Words omitted from AV1611

From Easton's Bible Dictionary under the listing of "Subscriptions"--

The subscriptions to Paul’s epistles are no part of the original. In their present form they are ascribed to Euthalius, a bishop of the fifth century. Some of them are obviously incorrect.
​

 

The majority portion of the rather lengthy entry in the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia under the listing of "Book of Psalms" (my underlines and bold)--

4. Titles in the Hebrew Text:
(1) Value of the Superscriptions.
It is the fashion among advanced critics to waive the titles of the psalms out of court as wholly worthless and misleading. This method is as thoroughly unscientific as the older procedure of defending the superscriptions as part of an inspired text. These titles are clearly very old, for the Septuagint, in the 2nd century BC, did not understand many of them. The worst that can be said of the superscriptions is that they are guesses of Hebrew editors and scribes of a period long prior to the Greek version. As to many of the musical and liturgical titles, the best learning of Hebrew and Christian scholars is unable to recover the original meaning. The scribes who prefixed the titles had no conceivable reason for writing nonsense into their prayerbook and hymnal. These superscriptions and subscriptions all had a worthy meaning, when they were first placed beside individual psalms. This indisputable fact of the great antiquity of these titles ought forever to make it impossible for scientific research to ignore them. Grant for the sake of argument, that not one of them came from the pen of the writers of the Psalms, but only from editors and compilers of exilic or post-exilic days, it would still be reasonable to give attention to the views of ancient Hebrew scholars, before considering the conjectures of modern critics on questions of authorship and date...

... We are far from claiming that the titles are always intelligible to us, or that, when understood, they are always correct. The process of constructing titles indicative of authorship had not ceased in the 2nd century BC, the Septuagint adding many to psalms that were anonymous in the Hebrew. The view expressed nearly 50 years ago by Perowne is eminently sane: "The inscriptions cannot always be relied on. They are sometimes genuine, and really represent the most ancient tradition. At other times, they are due to the caprice of later editors and collectors, the fruits of conjecture, or of dimmer and more uncertain traditions. In short, the inscriptions of the Psalms are like the subscriptions to the Epistles of the New Testament. They are not of any necessary authority, and their value must be weighed and tested by the usual critical processes."​

 

It seems that the Mormons don't omit these subscriptions found at the end of the Pauline epistles. In 1991, Max H. Parkin wrote a response to a Bible reader in “I Have a Question” Ensign (a Latter-Day publication) in regard to the authorship of the epistle of Philemon due to confusion caused by the subscription (despite Hills' opinion that these have "never been a problem"). Parkin was a instructor at Salt Lake's Institute of Religion, and his answer was a fairly detailed explanation which included in part (his bold & italic, my underline) --

The Origin of the Subscriptions. The subscriptions in the Byzantine manuscripts—contained in the Textus Receptus and carried into the King James Version—can be traced to their possible creation in the fourth century. Some mid-fourth-century Greek manuscripts of Paul’s epistles contain a compilation of textual notes—the works of a Christian scribe known as Euthalius (or Evagrius). It was Euthalius who composed many editorial aids to the manuscripts during that century and who possibly added “the subscriptions attached to the Pauline Epistles and retained in the King James Version,” says Bruce M. Metzger, a Greek palaeographer at Princeton Theological Seminary and an accomplished New Testament textual specialist.

Metzger believes that the subscriptions at the end of six of Paul’s letters—which he attributes to Euthalius—are either false or implausible when judged against the letters’ content. But Metzger does not cast the same doubt upon the one at the end of Philemon and the other six. (The subscriptions are all retained in the 1979 LDS edition of the Bible, to preserve the heritage of the King James Version.)​

There were footnotes indicating that this citation was from Metzger's book Manuscripts of the Greek Bible, pp. 40, 42.

 

Regarding the above OP question, this seemed interesting; below is a portion from the New Advent (the online Catholic Encylopedia) under the topic "Epistles to the Thessalonians" II. FIRST EPISTLE (their italics, my underline)--

C. Time and Place
The textus receptus, at the end of the two Epistles, gives a subscription stating that they were written from Athens (egraphe apo Athenon); and this same subscription is contained in the great uncial codices A, B2, K2, L2 -- that is, Alexandrinus (fourth century), Vaticanus (fifth century corrector), Mosquensis, and Angelicus (both of the ninth century); it is likewise translated in important Latin, Syriac and Coptic manuscripts. None the less, there can be no doubt but that the letters were written during Paul's first stay in Corinth...​

The article in this section then goes on to explain details to support their position.

 

Very true, Rob. What do you think of Thirtle's theory?

For those unfamiliar with the following hypothesis concerning the superscriptions of the Psalms: It seems a certain James William Thirtle asserted in his 1904 book The Titles of the Psalms: Their Nature and Meaning Explained that the musical-choral portion of superscripts were actually being attributed to the wrong Psalms; that is, the formula for this information should be that only the literary ascriptions (indicating either authorship or dedication) should be prefixed, and the musical directions should only appear at the ends of psalms. We recognize that the Tehilim (Hebrew name for the book of Psalms) were originally written in an uninterrupted fashion without the benefit of spaces or punctuation to indicate the beginning or end of individual psalms. Thirtle based his theory on the psalm (prayer) formula found in Habakkuk (Chapter 3) which is neither preceded nor followed by another psalm (thus avoiding any confusion of beginning or ending); the structure found there is that the literary ascription is at the head of the psalm, and the musical instruction is at the end. This model could be applied throughout the book of Psalms. A psalm (poem) in Isaiah 38 also follows this same structure.

For example, Psalm 3 is the first psalm to have an ascription ("A Psalm of David, when he fled Absalom his son") but notice that it is NOT preceded by any musical notation (just like in Habakkuk 3). In most Bibles, Psalm 4 has both a musical notation ("To the chief Musician of Neginoth") and an ascription ("A Psalm of David"). Psalm 5 is prefixed with the same musical notation combined with the same ascription. But if the musical directions current placed at the beginnings were attached at the end of each preceding Psalm (as a subscription), then everything seems to naturally fall into place. So, Psalm 3 should end with "To the chief Musician of Neginoth"; Psalm 4 should begin with "A Psalm of David" and at the end of the psalm it would be proper to find "To the chief Musician of Neginoth". Not every psalm currently has a superscription, and not all that have superscriptions have both a musical notation and an ascription.

This would mean that a few psalms that currently have no superscription might receive a musical subscript from a following psalm, and some psalms with only musical notations, would lose their only superscription. For example, Psalm 44 would donate its musical superscript ("To the chief Musician for the sons of Korah, Machil") to the end of Psalm 43. Psalm 44 has no ascription (and therefore would have no superscription) but would acquire a subscription from Psalm 45; and so on. In Bullinger's Companion Bible the ascriptions are treated as superscriptions, and the musical notations are treated as subscriptions in the manner just described. Scholars seems to find no serious flaws in Thirtle's theory, and it is somewhat puzzling that Bible editors/publishers have not adopted it.

The 1917 Scofield footnote to Psalm 4:1 states (my underline) --

Neginoth: stringed instruments mentioned in connection with Psalms 3.; 5. 43.; 54.; 60.; 66.; 75., where it seems clear that the musical directions now appearing as titles of Psalms 4.; 6.; 54.; 55.; 61.; 67.; and 76., were anciently appended to the preceding Psalms.​

Coincidently, it is the same Hebrew word neginoth that is found in the musical direction at Habakkuk 3:19 (where it is translated as "stringed instruments").

 

Here are portions of an entry from An Introduction to the Critical Study and Knowledge of the Holy Scriptures by British theologian Thomas Hartwell Horne, originally published in 1818, but this is the 8th edition (p. 215, under the subheading of ON THE DIVISON AND MARKS OF DISTINCTION OCCURRING IN THE NEW TESTAMENT with his italics and capitals, my underline) --

IV. But the SUBSCRIPTIONS annexed to the epistles are manifestly spurious: for, in the first place, some are, beyond all doubt, false, ...
Secondly, The subscriptions are altogether wanting in some ancient manuscripts of the best note, while in others they are greatly varied. And, thirdly, The subscription annexed to the first epistle to Timothy is evidently the production of a writer of the age of Constantine the Great, and could not have been written by the apostle Paul: ...
According to Dr. Mill, the subscriptions were added by Euthalius bishop of Sulca in Egypt, about the middle of the fifth century. But whoever was the author of the subscriptions, it is evident that he was either grossly ignorant, or grossly inattentive.​

 

In Part V "Transcribing of the Greek Manuscripts" of this Metzger book subtitled An Introduction to Greek Paleography he states in part at 24. SUPERSCRIPTIONS AND SUBSCRIPTIONS (his parenthesis, my underline)--

... The subscriptions, appended to the end of the books, were originally (like the titles) brief and simple. In the course of time these too became more elaborate, and often included traditional information (or misinformation!) regarding the place at which the book was written, and sometimes the name of the amanuensis.** It is probable that the subscriptions attached to the Pauline Epsitles (and retained in the King James Version) are the work of Euthalius. Six of these subscriptions are false or improbable; that is, they are either absolutely contradicted by the contents of the Epistle (1 Cor., Gal., 1 Tim.) or are difficult to be reconciled with them (1 and 2 Thess., Titus).​

 

Tyndale NT
Geneva
Matthew's
Bishop's
AV1611

At 2 Corinthians 13:14 (there are no verse numbers in Tyndale's and Matthew's) the AV1611 does not follow the Bishop's wording, nor the other versions which uniformly have "sent".
The second pistle to the Corinthians. Sent from Phillippos a citie in Macedonia by Titus and Lucas.
The seconde Epistle to the Corinthians, written from Philippi, a citie in Macedonia, and sent by Titus and Lucas.
The end of the second epistle to the Corinthians. Sent from Philippi a city in Macedonia, by Titus and Lucas.
The ende of the seconde Epistle to the Corinthians. Sent from Philippos, a citie in Macedonia, by Titus and Lucas.
The second Epistle to the Corinthians, was written from Philippos a citie of Macedonia, by Titus and Lucas.

At Galations 6:18 the AV1611 ignores the Bishop's wording, but agrees with the other three versions. The AV1611 always prefers "written" to "sent". The Greek word for these verses is a form of grapho (Strong's #1125 meaning: to write) in the Stephen's 1550 text.
Unto the Galathyans written from Rome.
Vnto the Galatians written from Rome.
Unto the Galatians written from Rome.
The Epistle vnto the Galathians, was sent from Rome.
Unto the Galatians, written from Rome.

At Ephesians 6:24 the AV1611 again does not follow the Bishop's wording, but agrees with Geneva. The agreement between the AV1611 and Geneva was a trend.
Sent from Rome unto the Ephesyans by Tichicus.
Written from Rome vnto the Ephesians, and sent by Tychicus.
Here ends the Epistle of saint Paul unto the Ephesians. Sent from Rome unto the Ephesians by Tychicus.
Sent from Rome vnto the Ephesians, by Tichicus.
Written from Rome vnto the Ephesians by Tychicus.

At 2 Timothy 4:22 the AV1611 and the Geneva are in agreement on this phrase unique to them. Notice that all the versions except the AV1611 have the word "Emperor" (which seems to be in the Greek TR).
The second pistle written from Rome unto Timothy, when Paul was presented the second time up, before the Emperor Nero.
The second Epistle writte from Rome vnto Timotheus, the first Bishop elected of the Church of Ephesus, when Paul was presented the second time before the Emperour Nero.
The end of the second epistle unto Timothy. Written from Rome when Paul was presented the second time up before the Emperor Nero.
The seconde epistle vnto Timothe, was written from Rome, when Paul was presented the seconde tyme vnto the Emperour Nero.
The second Epistle vnto Timotheus, ordeined the first Bishop of the Church of the Ephesians, was written from Rome, when Paul was brought before Nero the second time.

 

Last night, on my way home from work I was listening to the KJV on CD narrated by Roscoe Lee Browne (World Publishing, 1998) and he read the subscription at the end of Romans!

 

I looked through the Bibles at a secondhand bookstore yesterday and here is what I found (this mostly from my memory)--

a Nelson award-quality KJV did not have these words
a Zondervan award-quality KJV did have these words
a Collins KJV "The Bible" did not have these words
an Oxford "New Pilgrim" KJV Student Edition (2003) did not have these words
a Trident Reference Publishing (2006) paperback KJV did have these words​

One of these, I think it was the Oxford, had the dedication to King James in it, but not the preface to the Reader! Pity.

There were four different Bible styles offered from World Bible Publishing --

the KJV softcover did not have these words
the KJV large-print did not have these words
the KJV paperback did have these words!
the "KJV Commentary Bible" did not have these words​

 

1 Thessalonians 5:28 with subscription (simulates AV1611) --

The grace of our Lord Iefus Chrift be with you, Amen.

¶ The firft Epiftle vnto the Theffalonians, was written from Athens.​

From Unger's Bible Dictionary's article "First Thessalonians" (my underline) --

THESSALONIANS, FIRST EPISTLE TO. This, perhaps the earliest Pauline epistle, was written by the apostle in conjunction with Silvanus (Silas) and Timothy.
Occasion. Paul had established the Thessalonian church on his second missionary journey and was expelled from Thessalonica. From this city he went to Berea and to Athens. The epistle alludes to Paul's life at Thessalonica (chap. 2). At Athens he had sent Timothy back to Thessalonica to help the Christians amid their persecutions (1 Thess 3:1-3). Acts 18:5 records that Silas and Timothy rejoined the apostle at Corinth. It is clear, therefore, that the epistle was written from that city in A.D. 52 AD or 53...​

From Easton's Bible Dictionary's entry "Thessalonians, Epistles to the" (my underline) --

The first epistle to the Thessalonians was the first of all Paul's epistles. It was in all probability written from Corinth, where he abode a "long time" (Acts 18:11, 18), early in the period of his residence there, about the end of A.D. 52.​

__________

2 Thessalonians 3:18 with subscription (simulates AV1611) --

The grace of our Lord Iefus Chrift be with you all, Amen.

¶ The fecond Epiftle to the Theffalonians was written from Athens.​

From Smith's Bible Dictionary's entry "Second Thessalonians" (my underline) --

... appears to have been written from Corinth not very long after the first, for Silvanus and Timotheus were still with St. Paul. (2 Thessalonians 1:1) ​

From Easton's Bible Dictionary's entry "Thessalonians, Epistles to the" (my underline) --

The second epistle to the Thessalonians was probably also written from Corinth, and not many months after the first.​

 

There are many websites which claim to offer the Bible's text, I will only mention a few --

crosswalk.com's KJV does have the subscriptions in [brackets]
biblegateway.com's KJV does not have these words
blueletterbible.org's KJV does have the subscriptions in [[[triple brackets]]]
University of Virgina Library KJV does not have these words
University of Michigan Library KJV does not have these words
AV1611.com's KJV does have the subscriptions in [brackets]
ebible.org's KJV does not have these words
holybible.com's KJV does not have these words
onlinebibletalk.com's KJV does have the subscriptions but in lighter gray text
mountainretreatorg.net's KJV does have the subscriptions but in <<double angle brackets>>
kjvbible.org's KJV does not have these words​

Of those online texts that had the subscriptions, I didn't notice that any included the pilcrow (paragraph mark) or an extra space between lines.
I also thought these were especially interesting --

studylight.org's (standard?) 'King James Version' does not have the subscriptions,
but another (under "Early Translations") named 'AV1611' does have the subscriptions
onlinebaptist.com's KJV does not have these words, but there is a pair of empty brackets [] following the last word of the verse.
sacrednamebible.com's KJV (with Strong's links) does not have these words in English,
but their interlinear Greek obviously does have the subscriptions
deanburgonsociety.org does not seem to have an online KJV, nor even links to one​

 

Tyndale NT
Geneva
Matthew's
Bishop's
AV1611

At 1 Corinthians 16:24 (there is no versification in Tyndale's and Matthew's) the AV1611 does not follow the Bishop's wording, nor the other versions which uniformly indicate "sent".
The pistle unto the Corrinthyans sent from Philippos, By Stephana, and Fortunatus, and Acaichus, and Timotheus.
The first Epistle to the Corinthians, written from Philippi, and sent by Stephanas, and Fortunatus, and Achaicus, and Timotheus.
The end of the first epistle unto the Corinthians, sent from Philippi, by Stephanas, and Fortunatus, and Achaicus, and Timotheus.
The first (epistle) to the Corinthians, was sent from Philippos by Stephanas, and Fortunatus, and Achaicus, and Timotheus.
The first Epistle to the Corinthians was written from Philippi by Stephanas, and Fortunatus, and Achaicus, and Timotheus.

At Philippians 4:23 the AV1611 does include "to the Philippians" (in agreement with Geneva, plus Matthew's) lacking in the Bishop's shorter subscription.
Sent from Rome by Epaphroditus.
Written to the Philippians from Rome, and sent by Epaphroditus.
Here ends the epistle of saint Paul the Apostle unto the Philippians. Sent from Rome by Epaphroditus.
This Epistle was written from Rome, by Epaphroditus.
It was written to the Philippians from Rome, by Epaphroditus.

At Titus 3:15 the AV1611 and the Geneva are in agreement on this phrase unique to the two of them.
Written from Nichopolis a citie of Macedonia.
To Titus, elect the first bishoppe of the Church of the Cretians, written from Nicopolis in Macedonia.
Here ends the epistle of saint Paul the Apostle unto Titus. Written from Nicopolis a city of Macedonia.
Written from Nicopolis, (a citie) of Macedonia.
It was written to Titus ordeined the first Bishop of the Church of the Cretians, from Nicopolis of Macedonia.

At Philemon 1:25 again the AV1611 follows Geneva and Matthew's with the words "to Philemon" (rather than adopting the Bishop's wording).
Sent from Rome by Onesimus a servant.
Written from Rome to Philemon, and sent by Onesimus a seruant.
This ends the epistle of saint Paul the Apostle to Philemon. Sent from Rome by Onesimus a servant.
Written from Rome, by Onesimus a seruaunt.
Written from Rome to Philemon, by Onesimus a seruant.

 

Galatians 6:18 with subscription (simulates AV1611, but I haven't figured out a way to do the 'half-R') --

Brethren, the grace of our Lord Iefus Chrift be with your fpirit. Amen.

¶ Unto the Galatians, written from Rome.​

A portion from Unger's Bible Dictionary listing GALATIANS, EPISTLE TO ("Destination and Date", my underline) --

... If the "South Galatian theory" is subscribed to, Galatians may have been written either at Antioch in Syria at the consummation of the first missionary journey (14:26-28) or at Ephesus in the course of the third missionary journey (19:10). The apostle's visit to Jerusalem (Gal 2:1-10) is thought to be identical to that alluded to in Acts 11:30. If this is so, Galatians may have been sent from Antioch around A.D. 48 AD, prior to Paul's third visit to Jerusalem to attend the apostolic gathering of chap. 15. According to this theory, Galatians would be the earliest of the apostle's letters. There are strong reasons, however, to support the hypothesis that Galatians was written at Ephesus (52 AD) during the same time as the other epistles.​

A portion of the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia entry GALATIANS, EPISTLE TO THE ("IV. The Destination and Date, 1. Place and Time Interdependent", my underline) --

...Now the apostle revisited the South Galatian churches in starting on the 2nd missionary tour (Acts 16:1-5). Consequently, if his "Galatians" were Christians of Pisidian Antioch, Iconium, Lystra and Derbe (the South Galatian hypothesis), the letter was written in the further course of the 2nd tour--from Macedonia or Corinth about the time of 1 and 2 Thess (so Zahn, Introduction to the New Testament, I, English translation), or from Antioch in the interval between the 2nd and 3rd journeys (so Ramsay); for on this latter journey (Acts 18:23) Paul (ex hyp.) traversed `the (South) Galatian country' a third time. On the other hand, if they were people of Galatia proper, i.e. of North (Old) Galatia, the epistle cannot be earlier than the occasion of Acts 18:23, when Paul touched a second time "the Galatian country," which, on this supposition, he had evangelized in traveling from South Galatia to Troas during the previous tour (Acts 16:6-8). On the North Galatian hypothesis, the letter was dispatched from Ephesus during Paul's long residence there (Acts 19; so most interpreters, ancient and modern), in which case it heads the 2nd group of the epistles; or later, from Macedonia or Corinth, and shortly before the writing of the Epistle to the Romans (thus Lightfoot, Salmon, A. L. Williams and others).
Per contra, the earlier date, if proved independently, carries with it the South Galatian, the later date the North Galatian theory. The subscription of the Textus Receptus of the New Testament "written from Rome," rests on inferior manuscript authority and late Patristic tradition. Clemen, with no suggestion as to place of origin, assigns to the writing a date subsequent to the termination of the 3rd missionary tour (55 or 57 AD), inasmuch as the epistle reflects the controversy about the Law, which in Romans is comparatively mild, at an acute, and, therefore (he supposes), an advanced stage.​

From Easton's Bible Dictionary article GALATIANS, EPISTLE TO ("Time and place of writing", my underline) --

The epistle was probably written very soon after Paul's second visit to Galatia (Acts 18:23). The references of the epistle appear to agree with this conclusion. The visit to Jerusalem, mentioned in Galatians 2:1-10, was identical with that of Acts 15, and it is spoken of as a thing of the past, and consequently the epistle was written subsequently to the council of Jerusalem. The similarity between this epistle and that to the Romans has led to the conclusion that they were both written at the same time, namely, in the winter of A.D. 57-8, during Paul's stay in Corinth (Acts 20:2, 3). This to the Galatians is written on the urgency of the occasion, tidings having reached him of the state of matters; and that to the Romans in a more deliberate and systematic way, in exposition of the same great doctrines of the gospel.​

 

Lest some one think that Greek MSS are always purely the apostles' copied text without the distraction of extraneous material and annotations (colophons have already been briefly mentioned in this thread), here are only some of the other kinds of readers 'helps' added to these ancient 'Bibles' (just as many modern editions include footnotes, concordances, etc.) --

tables of content
chapter divisions (not our 'modern' ones)
aids in cross-referrencing (ie. 'Eusebian canon')
prologues (called 'hypothesis')
glosses (brief explanations of difficult words or phrases)
interpretive remarks and commentary ('scholia')
comments extracted from linked series of quotations from ecclesiastical writers ('catenae')
etymologies of proper names ('onomastica')
notes to aid with liturgical reading ('menologia')
musical notations ('neumes')​

Additionally (but not necessarily 'helpful' to the reader) --

adornments, illustration, and decorations (including 'monocondylia' which is a playing with letters)
abbreviations and symbols (ie. 'nomina sacra')
punctuation, paragraph markers, symbols
diacritics
pagination​

But none of the wealth of added information was considered inspired, nor was intended to be a part of the 'lemma' (original or base text), and not presented without proper disclosure and acknowledgment.
[Most of the above info from Metzger's book]

 

1 Timothy 6:21 (simulates AV1611) --

Which fome profeffing, haue erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen.

¶ The firft to Timothie was written from Laodicea, which is the chiefeft citie of Phrygia Pacaciana.​

From THE ANCIENT CHURCH: ITS HISTORY, DOCTRINE, WORSHIP, AND CONSTITUTION, TRACED FOR THE FIRST THEEE HUNDRED YEARS by William Dool Killen, D.D., (1859, p.181-2) --

"Every word of God is pure, but the Word of man a often deceitful"; and nowhere do his fallibility and ignorance appear more conspicuously than in his appendages to Scripture. Even the titles prefixed to the writings of the apostles and evangelists are redolent of superstition, for no satisfactory reason can be given why the designation of saint, has been bestowed on Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, whilst it is withheld, not only from Moses and Isaiah, but also from such eminently holy ministers as Timothy and Titus. The postscripts to the epistles of Paul have been added by transcribers, and are also calculated to mislead. Thus, the Epistle to the Galatians is said to have been "written from Rome," though it is now generally acknowledged that Paul was not in the capital of the Empire until long after that letter was dictated. The first Epistle to Timothy is dated "from Laodicea, which is chiefest city of Phrygia Pacatiana;" but it is well that Phrygia was not divided into Phrygia Prima, or Pacatiana, and Phrygia Secunda until the fourth century. It is stated at the end of another epistle that it was "written to Titus ordained the first Bishop of the Church of the Cretians;" but, as the letter itself demonstrates, Paul did not intend that Titus should remain permanently in Crete, and it can be shewn that, for centuries afterwards, such a dignitary as "the Bishop of the Church of the Cretians" was utterly unknown. ​

From the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia under PACATIANA (evidently written by E.J. Banks) --

About 295 AD, when the province of Asia was broken up, two new provinces were formed, Phrygia Prima (Pacatiana), of which Laodicea was "the chiefest city" (subscription to 1Ti the King James Version), and Phrygia Secunda (Salutaris).​

From the An Introduction to the Critical Study and Knowledge of the Holy Scriptures by Thomas H. Horne, B.D. (my underline) --

The subscription annexed to the first epistle to Timothy is evidently the production of a writer of the age of Constantine the Great, and could not have been written by the apostle Paul: for it states that epistle to have been written to Timothy from Laodicea, the chief city of Phrygia Pacatiana; whereas the country of Phrygia was not divided into two provinces of Phrygia Prima, or Pacatiana, and Phrygia Secunda, until the fourth century.​

From Easton's Bible Dictionary article "Timothy, First Epistle to" (my underline) --

Paul in this epistle speaks of himself as having left Ephesus for Macedonia (1:3), and hence not Laodicea, as mentioned in the subscription; but probably Philippi, or some other city in that region, was the place where this epistle was written. During the interval between his first and second imprisonments he probably visited the scenes of his former labours in Greece and Asia, and then found his way into Macedonia, whence he wrote this letter to Timothy, whom he had left behind in Ephesus.​

 

1 Corinthians 16:24 with subscription (AV1611) --

My loue be with you all in Chrift Iefus, Amen.

¶ The firft Epiftle to the Corinthians was written from Philippi by Stephanas, and Fortunatus, and Achaicus, and Timotheus.​

From Smith's Bible Dictionary entry "First Corinthians" --

... was written by the apostle St. Paul toward the close of his nearly three-years stay at Ephesus, (Acts 19:10; 20:31) which, we learn from (1 Corinthians 16:8) probably terminated with the Pentecost of A.D. 57 or 58.​

From Unger's Bible Dictionary entry "First Corinthians" --

The date of the epistle varies with critical opinion. We know it was written from Ephesus (16:8). It was seemingly written in the latter half of Paul's three-year ministry in that city (Acts 20:31; cf. 19:8-22). The spring of A.D. 54 AD or 55 is perhaps correct, although some would date it as late as A.D. 59 AD.​

From Easton's Bible Dictionary entry "Corinthians, First Epistle to the" --

Was written from Ephesus (1 Corinthians 16:8) about the time of the Passover in the third year of the apostle's sojourn there (Acts 19:10; 20:31), and when he had formed the purpose to visit Macedonia, and then return to Corinth (probably A.D. 57).​

It is almost certain that the autograph epistles had no titles. Titles became more of a necessity after Paul's personal letters began to be gathered together in codex form. The term used in the subscript ("first") tends to imply that there could be, or more likely already are, others; particularly since this one is NOT actually his initial letter to the church at Corinth (see 1 Corinthians 5:9).

 

Adam Clarke writes near the end of his commentary on Roman 16 (my underline) --

... That this epistle was written from Corinth is almost universally believed. That Phoebe was a deaconess of the Church at Cenchrea, we have seen in the first verse of this chapter; and that the epistle might have been sent by her to Rome is possible; but that she should have been the writer of the epistle, as this subscription states, egrafh dia foibhv, is false, for chap. xvi. 22 shows that Tertius was the writer, though by inserting the words and sent, we represent her rather as the carrier than the writer. This subscription, however, stands on very questionable grounds. It is wanting in almost all the ancient MSS.; and even of those which are more modern, few have it entirely, as in our common editions. It has already been noted that the subscriptions to the sacred books are of little or no authority, all having been added in latter times, and frequently by injudicious hands. The most ancient have simply To the Romans, or the Epistle to the Romans is finished. The word Amen was seldom added by the inspired writers, and here it is wanting in almost all the ancient MSS...​