The writer of this hit piece against the integrity of the biblical text is either ignorant about what orthodox Christians believe about the inspiration/authorship of the Bible, or has intentionally misrepresented both those beliefs and the Hebrew University research. Most of my Hebrew has long flown, but in another life I have a strong background in classical Hebrew (including study at Hebrew University).
The salient point is that, for orthodox (vs. "liberal") Christians, the inspiration of the biblical texts extends properly only to the biblical writers and the original manuscripts.
In other words, Christians do not claim that every copy of the text that was produced, in any language at any time, is equally "inspired." There are many copies of the biblical texts of varying accuracy (both the Hebrew and the New Testament), produced by those with different motivations and often limited skill. It would be ludicrous for Christians to claim that each and every one was "inspired."
It is the job of textual criticism ("lower" criticism rather than "higher," which is largely destructive) to ascertain to the highest degree possible what the original text said. This is accomplished by comparing the best of the "extant" manuscripts and applying interpretive rules. As a general rule, older is more accurate, but not necessarily so.
Textual scholars who hold a high view of Scripture believe that the translations that we have today reflect the inspired originals to a very high degree. Although there are many minor differences in wording, there are exceedingly few instances where any point of doctrine is affected. Thus, we can read our English Bible with a very high degree of confidence that it reflects the original inspired texts.
Thank you for your comments. I am convinced, the more I study the Bible, that it has been the Creator all along who has preserved and protected his revelation to mankind. Such a miracle has not and never will be the work of just men.