SkipCaptcha
696
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 856:
Line 856: +
Talk:Conservative Bible Project (view source)
Revision as of 23:51, July 1, 2017
, 23:51, July 1, 2017→Random question
::Yes, the New Testament is complete. Several Old Testament books are also complete. I recommend pulling the original source from the "KJV with Apocrypha" whenever possible to remain consistent with the rest of the project. This could really be of value to Catholic/Orthodox readers, and even some of the Protestant Reformers said that these books are good to read even if not canonical.--[[User:Anglican|Anglican]] ([[User talk:Anglican|talk]]) 12:09, 29 June 2017 (EDT)
::Yes, the New Testament is complete. Several Old Testament books are also complete. I recommend pulling the original source from the "KJV with Apocrypha" whenever possible to remain consistent with the rest of the project. This could really be of value to Catholic/Orthodox readers, and even some of the Protestant Reformers said that these books are good to read even if not canonical.--[[User:Anglican|Anglican]] ([[User talk:Anglican|talk]]) 12:09, 29 June 2017 (EDT)
:::Fine with me. Would you like to do this?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 12:24, 29 June 2017 (EDT)
:::Fine with me. Would you like to do this?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 12:24, 29 June 2017 (EDT)
::::Sure, I will do it soon when I have enough time to dedicate to it. Do you think that the additional books should be included in the Old Testament section, or in a separate "Apocryphal" section? --[[User:Anglican|Anglican]] ([[User talk:Anglican|talk]]) 19:51, 1 July 2017 (EDT)