Skip to main content

Bible References and Mobile Devices

The other day, I happened to visit one of my sites that uses numerous Scripture references with my cell phone. (Some of the articles here can be chock full o' references.) People with mobile devices will see something like Luke 6:22 as plain text, and may be asking, "What does expect us to do, go and look up all of those references?" No, not really.

It takes a passel of time for me to give links to many references in, say, Bible Gateway or something. And that's after looking things up myself in the first place. (This article I did for Genesis Week has a passel of Bible verses embedded in the text, and putting those in took almost as long as writing the article itself.) I have something installed called Reftagger that works with computers that use mouse pointers — just hover over the link, and the verse pops up, as well as a link to read more if it's a long passage. Unfortunately, mobile devices are left out of it. They have to be — no pointers to hover with.


A short explanation of what's going on with Bible references, and why people with mobile devices are unlikely to see what I tried to make available to them.
Reconstructed with a screenshot and clip art of a pointing hand.
So, it looks like my suggestion is that if someone wants to check out my Scriptural support and see if I'm using proper references, come back to the article when you're on a computer that has mouse stuff happening. Sorry for the inconvenience, but I thought I should at least explain what's happening.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Andy Stanley, Frank Turek, and Bad Theology

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Andy Stanley has been disappointing some people, and causing quite a few to be alarmed by his opposition to the authority of Scripture. (Note: Do not be confused.  Charles  Stanley is his father, senior pastor of First Baptist Church in Atlanta, Georgia, and heard on In Touch Ministries . I've found most of his teachings to be doctrinally sound, and he upholds the inerrancy and authority of the Bible.) Unfortunately, megachurch director Andy Stanley has been saying things that are destructive to the truth, including recommending the false teaching of theistic evolution. Gray wolf image credit: US National Park Service While shooting from the hip can be a good thing, someone claiming the title of pastor should reign himself in . Stanley was disrespectful of small churches, then apologized later . In another instance, " What  did he just say?", Stanley may have used a very bad word in a sermon. When the segment was legally posted on YouTube

Disappointment with Young Earth Creation

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  First, a note for anyone who is curious. The usual format: introduction with some of my thoughts plus links for useful information, excerpts of featured articles, then links to keep reading. I put my name on it and call it an article when I have more to say. This one will be different. I will reference older articles, then add some thoughts that I hope will prove helpful. There is more following the excerpt and link. So, does anyone remember Ken Keathley? Medal image manufactured at Custom Medal Maker Several years ago, Ken Keathley renounced young earth creationism to accept an old earth view. Apparently, he was disappointed by people in the young earth community. No kidding? Taking Friendly Fire This is where I'm going to open up and get personal with both of my readers. Ken Keathley is not the only one who has been disappointed, and in addition, I've been deeply hurt by the young earth community. Things I have posted on social(ist) media have been &qu

Evaluating Truth Claims in Genesis

Some people try to dismiss Genesis as myth containing spiritual truth using elements from the pagan neighbors of the Hebrews. Others say it is misunderstood, as if the Creator of the universe was unable to communicate with us. With closer inspection, we see that Genesis is a historical narrative. Credit: RGBStock /  Billy Frank Alexander The idea that the early chapters of Genesis are mythological should not be accepted by professing Christians, as there are serious problems that result. (One of these is that Jesus, Peter, Paul, and others referred to these chapters as literal history, so by denying this, one is calling them liars!) Also, there are repercussions with the gospel message. Read some classical mythology, then come back to Genesis and see the difference. Myths are vague and have a different flow, but the Bible is precise. Indeed, even the sequence of creation days is specific — a day itself is defined. Interestingly, many translations have in Genesis 1:5 less accurate by us