32 replies to this topic

[Lester P. Bagley]

Would you be satisfied with turning them off?

As has been pointed out be several others, these "headings" are highly inconsistent even for a single translation. My personal opinion is that they have no place in textual study. Perhaps we could have a module with all the headings ever devised?

Seriously, I would object to these being inserted into the text. They belong in notes and commentary, not in the text.

[Jonathan C. Borland]

As has been pointed out be several others, these "headings" are highly inconsistent even for a single translation. My personal opinion is that they have no place in textual study. Perhaps we could have a module with all the headings ever devised?

Seriously, I would object to these being inserted into the text. They belong in notes and commentary, not in the text.

If they could be turned off as the actual poll indicates, what's your beef, other than to impose your preference on others?

To me it is a little amusing that someone would take a sharpie and blot out all the section headings in his Bible instead of just ignoring them. But when he fights for blotting them out of my Bible via the Acc modules then his quirk has -- just a little :-) --overstepped its bounds.

[JonathanHuber]

My "beef", as you say, is that the folks at Accordance can't work on everything, so they use this forum as a way to gauge demand for features and modules and assign priority to new projects. This poll was made and I answered it. Do I want them to invest time in developing a feature I'll rarely use? No. If you want the feature, then vote yes. That's simple. Anyway, if they were going to spend the effort making some sets of heading available, I would honestly rather have them in the notes files.

[Lester P. Bagley]

If they could be turned off as the actual poll indicates, what's your beef, other than to impose your preference on others?

To me it is a little amusing that someone would take a sharpie and blot out all the section headings in his Bible instead of just ignoring them. But when he fights for blotting them out of my Bible via the Acc modules then his quirk has -- just a little :-) --overstepped its bounds.

Please understand I have no "beef" other than a concern for what the text actually says. Another way to put it, is what did the author, the writer actually say.

I'm coming from the position of a long time teacher. Since these headings are NOT written by the author they don't belong in the text. As others have pointed out, these are often commentary reflecting a theological point of view for a particular editor for a particular edition. Likewise, they are not consistent within a given translation.

Who's section headings should Accordance actually use? LIberal? Conservative? Catholic? Protestant? Should everyone be subjected to the vote for one point of view?

The reality is, this is an issue everyone struggles with in using (and in producing) any translation. At least one example has been cited in this topic's discussion and many other examples exist. If you would study the text, it's best to see it with as few distractions as possible. That's why it's always a poor method of study to read a commentary first.

I have no objection to you, me or anyone else adding anything to our notes. But when you fight for inserting anyone's commentary INTO the text (yes, that would include mine as well!), it just doesn't belong there.

Obviously we differ on the opinion for this poll. That's fine. I have simply expressed my opinion and why.

[Jonathan C. Borland]

Who's section headings should Accordance actually use? LIberal? Conservative? Catholic? Protestant? Should everyone be subjected to the vote for one point of view?

Uh, the headings that come with the actual hard copy of the versions purchased, you know, like "The Beatitudes," Matt. 5:1-12.

I understand the objection that this would take valuable programming time away from other things, and this can be leveled against any suggestion of improvement anywhere. In fact, it's an objection to adding the page numbers to the TDNT volumes module I purchased, without which the module is, at least to me, basically useless for checking citations in scholarly works.

Edited by Jonathan C. Borland, 10 September 2012 - 03:53 AM.

[T. Conrad]

If they could be turned off as the actual poll indicates, what's your beef, other than to impose your preference on others?

To me it is a little amusing that someone would take a sharpie and blot out all the section headings in his Bible instead of just ignoring them. But when he fights for blotting them out of my Bible via the Acc modules then his quirk has -- just a little :-) --overstepped its bounds.

I was the one who used the sharpie, not Lester. For a sermon message. Just a bit of visual hyperbole...

Also, they were not originally included in the modules, so no one is 'blotting' them out here. :-)

Edited by T. Conrad, 10 September 2012 - 09:03 AM.

[Chuck Schneider]

I think it would be interesting to have them, but I wouldn't want that to get in the way of (or delay) other incoming features.

[Jonathan C. Borland]

Well, in the rare case when all the Accordance programmers are sitting around the office twiddling their thumbs and wondering what to do, may I suggest the addition of the headings in the text modules?

[Randy Cue]

I have no real strong leaning either way on this topic. If you want to get really a purist text, you should also remove chapter and verse from the text. The reason those were added was to aid in finding particular locations in Scripture. Pericope headings can serve the same function. I understand the argument that pericope headings differ from version to version and also within different editions of the same version, but a similar statement came be made about chapter and verse designations. I don't see a reason not to include pericope headings as an option.

Soli Deo Gloria,
Randy

[Mark Nigro]

I have brought this up in the past as I do think headings offer a quick, birds-eye view of the general context. I sometimes use them when I need to breakdown and teach one to three chapters of text at once.

While the question of putting them into the biblical text or keeping them in the notes files is being discussed and voted on, I'd like to mention that the only bible I have actually found to have true section titles in my Accordance 'notes' files is the HCSB. I have checked my NASB, ESV, NJKV, NIV etc. All I can identify in the 'notes' files for these versions are cross references and translation notes. I have heard that the section headings are contained in the notes files for each respective bible, but I cannot seem to find them, what I am missing?

[D. Voth]

I think you're right that about others not having the headings, the original NIV doesn't have them, but the NIV 2011 version does includes them in the notes file along with the cross references.

[Michael Miles]

I voted no because I find that often enough I don't agree with these headings and find them off-putting.

I figure that if Father wanted headings in His Word, He's plenty capable of having had put them in there Himself.

[Getinthebible]

I am ok with it for the option so that I could know that the translators have said in their text. This would help me not be surprised by people in my Sunday School class talking about them. Since I do not have hard copies of these text I am not aware of what is written in them.

However I agree that they should not be used to decide what the bible means. That is what the Holy Spirit and time is for.

I also would rather other things be the center of the developer's efforts, as this is a very low priority for me personally.

Thanks for the chance to voice our opinions.