So many bibles! Which one to believe?

KJ isn't the most accurate, there were several deliberate alterations to the text at the time to fit with dominant religous though.

The most accurate NT we have readily available is the RSV and for the OT a septugrant is the bees knees. An interlinear bible is invaluable as well as a decent concordance. If you want to get serious books on Hebrew and Geek grammar or a lexicon is a must.

Even if you become an expert at ancient greek, you still have the problem of deciding which greek manuscripts to translate, they weren't all the same.

My biggest issue with people trying to say that the gospels are the word of God and all true is that they all say different things. Why do all 4 gospels have completely different accounts of what happened after Jesus' death? Read the last 1 or 2 chapters of each gospel and write a summary, none of them are the same.

Can't people just believe that they are stories about Jesus that were inspired by him and not some word-for-word literal word of God? If you say that you believe every word in the bible then your beliefs have to change with every chapter you read.

The variations between the gospels are amazingly minor especially in light of the fact that hundreds of ancient manuscripts have survived. The bottom line is that there is no significant differences between them which alter core beliefs of the Christian faith. All present accounts of the incarnation, life, death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ which assert the same beliefs. The synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) are so similar to each other than some believe that two were copied and revised from one of them (which one varies according to various people).

Concerning the accounts of the resurrection, there are differences between the gospels in the details. There have been explanations which harmonize these accounts. Whether you choose to believe them or not does not alter the fact that all four accounts clearly state that Jesus Christ rose from the dead on the third day. That is the core belief of Christianity.

I've heard some of the arguments which try to make them sound like they are saying exactly the same thing, but they are outlandish. Don't get my wrong, I find nothing wrong with believing all of them in the sense that they are saying basically the same things and that the low level details don't really matter, they were written by men based on stories they were told, so they are very likely to change small details.

The only problem that I have is with people who say that every single word is literally true, that's just crazy, that's like saying a + b = c and c - b = a + 1. Either one can be true, but they can't both be true.

Early christians had faith in God and in Jesus, they didn't have faith in a book, it didn't exist, just stories they were told here and there and they most certainly didn't believe all the stories they were told.

One thing that has always surprised me is that the compilers or the Bible and their successors chose to copy the Bible verbatim, warts and all. It would have been so much simpler for them to have edited the Bible to eliminate any inconsistencies. Of course, that doesn't make it easy for those who have followed, but I greatly admire their consistency and honesty.

that's not entirely true. There have been many instances of scribes changing words or phrases intentionally, they usually wrote notes in the margins which explained their reasons.