Reverse realm and contradictions of bible translation

The evidence for our New Testament writings is ever so much greater than the evidence for many writings of classical authors, the authenticity of which no-one dreams of questioning. And if the New Testament were a collection of secular writings, their authenticity would generally be regarded as beyond all doubt.
...
There are inexistence over 5000 Greek manuscripts of the New Testament in whole or in part. The best and most important of these go back to somewhere about AD 350...
Earlier still is a fragment of a papurus codex conaining John 18:31-33, 27 ...dated on palaeographical grounds around AD 130...
...
Perhaps we can appreciate how wealthy the New testament is in manuscript attestation if we compare the textual material for other ancient historical works. For Caesar's 'Galic War' (composed between 58 and 50 BC) there are several extant MSS, but only 9 or 10 are good, and the oldest is 900 years later than Caesar's day... The 'History of Thucydides' (c. 460-400 BC) is known to us from eight MSS, the earliest belonging to about the beginning of the Christian era. The same is true of the 'History of Herodotus' (C. 488-428 BC). Yet no classical scholar would listen to an argument that the authenticity of Herodocus or Thucydides is in doubt because the earliest MSS of their works which are of any use to us are over 1300 years later than the originals.

There is much evidence that the Protestant bible translation is a sophisticated copy of the Catholic Bible, because since the Protestant bible had been showing up, all books of the new testament has been carrying precisely the same mistranslations and contradictions which proceeded from the one mastercopy which belongs to the spiritual ordinances that were left to the doctrine of the Catholicism and the [holy] Mother city--congregation, (i.e. Rome and the State of Vatican).

The study of the kind of attestation found in MSS and quotations in later writers is connected with an approach known as teaxtual criticism. This is a most important and fascinating branch of study, its object being to determine as exactly as possible from the available evidence the original words of the documents in question. It is easily proved by experiment that it is difficult to copy out a passage of any considerable length without making one or two slips at least. When we have document like our New Testament writings copied and recopied thousands of times, the scope for copyist's errors is so enormously increased that it is surprising that there are no more that there actually are. Fortunately, if the great number of MSS increases the number of scribal errors, it increases proprotionately the means of correcting such errors, so that the margin of doubt left in the process of recovering the exact original wording in not so large as might be feared; it is in truth remarkable small. The variant readings about which any doubt remains among textual critics of the New Testament affect no material question of historical fact or Christian faith and practice.