ROMANS 16:3 Pri,skan The Textus Receptus, following 81 209* 255 256 462 489 920 1311 1319 1827 1852 syrp, h eth _al,_ reads the diminutive form Pri,skillan. The form Pri,skan is decisively supported by î46 (preiskan) A B C D F G L P most minuscules it vg copsa, bo arm _al_. See also the comments o... [ Continue Reading ]
ROMANS 16:7 VIouni,an {A} On the basis of the weight of manuscript evidence the Committee was unanimous in rejecting VIouli,an (see also the next variant in ver. Romans 16:15) in favor of VIounian, but was divided as to how the latter should be accented. Some members, considering it unlikely that a... [ Continue Reading ]
ROMANS 16:15 VIouli,an {A} The scribes of C* F Ggr mistook ioulian for iounian (compare the contrary error in ver. Romans 16:7).... [ Continue Reading ]
ROMANS 16:20 h` ca,rij tou/ kuri,ou h`mw/n VIhsou/ meqV u`mw/n {A} The shorter form of the benediction (î46 a B 1881) appears to be more primitive, for if Cristou/ (A C P Y 33 81 1739 _Byz_ all versions) were present originally there seems to be no reason why a copyist should have deleted it, where... [ Continue Reading ]
ROMANS 16:24 _omit verse_ {A} The earliest and best witnesses omit ver. Romans 16:24. See the comment on ver. 20.... [ Continue Reading ]
ROMANS 16:25-27 _The Doxology_ {C} While recognizing the possibility that the doxology may not have been part of the original form of the epistle, on the strength of impressive manuscript evidence (î61 a B C D 81 1739 itar, b, d*, f, o vg syrp copsa, bo eth Clement _al_) the Committee decided to i... [ Continue Reading ]
ROMANS 16:27 aivw/naj {A} The shorter text (î46 B C Y 33 88 104 614 1739 _Byz_ syrh copsa _al_) was preferred on the ground that the expansion of the doxology by the addition of tw/n aivw,nwn (î61vid a A D P 81 Old Latin vg syrp copbo arm eth _al_) was as natural for scribes as it would have been... [ Continue Reading ]