Gee one person has "feelings" that the text isn't right (like an illiterate liberal). Give me more evidence than hearsay that the text was fabricated or corrupted.

If it was "fabricated" in 300 AD I'm calling bullshit. If there is evidence it was fabricated or corrupted at another point in time (which is easily testable and verifiable through multiple scientific methods) then I'll believe it.

Also, who is Burgon? What kind of person was he? Was he playing a politicians game? His full name isn't in this source and apparently when I search there are a lot of Burgons. Why should I care what Burgon thinks? Burgon might just be full of shit.

A scripture that has been lost to history and likely gone forever. I don't see a source of him quoting from a Bible and could just as well be quoting from memory and teaching.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polycarp

The sole surviving work attributed to him is the Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians, a mosaic of references to the Greek Scriptures, which, along with an account of The Martyrdom of Polycarp, forms part of the collection of writings called Apostolic Fathers. After the Acts of the Apostles, which describes the death of Stephen, the Martyrdom is considered one of the earliest genuine accounts of a Christian martyrdom.[2] Charles E. Hill argues extensively that the teachings Irenaeus ascribes to a certain apostolic "presbyter" throughout his writings represent lost teachings of Polycarp, his teacher.[7]