Candol, as I read this from an outsider's standpoint, it appears you and Linda are understanding each other just fine. It's interesting conversation to read.
I just wonder at the fuss over whether this sutta is authentic or is that one? Did Buddha really say this or didn't he? I can understand people wanting to go over the Pali to see if there are better translations, if phrases and intention has been mistranslated. That I can see as being an interesting and worthwhile project.
But to try to figure out if the Buddha really said it, or if it's "authentic" seems futile. As you point out, there have been so many hands and views in the retelling of the teachings. How could monks prevent their own views and beliefs from sneaking in? Of course that is going to happen. No doubt some of them completely misunderstood some of the teachings.
I applaud people's efforts to understand the Pali, to inspect the translations. I leave those learning and experienced in Pali to come up with new translations. Whether or not the Buddha actually said or taught what comes out of these translations we can not know.
What we can know is how do these translations work into our every day practice? Do we find in our subject experience that what was is being taught via the translation is turning out to be true? If it is, then probably the translation is close to what the Buddha taught. If it doesn't work, or it doesn't make sense in life experience, then either the Buddha got it wrong or translators got it wrong. Doesn't matter either way, if a teaching isn't useful, it doesn't matter who got it wrong, it's just wrong.
As I mentioned in a previous post, I support Linda's view of DA, not because I think the Buddha really said that or taught that, but it makes sense as my practice reveals DA. The way I was interpreting the suttas caused me confusion. But when Linda laid it out the way she did, I saw that yes indeed that is what I've been experiencing, it makes sense for DA to operate in our lives that way, and so I feel she is really onto something there in her translation or interpretation because it works out in the Lab of Life.
If Buddha really taught DA in terms of rebirth, well then I think he was wrong and Linda's DA version is right. Or maybe the reason her version works out so well is because it is in fact what the Buddha was trying to get across. At any rate, it makes sense in life, neuroscience even backs up some of it, and it's testable.
Maybe instead of fussing over authenticity, apply each of the suttas to practice and see what rolls out.