Matthew 16:2-3

Matthew 16:2-3 @ovyi,aj genome,nhj … ouv du,nasqe*# {C}

The external evidence for the absence of these words is impressive, including a *B ¦¹³ 157 al syr^{c, s} cop^{sa, bomss} arm Origen and, according to Jerome, most manuscripts known to him (though he included the passage in the Vulgate). The question is how one ought to interpret this evidence. Most scholars regard the passage as a later insertion from a source similar to Luke 12:54-56, or from the Lukan passage itself, with an adjustment concerning the particular signs of the weather. On the other hand, it can be argued (as Scrivener and Lagrange do) that the words were omitted by copyists in climates (e.g. Egypt) where red sky in the morning does not announce rain.

In view of the balance of these considerations it was thought best to retain the passage enclosed within square brackets.