[sword-devel] Missing books - faithful translations?
aajdubuc at webhart.net
Wed Apr 28 08:16:15 MST 2004
Thanks for the re-assurance -- I had hoped there wasn't a 'bias' in their
omission. Hover, I must admit my frustration at not been able to complete my
I would be very interested in having access to these books in Spanish (since I
already have their equivalent hard-text). Whether they are called
'Apocryphal' or whatever, is of little bearing -- access to them would be the
paramount issue. The "display of the Apocrypha, how do you feel about the
display of the books in the commentary window?" would be fine!
I would be more than willing to learn how to add them as an 'Additional
Module' for the Douay-Rheims (both DRA & DRC). I'm in the process of hunting
down a 'Catholic' Spanish bible (hard copy). [In the meantime, until I find a
copy, I've used http://www.freetranslation.com for a rough approximation of
Thanks for replying, Kyle.
Regards & blessings!
On Wednesday 28 April 2004 10:42 am, you wrote:
> First, thanks for the encouragement!
> In answer to your main question, no, there hasn't been any "liberal
> editing" or theological bias against the texts in question. It is a design
> issue. The original design of the sword library was hard-coded, in a sense,
> to the modern KJV versification scheme, which did not include the
> However, there are plans to move to a more flexible system, that could
> support different versification schemes (everything from including the
> Apocrypha to translations like The Message). I also believe, but don't hold
> me to it, that there was discussion to release the books in a general book
> format, that would show up in the commentary window. However, I believe the
> concern there was showing the books outside of the bible window would again
> imply there was something wrong with those specific books.
> In response to the display of the Apocrypha, how do you feel about the
> display of the books in the commentary window? While it may not be as
> canonized, it would mean they are available to use. I don't remember
> reading about any specific decision, though if there is one, someone else
> will also respond, or at least appreciate some feedback.
> I hope this answered your questions and allayed any concerns you had about
> The Sword Project. Best wishes on your translation of Douay=Rheims to
> Spanish. Perhaps, someday it may be included in Sword (Note: decision not
> up to me, I do not speak for group in this case)
> In Christ,
> On Wed, Apr 28, 2004 at 07:54:25AM -0400, Andre Dubuc wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I'm new to this list, and am very pleased with the quality of the Sword
> > Project. My present project is the translation of an existing document
> > from English (Douay-Rheims 1914 version) to Spanish.
> > Originally, I d/l the Spanish Reina-Valera edition, and everything was
> > fine until I needed the books of Judith and Ecclesiasticus (Sirach) --
> > both of which are in my hard-copy edition of the Douay-Rheims.
> > None of the downloads: DRA, DRC, nor the SRV, have these books. I can
> > understand that in some non-Catholic circles, these books are considered
> > apocryphal. However, since they were included in the published original
> > versions, I am confused why they have been edited in these downloads.
> > Perhaps they should be re-named so as not to give the impression that
> > they are faithful to their name and their heritage.
> > My question is: would other d/l's of Bibles be canonical to their
> > tradition: i.e., 'Catholic' versions remain entire? Or should I assume
> > some liberal editing has taken place across the Sword Project?
> > Thank you for the outstanding software -- it's the best Bible sotware
> > I've used. I certainly hope someone can point me to a 'Catholic' version
> > of the Spanish bible that would include the required books.
> > Tia,
> > Andre
More information about the sword-devel