<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version='2.0' xmlns:dc='http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/' xmlns:atom='http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom'><channel>
<atom:link href='http://www.accordancebible.com/common/rss2/?&amp;channel=blog_comments&amp;article_id=3416965' rel='self' type='application/rss+xml' />
<title>Accordance Bible Software Blog Comments</title>
<link>http://www.accordancebible.com/common/rss2/?&amp;channel=blog_comments&amp;article_id=3416965</link>
<description>Syndicated BLOG Comments from Accordance Bible Software.</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2013 Accordance Bible Software</copyright>
<lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 May 2013 15:04:06 -0400</lastBuildDate>
<webMaster>support@accordancebible.com (Accordance Bible Software)</webMaster><item><title>Nick Matthews</title><link>https://www.accordancebible.com/3416965</link><description><![CDATA[<p>That's one of the reasons why I selected the JPS as one of my bibles. There are many translations that maintain at some level, part of the heritage of the KJV. The criticial source texts may be updated, and the language may be refreshed, but texts such as the ESV and NRSV derive throught the RSV, ASV, RV through to the KJV.</p>
<p>While the JPS only contains a translation of the OT, I felt that it provided a much different interpretation of the text. It's interesting in many ways precisely because it does not follow the NT tradition, and takes a much different ideological stance.&nbsp;</p>
<p>I've also become a fan of comparing any translation against the NET, especially when I have the extensive NET notes pane showing, as it often illuminates the translation decisions.&nbsp;</p>]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 15 Feb 2011 15:06:47 -0500</pubDate><guid>https://www.accordancebible.com/3416965</guid><dc:creator>Nick Matthews</dc:creator></item></channel></rss>