³ tc The reading “and I looked” (καὶ εἶδον, kai eidon) or some slight variation (e.g., ἶδον, idon) has excellent ms support (א A C P 1611) and its omission seems to have come through the mss that have already placed “and look” (καὶ ἴδε or καὶ βλέπε [kai ide or kai blepe]) after the verb “come” (ἔρχου, erchou) in 6:1. Thus, for these copyists it was redundant to add “and I looked” again.

² tc The reading “and I looked” (καὶ εἶδον, kai eidon) or some slight variation (e.g., ἶδον, idon) has excellent ms support (א A C P 1611) and its omission seems to come through the mss that have already placed “and look” (καὶ ἴδε or καὶ βλέπε [kai ide or kai blepe]) after the verb “come” (ἔρχου, erchou) as mentioned in the text-critical note on 6:1. Thus, for these copyists it was redundant to add “and I looked” again.

² tc Most witnesses, including some early and significnt ones (א P 5 33 1175 1611 2344 2492 M sy^{ph mss,h}), have κυρίου (kuriou, “Lord”) before ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ (Iēsou Christou, “Jesus Christ”), but this is a typical scribal addition, motivated by pietistic and liturgical concerns. Further, early and excellent mss (A B Ψ 048 0232 81 323 436 442 1243 1735 1739 1852sy^{ph mss}) lack κυρίου. Thus, both internally and externally, the shorter reading is strongly preferred.

¹ tc Most later mss, including some significant ones (P 5 81 436 442 1735 2344 2492 M) have θεόν (theon, “God”) instead of Χριστόν (Christon; “Christ”) here. But Χριστόν is widely supported by excellent and early witnesses (P⁷² א A B C Ψ 33 1175 1243 1611 1739 1852 latt sy co), and as a less common idiom better explains the rise of the other reading.

² tc Although some excellent witnesses lack explicit reference to the one strengthening Paul (so א* A B D* I 33 1739 lat co Cl), the majority of witnesses (א² D² [F G] Ψ 075 1175 1241 1505 1881 2464 M al sy Hier) add Χριστῷ (Christō) here (thus, “through Christ who strengthens me”). But this kind of reading is patently secondary, and is a predictable variant. Further, the shorter reading is much harder, for it leaves the agent unspecified.

³ tc The bulk of the Western witnesses (D*^,c F G K it) dropped καί (kai) here, most likely due to ascetic concerns (the absence of the καί makes the statement express absolute self-denial). Strong external attestation for its inclusion from excellent witnesses as well as the majority (P⁴⁶ א A B C D¹ Ψ 075 0278 33 1175 1241 1505 1739 1881 2464 M sy) also marks it as autographic.

² tn Or “makes knowledge acceptable” (so NASB). The verb תֵּיטִיב (tetiv, Hiphil imperfect of יָטַב [yatav, “to be good”]) can be translated “to make good” or “to treat in a good [or, excellent] way” (C. H. Toy, Proverbs [ICC], 303). M. Dahood, however, suggests emending the text to תֵּיטִיף (tetif) which is a cognate of נָטַף (nataf, “drip”), and translates “tongues of the sages drip with knowledge” (Proverbs and Northwest Semitic Philology, 32-33). But this change is gratuitous and unnecessary.

² tc The reading “the love from us that is in you” is very difficult in this context, for Paul is here enumerating the Corinthians’ attributes: How is it possible for them to excel “in the love from us that is in you”? Most likely, because of this difficulty, several early scribes, as well as most later ones (א C D F G Ψ [33] M lat), altered the text to read “your love for us” (so NIV; Grk ἐξ ὑμῶν ἐν ἡμῖν ἀγάπῃ [ex humōn en hēmin agapē]). The reading ἐξ ἡμῶν ἐν ὑμῖν ἀγάπῃ (ex hēmōn en humin agapē) is found, however, in excellent and early witnesses (P⁴⁶ B 0243 6 104 630 1175 1739 1881 co). As the harder reading it explains the rise of the other reading. What, then, is the force of “in the love from us that is in you”? Most likely, Paul is commending the Corinthians for excelling in deriving some inspiration from the apostles’ love for them.

⁵ tc The textual problem here between the present tense βασιλεύουσιν (basileuousin, “they are reigning”; so A 1006 1611 M^K) and the future βασιλεύσουσιν (basileusousin, “they will reign”; so א 1854 2053 M^A lat co) is a difficult one. Both readings have excellent support. On the one hand, the present tense seems to be the harder reading in this context. On the other hand, codex A elsewhere mistakes the future for the present (20:6). Further, the lunate sigma in majuscule script could have been overlooked by some scribes, resulting in the present tense. All things considered, there is a slight preference for the future.

² tc A few significant and early witnesses mss (א* B sa) lack ἐπισκοποῦντες (episkopountes, “exercising oversight”), but the participle enjoys otherwise good ms support (P⁷² א² A P Ψ 33 1739 M lat bo). A decision is difficult because normally the shorter reading is preferred, especially when found in excellent witnesses. However, in this instance the omission may be due to a hesitation among some scribes to associate oversight with elders, since the later church viewed overseer/bishop as a separate office from elder.

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.

⁴ tc Most witnesses, including some significant ones (א A C F G I [P] 075 2464 M it bo Hier), read “and the Lord Jesus Christ” at the end of this verse, no doubt to conform the wording to the typical Pauline salutation. However, excellent and early witnesses (B D K L Ψ 33 81 1175 1505 1739 1881 al sa Ambst) lack this phrase. Since the omission is inexplicable as arising from the longer reading (otherwise, these mss would surely have deleted the phrase in the rest of the corpus Paulinum), it is surely authentic.

³ tc The majority of later mss (א² A^c D¹ Ψ 0243 0278 33 1739 1881 M) as well as some versional witnesses include the pronoun “my” here, but the omission of the pronoun has excellent external support (P^46vid א* A* B D* F G latt). Scribes probably added the pronoun for clarity, making the obvious referent explicit. This would also make “power” more parallel with “my grace.” Though the original text probably did not include “my,” scribes who added the word were following the sense of Paul’s statement.

² tc ‡ Most mss, including some of the most important ones (B D E Ψ M sy), read αὐτοῖς (autois, “to them”) here, while some excellent and early witnesses (P^45vid,74vid א A 33 81 945 1739) lack the pronoun. Although it is possible that the pronoun was deleted because it was seen as superfluous, it is also possible that it was added as a natural expansion on the text, strengthening the connection between Peter and his listeners. Although a decision is difficult, the shorter reading is slightly preferred. NA²⁸ puts the pronoun in brackets, indicating some doubts as to its authenticity.

⁵ tc Some significant mss (P⁶⁶ B* [700]) have the present imperative ποιεῖτε (poieite) here: “If you are Abraham’s children, then do,” while many others (א² C K L N Δ Ψ ƒ^1,13 33 565 579 892 pm) add the contingent particle ἄν (an) to ἐποιεῖτε (epoieite) making it a more proper second class condition by Attic standards. The simple ἐποιεῖτε without the ἄν is the hardest reading, and is found in some excellent witnesses (P⁷⁵ א* B² D W Γ Θ 070 0250 1424 pm).

¹ tc Several witnesses, two of which are quite ancient (P^66,75 L N ƒ¹ 33 565 892 1241 al lat), have ὡς (hōs, “like”) before φραγέλλιον (phragellion, “whip”). A decision based on external evidence would be difficult to make because the shorter reading also has excellent witnesses, as well as the majority, on its side (א A B Θ Ψ ƒ¹³ M co). Internal evidence, though, leans toward the shorter reading. Scribes tended to add to the text, and the addition of ὡς here clearly softens the assertion of the evangelist: Instead of making a whip of cords, Jesus made “[something] like a whip of cords.”

² tc Instead of the future indicative δώσουσιν (dōsousin, “they will give”), most witnesses (C D W Θ Ψ ƒ¹ M) have the aorist subjunctive δῶσιν (dōsin, “they might give”). The aorist subjunctive is expected following ἵνα (hina, “so that”), so it is almost surely a motivated reading. Further, early and excellent witnesses, as well as a few others (א A B ƒ¹³ 33 579 1241 2542 al), have δώσουσιν. It is thus more likely that the future indicative is authentic. For a discussion of this construction, see BDF §369.2.

² tc Most mss, especially the later ones, have ἀγαπητός (agapētos, “the one I love”; A C* W ƒ¹³ 33 M it), or ἀγαπητὸς ἐν ᾧ (ἠ)υδόκησα (agapētos en hō (ē)udokēsa, “the one I love, in whom I am well pleased”; C³ D Ψ) here, instead of ἐκλελεγμένος (eklelegmenos, “the Chosen One”), but these variants are probably assimilations to Matt 17:5 and Mark 9:7. The text behind the translation also enjoys excellent support from P^45,75 א B L Ξ (579) 892 1241 co.

¹ tc Most witnesses, even early and excellent ones (P^45vid א² A C D L W Θ Ψ ƒ^1,13 33 M lat co), have “and fasting” (καὶ νηστείᾳ, kai nēsteia) after “prayer” here. But this seems to be a motivated reading, due to the early church’s emphasis on fasting (TCGNT 85; cf., e.g., 2 Clem. 16:4; Pol. Phil 7:2; Did. 1:3; 7:4). That the most significant witnesses (א* B), as well as a few others (0274 k), lack καὶ νηστείᾳ, when a good reason for the omission is difficult to find, argues strongly for the shorter reading.

² tc ‡ Most mss (P⁴⁵ A D W Θ ƒ^1,13 M lat sy) have αὐτοῦ (autou, “his”) after τοῖς μαθηταῖς (tois mathētais, “the disciples”), but several excellent witnesses (א B L Δ 33 579 892 1241 1424) lack the pronoun. This kind of variant is often a predictable expansion of the text; further, that many significant mss lack the pronoun gives support for the shorter reading. For these reasons, the pronoun is considered to be secondary. NA²⁸ puts αὐτοῦ in brackets, indicating some doubts as to its authenticity.