/lit/ - Literature

>>21061939
Missing 7% of the New Testament due to the Alexandrian texts rather than the TR is an issue. Removing the verse Matthew 18:11, changing the words "Joseph and his mother" into "his father and his mother" in Luke 2:33, removing the second half of Romans 11:6, etc.

It also has very serious problems in its Old Testament. Like in Genesis 22:17 it says "And your descendants shall possess the gate of their enemies," instead of what the verse really says, which is not plural but singular, and says: "and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies;" (Genesis 22:17b KJB).

This is important because Paul explicitly makes a point that this seed was singular, in Galatians 3:16. Every translation that screws up Genesis 22:17 in the way that the RSV does, and calls it "his descendants" (plural) removes this important connection because this whole promise to Abraham is actually to his seed (singular) which is Christ according to Paul. As another example, the RSV doesn't even know how to translate 1 Samuel 13:1. It just says "Saul was . . . years old when he began to reign"

>>21062004
>Mark 1:45
That's your best attempt at an example, anon? If so that helps. See the Webster dictionary for the origin of the word "blaze." Someone surely must have a better example, something that's absolutely unequivocal if they talk so much about it.