Here is another good post from Neil at 4Simpsons.
Excerpt:
Many people – including some Christians – are quick to say that the Bible has been translated and changed so many times over the centuries that we don’t know what the original writings said. For example, I saw a video clip where Deepak Chopra (alleged religious expert) claims that the King James was the 13th iteration of the Bible.
But contrary to that myth, the books of the Bible have only been translated once and the copying process was very robust, dependable and verifiable.
For example, Paul wrote in Greek, and we have Greek manuscripts to make translations from. That is one translation.
Deepak Chopra!!! He knows less about religion than my keyboard!
Look:
But I digress. I wanted to say something about the reliability of the Bible.
The Dead Sea Scrolls
When we discovered the Dead Sea Scrolls, it contained some manuscripts that were 1000 years earlier than our previous copies. It provides an excellent test of written transmission, because you can compare the best copy we had with a copy that is 1000 years earlier, then see if there are any differences.
Excerpt:
You know the children’s game called “telephone”? Some kid whispers a message to the kid next to him and it moves down the line until it emerges a garbled version of the original. It turns out the Bible is not like that. Despite endless translations and editions over the centuries, the original message appears to have emerged relatively unscathed. The Dead Sea Scrolls provided Old Testament manuscripts 1,000 years older than the previous oldest manuscript in existence. What the scrolls show is that the texts used at about the time of the destruction of the Second Temple, about 70 years after the death of Jesus, are almost the same as what we read today. Expert Weston W. Fields wrote: “The differences are neither theologically nor historically important. In general the scrolls testify to the amazing accuracy and great care with which ancient scribes passed along the biblical text.”
Too bad people like Deepak Chopra are so ignorant of such evidence.
WINTERY KNIGHT 
I don’t have much of an opinion on this, personally, but Deepak Chopra is pretty much the walking talking definition of ignorance on just about everything on which he opines.
LikeLike
What the scrolls show is that the texts used at about the time of the destruction of the Second Temple, about 70 years after the death of Jesus, are almost the same as what we read today.
Is this correct? To be technical, wasn’t the death of Jesus in +-30AD and the temple destruction in +-70AD, making it “40 years after the death of Jesus” not “70 years”?
LikeLike
Yes, you are right and they are wrong. The destruction of the temple was 70 AD. And Jesus’ death is 30 AD.
LikeLike
You are sooo right, I mean look at all of these great translations of Mark 4:31:
“Like a mustard grain, which at the time it was sown in the ground was the tiniest of all the seeds that are on the earth” New World Translation.
The American Standard Version says: “It is like a grain of mustard seed, which, when it is sown upon the earth, though it be less than all the seeds that are upon the earth,”
The New English Bible says “It is like a mustard seed that when sown in the ground, even though it is the smallest of all the seeds in the ground”
The King James Version says: “is less than all the seeds that be in the earth”.
The New Jerusalem Bible says “It is like a mustard seed which, at the time of its sowing, is the smallest of all the seeds on earth.
“The Catholic Douay Version says: ” It is as a grain of mustard seed: which when it is sown in the earth, is less than all the seeds that are in the earth:”
(and we can ignore that Jesus was clearly wrong on his statement about the mustard seed – it’s not the smallest seed on earth)…sorry wintery, anyone who’s multi-lingual knows the problems of translating – not everything goes nicely between languages and you’re often forced to make decisions on the the best translation. Now take cultural influences and local idioms whose meanings weren’t preserved from that era and you have today’s bibles – different in meaning and wording from the original works.
(like I’ve told you plenty of times before, I don’t mind if you don’t post this – I just want you to know the truth)
Jerry
LikeLike
Do you understand how Bible translation works? These different versions are all created from the original, which is in GREEK.
LikeLike
I believe my original post addressed that very issue.
LikeLike
Jerry, the post at Neil’s blog explains everything. All these translations are working off the Greek manuscripts, which is the original language. Some people like their Bible from 1611 translators who translate everything with “thees” and “thous” and some people like a direct translation like the NASB (like me) and some people want to have the Greek translated into teenager language, and they use the “Today’s English” version. But everyone is going off the Greek – you can read the Bible as it was written by reading the Greek version that all these modern translations are built from.
Sheesh.
LikeLike
But that still goes back to my post – what else did the 1611 translators like/want in their bible? What about modern society that wants everything fair and equal – what do they want in their bible? What you want in your bible is going to taint how you translate the original. Subtle nuances in a language can lead to very large and disparate views and interpretations…and those compound over time.
LikeLike
But the modern translations are all based on the original Greek! And you can just look at the original Greek if you want to see the original meaning.
LikeLike