¹ tc A number of significant mss of various texttypes (א B L W Δ Ψ 565 700 892 pc sa) do not include 11:26 “But if you do not forgive, neither will your Father in heaven forgive your sins.” The verse is included in most later mss (A [C D] Θ [Ë^1,13 33] Ï lat) and is not likely to be original. It is probably an assimilation to Matt 6:15. The present translation follows NA²⁷ in omitting the verse number, a procedure also followed by a number of other modern translations.

⁵ tc ‡ Several witnesses (Ì⁷⁵ A L Θ Ψ 070 ˹³ 33 579 892 al lat co) have “therefore” (οὖν, oun) here. This conjunction has the effect of strengthening the logical connection with the preceding statement but also of reducing the rhetorical power and urgency of the imperative. In light of the slightly greater internal probability of adding a conjunction to an otherwise asyndetic sentence, as well as significant external support for the omission (א B D W ˹ Ï), the shorter reading appears to be more likely as the original wording here. NA²⁷ puts the conjunction in brackets, indicating some doubts as to its authenticity.

¹ tc Several mss (D ˹³ [579] 700 al lat sy) add (with several variations among these witnesses) 17:36 “There will be two in the field; one will be taken and the other left.” It is not well enough attested to be original. Further, it is an assimilation to the parallel in Matt 24:40, which marks the addition as secondary. The present translation follows NA²⁷ in omitting the verse number, a procedure also followed by a number of other modern translations.

⁴ tc ‡ Most mss have the phrase ἐν ἡμῖν (en Jhmin, “within us”) after οὐχὶ ἡ καρδία ἡμῶν καιομένη ἦν (ouci Jh kardia Jhmwn kaiomenh hn, “Didn’t our hearts burn”). The phrase “within us” is lacking in some early mss (Ì⁷⁵ B D c e sy^s,c). These early witnesses could have overlooked the words, since there are several occurrences of ἡμῖν in the context. But it seems likely that other scribes wanted to clarify the abrupt expression “Didn’t our hearts burn,” even as the translation has done here. NA²⁷ includes the words in brackets, indicating doubts as to their authenticity.

¹ tc ‡ Most witnesses (Ì⁶⁶ A D L Θ Ψ Ë^1,13 33 Ï latt co) have ᾿Ιησοῦς (Ihsou", “Jesus”) here, while generally better witnesses (Ì⁷⁵ א B W {0141} 892 1241 pbo) lack the name. Although it is possible that Alexandrian scribes deleted the name due to proclivities to prune, this is not as likely as other witnesses adding it for clarification, especially since multiple strands of the Alexandrian text are represented in the shorter reading. NA²⁷ places the word in brackets, indicating some doubts as to authenticity.

² tc ‡ Although most mss, including several important ones (Ì⁶⁶ א C D L W Θ Ψ Ë^1,13 33 Ï lat), read αὐτοῦ (autou, “his”) after τῶν μαθητῶν (twn maqhtwn, “the disciples”), the pronoun is lacking in A B K Δ 0250 al. The weight of the witnesses for the inclusion is somewhat stronger than that for the exclusion. However, the addition of “his” to “disciples” is a frequent scribal emendation and as such is a predictable variant. It is thus most likely that the shorter reading is authentic. NA²⁷ puts the pronoun in brackets, indicating doubts as to its authenticity.

³ tc ‡ Most mss, including several important ones (Ì⁷⁴ א A C E Ψ 33 1739 Ï h p vg sy^h mae bo Cyr), have ὑμῶν (Jumwn, “your”) here, in conformity with the LXX of Amos 5:26. But other significant and diverse witnesses lack the pronoun: The lack of ὑμῶν in B D 36 453 gig sy^p sa Ir^lat Or is difficult to explain if it is not the original wording here. NA²⁷ has the word in brackets, indicating some doubt as to its authenticity.

⁴ tc ‡ Most mss read the infinitive “to travel” after “Barnabas.” διελθεῖν (dielqein) is found before ἕως (Jews) in D E Ψ 33 Ï and some versional mss. It is lacking in Ì⁷⁴ א A B 81 1739 pc and some versional mss. Although the infinitive with ἕως fits Lukan style, it has the appearance of a scribal clarification. The infinitive has the earmarks of a Western expansion on the text and thus is unlikely to be original. NA²⁷ has the infinitive in brackets, indicating doubt as to its authenticity.

² tc ‡ Most mss, including some of the most important ones (B D E Ψ Ï sy), read αὐτοῖς (autoi", “to them”) here, while some excellent and early witnesses (Ì^45vid,74vid א A 33 81 945 1739 pc) lack the pronoun. Although it is possible that the pronoun was deleted because it was seen as superfluous, it is also possible that it was added as a natural expansion on the text, strengthening the connection between Peter and his listeners. Although a decision is difficult, the shorter reading is slightly preferred. NA²⁷ puts the pronoun in brackets, indicating some doubts as to its authenticity.

⁴ tc ‡ Some mss read “of the things in which you have seen me.” The accusative object με (me, “me”) is found after εἶδές (eide") in B C*^vid 614 945 1175 1505 1739 1891 2464 pc sy sa; it is lacking in Ì⁷⁴ א A C² E Ψ 096 Ï latt bo. The external evidence is relatively evenly divided, though there is a slight preference for the omission. NA²⁷ includes the word in brackets, indicating some doubt as to its authenticity.

¹ tc Some later mss include 28:29: “When he had said these things, the Jews departed, having a great dispute among themselves.” Verse 29 is lacking in Ì^74vid א A B E Ψ 048 33 81 1175 1739 2464 pc and a number of versions. They are included (with a few minor variations) in Ï it and some versions. This verse is almost certainly not a part of the original text of Acts, as it lacks the best credentials. The present translation follows NA²⁷ in omitting the verse number, a procedure also followed by a number of other modern translations.

¹ tc ‡ A number of significant and early witnesses, along with several others (Ì^46vid א A C F G L Ψ 6 33 81 104 365 1505 al lat bo), read ᾿Ιησοῦς (Ihsous, “Jesus”) after Χριστός (Cristos, “Christ”) in v. 34. But the shorter reading is not unrepresented (B D 0289 1739 1881 Ï sa). Once ᾿Ιησοῦς got into the text, what scribe would omit it? Although the external evidence is on the side of the longer reading, internally such an expansion seems suspect. The shorter reading is thus preferred. NA²⁷ has the word in brackets, indicating doubt as to its authenticity.

³ tc ‡ αὐτό (auto) is found at this point in v. 13 in a number of significant witnesses, including A B C P 33 1739 al. But Ì⁴⁶ א D Ψ 0289 1881 Ï latt lack it. The pronoun could be a motivated reading, designed to intensify Paul’s statement. On the other hand, it could have been deleted because the article alone made the reference already clear. In this instance, the possibility of scribal addition seems more likely than scribal deletion, although a decision is difficult. NA²⁷ includes the word in brackets, indicating doubt as to its authenticity.

¹ tc ‡ Several important mss read ᾿Ιησοῦ (Ihsou, “Jesus”) after Χριστῷ (Cristw, “Christ”) in v. 17 (so Ì⁴⁶ א C D¹ 33 1739 al). Western mss have κυρίῳ ᾿Ιησοῦ (kuriw Ihsou, “Lord Jesus”; D* F G), while several significant mss, as well as the majority, have only Χριστῷ here (A B D² Ψ Ï sa). Once ᾿Ιησοῦ got into the text, it would continue to be copied. There is however no easy explanation for the word lacking in so many witnesses. Thus the shorter reading appears to be original. NA²⁷ includes ᾿Ιησοῦ in brackets, indicating doubt as to its authenticity.

¹ tc ‡ Before μέλος (melos, “member”) the great majority of witnesses read ἕν (Jen, “one”; א² C D F G Ψ 0285 33 1881 Ï latt sy), while the most important of the Alexandrian mss omit it (Ì⁴⁶ א* A B 1739). The addition of ἕν appears to be motivated by its presence earlier in the verse with μέλος and the parallel structure of the two conditional clauses in this verse, while little reason can be given for its absence (although accidental oversight is of course possible, it is not likely that all these witnesses should have overlooked it). NA²⁷ has the word in brackets, indicating doubt as to its authenticity.

¹ tc ‡ Most witnesses, including some important ones (א A D^s Ψ 048 Ï lat sy bo), have γάρ (gar, “for”) here, while an equally impressive array of witnesses lack the conjunction (Ì⁴⁶ B F G 0243 1739 1881 sa). This conjunction was frequently added by scribes in epistolary literature as a clarifying word, making the connection with the preceding more explicit. As such, it has the earmarks of being a motivated reading and thus should be rejected. NA²⁷ places the word in brackets, indicating doubts as to its authenticity.

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.

² tc ‡ Strong Alexandrian testimony, along with some other witnesses, suggests that ᾿Ιησοῦ (Ihsou, “Jesus”) follows Χριστοῦ (Cristou, “Christ”; so א A B C I L 0278 33 81 365 629 1175 2464 al lat), but the evidence for the shorter reading is diverse (Ì⁴⁶ D F G Ψ 075 1739 1881 Ï it sy Hier), cutting across all major texttypes. There can be little motivation for omitting the name of Jesus; hence, the shorter reading is judged to be original. NA²⁷ has ᾿Ιησοῦ in brackets, indicating some doubts as to its authenticity.

¹ tc ‡ Most witnesses, some of them important (א² A D H 1881 Ï lat sy bo), have σοι (soi, “you”) after παραγγέλλω (parangellw, “I charge [you]”), a predictable variant because the personal pronoun is demanded by the sense of the passage (and was added in the translation because of English requirements). Hence, the omission is the harder reading, and the addition of σοι is one of clarification. Further, the shorter reading is found in several important witnesses, such as א* F G Ψ 6 33 1739 pc. Thus, both internally and externally the shorter reading is preferred. NA ²⁷ places σοι in brackets, indicating some doubts as to its authenticity.

¹ tc ‡ A correlative καί (kai, “both you”) is found in a few witnesses (א*^,c F G 33 104 pc), perhaps either to underscore the value of Onesimus or in imitation of the νυνὶ δὲ καί (nuni de kai) in v. 9. The lack of καί is read by most witnesses, including א² A C D 0278 1739 1881 Ï it. Although a decision is difficult, the shorter reading has a slight edge in both internal and external evidence. NA²⁷ places the καί in brackets, indicating some doubts as to its authenticity.