I have an issue that it seems at least as far as I can tell, that all bibles are incorrect in various ways, as far as I can tell in my opinion.
Is there a bible that exists that has compared all texts rather than one source?
Using the LXX, Masoretic and Others etc? Or are they individually created separate from each other? If there an Masoretic text with the "flaws" changed to the LXX? etc. I'm just getting really frustrated with people making bibles without really doing a "proper job".
edited due to comments....
Bibles do this today...
Not really. As the dates don't add up apparently in regards to timelines = Masoretic = does not work apparently, and septuagint does, apparently = 7500 years roughly? Unless others are wrong? Also Sinaiticus & Vaticanus, they are all from 1 text each, and in all modern bibles and they contradict each other, right...
Two dissagreeing points are here from the hebrew in one corner and the septuagint in the other, so where are they right and wrong? and which bible is right?
these two pages/sites show obvious issues that no-one has sorted out that I have ever heard of, unless someone knows of a translation that includes Pauls Septuagint verses (explaining why because if they were removed, Paul would contradict himself and the hebrew) and the reason why Paul should be included if he is falsely claiming things not true in scripture if the hebrew is read and therefore in error doctrinally.
Apparently, without the Septuagint Paul is basically removed, one site says. On the other side it says Origin mentions and the dates also, that the verses were removed by Jews from their texts to remove support to Christianity.
I do not think the Septuagint/LXX is great or the hebrew in particular, I think we all just want the truth.