Something subtle that's easy to miss is the fact that the original text did not contain quotation marks, and neither does the KJV. There are places where by int

Something subtle that's easy to miss is the fact that the original text did not contain quotation marks, and neither does the KJV. There are places where by introducing quotation marks, the translator necessarily must make decisions which the original text does not support. Take for example one of my favorite sayings, Matthew 24:15-16. ESV: "So when you see the abomination of desolation spoken of by the prophet Daniel, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand), then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains." KJV: When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:) Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains: The quotation marks in the ESV suggest that the parenthetical phrase "Let the reader understand" was spoken by Jesus. But in actuality, it is ambiguous whether that was spoken by Jesus, or whether it is a note by Matthew. Was it Jesus telling us to understand Daniel, or Matthew telling us to understand Jesus? And if it was the former, did Jesus say it knowing that someday it would be read (even though no stenographers were present) and would thereby gain a double meaning?