“The scribes of the Byzantine text were guilty of taking liberties with the text in both adding to and taking away from.” Andrews
“It was the corrupt Byzantine form of text that provided the basis for almost all translations of the New Testament into modern languages down to the nineteenth century.” – Metzger
P72 B C K P 614 0209 1739 2492 Byz; Ambr has the original reading in 2 Peter 1:10, where we have Peter exhorting the brothers to “be all the more diligent to confirm your calling and choosing” (βεβαιαν υμων την κλησιν και εκλογην ποιεισθαι). A gloss, that is, a very short comment written by the scribe explaining
The quotation in verses 2 and 3 is composite, the first part being from Mal 3:1 and the second part from Is 40:3. It is easy to see, therefore, why copyists would have altered the words …
The NA28 apparatus has P46vid א* B C D* 6. 81. 629. 1506. 1739 lat co. We notice that they have P46 listed as a “vid,” which is short for Latin videtur, “apparent reading” “not certain”). It means that …
2 Peter 3:10
10 will be exposed. [heurethesetai] or shall be burned up. [katakaesetai]
Will God himself destroy the earth by fire? Has God’s original purpose for the earth changed?
MODERN textual scholars do not hesitate to omit from the Bible the spurious passage found at 1 John 5:7-8. It is omitted by the translations ERV, ASV, RSV, ESV, NASB, LEB, CSB, UASV, etc.) Commenting on these words, the greatest textual scholar of the 20th century Bruce M. Metzger said, “these words are spurious and have no right to stand in the New Testament is certain …” – Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament (1994), 647.
