Verses IFBs ignore when reading their Bibles.

[Smellin Coffee]

Exo 19:18  And mount Sinai was altogether on a smoke, because the LORD descended upon it in fire: and the smoke thereof ascended as the smoke of a furnace, and the whole mount quaked greatly. (AV)

These could be twisted into a anti-smoking text.

Genesis 24:64 And Rebekah lifted up her eyes, and when she saw Isaac, she lighted off the camel.

And liberals could twist this into a pro-smoking text. 

 

[bgwilkinson]

Exo 19:18  And mount Sinai was altogether on a smoke, because the LORD descended upon it in fire: and the smoke thereof ascended as the smoke of a furnace, and the whole mount quaked greatly. (AV)

These could be twisted into a anti-smoking text.

Genesis 24:64 And Rebekah lifted up her eyes, and when she saw Isaac, she lighted off the camel.

And liberals could twist this into a pro-smoking text. 

Very prophetic Camel cigarettes foretold in the OT. Some might think this verse supports smoking.

This better translation takes away a good smoking text.

24:64 Rebekah looked up and saw Isaac. She got down from her camel. 

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

Very prophetic Camel cigarettes foretold in the OT. Some might think this verse supports smoking.

This better translation takes away a good smoking text.

24:64 Rebekah looked up and saw Isaac. She got down from her camel. 

Someone told me a joke when I was a young teen.  "Which stretches more, rubber or skin?"  I don't remember the exact answer, but it was something like, "Skin because in the Bible, [someone] tied his ass to a tree and walked 40 miles." 

I knew nothing of the Bible then, and I've never been able to remember the punch line accurately enough to see if it's really from the Bible. 

 

[bgwilkinson]

Mat 23:24  Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel. (AV)

strain at is corrected here.

23:24 Blind guides! You strain out a gnat yet swallow a camel! (NET)

Some tend to fight for the bad translation.

excuse me..... but, what;s the big difference?.........the main point is that the gnat is rejected - strained out - spit out.....whatever...... but the camel is swallowed......... do any translations change what happens with regards to the camel?...... do any of them say the opposite happened?.....or that the guides aren;t blind?..... ....... one might say that making major issues out of all these minor differences in translations is a lot of straining at gnats..... .......have you come across the camels yet?..... 

lol 

You've hit on it, dead on, those that whine about the textual basis and the translation differences between older and newer Bible versions are simply missing the big picture.

The meanest translation is the Word of God, even if there are some minor errors. Believers have worked around these errors and differences for centuries, even as they have tried to fix them in the manuscripts (Bibles) they read and used daily.

With all of the so-called differences in modern versions none of them says the opposite.

 

[prophet]

Calling an update a "better translation", is disingenuous, because the translation was appropriate at the time it was done.

Calling a translation of a different set of documents a "better translation" is a blatant attempt to mislead.

But, you are depending on the false assumption, probably justifiable for the most part, that your target audience doesn't know the translation history.

There is warning about you in Scripture.

1 Peter 2:1

2? Wherefore laying aside all malice, and all guile, and hypocrisies, and envies, and all evil speakings,

1 Thessalonians 2:3
For our exhortation was not of deceit, nor of uncleanness, nor in guile:

Psalms 32:2

Blessed is the man unto whom the Lord imputeth not iniquity,
and in whose spirit there is no guile.

1 Peter 2:1
2? Therfor putte ye awei al malice, and al gile, and feynyngis, and enuyes, and alle bacbityngis;

Earnestly Contend

 

[bgwilkinson]

Calling an update a "better translation", is disingenuous, because the translation was appropriate at the time it was done.

Calling a translation of a different set of documents a "better translation" is a blatant attempt to mislead.

But, you are depending on the false assumption, probably justifiable for the most part, that your target audience doesn't know the translation history.

There is warning about you in Scripture.

1 Peter 2:1

2? Wherefore laying aside all malice, and all guile, and hypocrisies, and envies, and all evil speakings,

1 Thessalonians 2:3
For our exhortation was not of deceit, nor of uncleanness, nor in guile:

Psalms 32:2

Blessed is the man unto whom the Lord imputeth not iniquity,
and in whose spirit there is no guile.

1 Peter 2:1
2? Therfor putte ye awei al malice, and al gile, and feynyngis, and enuyes, and alle bacbityngis;

Earnestly Contend

Why would you launch an ad hominem attack?

I gave you more credit than that.

I will gladly discuss ideas, facts and concepts concerning Bible transmission, I want to stay away from personal accusations made or received.