Romans 14:6 (traditional text)HomoioTeleuton +
ο φρονων την ημεραν κυριω ... φρονει και ο
μη φρονων την ημεραν κυριω ου φρονει και ο
... εσθιων κυριω ..... εσθιει ..... ευχαριστει γαρ τω θεω και ο
μη εσθιων κυριω ουκ
εσθιει και ευχαριστει ....... τω θεω
He who is ..... regarding the day, to the Lord he doth ..... regard [it], and
he who is not regarding the day, to the Lord he doth not regard [it].
He who is eating, to the Lord he doth eat, for he doth give thanks to God; and
he who is not eating, to the Lord he doth not eat, and doth give thanks to God.
INCLUDE LINE: Koine text, 33 etc. (miniscules), Byz Maj (Majority text)
OMIT LINE: Heschian (Egyptian = B/ א /C / A? [ΔΨ?] ) text,
von Soden gives both readings equal probability
(notes courtesy of Nestle text)
A formal case of Haplography could never have a more perfect form than this; the two lines differ by only three letters. 3/44 counting word-spacing, or an agreement in exact content of about 93%.
No editor or scribe would create such a monstrosity just to make Paul's argument more complete. Instead we have Paul's usual thorough "either ...or" style of debating, coupled with one tired copyist, followed by eager editors (excisors).
The dual-line structure so common in Hebrew poetry and proverb is a plain Pauline Hebraism. The internal evidence for authenticity is given in the immediately following parallelism.
WH, Nestle, UBS opt for the shorter text on the basis of the "textual evidence" (i.e., Aleph/B), and UBS inexplicably leaves out any textual footnote whatsoever.
Naturally 'modern' versions following the UBS text omit the verses without even a note to say goodbye.