A new ONLYism?

[prophet]

I only use KJV.  I believe it to be a correct translation.  Hence, I use no other.

Maybe the terminology means something different to the Ruckmanites or other such groups.  "Universally Accepted" could mean the only English version not criticized by any group.  UA could mean the only version that is acceptable to all.  UA could mean the majority of people accept and use.

I have found ALL versions to be criticized, therefore, not any version is accepted by all and the KJV is definitely not the most sold in bookstores today.  One could say that most groups that accept other versions do accept the KJV, while many KJV groups do not accept any other, so the KJV is the only UA Bible - but that sounds like an awful lot of semantics to prove nothing.

This shouldnt have to be said.  Sad.


Anishinaabe

 

[prophet]

Tyndale
Wycliff
Darby
Kjv
Anishnaabemowin
Navajo
Cherokee
So, yeah, id be a hypocrite.

Anishinaabe

That's an interesting list. What are the Indian versions based on? Were they translated from the Textus Receptus, UBS or from an English Bible?

Sorry, I took so long to get back to you on this.
Here's the title page to the one from Canadá:

The following translation into the Ojibwa language, was made by John and Peter Jones, who are nativeireligious teachers employed bythe Methodist Episcopal Missionary Society in Canada, and published by the British and Foreign Bible Society. The edition here presented is copied from that of the British and Foreign Bible Society, with scarcely any alterations, except the chang ing of a few words to render them more intelligible, and more con formed to correct usage, as the language is spoken in this part of the country, The orthography, however, is entirely diiïerent; this edition being Written in the orthography adopted by the missionaries of the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions in writing the Ojibwa language. This translation, it is believed, is as correct in general as any which can be made in the present state of Ojibwa literature.
      La Pointe, September 1837

Anishinaabe

 

[Binaca Chugger]

I only use KJV.  I believe it to be a correct translation.  Hence, I use no other.

Maybe the terminology means something different to the Ruckmanites or other such groups.  "Universally Accepted" could mean the only English version not criticized by any group.  UA could mean the only version that is acceptable to all.  UA could mean the majority of people accept and use.

I have found ALL versions to be criticized, therefore, not any version is accepted by all and the KJV is definitely not the most sold in bookstores today.  One could say that most groups that accept other versions do accept the KJV, while many KJV groups do not accept any other, so the KJV is the only UA Bible - but that sounds like an awful lot of semantics to prove nothing.

This shouldnt have to be said.  Sad.


Anishinaabe

What do you mean?

 

[prophet]

I only use KJV.  I believe it to be a correct translation.  Hence, I use no other.

Maybe the terminology means something different to the Ruckmanites or other such groups.  "Universally Accepted" could mean the only English version not criticized by any group.  UA could mean the only version that is acceptable to all.  UA could mean the majority of people accept and use.

I have found ALL versions to be criticized, therefore, not any version is accepted by all and the KJV is definitely not the most sold in bookstores today.  One could say that most groups that accept other versions do accept the KJV, while many KJV groups do not accept any other, so the KJV is the only UA Bible - but that sounds like an awful lot of semantics to prove nothing.

This shouldnt have to be said.  Sad.


Anishinaabe

What do you mean?

It is puré logic, and SHOULD be unecessary to iterate. universal means universal, duh!

But yet, you felt it necessary to go into an explanation.  Not because YOU dont understand, but because you had good reason to believe that a so-called "educated" man needed additional information, to draw the simplest of logical conclusions.

Wading into an "adult" conversation, and then back-stepping it, until the jelly hits the bottom shelf, gets old.
Too often, we end up in 8th grade, again, or 5th.

I find it sad, that conversations get derailed over failure to draw a simple logical conclusión.  Or that some monkey, sitting in on it, throws his own feces at everyone, and runs around screeching, trying his best to insinuate that no one else is able to keep up with the newly devolved conversation.
SAD.

Anishinaabe