Ezra Abbot (1819-1884)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ezra_Abbot
divides the grammatical tries into seven, and an outlier or two. Number 2 is supposed to be the AV, #5 is similar. However, the idea that this is a straight deity text is incorrect (see the intro to the Timothy Dwight article, and it comes up in Abbot too.)
On the Construction of Romans ix. 5 (1882)
Ezra Abbot
http://books.google.com/books?id=830FAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA87
p. 87-154
Timothy Dwight article is p. 22-55 with opposite viewpoint.
Ezra Abbot
http://books.google.com/books?id=830FAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA22
Recent Discussions of Romans ix. 5 (1883)
https://archive.org/details/journalo...iuoft/page/n93
p. 90-112
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3268764
You will, I believe, find the issues raised by Bengel (mentioned by Abbot) and JFB referenced in more depth in the Abbot articles. Overall, it would take a good chunk of study to come up to speed.