The form ἕορακεν.
The unusual form ἕορακεν is found in א B* C D P, and is therefore to be preferred to ἕωρακεν.
ii. 23 [καὶ] ἀφειδίᾳ ϲώματοϲ.
ii. 23. Is καί to be omitted?
Here καί is found in all the Greek copies except B, but is omitted in these Latin authorities, m, the translator of Origen (In Rom. ix. § 42, IV. p. 665), Hilary of Poitiers (Tract. in xiv Ps. § 7, p. 73), the Ambrosian Hilary, Ambrose (de Noe 25, p. 267), and Paulinus (Epist. 50, p. 292 sq.). We have more than once found B and Hilary alone in supporting the correct reading (i. 22, ii. 2); and this fact gives weight to their joint authority here. The omission also seems to explain the impossible reading of d, e, which have in religione et humilitate sensus et vexationem corporis, where for et vexationem, we should probably read ad vexationem, as in the Ambrosian Hilary. There was every temptation for a scribe to insert the καί so as to make ἀφειδίᾳ range with the other datives: while on the other hand a finer appreciation of the bearing of the passage suggests that St Paul would have dissociated it, so as to give it a special prominence.
A similar instance occurs in [iii. 12] ὡς ἐκλεκτοὶ τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἅγιοι καὶ ἠγαπημένοι, where B omits the καί with 17 and the Thebaic Version[[537]]. In 219 καὶ ἅγιοι is read for ἅγιοι καί. The great gain in force leads to the suspicion that this omission may be correct, notwithstanding the enormous preponderance of authority on the other side.
iv. 8. γνῶτε τὰ περὶ ἡμῶν.
iv. 8 γνῶτε τὰ περὶ ἡμῶν.
Of the various readings of this passage I have already spoken (p. [29] sq., note [1], p. 301).
The authorities are as follows: