There are 233 English translation-versions of the Bible. Many of them contradict each other, and yet people still insist it is the word of God. Which God? This means there are 233 God's?<quoted text>
correction : YOUR interpretation of what you THINK YOUR bible says
1 COR. 7:36 ("But if a man thinketh that he behaveth himself unseemly toward his virgin daughter...and if need so requireth, let him do what he will; he sinneth not; let them marry"--AS) versus the BBE, NAB, KJ, NI, NEB, NWT AND ML which omit the word "daughter." The latter don't agree with the ASV's teaching that fathers should marry their daughters rather than behave "unseemly" toward them.
GAL. 3:24 ("Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring <or lead> us to Christ"--KJ, AS, BBE, NWT, NAS, NI, LV) versus ("...the law served as our custodian until Christ came"--ML, LB, RS, JB, NEB, NAB, TEV). If the law served as our custodian until christ came as the latter asserts, then it no longer held that role after he arrived which the former projects. The first version does not rule out its guidance after his arrival. Moreover, serving as our custodian does not necessarily mean it's bringing us to Christ.
1 TIM. 3:2, 12 & Titus 1:6 ("A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife...."--KJ, ML, RS, LB, AS, BBE, NI, NWT, NEB, NAS, TEV, LV) versus ("A bishop must be irreproachable, married only once"--JB, NAB). The JB and NAB clearly limit a bishop to only one wife whereas the former do not keep him from having many wives as long as he has no more than one at a time.
1 TIM. 3:16 ("...great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh...."--KJ) versus ("Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of our religion: He was manifested in the flesh...."--RS, ML, JB, NI, AS, BBE, NEB, NAB, TEV, NWT, NAS). With differences of this magnitude is it any wonder that the King James only supporters are up-in-arms. In this instance, the KJ is the only version clearly saying God was manifest in the flesh. If "he" is referring to Jesus Christ, then it is only stating the obvious. If Jesus came, he came in the flesh or as a man. But it doesn't say he was God or God came in the flesh.
1 TIM. 4:4 ("For every creature of God is good...."--KJ, AS) versus ("For everything created by God is good...."--RS, ML, LB, JB, NI, BBE, NEB, NAB, TEV, NWT, NAS, LV). If everything created by God is good, that would include far more than just the "creatures" mentioned in the KJ and ASV.
1 TIM. 6:10 ("For the love of money is the root of all evil"--KJ, RS, ML, JB, NEB, NAS, LV) versus ("For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil"--NI, AS, TEV, NAS) versus ("For the love of money is a root of all evil"--BBE) versus ("For the love of money is a root of all sorts of injurious things"--NWT). Is the love of money "a" root or "the" root? If it's "a" root then there could be many others. Is it the root of "all evil" or "all kinds of evil"? "All kinds" does not mean "all evil." Some could be excluded.
2 TIM. 3:16 ("All scripture is given by inspiration of God"--KJ, RS, ML, LB, JB, NI, BBE, NAB, TEV, NWT, NAS) versus ("Every scripture inspired of God is also profitable for teaching...."--AS, NEB, LV). A cardinal belief of all fundamentalists is that all scripture is inspired, but that is clearly not the import of the AS, NEB and LV. They leave open the possibility that some of Scripture is not inspired.