Philippians 3:15-17 (Traditional text) - homoioteleuton +
και τουτο ο θΣ υμιν απο-
καλυψει πλην εις ο εφθα-
σαμεν τω αυτω στοιχειν
κανονι το αυτο φρονειν
συμμιμηται μου γινεσθε
...God will reveal even this to you:
Still, up to what we have already attained,
let us walk the same rule,
let us be of the same mind.
Join in following my example,
INCLUDE LINE: א(corr.) K P Ψ (69 1908 w.o.r.) 88 181 326 614 630 1877 1962 1984 1985 2495 Byz Maj (Majority of continuous MSS), Syr-H, Syr-P, Aeth., Chrysostom Theodore Theodoret John-Dam
(reverse phrases): 81 104 330 451 (629) 1241 2127 2492 it-c/d/dem/div/f/x/s, Vg Goth Arm Euthaliu
Omit Line: P46 א* A B Ivid 33 1739 Copt-Sa/Bo Aeth-Ro. Hilary Aug. Theod.-Aneyra Ferrandus
Omit Other Line: 1881
Another case where over 55% of the line resembles the previous one.
Like the previous case, some textual critics imagine this to be some kind of remnant left-over from a long lost act of conflation, hoping to bolster Hort's theory of an inferior Byzantine text-type.
But again the actual textual evidence is inverted: The earlier text appears to be a fuller reading, and the omissions begin 200 years after Christ.
The evidence of Haplography overwhelms any other explanation. The alternate mistake of the late Ms. 1881 just underlines how easy haplography errors are, and how they can generate imaginary features of "conflation".
When a scribe drops a line, its natural (if the sense allows) just to write the line following the intruding 2nd (now 1st) line. Haplography errors naturally generate phrase order reversals, because it is less effort than erasing a whole line written in permanent ink.
Naturally however, we can't expect to be of the same mind with textual critics who take Hort's conflation theory seriously.
Hort, Nestle & UBS2 omit to spite the evidence, and all 'modern' versions follow, ignoring the UBS notes and skipping along with the lacunated critical judgements of long dead skeptics.