Может ли неточный перевод стихов Библии повлиять на веру?

Давайте конкретные стихи, тогда и поговорим. На слишком общий вопрос нет слишком общего ответа.
Приводите точный номер главы и стиха:
Например.
"К Ефесянам или Эфесянам"
Не принципиально и на смысл не влияет.
"Пришествие его или Присутствие его"
Где Вы обнаружили такое отличие?
"Слово было богом или Слово было Бог"
Если Вы про стих Ин 1:1 , то сам текст амбивалентен и носители языка переводили его по-разному: и под ортодоксию, и под модализм и под субординатизм — как угодно. Позволю себе грех цитирования в качестве эдакого сознательного ad verecundiam:

An Exegetical Discussion of John 1:1 The text of John 1:1 itself has a sordid past and a myriad of possible interpretations. With the Greek alone, we can create emphatic, orthodox, creed-like statements, or we can commit pure and unadulterated heresy. The Nestle-Aland twenty-seventh edition of John 1:1 reads: En arche en ho logos, kai ho logos en pros ton theon, kai theos en ho logos. A simple English translation reads: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.4 From the point of view of early church history, heresy develops when a misunderstanding arises concerning Greek articles, the predicate nominative, and grammatical word order. To illustrate, the early church heresy of Sabellianism understood John 1:1c to read, "and the Word was the God"; while the early church heresy of Arianism understood John 1:1c to read, "and the word was a God."5 As we can easily see, these subtle nuances reveal a radical shift from the standard orthodox thinking of John 1:1c: "and the Word was God." Yet from a historical perspective, what should we make of this ho logos? From the textual evidence of the Septuagint (LXX) it seems reasonable to suggest that John's en arche (in the beginning) may be an allusion to Genesis 1:1, which in the LXX also reads: en arche.6 But, it is also quite possible that the translators of the LXX are providing us with an interpretation of the Hebrew text of Genesis 1:1.7 The issue is far from solved, however, when we consider the tension created by b'reshith, the Hebrew equivalent of en arche. As readers of the Bible, we may desire never to see tensions in the biblical text, but reality is a far different situation.

Цит. по:

Reed, David A. "How semitic was John? Rethinking the hellenistic background to John 1: 1." Anglican theological review 85.4 (2003): 709