1 Pet 3:7 [Textus Receptus (Elzevir) (1624)]774
Οἱ ἄνδρες ὁμοίως, συνοικοῦντες κατὰ γνῶσιν, ὡς ἀσθενεστέρῳ σκεύει τῷ γυναικείῳ ἀπονέμοντες τιμὴν, ὡς καὶ συγκληρονόμοι χάριτος ζωῆς, εἰς τὸ μὴ ἐκκόπτεσθαι τὰς προσευχὰς ὑμῶν.
1 Pet 3:7 [Codex Sinaiticus (א or 01) (4th century)]
1 Pet 3:7 [Codex Alexandrinus (Royal MS 1 D VIII) (A02) (5th century)]
1 Pet 3:7 [Codex Vaticanus Graecus 1209 (B03) (4th century)]101bc2-3
Ανδρες ομοιως συνοικουντες κατα γνωσι- ως ασθενεστερω σκευει τω γυναικειω απονεμοντες τειμην ως και συνγκληρονομοις χαριτος ζωης εις το μη εγκοπτεσθαι ταις προσευχαις ϋμων .
1 Pet 3:7 [Codex Ephraemi Syri Rescriptus (C04) (5th century)]
Critical Apparatus :
(1) οι ανδρες : 910
(2) OMIT οι : B
(3) τιμην : 910
(4) τειμην : B
(5) ως και : B, 910c
(6) και ως : 910*
(7) συγκληρονομοι : 910
(8) συνκληρονομοις : B*
(9) συγκληρονομοις : B1
(10) ζωης : B
(11) ζωσης : 910
(12) εκκοπτεσθαι :
(13) εγκοπτεσθαι : B, 910
(14) τας προσευχας : 910
(15) ταις προσευχαις : B
A Textual Commentary On 1 Peter 3:7
(a) Stephens’s text was that followed in the Greek New Testament in WALTON’S POLYGLOT, 1657 ; it was also edited without intentional variation by Mill in 1707 : and since that period Mill’s text has been commonly reprinted in this country, having thus become our current text : in foreign countries the Elzevir edition has been regarded as “the received text” ; although, in point of fact, in many of those places in which the Stephanic text differs from that of the Elzevirs (comparatively few as such variations are) the editions published on the Continent as “the received text,” follow such Stephanic readings ; and sometimes (as in 1 Pet. iii. 7) they follow neither.
(S. P. Tregelles, An Account of the Printed Text of the Greek New Testament, p. 35)
(b) In those interchanges of vowels which were common even when our oldest MSS . were written (ει and ι, and αι and ε), the ordinary rules of Greek orthography must be followed throughout : but it must be remembered that, whichever is written, it involves no license of conjecture to read the other.
Iota subscribed or postscribed belongs to the same subject as vowel changes. This letter had formerly been postscribed, as may be seen in inscriptions, and in secular MSS., such as the Vatican fragments of Dion Cassius ; † but it was wholly omitted in biblical codices before the time when our most ancient copies were written‡, and the subscribed Iota belongs to a much more recent period.§ Its insertion, therefore, in printed editions, is rather a compliance with modern practice, than a requirement of ancient authority. But, though the oldest MSS. of the New Testament show no instance of this Iota, yet there are cases in which there may be perhaps a trace of its existence : for the oldest MSS. present the forms dº (written, of course, δω) and δοι, and γνῳ (γνω) and γνοι, etc., as though they might stand interchangeably the one for the other : as if, in fact, ΔΩΙ of the more ancient orthography might be expressed by either ΔΩ or ΔΩΙ. In all these points the authorities must be followed ; but this fact suggests the inquiry, whether the terminations –οι and –ῳ ever stand the one for the other in circumstances of a different kind ; for if this appears to be the case, it must be considered as orthographic variation merely ; and thus to disregard the form actually occurring, would not be in any sense license of conjecture.
An instance of a word in which it has been supposed that the termination –οι ought to be –ῳ, is found in συγκληρονομοι, 1 Pet. iii. 7 : for which it has been proposed to read συγκληρονομῳ, so as to be closely connected with the dative singular σκευει, which has immediately preceded. Now, though there is no direct authority for so taking this word, yet there is no occasion to alter a letter of the text to enable us to understand it thus, if the connection and construction really require it ;* for, when the postscribed ι had ceased to be written, –ωι was in fact expressed either by –οι or –ω.
* The interchange of the words η and ει appears to be anterior to the confusion of sound, which subsequently led to the substitution of one vowel for another.
† For instance , ΕΝΤΩICΥΝΕΔΡΙΩΙ, ΑΥΤΩΙ, ΕΚΕΙΝΩΙ ; but on the same page occurs TOIOYTQANΔΡI, showing that the insertion of the Iota was on the wane.
‡ For the only traces of Iota postscribed in uncial MSS. of the New Testament, see above, page 158 note.
§ The cursive MSS . are most irregular in their use of the postscribed or subscribed Iota. The following is the testimony of Mr. Scrivener, in his “Collation of the Gospels” (a book of great value on such points, for the facts which it contains) :— “I have diligently noted in the preceding chapter which of the copies I have collated retain, and which reject, the .. In the great majority ι ascriptum is found but rarely ; in all, it is far oftener neglected than inserted : …. ι subscriptum is seldom met with at all except in m and n, and even in them I must make the same reservation ; it is still more frequently omitted.” (Introd. p. lxxj.)
(S. P. Tregelles, An Account of the Printed Text of the Greek New Testament, pp. 210-211)