And with over 200,000 cross-references, I am a very happy camper!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm looking forward to getting this too. I was almost giddy when I saw the Evangelical Bible price too.  I should hope it's bigger than the Windsor. With 200k x-refs, it would be unreadable otherwise! Is the text larger than the Windsor or the same size? It looks to be basically the same font in the pics.
> 
> On their FB page, Evangelical Bible says they are considering giving the WRB the Schuyler treatment as well.
Click to expand...


The WRB appears to share the same text size as my Windsor (i.e. not Matthew Winzer, hehe) bible.


----------



## sevenzedek

cwjudyjr said:


> sevenzedek said:
> 
> 
> 
> The mail man was very nice to me today! I just received my copy the WRB about ten minutes ago. I think it is the perfect size. Not too big. Not too small. However, it is larger than my Windsor Metrical. The leather cover is smooth but not shiny; a little rigid (they used a thicker board), but it opens nicely and lays open nicely; very flexible spine. The text looks just like the Windsor. It has four ribbons (two red; two black) and sixteen unlined bible paper pages in the back for notes. The smell is great and it looks like a high quality bible. And with over 200,000 cross-references, I am a very happy camper!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Does the WRB have the Confessions?
Click to expand...


No.


----------



## sevenzedek

Chris,

What the Schulyer treatment?


----------



## Pilgrim

sevenzedek said:


> Chris,
> 
> What the Schulyer treatment?



Evangelical Bible now has their own high quality or premium line of Bibles, Schuyler Bibles. The ESV with the confessions was the first one to be released. The second one is a single column NKJV. I'm not sure what's up next for them (unless it's the Westminster) but you can keep abreast of the latest news by liking EB's FB page. They take polls to gauge what their audience wants, which, If I recall correctly, was a factor in how their ESV came out. It was probably a factor in the choice of the NKJV since there is a paucity of high quality NKJV's today, especially with the demise of Nelson's Signature Series. In the case of the WRB my guess is that it would primarily mean a better cover, art gilt edges and better paper. I don't know what else they would be able to do with it unless it were to be something like adding confessions or some other study helps. At a glance their ESV looks like the Classic Reference Ed. text block and I know that the NKJV is the Nelson Single Column text block that was released a few years ago. I don't have the WRB yet but my guess is that the cover is something like the Windsor. Nice, especially for the price, but not in the same league as R.L. Allan or the better Cambridge covers. 

My Windsor that I got about 2 years ago is already showing signs of coming apart. I hope that's because it was printed and bound in Belarus instead of the Netherlands by Jongbloed. (But I know at least two people who have had the Calfskin TBS Concord split on them after about a year's use. I think those were made in the UK. I held off buying that one because the Westminster is cheaper and appears to be a better value if the cross refs. is mainly what one is after.) My Windsor has the wavy pages that J. Mark Bertrand or someone else noted as well. It never had a "new Bible smell" either and instead smelled similar to newspaper inside and had a similar feel as well, including being somewhat susceptible to smudging. (I see that some new lower end Cambridge editions are being made in Belarus as well, with similar quality paper/print and maybe smell as well.) I haven't heard of any problems with the WRB though, which I understand is being made in the Netherlands. Since the Windsor was so inexpensive I didn't bother to send it back, etc. although in retrospect I probably should have.


----------



## sevenzedek

The WRB is not like the Windsor. The kind of leather used for the WRB is a softer leather that actually has that new bible smell. Although, when you open it up, that new bible smell has that new glue smell that somewhat competes with it it. At any rate, I am still very happy with the WRB.

As far as the cross-references are concerned, I have been very pleased. But only time will tell.


----------



## Pilgrim

Someone probably already mentioned it, but Subject Chain references and Cross References, while not totally unrelated, are really two separate things. The Thompson would be more akin to its contemporary, the Scofield, although the latter has far fewer subject chains and has a much more obvious doctrinal slant. 

The interesting comparison for me would be the Westminster Reference Bible and something like the Treasury of Scripture Knowledge and the more recent Nelson's Cross Reference Guide to the Bible, which was produced by the man (Jerome Smith) who had also worked on the New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge some years ago. I don't know about the original Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, but Nelson's Cross Reference Guide was produced by a premillennialist and likely a dispensationalist. I don't know how that impacts the work as a whole, but he felt the need to insert a note about unfulfilled prophecy in Isaiah. I don't have it handy right now and I can't recall the note in detail. As a historic/covenant premil, I might even have some agreement with such a note in general terms but in my opinion it's not necessary in a work that is supposed to help one compare Scripture with Scripture and isn't supposed to be a commentary. (However it doesn't have many other notes.) But I think _some_ kind of bias probably cannot be helped in at least some cases, however few. Someone of a particular doctrinal perspective might make connections or associations that others perhaps might not. 

As far as any bias, Thompson was a Methodist and John Brown of Haddington of course was Presbyterian. Many over the years have vouched for Thompson's neutrality and lack of bias or agenda. Not having one, I can't say one way or another although I have seen at least one dispensationalist complain about the eschatology in the Thompson. I've wanted to get a Thompson for the past several years, but the red letters they have now are practically pink, which is practically impossible for me to read.


----------



## Pilgrim

Nelson's Cross Reference Guide to the Bible has at least twice the number of references for Luke 24:27 compared to what Patrick posted above. But Nelson's is 1521 pages. Not too easy to cram all that into a Bible! It also uses the KJV. The forward says it's because the KJV is still the standard for close study. My guess is that legal reasons had an impact as well (perhaps a decisive one?) since it includes practically every word of the text. I guess they could have used their own NKJV text but the KJV is still more popular and at this point likely always will be. 

It may be that the Westminster Reference Bible may contain the most extensive set of cross references of any *purely reference Bible* in history. From what I understand, Brown's _Self-Interpreting Bible_ had all of these cross references (or most of them anyway, as Patrick surmised above) but the later editions also include some extensive textual and other notes in the margin (historical and geographical, if memory serves) as well as fairly extensive commentary at the bottom of the page. Brown's original edition had some notes as well, although evidently far fewer than the early 20th C editions. (I don't have one to compare and don't know whether or not the old one is online.) Thus, unlike the WRB, the _Self-Interpreting Bible_ is essentially a Study Bible, one that of course predated the Scofield by many years. The later editions were 4 vols, but part of that was due to the hundreds of photographs of the Holy Land that were included, as well as the relatively large print. (The Bible text is probably 12-14 pt.) It also includes the Apocrypha (without notes) and Brown's Metrical Psalms, among other material.


----------



## Gavin

Pilgrim said:


> As far as any bias, Thompson was a Methodist and John Brown of Haddington of course was Presbyterian.



Traditional Methodists are very much in line with the Covenant and Reformed Theology, with the greatest exception being one the point of Limited Atonement (and they are zealous evangelists)


----------



## sevenzedek

Pilgrim said:


> ... Brown's original edition had some notes as well, although evidently far fewer than the early 20th C editions. (I don't have one to compare and don't know whether or not the old one is online.) Thus, unlike the WRB, the _Self-Interpreting Bible_ is essentially a Study Bible, one that of course predated the Scofield by many years. The later editions were 4 vols, but part of that was due to the hundreds of photographs of the Holy Land that were included, as well as the relatively large print. (The Bible text is probably 12-14 pt.) It also includes the Apocrypha (without notes) and Brown's Metrical Psalms, among other material.



Here is a link to a thread I started awhile ago. You may download Brown's bible there. 

http://www.puritanboard.com/f29/john-brown-haddingtons-self-interpreting-bible-pdf-download-68398/

The "other material" in Brown's bible looks into areas of bible study that modern study bibles do not. It is definitely worth looking at.

I wasn't aware that the apocrypha and Metrical Psalms were in Brown's bible. I might double check later today. Also, the notes do appear to be quite extensive. I would be very happy if someone would reprint this work!

As far as the cross references in the WRB, TBS includes Brown's references and the references in from their Concord Reference Bible.


----------



## Pilgrim

sevenzedek said:


> Pilgrim said:
> 
> 
> 
> ... Brown's original edition had some notes as well, although evidently far fewer than the early 20th C editions. (I don't have one to compare and don't know whether or not the old one is online.) Thus, unlike the WRB, the _Self-Interpreting Bible_ is essentially a Study Bible, one that of course predated the Scofield by many years. The later editions were 4 vols, but part of that was due to the hundreds of photographs of the Holy Land that were included, as well as the relatively large print. (The Bible text is probably 12-14 pt.) It also includes the Apocrypha (without notes) and Brown's Metrical Psalms, among other material.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a link to a thread I started awhile ago. You may download Brown's bible there.
> 
> http://www.puritanboard.com/f29/john-brown-haddingtons-self-interpreting-bible-pdf-download-68398/
> 
> The "other material" in Brown's bible looks into areas of bible study that modern study bibles do not. It is definitely worth looking at.
> 
> I wasn't aware that the apocrypha and Metrical Psalms were in Brown's bible. I might double check later today. Also, the notes do appear to be quite extensive. I would be very happy if someone would reprint this work!
> 
> As far as the cross references in the WRB, TBS includes Brown's references and the references in from their Concord Reference Bible.
Click to expand...


The Apocrypha is at the end of Vol. 3. I'm thinking that that's where the Metrical Psalms are too. 

A reprint would be nice although I'm not sure what the demand would be beyond Reformed Bible geeks. I have to think it would be less than the Geneva. The pictures could be taken out, which would cut down on the size of the work. I have been thinking that someone could publish Brown's reflections on each chapter and have a very nice devotional work. (With regard to devotional quality Reformed KJV's, Reformation Heritage is working on one that is slated for 2014.) 

Do note that this isn't a rare book. Copies are readily available for purchase online. At any given time there are several copies available on ebay. (I can't recall looking to see what might be listed on sites like Abebooks.) But I think one might be hard pressed to find a copy of the Self-interpreting Bible that is ready for regular use unless it has already been rebound. I did see one set a few months ago that looked good at a very reasonable price ($30 incl. shipping) but I didn't bid in time. The first 2 vols. I got a few years ago were very cheap (something like $2.50 apiece, plus shipping, which was probably over $10) and I got them just to check it out even though I knew that the back cover was coming off both of them. I had thought I could get the other 2 vols. and have them rebound, but finding the right two volumes was harder than finding a new set. The paper in these is in good shape, especially for books that are around 100 years old. 

The reason I say one would be hard pressed to find one that is immediately ready for regular use is that some if not all of them seem to have had a defect where the cover on the spine eventually came off (i.e. the part that has the title written on it.) Both sets I have are like that. (You can see examples here and here although the ebay links will be no good in a few days.) The full set that I have has a tight binding, but I can't use it without parts of it flaking off everywhere. Someone had put library tape on it but it eventually came off. These are the more recent 4 Vol. sets. I think one set of mine is 1916 and the other one dates from the 20's. (But it might be 1905. I've seen all of those dates at different times on ebay.) I don't think it was republished after the 1920's but the 4 Vol. set was reprinted many times over the course of maybe 25-30 years. The latest I've seen is 1924 or 1925. You can see also that the older 1 vol copies from earlier in the 19th Century are usually listed at a price that many of us probably would hesitate to pay--$250-$600 range with $400+ probably being most common. Those have the work of Henry Cooke included. (By and large it appears to be sound and helpful material, as is the case with Josiah Porter's material added to the later editions. But many will find the notes on creation to be objectionable if nothing else.) Finding one that only has Brown's work alone might be very difficult. 

I have seen that copy at Google Books that you've linked. It's good to get an idea about what kind of information is included, but to me due to the size of the work and the lack of a hyperlinked Table of Contents, it's practically unusable in that format unless one has a lot of time to spare. But looking at it now, it seems that it may be a little more user friendly in Google Play. But as far as I can see you can't even search by page number, which you can do in the regular Google Books interface. There is an original Thompson's Chain Reference (1908?) in Google Books too, as well as a 1909 Scofield.

Edit: SWRB did do a photocopy reprint, but it seems to me that going the ebay and rebind route would be better. An outfit called Nabu Press recently issued a reprint that appears to be a paperback.


----------



## Pilgrim

Gavin said:


> Pilgrim said:
> 
> 
> 
> As far as any bias, Thompson was a Methodist and John Brown of Haddington of course was Presbyterian.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Traditional Methodists are very much in line with the Covenant and Reformed Theology, with the greatest exception being one the point of Limited Atonement (and they are zealous evangelists)
Click to expand...


The question of apostasy/conditional security is a big difference. Many will cite it as being THE major difference between themselves and the usual Baptist types and will refer to anyone who believes in either Perseverance of the Saints or eternal security as being a Calvinist. That's the case even if they're essentially in agreement on the other 4 points. I've seen some refer to Billy Graham as a Calvinist for that reason. Prevenient Grace is another big difference, although it seems to me that that's a more coherent and orthodox position than the Semi-Pelagianish views that many evangelicals believe when it comes to things like Original Sin, with some denying it outright. (This essentially Semi-Pelagian view includes many Wesleyan/Arminians, Methodists and Pentecostals as well, regardless of what their doctrinal statement says.) In my experience, many Methodists will have little understanding of Covenant Theology either, although some of the more well read clergy will give that as one justification for paedobaptism. But many believe in some form of baptismal regeneration as well. Their liturgy outright states that it imparts the new birth. 

I don't know if any of that comes through in the Thompson i.e. Arminianism, apostasy, entire sanctification (if Thompson even believed that--it seems that many in his day in the Methodist denomination (as opposed to Wesleyans) did not.) I suspect that those views probably do not come through in his work, whereas the failure to "rightly divide" between Israel and the Church to the satisfaction of the traditional dispensationalist will be much more obvious. 

I won't belabor the point, but For what it's worth Methodists in North America and very likely the UK are not known for zealous evangelism. A great many of them don't think there's really anything to be saved from. That's not to say that there are no evangelicals among them however.


----------



## cwjudyjr

Gavin said:


> Pilgrim said:
> 
> 
> 
> As far as any bias, Thompson was a Methodist and John Brown of Haddington of course was Presbyterian.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Traditional Methodists are very much in line with the Covenant and Reformed Theology, with the greatest exception being one the point of Limited Atonement (and they are zealous evangelists)
Click to expand...


Perhaps my experience with Methodistism isn't the norm, but in the Baltimore/Washington Annual Conference I found the Methodist Church to be Arminian. Your perspective that they are in line with Covenant/Reformed postions, with the one exception intrigues me. 

Can you point me to where I can look into this?

Thanks!


----------



## Pilgrim

cwjudyjr said:


> Gavin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pilgrim said:
> 
> 
> 
> As far as any bias, Thompson was a Methodist and John Brown of Haddington of course was Presbyterian.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Traditional Methodists are very much in line with the Covenant and Reformed Theology, with the greatest exception being one the point of Limited Atonement (and they are zealous evangelists)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Perhaps my experience with Methodistism isn't the norm, but in the Baltimore/Washington Annual Conference I found the Methodist Church to be Arminian. Your perspective that they are in line with Covenant/Reformed postions, with the one exception intrigues me.
> 
> Can you point me to where I can look into this?
> 
> Thanks!
Click to expand...


I can only guess that he was thinking of my reference to a dispensationalist complaining about the eschatology of the Thompson i.e. that it didn't distinguish Israel and the Church. As I noted previously, there are certainly more differences than that (e.g. conditional security, conditional election, resistible grace) unless he is referring to some group of Methodists that are not traditional Arminians. 

Your experience is certainly the norm. In many cases they are simply outright liberal and traditional Arminianism would be a vast improvement. If it weren't for the votes of the conservative Africans at the General Conference on issues like homosexuality, the United Methodist Church would be as bad or worse than the PCUSA. There are certainly a good many evangelicals, but they are surely in the minority in North America. Good News and the Institute for Religion and Democracy are two evangelical groups. 

Perhaps there is a redoubt of conservative Methodists in Australia as there is with the Sydney Anglicans? I know of the Welsh Calvinistic Methodists but am not familiar with Methodist groups Down Under.


----------



## cwjudyjr

[/QUOTE]

I can only guess that he was thinking of my reference to a dispensationalist complaining about the eschatology of the Thompson i.e. that it didn't distinguish Israel and the Church. As I noted previously, there are certainly more differences than that (e.g. conditional security, conditional election, resistible grace) unless he is referring to some group of Methodists that are not traditional Arminians. 

Your experience is certainly the norm. In many cases they are simply outright liberal and traditional Arminianism would be a vast improvement. If it weren't for the votes of the conservative Africans at the General Conference on issues like homosexuality, the United Methodist Church would be as bad or worse than the PCUSA. There are certainly a good many evangelicals, but they are surely in the minority in North America. Good News and the Institute for Religion and Democracy are two evangelical groups. 

Perhaps there is a redoubt of conservative Methodists in Australia as there is with the Sydney Anglicans? I know of the Welsh Calvinistic Methodists but am not familiar with Methodist groups Down Under.[/QUOTE]

I was a member of the Methodist Church in the 1980's and early 1990's and became disillusioned when it became evident the slide to liberalism wasn't only social but also theologically. This was in the early years after my conversion so it took me awhile to know there was something non-Biblical going on and what that was.

As I recall, in the early 90's there was a group within the Methodist Church from the south, Alabama I think, called The Confessing Movement that was trying to call the denomination back to biblical standing. Not long after I looked at the PUSA and found it wanting, more than the Methodist Church. Ended in the PCA and have been very pleased with the biblical foundation in it.


----------



## Gavin

.
I must humbly concur with Conrad and Chris and admit I wrote this too hastily. As I hit the enter button I thought uh oh Can of worms.
I did have Whitfield and one or two early Methodist in mind. Admittedly the last 150 yrs or so it has become a free for all.
The Methodists largely merged into the Uniting Church (along with many Presbyterian churches and Congregational) here in Aus and doctrinally speaking have taken the broad road. I was not referring to such as these.

Some time ago, I was fortunate enough to find a copy of Suttcliffs commentary. Suttcliff was a Wesleyen Methodist but from the notes I have read, with some exception s , they seemed pretty orthodox to me, and if those notes were compared with the modern day free will Methodist, (who along with many free will Baptist congregations are really Pentecostals in sheep's clothing ) they would indeed be considered closer to us than to them. Spurgeons comment on his notes can easily be found.

Maybe Thompson had drifted away from these Methodist pioneers, I don't know, but he could have chosen to go with dispenationalism yet didn't
. 
I think this topic would be better discussed in a different thread, but I did notice that one of the contributors for Prof Beekes upcoming Study Bible is a Methodist.


----------



## cwjudyjr

Gavin said:


> .
> I must humbly concur with Conrad and Chris and admit I wrote this too hastily. As I hit the enter button I thought uh oh Can of worms.
> I did have Whitfield and one or two early Methodist in mind. Admittedly the last 150 yrs or so it has become a free for all.
> The Methodists largely merged into the Uniting Church (along with many Presbyterian churches and Congregational) here in Aus and doctrinally speaking have taken the broad road. I was not referring to such as these.
> 
> Some time ago, I was fortunate enough to find a copy of Suttcliffs commentary. Suttcliff was a Wesleyen Methodist but from the notes I have read, with some exception s , they seemed pretty orthodox to me, and if those notes were compared with the modern day free will Methodist, (who along with many free will Baptist congregations are really Pentecostals in sheep's clothing ) they would indeed be considered closer to us than to them. Spurgeons comment on his notes can easily be found.
> 
> Maybe Thompson had drifted away from these Methodist pioneers, I don't know, but he could have chosen to go with dispenationalism yet didn't
> .
> I think this topic would be better discussed in a different thread, but I did notice that one of the contributors for Prof Beekes upcoming Study Bible is a Methodist.



Ah, that makes sense. I know many in the Methodist Church who are strong believers and at its root in history has a strong evangelical past. It's unfortunately today's leadership that has become less dependent on scripture.

Thanks for clarifying.

Conrad


----------



## reformedminister

Just received my WRB yesterday. A fine Bible in comparison to Allen. It will take some time to offer a good summary of my opinion but I will say I do like the fact that the modern definitions of archaic words in the margins is quite helpful as opposed to turning to the back of the Bible.


----------



## py3ak

Gavin said:


> I think this topic would be better discussed in a different thread, but I did notice that one of the contributors for Prof Beekes upcoming Study Bible is a Methodist.



Dr. McKnight is a Methodist much more in the stamp of Whitefield. But the Evangelical Methodist denomination is quite small, and certainly not representative of contemporary Methodism.


----------



## Claudiu

So what's the early consensus? For those who were able to follow some of the cross-references, how are they in comparison to the Thompson? I'm looking to get a cross-reference bible, and debating between the Westminster and Thompson.


----------



## reformedminister

I still think the TCR has more references overall and more Bible helps than the WRB, but I must say that I am really enjoying the WRB.


----------



## Ask Mr. Religion

I think the WRB has more cross-references in total than the TCR. The TCR folks have 100,000 indexes aside the verses in the bible. These indexes are topical items comprising 4451 categories (so there is a great deal of repetition). These 4451 categories index into 8,000 topics. At the back of the TCR is where these topics have verses listed, the boldface verses among them which are given in full text which increases the page count of the TCR's backmatter. I have not counted the number of actual verses that are cross-referenced, but there would need to be 200,000/4451 = 44 verses per each category index. I just do not see that many verses, but I could be wrong.

EDIT: In case I am giving the wrong impression I just want to say that I enjoy owning both Bible versions. The TCR has served me well over the years and it is a fine Bible for folks that want something less than a full-blown study Bible with notes offering men's interpretations of the verses.

AMR


----------



## sevenzedek

Claudiu said:


> So what's the early consensus? For those who were able to follow some of the cross-references, how are they in comparison to the Thompson? I'm looking to get a cross-reference bible, and debating between the Westminster and Thompson.



If you want to an easy to follow chain of references, the TCR has it. The WRB, on the other hand, does not have the chain system. However, there are several things I enjoy about the WRB in comparison to the TCR.

* All black text rather than the pink words of Christ.
* The smooth leather feel that looks regal but modest.
* The paper seems to be a better quality. The paper has a very light creamy color that has a high quality look to me.
* Marginal notes for archaic words and translator's notes.
* Four ribbon markers if you decide that is what you want.
* Simplicity. There is an enjoyable simplicity about the WRB. It a bible. And when I pick it up it looks and feels like it wants to be read copiously from cover to cover. The TCR has too much material in the back and I find the subject headings in the margin to be a distraction. Others would see this as more of an advantage.

If one wanted the best of both worlds, one could purchase a WRB and purchase the TCR reference material apart from the bible. I have seen the TCR material in a book all on it's own. Of course, the e-Sword bible for the iPod has this for free (without the Kirkbride extended material).


----------



## Gavin

I think there is a distinction to be made, Thomson s is more of a Topical Reference whilst the Westminster is more a cross reference.


----------



## Beau Michel

I cut my spiritual teeth on the Thompson Chain Reference Bible.I have used in to much profit in the past.It is an excellent Study Bible.


----------



## Beau Michel

Does anyone know if the Thompson Chain is available in the ESV?


----------



## Pilgrim

sevenzedek said:


> All black text rather than the pink words of Christ.



This is probably the chief reason why I have never purchased a Thompson. I don't like red letters to start with and find them hard to read now beyond a few verses. (It's not as bad if it's a duller or darker red printed that is printed on relatively thick paper, as with older Nelson Bibles.) The ink in the current Thompsons are beyond red and are essentially pink, as you note. Considering the cost and not being sure I'd use it that much, I've never pulled the trigger. Cambridge has also decided that everyone wants red letters and doesn't offer an alternative in most of their versions. But I think the Clarion is "black letter," a welcome change. The same goes for Oxford, although I don't know if they publish anything now except for Scofields and liberal versions. 

I've got what I call "Study Bible Fatigue" at this point anyway having just recently purchased two more massive tomes. I'll probably get the WRB (and maybe sooner rather than later lest it become temporarily unavailable) but don't see getting a Thompson any time soon unless it's maybe a used copy in good condition at a good price.


----------

