Romans 16 Part Two

In my previous post on Romans 16, I briefly wrote about the two exegetical problems found in the passage. There are also two textual problems. The first concerns verse 24: "The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all, Amen." Most Greek mss. contain the verse, however, it is lacking in some key mss. (p46, p61, 01, B C D 81 1739 2464 pc). In other mss. (P 33 104 365 ), the verse is found after v. 27. Neither NA nor UBS place the verse in the text. Most modern translations either bracket the verse or footnote it. The strong external evidence and the fact that the verse is redundant [see v. 20], make it probable v. 24 is not part of the original text of Romans.

The second textual problem concerns the doxology found in vv. 25-27. As the note in NET makes plain, there are considerable differences in the mss. over the presence and placement of these verses. Primarily, the mss. place the verses after v. 23, after 14:23, or after 15:33. Some mss. have the verses in two places. Only a few mss. omit the doxology, therefore, it is very likely part of the original text.

A decision on this text is difficult, and the opinions of scholars differ. I hold to the traditional placement at the end of the letter. I do so for two reasons. First, it doesn't make sense for it to be placed at 14:23. From 14:1 through 15:13, Paul is dealing with one subject--accepting one another in love. 15:1 continues the thoughts of what went on before it, and a doxology here would disrupt the thought. Second is the external evidence. P46 is the only support for the doxology after 15:33 (1506 has the doxology after 14:23 and 15:33). Granted, it is very early support, but there is no other external evidence to warrant placing it there. Internally, v. 33, "Now may the God of peace be with you all. Amen" is sufficient--the doxology would be redundant. There is more support for placing the doxology after 14:23, but the strong evidence placing it at the end of the letter is persuasive (p61, 01, B C D 81 1739).

Metzger suggests two possibilities for the textual problem. First, Paul may have send two different copies of Romans--one lacking chapter 16 and other with it. Second, Marcion distributed a copy of Romans lacking chapters 15 and 16.

Another suggestion could be that Paul himself kept copies of his letters in a notebook and after his death someone [Luke, Timothy?] distributed a shortened Romans. I find this very plausible.