ROMANS 7:14 oi;damen {A} Influenced by Paul’s frequent use of “I” in verses Romans 7:7 to Romans 7:25, a few copyists and church Fathers divided the word so as to read oi=da me,n. But to do this overlooks the need at this point in the apostle’s argument for a statement that would command the gener... [ Continue Reading ]
ROMANS 7:18 ou; {B} The abrupt termination of the sentence with ou; (a A B C 81 1739 copsa, bo goth arm _al_) prompted copyists to add some kind of supplement: (_a_) eu`ri,skw (D G K P Y 33 88* 614 _Byz Lect_), or (_b_) ginw,skw (88mg 2127), or (_c_) _is not in me_ (eth).... [ Continue Reading ]
ROMANS 7:20 @evgw,# {C} Not only is the external evidence rather evenly balanced, but also from the point of view of transcriptional probability evgw, might have been either accidentally omitted through parablepsis or deliberately added for emphasis in conformity with the following evgw,. Accordin... [ Continue Reading ]
ROMANS 7:22 qeou/ {A} The scribe of B, having noticed tw|/ no,mw| tou/ noo,j in ver. Romans 7:23, inadvertently replaced qeou/ with noo,j in ver. Romans 7:22.... [ Continue Reading ]
ROMANS 7:25 ca,rij de. tw|/ qew|/ {B} The reading that seems best to account for the rise of the others is ca,rij de. tw|/ qew|/, supported by a1 C2 Y 33 81 88 104 436 2127 _al_. Two Western readings, h` ca,rij tou/ qeou/ (D itar, b, d, mon, o vg Irenaeus _al_) and h` ca,rij kuri,ou (G itg), pedant... [ Continue Reading ]