That is how theists weasel out of the reality that their sh!t is bogus.
When there are mistakes or contradictions or discrepancies in their sacred text
it's all "well, human beings wrote this stuff down, and people are not perfect"; or, "well, see, we are only puny flawed humans and we can't hope to ever understand the vastnest of the mind of god."
The way some Christians talk, we are so far below god in understanding as to be like ants are to humans. So, if I shout instructions to the ant to get off the sidewalk and go into the grass, whose fault is it if the ant doesn't understand me? Am I justified in stomping on the ant and pouring boiling water down its anthill for not obeying me?
Yet we are also supposed to accept that this is an all-powerful being who really, really wants to communicate this vitally important information to us. Why would this all-powerful being hand over the task of transmitting the important information to flawed humans who have to physically record it by hand from oral stories under less than ideal conditions
? Didn't god know that people would change the meaning and make mistakes, or that the information would not be understood properly after being translated so many times?
Instead we get, from each and every ancient religion, the same exact convoluted process: traditional oral stories, hand-copied in bad light in dead languages, by underpaid scribes or monks, working under rulers with their own political and religious agendas.
Then this omniscient being would take a further chance of misunderstanding by having the originals written down in obscure languages that hardly anyone knows, with ambiguous pronouns, no vowels, etc. so the info would have to be re-interpreted and then re-translated many times. Again, by hand, under less than ideal conditions. For a largely illiterate global population.
Who in their right mind would choose this chancy, piecemeal mistake-prone method to transmit any kind of important information? An all-powerful, all-knowing god, all-loving that's who!
It would be like having doctors dictate prescriptions for a new miracle drug guaranteed to cure cancer--but only in Chinese to a group of 7-year-old English-speaking children who write them down phonetically in yellow crayon. In the dark.
And then weeks later, having several different other children who don't read Chinese or English re-copy the prescriptions in green crayon. In a moving car.
And then even later, have other children translating those copies into other languages in red crayon. While watching tv. And then faxing the resulting prescriptions to pharmacists worldwide.
Would it surprise anyone if the pharmacists gave out the wrong medicine and it did not cure cancer? Would it be fair to send the pharmacists to jail for making people sicker or killing them? Would anyone say this was a good method or a smart method to explain how to cure cancer? Would anyone buy the argument that this complicated mess was the best way, or the only way to do it?