was the bible corrupted from its original source by its translators through each authors corresponding interest?

Its original source was the early writings of the Church Jesus Christ founded, to which He promised "The Holy Spirit will guide you into all truth", and "Whatsoever you bind upon Earth is bound in Heaven", and "He who hears you hears Me". Which is how we know that these 73 texts are the inspired Word of God. That Holy Bible still exists today exactly as it was first compiled in the 4'th Century.  Of course, Protestants have produced inaccurate translations in the past 500 years, removed whole books of God's Holy Word, and made thousands of misinterpretations, which is why there are thousands of conflicting denominations.

There is no indication that the Bible we have today is substantially corrupted. 

There is more manuscript evidence for the New Testament than any other ancient documents.  They are also sourced from a wider range of localities and closer to the time of the originals than any other.

The science of higher textual criticism (a very similar process to DNA mapping) shows where the variants occur within the families of manuscripts and can trace back with high confidence to what the originals said.

So while it can be said that each copy and translation does introduce variations, there is no basis to conclude that what we have today does not reasonably represent what the authors intended.

(A good study Bible will have notes where there a word and phrase variants and identify the section text that are thought not original to the earliest manuscripts. )

There is no “perfect “ translation, but there are very few that can be said to be really bad. 

The only version that I know of that fits your question is the ‘New World Testament”.  

the bible was corrupted and most sects who used it as their reference have their corresponding interest. . .the manuscripts, original as the writings may deem inside Vatican collections but there are versions more ancient than the said bible writings were now being discovered and more to come . .ex. are the Lemurian tablets which are far more older knowledge inscriptions where bible stories may have been derived . . .historical and spiritual, the bible ma be categorized.

The question is
literally
nonsense.

IF "the Bible was corrupted from its original source by its translators"
that has no relevance whatsoever to "through each authors corresponding interest".

We can agree that translation is never perfect, and that even today's Bible translators do not translate the Bible perfectly.

But...what has that to do with any of the Biblical authors' "corresponding interest"?
WHAT "corresponding interest"?

It was more reliable before world leaders forced re-writings. But the bible mainly like a historical account, initially.

No, the Bible is not corrupt. Those errors or additions made by some deceitful translators have been spotted. For example at 1 John 5:6,7,8, the spurious text (the Comma Johanneum) which was added by Trinitarian Latin translators, it was not found in older versions. Today there are ancient copies of manuscripts which have been found and the addition at 1 John 5:6,7,8 was not there.  

A comparison of ancient manuscripts shows the Bible has kept its accuracy.  

Study Hebrew and Greek and you can see for yourself.  All translations have some bias to them.

The Bible survived attempts to alter its message: https://www.jw.org/finder?wtlocale=E&docid=2016247&srcid=share

I don't believe so. It's an interesting speculation; but it's not proven to be conclusively true.

No. If God were not pleased with his Holy Bible then he'd move heaven and earth to give us another. 



He judges all alike by it, whether we believe it or not.