The results of course have been almost exclusively negative, as the Times Online reports (URL below). Supposedly the intent of the artists (if seriously to be believed) was "to reclaim the Bible as a sacred text"; however, the results have been quite the opposite. Those writing and altering the biblical text "have daubed its pages" with atheism and profanities. Even though the original artist said "“Any offensive things that have been written are not the point of the work,” the result was quite the opposite. As expected, the Christian community has reacted quite negatively to all the radical material that has been inserted and texts altered or torn out in the name of "art".
Leaving aside the socio-political agenda and demerits of the organizers (which are clearly stated in the Times Online article and need not be gone into here), what is interesting in all this is that the example provides a strong but negative postmodern parallel to concepts such as Parker's Living Text and Ehrman's Orthodox Corruption, with the difference being more a matter of kind and degree as opposed to the hypothesis itself.
When evaluating the numerous various readings that appear intentional in our sources -- especially those that might affect translation or exegesis -- one seriously should consider the possible motivations (whether positive or negative) that might underlie the changes so made by scribes of varying stripe, lest we fall into the trap of assuming someone's personal opinion to be more valuable than the text he or she chose to alter in the first place.