1 Cor 15:29 added explanations to the last two sentences that are purely added to the text to give some insight into this very difficult text. These probably should not be here at all, but rather in a note, but I will leave it like this for now.
1 Cor 14:12 change wording instead of "through you" to what you see. The Corinthians were looking for the charismata for selfish reasons, not for building up the body. This is Paul's way of using their desire for the common good.
1 Cor 13:10 change wording, "things that are perfect happen" to what you see. This is a bit clumsy language, but the idea is completeness to complement the partiality of verse 9.
1 Cor 13:1 change wording from "I would be worth less than a gong or a cymbal, which does nothing but make noise." to what you see. The talking is compared to the gong and cymbal, not the person doing the talking.
1 Cor 12:28 cut extra sentences, "Those are the gifts God gave you, gifts of people who are members of the the local church. God gave them to you." These are good thoughts, but serve as application that is only implied in the text.
1 Cor 12:9 cut sentence at end of verse for the same reason as in verse 8. "The Spirit gives a variety of gifts, but he is still the same Spirit of God."
1 Cor 12:8 cut last sentence of verse, "These different gifts come through the work of the same Spirit in each one who believes in Christ." because it is not in the text at all.
1 Cor 11:29 change wording, "does not consider that he is handling the Lord's body" to what you see. This is to include the optional idea in interpreting this passage that the misuse of the Lord's Supper is offensive both to the elements (as this wording shows) AND to the fellowship (as the passage and even the whole letter is centering on).
1 Cor 11:27 change the wording: "will be guilty of a sin against." The idea of "sinning against" is not in the text or the ULB and tends to distance the offender from the death of Christ. Paul is making the point very strongly when he labels such offenders as guilty of the death of the Lord as much as those crucifying Jesus.
1 Cor 11:19 change wording to reflect Paul's sarcasm or irony in posing the parties within the church as competing with each other. The competition will filter out the αιρεσεις (heresies) -- assumed to be under the guidance of the Spirit. Paul also uses sharp sarcasm in chapter 15 when proving the resurrection.
1 Cor 11:10 change wording to avoid the danger of misinterpretation with gender roles. The phrase "of the man over her" after "authority" is not in the original. A popular interpretation is that the head covering is a sign that she HAS authority to participate in worship and that the covering is the sign of God's authority over her. By dropping this phrase, the option is left to the reader.
Another difficulty here is "angels" that can mean both the spirits and the human messengers. The woman's covering would make her more appropriate and acceptable to visiting messengers from other churches. This might be worth a note , but note a change here in wording.
1 Cor 10:19-20 change wording for clarity of concept. A quote from Leon Morris: "To eat idol meat might be held to sanction idolatry; not to eat it might imply that the idol was real. Paul starts with vigorous questions that imply that the idol sacrifice and the idol are both shams."
1 Cor 9:15 change wording "money" to "any of these things" because the rights Paul could have claimed go beyond the monetary and other changes for clarity
1 Cor 9:10 cut extra wording at the end, ", just like an an apostle over his church" since this is not at all in the text. Besides, it gives the idea that apostles have churches like pastors, but apostles are sent out, pastors stay.
1 Cor 7:30 change "shed a tear" to what you see because it is an idiom that could be unfamiliar to many. Also, dropped "or in their hearts" after "joy on their faces" because this is added. Also, "they wanted" after "to buy something." These are all additions that qualify the ideas too far.
1 Cor 3:4 change wording: "tearing the church into pieces" is an assumption here. This is probably true, but Paul is working up to this evaluation of the Corinthians. It is too early to let that cat out of the bag here.
See in Reader
Henry Whitney
Tom Warren
pohlig
Hanker10