² tc The Western text (D it) has αἰνοῦντες (ainountes, “praising”) here, while the Alexandrian mss (P⁷⁵ א B C* L) have εὐλογοῦντες (eulogountes, “blessing”). Most mss, especially the later Byzantine mss, evidently combine these two readings with αἰνοῦντες καὶ εὐλογοῦντες (A C² W Θ Ψ ƒ^1,13 33 M lat). It is more difficult to decide between the two earlier readings. Internal arguments can go either way, but what seems decisive in this instance are the superior witnesses for εὐλογοῦντες.

² tc Most mss (P⁴⁵ A D¹ Q W Θ 070 ƒ^1,13 33 M lat sy) read τοῦ θεοῦ (tou theou, “of God”) instead of αὐτοῦ (autou, “his”; found in א B D* L Ψ 579 892 co). But such a clarifying reading is suspect. αὐτοῦ is superior on both internal and external grounds. P⁷⁵ includes neither and as such would support the translation above since the article alone can often be translated as a possessive pronoun.

⁵ tc Most mss (P⁴⁵ Ψ 070 ƒ¹³ 33 M) supply the pronoun ὑμῶν (humōn, “your”) here, although several significant and early witnesses omit it (P⁷⁵ א A B D L Q W Θ ƒ¹ 700 2542 al lat). Externally, the shorter reading is superior. Internally, the pronoun looks to be a scribal clarification. In context the article can be translated as a possessive pronoun anyway (ExSyn 215), as it has been done for this translation.

² tc The translation follows the reading that has Luke’s normal imperfect here (ἐκωλύομεν, ekōluomen; found in P^75vid א B L Ξ 579 892 1241). Most mss, however, have an aorist (ἐκωλύσαμεν, ekōlusamen; found in A C D W Θ Ψ ƒ^1,13 33 M co), which would be translated “we forbade him.” The imperfect enjoys the best external and internal support.

² tc Most mss, especially later ones (A C [D] Θ Ψ ƒ¹³ 33 M), have “the sick slave” here instead of “the slave.” This brings out the contrast of the healing more clearly, but this reading looks secondary both internally (scribes tended toward clarification) and externally (the shorter reading is well supported by a variety of witnesses: P⁷⁵ א B L W ƒ¹ 579 700 892* 1241 2542 it co).

² tn Grk “reasonings.” This is the noun form of the infinitive διαλογίζεσθαι (dialogizesthai, “began to reason to themselves”) used in v. 21. Jesus’ reply to them in the latter part of the present verse makes clear that these reasonings were mental and internal, so the translation “thoughts” was used here. On the hostile or evil nature of these thoughts, see G. Schrenk, TDNT 2:97.

¹ tc The majority of mss read ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς (ho Iēsous, “Jesus”), which clarifies who is the subject of the sentence. Although the shorter text is attested in far fewer witnesses (P²¹ א B D 892* sy^s,c sa bo), both the pedigree of the mss and the strong internal evidence (viz., scribes were not prone to intentionally delete the name of Jesus) argue for the omission of Jesus’ name. The name has been included in the translation, however, for clarity.

⁵ tc The MT, supported by the Dead Sea Scrolls 4QpNah and Mur88, reads “your help.” The LXX and Syriac read “her help.” While the MT has strong external support, the internal evidence supports the LXX. The speaker is still speaking about Thebes to Nineveh and a shift to second person would imply a brief direct address to Nineveh, for whom the named nations were not allies.

³ tn Heb “good.” The repetition of טוֹב (tov, “good”) forms an inclusion (a structural device that rounds off the unit), while the two internal terms מִשֶּׁמֶן…שֵׁם (shem mishemen, “name…ointment”) create a paronomastic wordplay (see the note on the word “perfume”). The combination of these two sets of literary devices creates an AB:B'A' chiasm: מִשֶּׁמֶן טוֹב // שֵׁם טוֹב (tov shem // mishemen tov, e.g., “good name”// “ointment good”).

² tn The noun בֶּטֶן (beten) can refer to the stomach, womb, or internal organs. In Prov 20:30 and 22:18 it appears to be metaphorical for the inner person, or soul. Given the references to the mouth, lips, and being satisfied, on one level it refers to the stomach. But it probably functions on a spiritual level as well, especially when read with the following verse.

¹ tn Heb “circumcise the foreskin of” (cf. KJV, ASV, NRSV). Reference to the Abrahamic covenant prompts Moses to recall the sign of that covenant, namely, physical circumcision (Gen 17:9-14). Just as that act signified total covenant obedience, so spiritual circumcision (cleansing of the heart) signifies more internally a commitment to be pliable and obedient to the will of God (cf. Deut 30:6; Jer 4:4; 9:26).

¹ tc Most mss (C Ψ 1611 1739^c 1244 M as well as a few versions and fathers) read “uncontrollable” (ἀκατασχετόν, akatascheton), while most of the more significant witnesses (א A B K P 1175 1243 1735 1739* latt co) have “restless” (ἀκατάστατον, akatastaton). Externally, the latter reading should be preferred. Internally, however, things get a bit more complex. The notion of being uncontrollable is well suited to the context, especially as a counterbalance to v. 8a, though for this very reason scribes may have been tempted to replace ἀκατάστατον with ἀκατασχετόν. In a semantically parallel early Christian text, ἀκατάστατος (akatastatos) was considered strong enough of a term to denounce slander as “a restless demon” (Herm. 27:3). On the other hand, ἀκατάστατον may have been substituted for ἀκατασχετόν by way of assimilation to 1:8 (especially since both words were relatively rare, scribes may have replaced the less familiar with one that was already used in this letter). On internal evidence, it is difficult to decide, though ἀκατασχετόν is slightly preferred. However, in light of the strong support for ἀκατάστατον, and the less-than-decisive internal evidence, ἀκατάστατον is deemed more likely to be the initial reading.

⁸ sn The phrase in your hearts is sometimes considered an inappropriate image for the parousia, since the coming of Christ will be visible to all. But Peter’s point has to do with full comprehension of the revelation of Christ, something only believers will experience. Further, his use of light imagery is doing double-duty, suggesting two things at once (i.e., internal guidance to truth or illumination, and OT prophecy about Christ’s return) and hence can not be expected to be consistent with every point he wishes to make.

² tc Most witnesses (D¹ M) have “various washings, and external regulations” (βαπτισμοῖς καὶ δικαιώμασιν, baptismois kai dikaiōmasin), with both nouns in the dative. The translation “washings; they are…regulations” renders βαπτισμοῖς, δικαιώματα (baptismois, dikaiōmata; found in such significant mss as P⁴⁶ א* A I P 0278 33 1739 1881 al sa) in which case δικαιώματα is taken as the nominative subject of the participle ἐπικείμενα (epikeimena). It seems far more likely that scribes would conform δικαιώματα to the immediately preceding datives and join it to them by καί than they would to the following nominative participle. Both on external and internal evidence the text is thus secure as reading βαπτισμοῖς, δικαιώματα.

¹ tc ‡ A correlative καί (kai, “both you”) is found in a few witnesses (א*^,2 F G 33 104), perhaps either to underscore the value of Onesimus or in imitation of the νυνὶ δὲ καί (nuni de kai) in v. 9. The lack of καί is read by most witnesses, including א^c A C D 0278 1241 1505 1739 1881 M it. Although a decision is difficult, the shorter reading has a slight edge in both internal and external evidence. NA²⁸ places the καί in brackets, indicating some doubts as to its authenticity.

¹ tc The reading ὁ κύριος (ho kurios, “the Lord”) is well supported by א* F G 33 1739 1881 sa, but predictable expansions on the text have occurred at this point: A 104 614 read ὁ κύριος ᾿Ιησοῦς (ho kurios Iēsous, “the Lord Jesus”), while א² C D Ψ 1175 1241 1505 M al sy bo have ὁ κύριος ᾿Ιησοῦς Χριστός (ho kurios Iēsous Christos, “the Lord Jesus Christ”). As B. M. Metzger notes, although in a late book such as 2 Timothy, one might expect the fuller title for the Lord, accidental omission of nomina sacra is rare (TCGNT 582). The shorter reading is thus preferred on both external and internal grounds.

¹ tc The Greek conjunction ὅτι usually means “because,” but here it takes the sense “so that” (see BDAG 732 s.v. 5.c). This unusual sense led to textual variation as scribes attempted to correct what appeared to be an error: D* along with a few versional and patristic witnesses read ἀληθὲς ὅτι (“it is true that”), and א² D¹ Ψ 1175 1241 1505 M al sy read δῆλον ὅτι (“it is clear that”). Thus the simple conjunction is preferred on internal as well as external grounds, supported by א* A F G 048 33 81 1739 1881.

¹ tc Most mss (א A C D² F G Ψ 0278 1175 1241 1505 2464 M al) have the plural τύπους (tupous, “examples”) here, while a few significant witnesses have the singular τύπον (tupon, “example”; B D*^,c 6 33 81 104 1739 1881 lat). With ὑμᾶς (humas, “you”) immediately preceding, the plural form looks motivated: Scribes would be expected to change the singular to the plural here. Although the external evidence for the singular reading is not overwhelming, the internal evidence for it is compelling.

¹ tc Since “the word of Christ” occurs nowhere else in the NT, two predictable variants arose: “word of God” and “word of the Lord.” Even though some of the witnesses for these variants are impressive (κυρίου [kuriou, “of the Lord”] in א* I 1175 bo Cl; θεοῦ [theou, “of God”] in A C* 33 104 323 945 al), the reading Χριστοῦ (Christou, “of Christ”) is read by an excellent cross-section of witnesses (P⁴⁶ א² B C² D F G Ψ 075 1505 1739 1881 2464 M lat sa). On both internal and external grounds, Χριστοῦ is strongly preferred.

¹ sn Among whom. The relative pronoun phrase that begins v. 3 is identical, except for gender, to the one that begins v. 2 (ἐν αἵς [en hais], ἐν οἵς [en hois]). By the structure, the author is building an argument for our hopeless condition: We lived in sin and we lived among sinful people. Our doom looked to be sealed as well in v. 2: Both the external environment (kingdom of the air) and our internal motivation and attitude (the spirit that is now energizing) were under the devil’s thumb (cf. 2 Cor 4:4).