thats good, but i'm thinkin' more like 100 acres to 1,200 acres

I have heard many scholars say that the Authorised King James Version is probably the most 'valid' Christian Bible, praising its accuracy in translation.  The New International Version seems easier to read for the average person, but I have been made aware of inconsistent translations (such as the confusion arising from the Greek word Arsenokoitai; compare 1 Corinthians 6 and 1 Timothy 1).  Bear in mind that translating anything into another language opens the door to many potential ambiguities.  The translation in question will reflect the politics and comprehension of the translators.
 
Take the word Cyclops, for example.  It is derivative of the Greek word kyklops, which is in turn derivative of kyklos (meaning "round") and ops (meaning "eye").  So, the term literally means "round eye".  But, cyclops are not known for having round eyes, they are known for having a single eye.  Ancient Greek legends would have been incorrectly translated if it was understood that Odysseus had met Polyphemus the Round-eye, rather than Polyphemus the Single-eye.
 
Translating words without a full understanding of their meaning (as is the case for some terms in the Bible) can result in ambiguities (at best), or outright fallacies (at worse).  The potential for bias is high, as the translator can adapt the language to best represent his vision of the religion, without making it clear that other translations (with very different meaning) could be just as valid.
 
Quote from Hondo I. Sackett on May 9^th, 2008, 6:15pm:

How can anyone know that this hasn't already happened?  Even if someone did modify the Bible, and they did incur God's wrath, how would anyone know?  We could all be reading non-canonical Bibles without even knowing it.