(0.40639792857143) | (Rom 15:17) |
1 tc ‡ After οὖν (oun), several important Alexandrian and Western |
(0.40639792857143) | (Rom 16:24) |
1 tc Most |
(0.40639792857143) | (1Co 1:1) |
2 tc Many important |
(0.40639792857143) | (1Co 6:11) |
2 tc The external evidence in support of the reading ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ (Ihsou Cristou, “Jesus Christ”) is quite impressive: Ì11vid,46 א B Cvid D* P 33 81 104 365 629 630 1739 1881 2464 al lat bo as well as several fathers, while the reading with merely ᾿Ιησοῦ has significantly poorer support (A D2 Ψ Ï sa). Although the wording of the original could certainly have been expanded, it is also possible that Χριστοῦ as a nomen sacrum could have accidentally dropped out. Although the latter is not as likely under normal circumstances, in light of the early and widespread witnesses for the fuller expression, the original wording seems to have been ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ. |
(0.40639792857143) | (1Co 9:15) |
2 tc The reading ἤ – τὸ καύχημά μου οὐδεὶς κενώσει (h – to kauchma mou oudei" kenwsei, “than – no one will deprive me of my reason for boasting!”) is syntactically abrupt, but fully in keeping with Pauline style. It is supported by Ì46 א* B D*,c 33 1739 1881 as well as early patristic authors. Most witnesses, especially the later ones (א2 C D2 Ψ Ï lat), have a significantly smoother reading than this: ἢ τὸ καύχημά μου ἵνα τις κενώσῃ (or κενώσει); h to kauchma mou {ina ti" kenwsh (or kenwsei), “than that anyone should deprive me of my boasting.” The simple replacement of οὐδείς with ἵνα essentially accomplishes the smoothing out of the text, and as such the ἵνα reading is suspect. Not only is the harder reading in keeping with Pauline style, but it is also found in the earlier and better witnesses. |
(0.40639792857143) | (1Co 11:2) |
1 tc The Western and Byzantine texts, as well as one or two Alexandrian |
(0.40639792857143) | (2Co 1:12) |
2 tc Two viable variants exist at this place in the text: ἁγιότητι (Jagiothti, “holiness”) vs. ἁπλότητι (Japlothti, “pure motives”). A confusion of letters could well have produced the variant (TCGNT 507): In uncial script the words would have been written agiothti and aplothti. This, however, does not explain which reading created the other. Overall ἁπλότητι, though largely a Western-Byzantine reading (א2 D F G Ï lat sy), is better suited to the context; it is also a Pauline word while ἁγιότης (Jagioth") is not. It also best explains the rise of the other variants, πραότητι (praothti, “gentleness”) and {σπλάγχνοις} (splancnoi", “compassion”). On the other hand, the external evidence in favor of ἁγιότητι is extremely strong (Ì46 א* A B C K P Ψ 0121 0243 33 81 1739 1881 al co). This diversity of |
(0.40639792857143) | (2Co 4:6) |
3 tc ‡ Most witnesses, including several early and important ones (Ì46 א C H Ψ 0209 1739c Ï sy), read ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ (Ihsou Cristou, “Jesus Christ”), while other important witnesses, especially of the Western text (D F G 0243 630 1739* 1881 lat Ambst), have Χριστοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ. The reading with just Χριστοῦ is found in A B 33 {sa} Tert {Or Ath Chr}. Even though the witnesses for the shorter reading are not numerous, they are weighty. And in light of the natural scribal proclivity to fill out the text, particularly with reference to divine names, as well as the discrepancy among the witnesses as to the order of the names, the simple reading Χριστοῦ seems to be the best candidate for authenticity. NA27 reads ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ with ᾿Ιησοῦ in brackets, indicating doubts as to its authenticity. |
(0.40639792857143) | (2Co 5:17) |
2 tc Most |
(0.40639792857143) | (2Co 11:3) |
5 tc Although most |
(0.40639792857143) | (2Co 13:14) |
1 tc Most witnesses, especially later ones (א2 D Ψ Ï lat sy bo), conclude this letter with ἀμήν (amhn, “amen”), while several early and important |
(0.40639792857143) | (Gal 1:15) |
1 tc ‡ Several important witnesses have ὁ θεός (Jo qeos) after εὐδόκησεν (eudokhsen; so א A D Ψ 0278 33 1739 1881 Ï co) while the shorter reading is supported by Ì46 B F G 629 1505 pc lat. There is hardly any reason why scribes would omit the words (although the Beatty papyrus and the Western text do at times omit words and phrases), but several reasons why scribes would add the words (especially the need to clarify). The confluence of witnesses for the shorter reading (including a few fathers and versions) adds strong support for its authenticity. It is also in keeping with Paul’s style to refrain from mentioning God by name as a rhetorical device (cf. ExSyn 437 [although this section deals with passive constructions, the principle is the same]). NA27 includes the words in brackets, indicating some doubts as to their authenticity. |
(0.40639792857143) | (Gal 2:20) |
4 tc A number of important witnesses (Ì46 B D* F G) have θεοῦ καὶ Χριστοῦ (qeou kai Cristou, “of God and Christ”) instead of υἱοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ (Juiou tou qeou, “the Son of God”), found in the majority of |
(0.40639792857143) | (Gal 3:17) |
1 tc Most |
(0.40639792857143) | (Eph 1:3) |
1 sn Eph 1:3-14 comprises one long sentence in Greek, with three major sections. Each section ends with a note of praise for God (vv. 6, 12, 14), focusing on a different member of the Trinity. After an opening summary of all the saints’ spiritual blessings (v. 3), the first section (vv. 4-6) offers up praise that the Father has chosen us in eternity past; the second section (vv. 7-12) offers up praise that the Son has redeemed us in the historical past (i.e., at the cross); the third section (vv. 13-14) offers up praise that the Holy Spirit has sealed us in our personal past, at the point of conversion. |
(0.40639792857143) | (Eph 3:1) |
1 tc Several early and important witnesses, chiefly of the Western text (א* D* F G [365]), lack ᾿Ιησοῦ (Ihsou, “Jesus”) here, while most Alexandrian and Byzantine |
(0.40639792857143) | (Eph 4:9) |
2 tc The Western texttype (D* F G it) lacks the plural noun μέρη (merh, “regions”); the shorter reading cannot be dismissed out of hand since it is also supported by Ì46 (which often has strong affinities, however, with the Western text). The inclusion of the word has strong external support from important, early |
(0.40639792857143) | (Eph 4:32) |
1 tc ‡ Although most witnesses have either δέ (de; Ì49 א A D2 Ψ 33 1739mg Ï lat) or οὖν (oun; D* F G 1175) here, a few important |
(0.40639792857143) | (Eph 5:2) |
2 tc A number of important witnesses have ὑμᾶς (Jumas, “you”; e.g., א* A B P 0159 81 1175 al it co as well as several fathers). Other, equally important witnesses read ἡμᾶς (Jhmas, “us”; Ì46 א2 D F G Ψ 0278 33 1739 1881 al lat sy). It is possible that ἡμᾶς was accidentally introduced via homoioarcton with the previous word (ἠγάπησεν, hgaphsen). On the other hand, ὑμᾶς may have been motivated by the preceding ὑμῖν (Jumin) in 4:32 and second person verbs in 5:1, 2. Further, the flow of argument seems to require the first person pronoun. A decision is difficult to make, but the first person pronoun has a slightly greater probability of being original. |
(0.40639792857143) | (Eph 6:1) |
2 tc B D* F G as well as a few versional and patristic representatives lack “in the Lord” (ἐν κυρίῳ, en kuriw), while the phrase is well represented in Ì46 א A D1 Ivid Ψ 0278 0285 33 1739 1881 Ï sy co. Scribes may have thought that the phrase could be regarded a qualifier on the kind of parents a child should obey (viz., only Christian parents), and would thus be tempted to delete the phrase to counter such an interpretation. It is unlikely that the phrase would have been added, since the form used to express such sentiment in this Haustafel is ὡς τῷ κυρίῳ/Χριστῷ (Jw" tw kuriw/Cristw, “as to the Lord/Christ”; see 5:22; 6:5). Even though the witnesses for the omission are impressive, it is more likely that the phrase was deleted than added by scribal activity. |