They don't because copies were purposefully "harmonized" with the oldest extant copies, so there is a great deal of "concordance" with what is genera ll (doctrinally) believed to be true. But this is retro-vision. We still don't know what the first century originals looked like. The oldest codex (circa end of the 2nd century) is, first of all, incomplete, and is not necessarily in agreement with other manuscripts, mostly fragments. For instance, you have long and short version of Luke's Gospel. Which one is is your pick?
There are numerous differences among manuscripts if not in artificially harmonized modern Bibles.
This post #70 does not warrant an answer.