responding to common objections to bible

[Rhyfelwyr]

"There is also not a single semi-significant point of Christian faith that is challenged as a result of translation differences/errors." Probably why the need of the Orange Bible was not so accurate... And of course, the various streams in the Christianity never happened, nor Religious Wars. Just minors disagreements on Mary (Virgin or not), the holly Trinity, and marriage of the Priests...

Presuming you are referring to the wars surrounding the Reformation, the controversy there was largely because one side believed that sources outside the scripture had authority to reveal or determine fundamentals of the faith.

*cough*

What about salvation? you only need to compare King James Version (KJV) to the New English Bible (NEB) and you will run into reformation bias on this particular subject.

Salvation? I have heard that the KJV leans towards a Calvinistic/predestination position, although the examples I've seen have never shown blatant mistranslation - if a particular word or phrase is questionable, then it is actually good and honest practice to assess its meaning by referring to that found throughout the rest of the scripture - I believe that is what happened with the KJV when certain verses in it that appear to support predestination might be contested by some as being more neutral on the topic.

Certainly, the KJV does (ironically, given its adoration by presbyterians and congregationalists) lean towards an episcopalian position on church governance. But this is less a dishonest translation, and more playing into how words have changed - preferring the term 'bishop' for example when elder would be equally appropriate, even though the term 'bishop' in the Apostles' time would have meant what we mean by 'elder' nowadays.

I suppose there is the rather blant addition of a certain excerpt to support the concept of the Trinity, although I think that concept is proven by scripture anyway (even if it is always expressed wrong, there's a reason the term 'Trinity' is never used in the scripture).

Aren't you forgetting a bunch of other religious/philosophical texts now? The first who springs to mind are those of the ancient chinese... And the code of Hammurabi, of course.

Well, perhaps. But the Code of Hammurabi is a major political/legal document, the scripture is just the writings of nobodies that were part of an obscure cult or minor desert people. The Code of Hammurabi is also carved in rock, and is I would think (apologies if wrong) much shorter in length that the entirety of the scripture. So what stands out as being more miraculous?

Plus, for all the stuff we are talking about here, with the confusion that could have come about from copying dubious copies, we have access to documents now that are at least extremely close to the originals, so we can compare them more directly.