1 CORINTHIANS 9:9 khmw,seij Although the reading fimw,seij has somewhat stronger external support (î46 a A B3 C Db, c K L P almost all minuscules), a majority of the Committee preferred khmw,seij (B* D* F G 1739) on transcriptional grounds, for copyists were more likely to alter the less literary... [ Continue Reading ]
1 CORINTHIANS 9:10 evpV evlpi,di tou/ mete,cein The reading that best explains the origin of the others is evpV evlpi,di tou/ mete,cein (î46 a* (A) B C P 33 69 vg syrp, h copsa, bo, fay arm _al_). Not observing that avloa/n must be understood after avlow/n, copyists assumed that mete,cein was the i... [ Continue Reading ]
1 CORINTHIANS 9:15 ouvdei.j kenw,sei {B} According to the view of a majority of the Committee the earliest reading is that supported by î46 a* B D* 33 1739 itd syrp _al_. Not observing that after h; Paul breaks off the sentence (a figure of speech called aposiopesis), various copyists attempted in... [ Continue Reading ]
1 CORINTHIANS 9:20 mh. w'n auvto.j u`po. no,mon {A} The Textus Receptus, following Dgrc K Y 88 256 326 460 1175 1518 2138 syrp eth, omits the parenthetical clause mh. w'n auvto.j u`po. no,mon. The words, which are decisively supported by (î46) a A B C D* F G P it vg syrh copsa goth arm, probably f... [ Continue Reading ]
1 CORINTHIANS 9:22 pa,ntwj tina,j {A} Instead of pa,ntwj tina,j, strongly supported by a wide spectrum of witnesses, the Western text (D F G lat) reads pa,ntaj, the result of scribal conformation to the preceding clauses.... [ Continue Reading ]
1 CORINTHIANS 9:23 pa,nta The reading pa,nta is strongly supported by î46 a A B C D E F G P 33 69 181 424c 436 1611 1837 it vg copsa, bo arm eth. Later copyists (followed by the Textus Receptus), wishing to define the meaning more precisely, replaced pa,nta with tou/to (K L Y many minuscules syrp,... [ Continue Reading ]