Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 7:22 pm
That's not a problem, I have them in zefania format also.
Hope the converter is fixed soon!
MiKEY
Hope the converter is fixed soon!
MiKEY
Will do my best!DrMiKEY wrote:That's not a problem, I have them in zefania format also.
Hope the converter is fixed soon!
MiKEY
Can't agree with you more:MsLile wrote: ... There are so many devirsions going around and the attack upon GOD's Word is unbelievable at times, but it is going on, sometimes "shock and awe" ( mostly "shock" ) ...
For those interested, I have posted Catholic Deuterocanonical Books from Douay Rheims and Vulgate to Aarons share site in the Shared folder:Rev 22:18,19 wrote:If any man shall add to these things, God shall add unto him the plagues written in this book. And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from these things that are written in this book.
Hello Gratias,Gratias wrote:I have been waiting for 2 years just to be able to read the deutero-canonical scriptures in the word, so I will have to stick to e-sword. The word so far ignores the Bible as the largest group of Christians read it, very sorry to say. Nice software for protestants.
Costas, keep up the great work!csterg wrote:Hello Gratias,Gratias wrote:I have been waiting for 2 years just to be able to read the deutero-canonical scriptures in the word, so I will have to stick to e-sword. The word so far ignores the Bible as the largest group of Christians read it, very sorry to say. Nice software for protestants.
I believe that the issue for deutero-canonical scriptures has been addressed in detail in other threads. I do not ignore the issue at all, as i do not ignore anyone who is asking for a feature.
What i don't understand is why you expected that they would be included now?
I never said anything like that, on the contrary i made clear my position on this issue enough times.
I did say that they will be included as general books though, and this will be done. If this is what you are referring to, then the answer is that it's not my priority for now: anyone is very welcome to undertake this, since i have purposefully provided all the tools and information to do this.
Please, don't forget that the last 2 years that you were waiting, i have been working hard with absolutely no compensation on TW. Don't you think it's a bit hard to express yourself like that?
Also, I am not trying to compete with anyone nor make TW a software to make everyone happy. I think this is obvious or else it would have been on the same track as many other freeware apps that aim in 'getting popular fast'.
I am really sad for this comment,
Costas
Costas, may I make a comment here, please?csterg wrote:Hello MiKEY,DrMiKEY wrote:I don't know, just a thought...
Presently the converter recognizes these books, for example in the Zefania DRB, as apocryphal.
Would it be dificult to make an option in the converter to include these.
In the bible view, their is a list of Books, either OT or NT.
If a bible version doesnt contain either, these are not displayed, like with the Septuagint
Would it be posible to enable this also for these books that are parts of the bible versions?
Like with the mentioned Septuagint:
Tobit, Judith, Wisdom of Solomon, Wisdom of Jesus Sirach, Baruch, Epistle of Jeremy (which later became chapter 6 of Baruch in the Vulgate), additions to Daniel (The Prayer of Azarias, the Song of the Three Children, Sosanna and Bel and the Dragon), additions to Esther, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, 3 Maccabees, 4 Maccabees, 1 Esdras, Odes, including the Prayer of Manasses, and Psalm 151
...are all parts of the original Septuagint, so shouldn't they be included so that the Septuagint (as well as the Vulgate, DRB, ...) are in their "original" form, at least according to the originals they were transcribed from. I have found the the Zefania contain these books.
I am not saying that all of these books are deuterocanonical by all, but it would be nteresting to see also what others read.
I feel that some apocrypha, for example Enoch, could be included in the book view, even though they are considered apocrypheal by all christans except Ethiopian Orthodox.
So in sort I am wondering, is it problematic to make it part of the Bible view? Programming? Referencing to other versions that don't contain these books? I am willing to donate when such possabilities are capable.
PS: love this program how easy it is to use and all the functions.
MiKEY
the program was designed from the beginning to conform to the Masoretic OT. Technically, this means that it is really difficult to support the apocrypha. The LXX does not contain the apocrypha and there have been some verse adjustments (where the original verse number is included in parenthesis) to make it usable with the program.
But this was not a random decision, the reason was that i don't believe that the apocrypha or deuterocanonical are part of the Bible. I know there are differing opinions out there (for which i don't want to engage in a discussion in this forum), but i had to make a choice according to what I believe is God's Word.
I think that these books have historical value and they should be included as reference books. The 'General book' functionallity serves this purpose very well in 2 perspectives:
1. It can support random hierachical books (so no problem with any versification)
2. It implicitly makes clear that these are reference books, not books of the Bible (i do argue from my point of view).
"The Word" is not just a tool to accommodate any 'holy book'. I could probably make it easy enough to put the Koran in the Bible view and have an even broader user base, but this is not my purpose. "The Word" is a program to study the Bible, primarily. This is why it's internal structure is designed in a way to do exactly this and nothing more.
I believe that the design of the program is according to the purpose of the whole effort, e.g. to bring a quality program for free to study the Word of God; it's not to make money or be 'stretched' to included things outside it's original purpose. I wouldn't know what i would have to answer to God otherwise.
For a last note: i know that there are many dear brothers that disagree with this position, and I am sure that we will all know better when we meet in heaven.
In Christ,
Costas
Okay. Let's just say I'm right and your wrong and leave it that then, okay? <lol>csterg wrote:Hi Dave,
you have made good points and I appreciate them, really.
The issue with apocrypha is not that simple to explain, although it is clear in my mind. If i was creating a software just to make money, i would have thought differently. But I didn't invest all these years in TW for money!
I feel I have a responsibility towards God about it. I hear your arguments, and to be honest i have thought EXACTLY the same things when i decided what to do. I decided to go with what i read and understand in God's word and with my conscience.
Some quick answers to the points you say:
1. I don't have any "KJV with apocrypha" module. I will have a KJV Bible, and i will have a "KJV-apocrypha book comanion". I am sure you get the difference here.
2. Any text split in 31102 lines can be displayed in the Bible view, be that the Koran or the 'best recipes of Greece'. This means nothing. The reason that the program is setup like this, does not mean it censors something. It is just a technical division that is based on the fact of what I believe to be God's word.
3. Did you know that Excel (until version 2003) only supported 65535 rows? Do you know that this means you cannot put in the Excel the whole Bible where each word takes 1 line? Does this mean that MS censors the Bible? Of course not ... (you get the idea)
4. You well said that you want the apocrypha as an add-on to read (for historical reasons or whatever). At the same time, we all know that we use the text of the Bible to count words, find references, etc. If the Apocrypha were part of the Bible, wouldn't that confuse so many people who try to find how the word 'God' is used? Because the results would include texts that are not part of it! Do you see why the Bible view should only contain the Bible?
Please, let NOT this expand to any type of theological discussion. I am only explaining here the technical decisions i took concerning TW, which (of course) are based on my theological 'bias', as anybody's decisions are.
Costas
I don't remember who sent me the last PM I received, but it was rude, so I deleted it.Skip_a_roo wrote:Dave,
I sent you a pm. Did you get it? If so, please respond.
Thanks!
Here is my comment on the whole thing. Remember, this opinion and $5 will get you a real nice cup of coffee at Starbucks, of course, almost everything is $5 there!
If The Word doesn't offer a module, or a Bible or whatever, because the author decides not to, why do we try to change them to honor our request when we pay nothing for the product? That seems just absurd to me. I understand if I buy a car and it is supposed to have a certain function and doesn't that I have a case for my feelings. If someone was to give me the car, fuel it so I could get to work, and pay my insurance for me, would I complain that the color was wrong? Only if I was an ungrateful ignoramus.
Costas, thanks for the car, the fuel and the insurance, I'm going to use it no matter what color it is! If I find I don't like something about it, I'll choose to use a different car that I may have to pay for all of those things myself!
p.s. esword has a module like you describe, it's free too! I would suggest you use it, Dave.