Romans 2:16

ἐν ἡμέρᾳ ὅτε κρινεῖ ὁ Θεὸς τὰ κρυπτὰ τῶν ἀνθρώπων, κατὰ τὸ εὐαγγέλιόν μου, διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ.

RBT Greek Interlinear:

Strongs 1722; en; ἐν; within; Prep

Strongs 3739; hē; 〈ᾗ〉; [her whom/whosoever]; RelPro-DFS

Strongs 2250; hēmera; ἡμέρᾳ; day; N-DFS

Strongs 3753; hote; ‹ὅτε›; when; Adv

Strongs 2919; krinei; κρίνει; He separates; V-PIA-3S

Strongs 3588; ho; ὁ; the; Art-NMS

Strongs 2316; Theos; Θεὸς; God; N-NMS

Strongs 3588; ta; τὰ; the; Art-ANP

Strongs 2927; krypta; κρυπτὰ; hidden things; Adj-ANP

Strongs 3588; tōn; τῶν; the; Art-GMP

Strongs 444; anthrōpōn; ἀνθρώπων; men; N-GMP

Strongs 2596; kata; κατὰ; down; Prep

Strongs 3588; to; τὸ; the; Art-ANS

Strongs 2098; euangelion; εὐαγγέλιόν; gospel; N-ANS

Strongs 1473; mou; μου; of myself; PPro-G1S

Strongs 1223; dia; διὰ; across; Prep

Strongs 5547; Christou; Χριστοῦ; of anointed; N-GMS

Strongs 2424; Iēsou; Ἰησοῦ; Salvation; N-GMS

RBT Hebrew Literal:

within which day the God is separating the Concealed Things of the Men according to the Gospel of Myself, across through an anointed one, Salvation.⁷

Julia Smith Literal 1876 Translation:
In the day when God shall judge the concealed things of men according to my good news by Jesus Christ.

LITV Translation:
in a day when God judges the hidden things of men, according to my gospel, through Jesus Christ.

ESV Translation:
on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus.

Footnotes

7

The authoritative manuscripts have

ἐν ᾗ ἡμέρᾳ "in which day" — with ᾗ as a relative pronoun, dative feminine singular agreeing with ἡμέρᾳ "day".

later copies removed the relative pronoun and added in ὅτε "when" : 

ἐν ἡμέρᾳ ὅτε "in the day when" — ὅτε as a temporal conjunction, introducing a finite clause.

The relative pronoun refers the reader back to the previous words, e.g. the Heart, she who jointly bears witness...

We found no translations following the authoritative texts on this verse.

Every translation follows the change — that is, nearly all modern translations render Romans 2:16 using a temporal clause, e.g., “on the day when God judges...,” even though the critical text preserves ἐν ᾗ ἡμέρᾳ, a relative clause.

The Scholar might call it "semantic smoothing" or maybe "an avoidance of wooden literalism" or some sort of crafty-speak of which there are endless ways a tongue can sway thoughts. But this isn't a matter of "wooden literalism" versus "dynamic fluency." It's a case of lexical substitution that erases the embedded doctrinal structure the author is trying to convey. The same translation committees that will appeal to "authoritative" sources will, at the same time, lean toward traditional renderings, theological bias, and reader familiarity, over authoritative sources when it is convenient. In this way variant readings become more of a tool to help scholars translate according to how they want things to read. With variant texts, they can pick and choose what they want as they go. This undermines the notion of the critical text being the true "final authority" in practice, and truly shows the "forked-tongue" nature of traditional translation practices. Are the authoritative texts authoritative or not? And if so, why are you choosing to deviate from them?

For our part, the RBT adheres to the authoritative texts as consistently as possible. When we see obvious changes, deletions, insertions, etc. that conflict with the authorities, we stick to the authorities, plain and simple.