It has happened to me several times now that someone thought that the various "versions" of the Bible are all different and products of various edits over the years. Every time some editor (I don't know who they would mean) has picked away at the literature, there is a new version.
Some rabbi, whose talk a friend of mine liked on Facebook, went on for about half an hour tying to distinguish the "a son of man" in Daniel, from the "the Son of Man" of the Gospels. In the middle of that he laughed in scorn at the King James "version". First of all, it was a great travesty to go from "a" son of man to "the"son of man. Then it was ridiculous that there could be "versions" of this.
We must be grasping at straws, me thinks. Messianic Jews find this passage extremely compelling.
The fact is that the manuscripts are ancient and have been treated with reverence and care. The different versions, deal with changes in our contemporary language and expression. All try to be faithful to the original.
For an example of different "versions" of the Bible see this: http://biblehub.com/
for the Bible in different languages and editions.
--------------- Also from Facebook below: Comedian wrong about the Bible.
"The moment an atheist or critic of the Bible (or comedian, in this case) uses this ridiculous telephone canard, you can be sure they have zero idea what they are talking about, and are farting hot wind for rhetorical effect.
The Bible did not come to us through a process of editing, rewriting, or multiple translations. Every, single reputable translation we have comes directly from spectacularly well-attested Greek and Hebrew manuscripts. And in general, the newer, more literal translations (ESV, NASB, etc.) are drawn from the very oldest manuscripts, which long predate the sources for older English translations, like the King James. And of course, the Bible's manuscript evidence is stronger than virtually any other work of antiquity, including the works of philosophers like Plato and authors like Homer, whom no one seriously disputes as authentic and essentially true to their autographs.
In other words, when someone uses the telephone argument, you can dismiss them, and suggest they come back when they know what they're talking about."
~@Gregory Shane Morris
Approach to Outreach
3 hours ago