There is some validity on both sides. But WWJD?
Sorry, but one cannot have it both ways. There is no middle ground since facts are facts. James White, Gail Riplinger, etc. (both unsafe) have their viewpoints,
but it you wish to know what Jesus would do, you can see that for Him the traditional Hebrew Text was the Word of God (Luke 24:25-27; 45-48). Many claim that Christ and His apostles used the corrupted Septuagint Greek translation, but that is impossible. In Palestine the traditional Hebrew Text was the Bible, and it is this Traditional text (called the Massorah or Masoretic Text), which was translated directly into the King James Bible from the printed Rabbinic Bibles of the 16th century:
The Hebrew text underlying the KJV is reliable and does not have any demonstrable error. By God’s grace and providence there are not as many variant readings among the Hebrew Old Testament manuscripts as there are among the Greek New Testament manuscripts. Most of the variants concern pronunciations which do not affect translation. Many believe that the KJV is based on the Hebrew Masoretic text of the Second Rabbinic Bible, edited by Jacob Ben Chayyim and printed by Daniel Bomberg in 1525. However, the KJV appeared to follow the First Rabbinic Bible, edited by Felix Pratensis in 1517-1518, as this first edition includesJoshua 21:36-37 and Nehemiah 7:68 whereas the second edition omits these verses. Except for these two passages, the KJV appeared to follow the Ben Chayyim text.
What the modern versions use are corrupted Hebrew Bibles or their equivalents:
Many recent versions of the Bible are based on the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, the third edition of the Masoretic text edited by Rudolph Kittel. There are eight places where differences between the two texts (the Ben Chayyim and the Rudolph Kittel) affect translation – they are: 1 Kings 20:38, Proverbs 8:16, Isaiah 10:16, Isaiah 27:2, Isaiah 38:14, Ezekiel 30:18, Zephaniah 3:15, and Malachi 1:12...With only eight significant variants between the Jacob Ben Chayyim and the Rudolph Kittel editions, the Hebrew texts underlying the KJV and modern translations are fairly similar. However, modern textual critics believe that some verses in the Bible are erroneous in all editions of the Masoretic text. These critics believe that a Bible translation must consult the Masoretic text as well as other ancient witnesses such as the Dead Sea Scrolls, Samaritan Pentateuch, Aramaic Targum, Septuagint, and the Latin Vulgate. The prefaces of some of the leading translations have the following to say about the translators' view of a deficient Masoretic text:...
Both quotations from
http://www.kjvtoday.com/home/reliable-hebrew-text
When it comes to the New Testament Text Jesus would use only the
Traditional Majority Greek Text (also known as the Byzantine Text) because the majority of manuscripts, early translations, lectionaries (church lesson books), and the writings of the Early Church Fathers (known as patristic quotations) are all based on this text (as is the KJV). This is also the text which was DISCARDED by Westcott and Hort while they created a new Greek "critical" text based on Gnostic corruptions. Study
The Revision Revised and don't take my word for it.
The differences between the traditional and the critical texts are so great that
thousands of words have been affected (additions, omissions, alterations, transpositions). There are at least 1500 passages which have doctrinally significant changes, particularly in connection with Christ, His deity, and the Holy Trinity. More importantly the doctrine of Scripture has been attacked.
