#Balanced, the existing feat is equally good There are two distinct changes in your house-rule and I will deal with them separately. ###Adding Ranger and Paladin as options There is nothing about the ranger or paladin spells lists that make this inherently unbalanced for this feat. Each has a few unique spells, hunter's mark, hail of thorns, etc.. for the ranger and the smite spells for the paladin. But these are restricted to these spell lists more for thematic reasons than balance concerns as there are similar power spells available on the other spell lists.

Most likely these classes were excluded from the list simply for not being full casters. I would have said it was because of a lack of cantrips adding complexity to the feat, but they are also excluded from the Ritual Caster feat which has no cantrip requirement.

It is important to remember that while I can't see an issue with allowing these spell lists from reading through them, I haven't playtested them. Neither have a spent a great deal of time trying to find a build to exploit this. It is possible there exists a spell on those lists that is utterly broken under certain conditions (though I doubt it or more people would multi-class into these classes).

I recommend allowing this on a playtest basis and, as with all house-rules, be prepared to adjust if things don't work.

###Two First Level Spells My gut feel is that this is fine. At early levels it might be strong but with the way cantrips scale with character level I believe two cantrips are stronger than one 1st level spell. Therefore this option is likely a reduction in the power of this feat, and one that most players should avoid taking.

Additionally, there is no way that this could be overpowered. Two 1st level spells can be obtained through the Ritual Caster feat, though not the free castings. With the way the feat is worded the castings are not spell slots so paladins cannot expend them for uses of Divine Smite. The concentration mechanic prevents any misuse from interacts between potential spell choices.

Similar to the first part I believe this is balanced with the original version of the feat, perhaps even underpowered and shouldn't pose any issues. However as I said, someone could always find a potential loophole I haven't thought of, so you should allow this as a playtest rule and be prepared to make changes.

###Conclusion Both your changes to the feat are fairly minor and in most cases, sub-optimal compared to the original. I can see few situations, other than specific character concepts, to choose your variant options over the original version of the feat. If you assess the balance of a feat based on its most powerful options, your version is identical to the existing one, therefore is balanced.

Balanced, the existing feat is equally good

There are two distinct changes in your house-rule and I will deal with them separately.

Adding Ranger and Paladin as options

There is nothing about the ranger or paladin spells lists that make this inherently unbalanced for this feat. Each has a few unique spells, hunter's mark, hail of thorns, etc.. for the ranger and the smite spells for the paladin. But these are restricted to these spell lists more for thematic reasons than balance concerns as there are similar power spells available on the other spell lists.

Most likely these classes were excluded from the list simply for not being full casters. I would have said it was because of a lack of cantrips adding complexity to the feat, but they are also excluded from the Ritual Caster feat which has no cantrip requirement.

It is important to remember that while I can't see an issue with allowing these spell lists from reading through them, I haven't playtested them. Neither have a spent a great deal of time trying to find a build to exploit this. It is possible there exists a spell on those lists that is utterly broken under certain conditions (though I doubt it or more people would multi-class into these classes).

I recommend allowing this on a playtest basis and, as with all house-rules, be prepared to adjust if things don't work.

Two First Level Spells

My gut feel is that this is fine. At early levels it might be strong but with the way cantrips scale with character level I believe two cantrips are stronger than one 1st level spell. Therefore this option is likely a reduction in the power of this feat, and one that most players should avoid taking.

Additionally, there is no way that this could be overpowered. Two 1st level spells can be obtained through the Ritual Caster feat, though not the free castings. With the way the feat is worded the castings are not spell slots so paladins cannot expend them for uses of Divine Smite. The concentration mechanic prevents any misuse from interacts between potential spell choices.

Similar to the first part I believe this is balanced with the original version of the feat, perhaps even underpowered and shouldn't pose any issues. However as I said, someone could always find a potential loophole I haven't thought of, so you should allow this as a playtest rule and be prepared to make changes.

Conclusion

Both your changes to the feat are fairly minor and in most cases, sub-optimal compared to the original. I can see few situations, other than specific character concepts, to choose your variant options over the original version of the feat. If you assess the balance of a feat based on its most powerful options, your version is identical to the existing one, therefore is balanced.