However, she could never identify any of the supposed mistakes. Her major evidence for supporting this was the difference between the four Gospels. It seems that she could not understand that they were written from different perspectives, by four different authors and to different audiences. Apparently, she viewed the differences in the accounts as contradictions and errors.
Further she saw the variety of translations as proof that the Bible was somehow flawed. It seems she believed that each translation was a different Bible and written to fix errors in other translations. I have been amazed that the misunderstanding about Bible translations that exist. Over the years I have encountered people who seem to believe that each translation is an attempt to fix others. I’ve even been told that any translation with the word New in the title is heretical. The reason was by using the word New (i.e. New American Standard or New King James) that the translators were trying to change the Bible. Of course, those that claim the King James is somehow the only acceptable translation or at least a superior translation than others puzzles me. Much of their reasoning relies on superficial things such as the longevity or differences in the wording found in other translations. I’ve never understood why some chose to focus on the difference between newer translations and the KJV. The Bible was not originally written in English most modern translations were translated from Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic .
I think the problem is not the availability of a good translation of the Bible. In my opinion there are many good translations available. The problem for many of us is actually studying the Bible and applying it to our lives. Many times we would rather read into a passage what we think or want it to mean rather than the actual meaning of a passage.