It has been awhile since I've studied the issue, but I have always felt that modern text-critical scholars (with who's methods I am in general agreement) take an approach to this passage that is more prejudicially dismissive than necessary. I remember that Francis Turretin spoke of a number of sources in his Institutes that are not engaged by Metzger. That could be where some of the problem is to be found. If you have older scholars, such as Turretin, arguing from sources that are no longer extant and therefore are unavailable to todays scholars, you will be receiving a skewed picture that is based upon limited resources. I also remember reading that Jerome was aware of a number of Greek mss in his day which included the reading. Do we have all of these resources readily available to us? No. Is that a good reason to dismiss the possibility that modern TC scholarship has made a mistake in their research of the issue? No.

FWIW, I've used Metzger extensively, both during and after my seminary exegesis, and once you become familiar with his work you can see more than a few instances in which his (or the committee's) argumentation is flawed/weak/unconvincing. On numerous readings you will find that they don't even agree amongst themselves. So, Metzger isn't really the final say.

__________________
Adam J. Myer
Slated for the Jan. 10th Chaplains Basic Officer Leadership Course
Estacada Christian Church
Sandy, Oregon

Soli Deo Gloria