I think your explanation treats the bible as a historical document. There are many issues with historical documents and one rule is that historians are prepared to change their understanding if they encounter new evidence.

Academic disputes are still relatively peaceful.

The issue is that most readers see it as a spiritual (or even political or legal) document which makes things difficult. The bible is not supposed to have loopholes or even revisions. Imagine if there is evidence that the site of Jesus's death was not in Israel but in another country. Imagine the pain of the people that made the pilgrimage to the wrong place. Can a denomination say "Opps, we got the wrong version. Wine drinkers are welcomed back. No harm, no foul."

It is not just translation issues because we still have to look at the old arguments to see why certain books were canonized and what was excluded.

The final issue is that the English bible is further translated into other languages. Ouch.