[Eagle Eye]

Go to the back of Youngs or Strongs and it shows verses that have been altered or added to the texts as well as other known corruptions to the text.

Also look at an interlinear and you'll see how the KJV took some liberties with the Stephens text.

I don't rely on commentaries and church literature. I prefer to use various common research texts that don't require a formal education in ancient languages.

Then there are commonly accepted principles for research and interpretation such as most scripture is correct, clear, and to the point. Then one must consider both immediate and remote context. Then one should interpret difficult or unclear verses in light of the many clear ones and not vice versa. Don't forget that the Bible was written in an ancient eastern culture and some of their notions don't translate well. (salting and swaddling, standing at the gate and calling, covanents, etc) Also don't forget that there are many, many figures of speech to emphasize important ideas (polysyndaton, asyndaton, hendiady, hypocatastasis, etc.)

But you have to really want to learn the truth instead of rely on tradition.

And over the years I've met very few who have the courage to do that.

[Uncle Chip]

Also look at an interlinear and you'll see how the KJV took some liberties with the Stephens text.

Well then there has to be some translation around that didn't take liberties with the text, right? Then tell us just what bible does have Matthew 28:19 translated accurately.

[dangus]

>> And over the years I've met very few who have the courage to do that. <<

Extreme arrogance is a form of cowardice.