Rom 5:1 [Textus Receptus (Elzevir) (1624)]526
Δικαιωθέντες οὖν ἐκ πίστεως, εἰρήνην ἔχομεν πρὸς τὸν Θεὸν διὰ τοῦ Κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ·
Rom 5:1 [Codex Sinaiticus (א or 01) (4th century)]q82f2vc2
δικαιωθεντες ου- εκ πιστεως· ειρηνην εχωμεν προς τον θν δια του κυ ημων ιυ χυ ·
Rom 5:1 [Codex Alexandrinus (Royal MS 1 D VIII) (A02) (5th century)]
Rom 5:1 [Codex Vaticanus Gr. 1209 (B03) (4th century)]1449c2
Δικαιωθέντες οὖν ἐκ πίστεως εἰρήνην ἔχοωμεν πρὸς τὸν θν διὰ τοῦ κυ ἡμῶ- ιυ χυ·
Rom 5:1 [Codex Ephraemi Syri Rescriptus (Grec 9) (C04) (5th century)]
Rom 5:1 [Codex Claromontanus (Grec 107) (D06) (5th century)]
Critical Apparatus :
(1) εχομεν : B¹
(2) εχωμεν : א, B*, 910
A Textual Commentary On Romans 5:1
(a) Rom. v. 1. Common text ἔχομεν, but ἔχωμεν, Vulg., Peshito Syr., Memph., Arm., Chrysostom, Cyril, and other fathers ; with A B * (sic) D J, 17, 37, and other copies.
(S. P. Tregelles, An Account of the Printed Text of the Greek New Testament, p. 146)
(b) One principal object which I had in going abroad was to endeavour to collate for myself the Vatican MS. (B). This important document was collated for Bentley by an Italian named Mico, and this collation was published in 1799 ; it was subsequently collated (with the exception of the Gospels of Luke and John) by Birch. A third collation (made previously to either of these, in 1669,) by Bartolocci, remains in MS. at Paris.* As this is the most important of all New Testament MSS., I had compared the two published collations carefully with each other : I found that they differed in nearly two thousand places ; many of these discrepancies were readings noticed by one and not by the other. I went to Rome, and during the five months that I was there, I sought diligently to obtain permission to collate the MS . accurately, or at least to examine it in the places in which Birch and Bentley differ with regard to its readings. All ended in disappointment. I often saw the MS., but I was hindered from transcribing any of its readings. I read, however, many passages, and have since noted down several important readings. The following are of some moment : Rom. v. 1, εχωμεν is the original reading of the MS. (thus agreeing with the other more ancient MSS. etc.) ; a later hand has changed this into εχομεν. The collations of Birch, Bentley, and Bartolocci, do not notice this passage. In Rom. viii. 11, the MS. reads δια το ενοικουν αυτου πνευμα : to notice this reading explicitly is of the more importance, because Griesbach and Scholz cite the Vatican MS. as an authority for the other reading (which, however, they reject), δια το ενοικουντος αυτου πνευματος.
* This I copied in the Bibliothèque du Roi, in 1849.
(S. P. Tregelles, An Account of the Printed Text of the Greek New Testament, p. 156)