Why worry about ‘corrupting’ the bible when one can very easily omit things you don’t like or modify things you do.
For instance: how did a yearly feast to remember GOD’s blessing and salvation (Passover) get morphed into ‘holy communion’ that we see today?
Some churchs stuff the wine and bread in you every time the doors are open, while others that do it when the pastor thinks he needs to scare the congregation in a certain direction.
Because a sound, well-reasoned, thorough base of ...
1) why scripture is inspired, preserved, inerrant
2) why a particular translation included certain verses, and excluded others
3) what tradeoffs were made in choosing the particular rendering of a word/phrase/sentence
4) how to read scripture to minimize apparent contradictions (there are none per )
5) a doctrinal creed based on all the above
6) a systematic theology based on the above
7) a format for church, evangelism, “letting light shine” as Christians
Once done, then it is the task for liberals to pretend it does not exist. If you’ve spent any time debating liberals, you know that ...
1) they only buffalo the ignorant
2) they know they can only buffalo the ignorant
3) only a few sit around to scream and whine after you’ve exposed them as a fraud
This is a “good thing”. Why should liberals “re-translate” the scriptures every generation, and have yet more opportunities to introduce doctrinal dreck?
If a church “decides” not to do something, let them dance around and pretend a solid argument has not been made.
I am amused by the truth in your tagline, but then ashamed I am not doing more.