CLAIM: Textual critics debate which manuscripts to prefer in Romans 5:1. One set prefers the indicative mood (“we have”), while others prefer the subjunctive mood (“let us have”). Some of our manuscripts use the Greek term echōmen (subjunctive), which means “let us have.” Others contain echomen (indicative), which means “we have.” The subjunctive reading exists in the Byzantine Text, Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Alexandrinus, Codex Bezae, and others. The difference between the two is a single letter in Greek. To add to the confusion, the church fathers quote both versions. Which should we prefer?
RESPONSE: There are a number of reasons to infer that the indicative reading is correct:
First, the indicative reading (“having been justified”) is in the earliest manuscript that we possess. The Wyman fragment (0220vid) dates to the third century. This vellum fragment was discovered in 1950, and it supports the indicative.[1]
Second, it is likely that a scribe could have misheard the vowel sound. As we noted above, the difference between the indicative and subjunctive is the difference between a “long O” and a “short O.” Dunn writes, “An amanuensis’s mishearing the ο for ω (being of similar sound) is inherently likely.”[2]
Third, many of our best texts contain the indicative reading. A later scribe corrected this reading in Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, and the Graeco-Latin codex.[3]
Fourth, the context refers to justification as a past event. Throughout the section, we read nothing but indicatives, and the section “contains not even one exhortation.”[4] In Romans 5:10-11, we read, “For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life. 11 And not only this, but we also exult in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received the reconciliation.” Therefore, even if Romans 5:1 didn’t mention justification as a past event, these verses would.
Bruce argues that a similar principle is at work in Romans 14:19. Even though the majority of manuscripts favor “we pursue,” the context implies the standard reading of “let us pursue.”[5]
Conclusion
For these reasons, we prefer the indicative reading, which is also the majority view in NT translations held by the majority of textual critics.[6]
[1] Harrison, E. F. Romans. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Romans through Galatians (Vol. 10). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House. 1976. 60.
[2] Dunn, J. D. G. (1998). Romans 1–8 (Vol. 38A, p. 245). Dallas: Word, Incorporated.
[3] Bruce, F. F. (1985). Romans: an introduction and commentary (Vol. 6, p. 126). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.
[4] Stott, J. R. W. (2001). The message of Romans: God’s good news for the world (p. 139). Leicester, England; Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.
[5] See footnote. Bruce, F. F. (1985). Romans: an introduction and commentary (Vol. 6, p. 126). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.
[6] Dunn, J. D. G. (1998). Romans 1–8 (Vol. 38A, p. 245). Dallas: Word, Incorporated.