Here we have considerable variation between the singular and plural in this series of conjuncts. There are two cases where 𝓟 reads in the singular while the 1830 edition reads in the plural: strife versus strifes, and iniquity versus iniquities. In the last case, the 1908 RLDS edition restored the singular reading iniquity but not the singular strife (perhaps because the singular strife seemed less plausible). These two cases are rather difficult to analyze since both 𝓟 and the 1830 edition are firsthand copies of 𝓞 for this part of the text.
There is also a third case of variation in this passage, namely, persecutions versus persecution, where the singular occurs only in the 1906 LDS edition. This variant is easily resolved. As explained under Mosiah 27:3, there has been some tendency in the history of the text to accidentally replace the plural persecutions with the singular. The critical text will, of course, maintain the plural persecutions here in Mormon 8:36 since it is the reading in both 𝓟 and the 1830 edition.
Transmissional evidence suggests that the plural strifes is the correct reading here in Mormon 8:36. As explained under Alma 1:32, there are two other cases where scribe 2 of 𝓟 initially wrote strife instead of the correct strifes (namely, in 3 Nephi 21:19 and 3 Nephi 30:2). On the other hand, there are no examples where the 1830 typesetter accidentally replaced a singular strife with the plural, but there is one case (in Alma 4:9) where he replaced strifes with strife. Yet in all these cases the tendency is to replace the plural strifes with the singular, undoubtedly because modern English speakers expect the singular (even though the Book of Mormon text itself prefers the plural, nine to three in the original text). Thus the critical text will accept here in Mormon 8:36 the plural strifes, the 1830 reading.
For the last case of variation in this passage, 𝓟 has “all manner of iniquity” while the 1830 edition has “all manner of iniquities”. This case is quite difficult. There are two cases where the 1830 typesetter accidentally replaced a singular iniquity with the plural:
These two examples thus support an analysis for Mormon 8:36 in which the 1830 typesetter accidentally introduced the plural iniquities.
As far as scribal corrections go, we have the following examples involving the number for iniquity, all in the printer’s manuscript:
In three of these cases, the scribe first wrote the singular, then corrected to the plural. In the two other cases, the opposite occurred. Scribe 2 of 𝓟 is responsible for only one of these momentary errors (in Mormon 2:10), in which he accidentally wrote the plural initially. This error cannot be used as direct evidence that he accidentally wrote the singular in Mormon 8:36, although it does show him mixing up the number.
As far as the phrase “all manner of X” is concerned, errors for this expression show that an expected plural is sometimes replaced by the singular, although there are only two examples:
Elsewhere in the text, there are 13 instances of “all manner of iniquity/iniquities”. None of these exhibit any variation in number. In nine of these cases we get the singular, while four have the plural. Nonetheless, one factor seems to play a major role here. When this phrase is the direct object of the verb do, we get only the singular “all manner of iniquity” (eight times). On the other hand, if we have a list, with “all manner of iniquity/iniquities” ending the list, only once do we get the singular:
𝓞 is extant here and definitely reads with the singular “all manner of iniquity”, so the reading seems firm (although Oliver Cowdery, the scribe in 𝓞 for this passage, could have made an error). In the four other cases with lists, we get the plural “all manner of iniquities” at the end of the list:
However, the one occurrence in Alma 62:40 of “all manner of iniquity” ending a list argues that such a reading is also possible in Mormon 8:36; four plural examples is not enough to argue for emending Alma 62:40 to the plural.
Given all this information, the most plausible reading for Mormon 8:36 is to follow the error tendency, which argues that the 1830 typesetter made the mistake in Mormon 8:36 and accidentally replaced the singular iniquity with the plural. The critical text will therefore accept the singular iniquity in 𝓟. This means that the original text has two instances of “all manner of iniquity” at the end of a list, here in Mormon 8:36 and in Alma 62:40.
There is one other case involving grammatical number that needs to be considered here in Mormon 8:36, namely, the occurrence of the singular envying (“unto the wearing of very fine apparel / unto envying and strifes and malice and persecutions and all manner of iniquity”). As noted under Helaman 13:22, the Book of Mormon text otherwise prefers the plural envyings when combined with other noun conjuncts. It is possible that the preceding gerund phrase (“unto the wearing of very fine apparel”) influenced the reading here. Moreover, earlier in this chapter, there is a correct gerundive use of envying (which is necessarily singular): “even to the envying of them who belong to their churches” (Mormon 8:28). One could use these two preceding gerundives to argue that the gerundive envying is correct here in verse 36. Alternatively, one could argue that these two gerundives led to the replacement of the later envyings with envying in the early transmission of the text. It is difficult to determine whether the original text in Mormon 8:36 read envying or envyings. The original manuscript undoubtedly read in the singular since both 𝓟 and the 1830 edition read in the singular. But since the singular will work, the critical text will maintain it. Unique readings will occur. Nonetheless, the possibility remains that envying here in Mormon 8:36 is a primitive error for envyings.
Summary: Maintain in Mormon 8:36 the plural strifes and the plural persecutions, but follow the reading of the printer’s manuscript for the less common but possible “all manner of iniquity” since there is evidence that the 1830 typesetter tended to replace the singular iniquity with the plural iniquities; the occurrence of the singular envying, despite its uniqueness, will be retained since its use here is possible.