² tc Codex D (with some support with minor variation from W Θ Ë¹³ 565 2542 pc it) reads, “Enough of that! It is the end and the hour has come.” Evidently, this addition highlights Jesus’ assertion that what he had predicted about his own death was now coming true (cf. Luke 22:37). Even though the addition highlights the accuracy of Jesus’ prediction, it should not be regarded as part of the text of Mark, since it receives little support from the rest of the witnesses and because D especially is prone to expand the wording of a text.

² tc Several mss read ᾿Ιησοῦν (Ihsoun, “Jesus”) after Χριστόν (Criston, “Christ”; א* A D* 630 1506 1739 1881 pc bo); C 81 104 lat have ᾿Ιησοῦν Χριστόν. The shorter reading is more likely to be original, though, both because of external evidence (א² B D² F G Ψ 33 Ï sa) and internal evidence (scribes were much more likely to add the name “Jesus” if it were lacking than to remove it if it were already present in the text, especially to harmonize with the earlier mention of Jesus in the verse).

¹ tc Grk “the brother.” Later witnesses (א² D² Ï) have ἀνδρί (andri, “husband”) here, apparently in conscious emulation of the earlier mention of ἀνήρ (ajnhr) in the verse. However, the earliest and best witnesses (Ì⁴⁶ א* A B C D* F G P Ψ 33 1739 al co) are decisively in favor of ἀδελφῷ (adelfw, “brother”), a word that because of the close association with “wife” here may have seemed inappropriate to many scribes. It is also for reasons of English style that “her husband” is used in the translation.

¹ tc The Byzantine text, as well as a few other witnesses (D² [L] Ψ 1881 Ï) lack this parenthetical material, while geographically widespread, early, and diverse witnesses have the words (so א A B C D* F G P 33 104 365 1175 1505 1739 al latt). The phrase may have dropped out accidentally through homoioteleuton (note that both the preceding phrase and the parenthesis end in ὑπὸ νόμον [Jupo nomon, “under the law”]), or intentionally by overscrupulous scribes who felt that the statement “I myself am not under the law” could have led to license.

¹ tc ‡ μου (mou, “my”) is found after ἀδελφοί (adelfoi) in a number of significant witnesses (א A B* D¹ 048 326 1175 2464 al), but lacking in most other witnesses (Ì⁴⁶ B² D* F G Ψ 0243 33 1739 1881 Ï lat). Every other time Paul says “So then, brothers (and sisters)” he adds “my” (ὥστε, ἀδελφοί μου; {wste, adelfoi mou). There is no good reason why scribes would intentionally omit “my” here but not elsewhere. Thus, the longer reading is in conformity with Paul’s general style and as such seems to be scribally motivated. NA²⁷ has the word in brackets, indicating doubt as to its authenticity.

³ tc The majority of later mss (א² A^c D¹ Ψ 0243 0278 33 1739 1881 Ï) as well as some versional witnesses include the pronoun “my” here, but the omission of the pronoun has excellent external support (Ì^46vid א* A* B D* F G latt). Scribes probably added the pronoun for clarity, making the obvious referent explicit. This would also make “power” more parallel with “my grace.” Though the original text probably did not include “my,” scribes who added the word were following the sense of Paul’s statement.

³ tc παραδόσεων (paradosewn; “traditions, commandments”) is read by D*, while the vast majority of witnesses read παραβάσεων (parabasewn, “transgressions”). D’s reading makes little sense in this context. πράξεων (praxewn, “of deeds”) replaces παραβάσεων in Ì⁴⁶ F G it Ir^lat Ambst Spec. The wording is best taken as going with νόμος (nomo"; “Why then the law of deeds?”), as is evident by the consistent punctuation in the later witnesses. But such an expression is unpauline and superfluous; it was almost certainly added by some early scribe(s) to soften the blow of Paul’s statement.

² tc Instead of the present participle συγκλειόμενοι (sunkleiomenoi; found in Ì⁴⁶ א A B D* F G P Ψ 33 1739 al), C D¹ 0176 0278 Ï have the perfect συγκεκλεισμένοι (sunkekleismenoi). The syntactical implication of the perfect is that the cause or the means of being held in custody was confinement (“we were held in custody [by/because of] being confined”). The present participle of course allows for such options, but also allows for contemporaneous time (“while being confined”) and result (“with the result that we were confined”). Externally, the perfect participle has little to commend it, being restricted for the most part to later and Byzantine witnesses.

² tc Most later witnesses (א² D¹ H^c Ψ 1881 Ï) have “wise” (σόφῳ, swfw) here (thus, “the only wise God”), while the earlier and better witnesses (א* A D* F G H* 33 1739 lat co) lack this adjective. Although it could be argued that the longer reading is harder since it does not as emphatically affirm monotheism, it is more likely that scribes borrowed σόφῳ from Rom 16:27 where μόνῳ σόφῳ θεῷ (monw sofw qew, “the only wise God”) is textually solid.

¹ tc The Greek conjunction ὅτι usually means “because,” but here it takes the sense “so that” (see BDAG 732 s.v. 5.c). This unusual sense led to textual variation as scribes attempted to correct what appeared to be an error: D* and a few versional witnesses read ἀληθές ὅτι (“it is true that”), and א² D² Ψ Ï read δῆλον ὅτι (“it is clear that”). Thus the simple conjunction is preferred on internal as well as external grounds, supported by א* A F G 33 81 1739 1881 pc.

¹ tn The Piel of the verb חָיָה (khayah, “to live”) means “to keep alive, to preserve alive,” and in some places “to make alive.” See D. Marcus, “The Verb ‘to Live’ in Ugaritic,” JSS 17 (1972): 76-82.

² sn On the geographical background of vv. 1-2 see J. P. Harland, “Sodom and Gomorrah,” The Biblical Archaeologist Reader, 1:41-75; and D. N. Freedman, “The Real Story of the Ebla Tablets, Ebla and the Cities of the Plain,” BA 41 (1978): 143-64.

² sn Then he tied up. This text has given rise to an important theme in Judaism known as the Aqedah, from the Hebrew word for “binding.” When sacrifices were made in the sanctuary, God remembered the binding of Isaac, for which a substitute was offered. See D. Polish, “The Binding of Isaac,” Jud 6 (1957): 17-21.

² sn Put your hand under my thigh. The taking of this oath had to do with the sanctity of the family and the continuation of the family line. See D. R. Freedman, “Put Your Hand Under My Thigh – the Patriarchal Oath,” BAR 2 (1976): 2-4, 42.

³ sn “Horeb” is another name for Mount Sinai. There is a good deal of foreshadowing in this verse, for later Moses would shepherd the people of Israel and lead them to Mount Sinai to receive the Law. See D. Skinner, “Some Major Themes of Exodus,” Mid-America Theological Journal 1 (1977): 31-42.

³ tn The verb may have the idea of sinking with a gurgling sound, like water going into a whirlpool (R. A. Cole, Exodus [TOTC], 124; S. R. Driver, Exodus, 136). See F. M. Cross and D. N. Freedman, “The Song of Miriam,” JNES 14 (1955): 243-47.

⁷ sn See further T. D. Weinshall, “The Organizational Structure Proposed by Jethro to Moses (Ex. 18:17),” Public Administration in Israel and Abroad 12 (1972): 9-13; and H. Reviv, “The Traditions Concerning the Inception of the Legal System in Israel: Significance and Dating,” ZAW 94 (1982): 566-75.

¹ tn Heb “And you shall keep all my statutes and all my regulations and you shall do them.” This appears to be a kind of verbal hendiadys, where the first verb is a modifier of the action of the second verb (see GKC 386 §120.d, although שָׁמַר [shamar, “to keep”] is not cited there; cf. Lev 22:31).

¹ tn Heb “And you shall keep my statutes and you shall do them.” This appears to be a kind of verbal hendiadys, where the first verb is a modifier of the action of the second verb (see GKC 386 §120.d, although שָׁמַר [shamar, “to keep”] is not cited there; cf. Lev 22:31, etc.).

¹ tn Heb “And you shall keep all my statutes and all my regulations and you shall do them.” This appears to be a kind of verbal hendiadys, where the first verb is a modifier of the action of the second verb (see GKC 386 §120.d, although שָׁמַר [shamar, “to keep”] is not cited there; cf. Lev 22:31, etc.).