Original sentence: Finally, one point that has been argued with regard to a text's inerrancy is that, even if it were guaranteed of the text in its original language, this is no longer true after translation, because direct translation is a bit of a myth.For instance, it is currently being argued among scholars that the original messianic prophecy did not require that the Messiah's mother be a virgin, only young.However, critics of this view argue that the Bible can still be construed as the "Word of God" in the sense that these authors' statements may have been representative of, and perhaps even directly influenced by, God's own knowledge.In the case of the Bible, the original texts were in several ancient languages, which few are now familiar with.Some have argued that the Bible need not be inerrant even if it is entirely the Word of God, because God is capable of lying, and may even have purpose for this
Edited sentence: Finally, one very subtle point to bear in mind with regard to a text's inerrancy is that, even if it were guaranteed of that text in its original language, this is no longer true after translation, because direct translation is a bit of a myth.For instance, it is clear that the original messianic prophecy did not require that the Messiah's mother be a virgin, only young.However, the Bible can still be construed as the "Word of God" in the sense that these authors' statements may have been representative of, and perhaps even directly influenced by, God's own knowledge.In the case of the Bible, the original texts were in several ancient languages.Nonetheless, the Bible need not be inerrant even if it is entirely the Word of God, because God is capable of lying, and may even have purpose for this.interestingly, most defenders of Biblical inerrancy are familiar with none of these, but only with the translations in their own language, usually English