bounced message, please use subscribed email to post. I have forwarded
this one.
Thanks,
-Troy.
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Jul 11 00:13:56 2001
Received: from leon.brooks (bengal-lnk.qiservices.com.au [202.181.72.54])
by www.crosswire.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA24501
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 11 Jul 2001 00:13:54 -0700
Received: from brooks.fdns.net (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by leon.brooks (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06CB0446
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 11 Jul 2001 15:14:38 +0800 (WST)
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2001 15:14:38 +0800
From: Leon Brooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Organization: Would be nice
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.2) Gecko/20010702
X-Accept-Language: en-us
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [sword-devel] apocrypha
References: <000001c106c4$666cd650$b53b5140@didymus>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Chris Little wrote:
>>> 4) What about the additions to Esther & Daniel? Should they be included
>>> in the apocrypha as alternates to the canonical books or should their
>>> additions be added as additional books (AddEsther, Bel & the Dragon,
>>> Susanna, Pr. Azariah, and Pr. Manasses)?
>> We should definitely not include them into the CANONICAL books. There
>> must be a distinction. And users must be able to turn off apocrypha
>> completely, as many won't accept them.
> The KJV is going to present an interesting issue. :) On the one hand,
> I feel we should only distribute the KJV with the Apocrypha included
> since that is how it was presented by its authors. On the other hand,
> I don't really feel like answering the complaints we will get for
> doing this. (At least with the KJV there is no Daniel chapter 13,
> only a Susanna chapter 1, and likewise the other additions to Daniel &
> Esther are segregated from their canonical cousins.)
It's a bit more complex than that. When the KJV was first released it
had no Apocrypha (well, would *you* want to assert that hyenas change
their sex biannually?), and when a translation of the Apocrypha was
released later, it was always numbered and bound collectively and
separately (usually between OT and NT).
However, this is the age of somputers. Ship it either configured to be
separate-looking (separate class for searches and numbering, and not
searched by default) or offer it as an optional extra, which (if
installed) you should be able to refer to both ways.
Cheers
