Some Textual Variants In Romans

Just like in the other thread concerning the book of acts,I will cite some info from Philip W.Comfort's book :New Testament Text And Translation Commentary.

1:16a
WH NU : the gospel
var/TR : the gospel of Christ

"The WH NU reading has vastly superior documentary support (both early and diverse) than that of the variant." (p.436)

2:17
WH NU : but if you call yourself a Jew
var/TR : look,you are called a Jew

"The variant reading is probably the result of a scribal error that found its way into the majority of Byzantine manuscripts and TR.' (p.439)

7:6
WH NU : we were freed from the law,having died [to that] in which we were held
var/TR : we were freed from the law --bringing death --in which were held

"The WH NU reading has the best support and perfectly suits the context,which indicates that the believers are freed from the tyranny of the law because they have died to the law in Christ's death." (p.446)

8:1
WH NU: end verse with "Christ Jesus."
var 1 : not walking according to the flesh
var/TR : not walking according to the flesh,but according to Spirit

Comfort contends that the WH NU has the best manuscript support and that "Paul does not attempt to put any condition on our justification." (p.448,449)

9:31
WH NU : did not attain [that]law
var/TR : did not attain [that]law of righteousness

"The WH NU reading has early and diverse documentary support...the variant is the result of scribal expansion (found in TR),borrowing from the previous clause." (p.457)

9:32
WH NU : by works
var/TR : by works of law

"The WH NU reading has excellent documentary support. The variant (printed in TR)is the result of scribal conformity to Paul's normal usage (see 3:20,28;Gal 2:16)." (p.457)

11:6
WH NU : it [grace] would no longer be grace
var/TR : it [grace] would no longer be grace. But if it is of works,then it is no longer grace;otherwise work is no longer work

"The textual evidence in favor of the shorter reading is impressive...the variant is likely an interpolation created perhaps as early as the fourth century...The gloss adds nothing to this,but rather detracts with the opaque statement,'otherwise work is no longer work.' " (p.461)

13:9
WH NU : you shall not steal
var/TR : you shall not steal,you shall not bear false witness

Comfort says the WH NU reading has early and diverse textual attestation.(p.465)

14:6
WH NU :doesn't have "and the one not regarding the day,to the Lord regards it not
var/TR : adds the above mentioned phrase

The WH NU reading has superior manuscripts support per Comfort. He says that "scribes added an antithetical statement . This change occurred late in the history of the transmission of the text..." (p.467)

 

Per Comfort's book --in the book of Romans here's how agreement with the TR fared.

TR agreeing with WH : 12 times.
TR agreeing with NU : 19 times.

 

Expanation of the prior post

1:1 :TR WH
3:9 : TR WH NU
4:1 : TR NU
4:19 : TR WH NU
5:1 : TR NU
5:2 : TR WH NU
8:20,21 : TR WH NU
8:23 : TR WH NU
8:28 : TR NU
8:34b : TR NU
8:34c : TR NU
8:35 : TR WH NU
10:15 : TR NU
10:9 : TR NU
12:1 : TR WH NU
12:14 : TR NU
13:14 : TR WH NU
15:7 : TR WH
15:19 : TR WH NU
15:30 : TR WH NU
15:31 : TR WH NU

 

Explanation

The header of my previous post was wrongly spelled. For shame Rippon!