How accurate is the Bible? The "compiled" version (Council of Nicaea) was not established for hundreds, or even thousands, of years after events happened. Stories were handed down generation to generation to generation before being written down. Scrolls were copied over and over again - by people - capable of mistakes, establishment, redaction, plain changes. Translations of translations. Books describing personal experiences with Jesus were not written down for hundreds of years.
Historians date Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John as having been written between 250 and 300AD - and not by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. How did matters of private conversations with Jesus and other disciples accurately, verse by verse, and word by word, get to the Bible?
Yet everyone seems to get very involved with citing books, chapters, and even words to advocate their personal beliefs or argue against someone else's belief/practice. Can we really argue about things like "to become" vs. "will become? Really?
Can a "religion" just cherry pick random verses from the Bible and tell people YOU MUST OBEY - SEE THAT WORD SAYS SO IN THE BIBLE. Really? What if someone coping a scroll in 245AD, just changed a line because it sounded better? What if they missed a word, line, page?
Don’t get me wrong - I have a lot of respect for the Bible, it's meaning, and its' effect on the whole planet. But I don't see how cherry picking singe verses, usually complete out of context, can used to argue for/against anything or be used to control people and make them obey human people. If you want to make a case, quote entire chapters or books.