>>17939649
>The question is do you trust your bible translators?
That is a great question. One I set out to circumvent by actually learning Koine Greek and Biblical Hebrew. The results were pretty surprising: learning Koine adds virtually no insight whatsoever, since the flow of the text is pretty much the same as in English and many of the confusing sections are either exactly the same or they have novel words that first appear in the Bible (so you can't cross-reference their meaning philologically). And learning Hebrew is a waste of time because the language is so primitive that reading a translation in a language that has past/present/future tenses is an act of mercy. Distrusting translations and "edits" is mostly a meme that serves as an excuse to not engage with the text. The most severe "edit" I have ever found were "sons of Israel" replaced by "sons of God" in a Deuteronomic fragment, which wouldn't really make a difference to 99% of readers anyway. As far as my understanding goes, this is a non-issue.
> What if the trinity isn't in the original text, the Greek texts?
It's in the Tradition. Christ didn't leave us a book, he left us a Church where teachings, mindset, practices and a living communion with God were preserved. The Bible came later as a product of this Tradition. It makes no sense to distrust the Tradition in its central thesis (Trinity) while accepting its product (the Bible).
Granted, the Church has fragmented since the times of Christ, but Catholic and Orthodox seem to be pretty safe bets. It's not about the institution, but about being pure at heart.