Complete textual-variant dossier
Adverse entailment established
Sections distinguish readings, edition history, evidence, theological consequences, and the Research Center's evaluation. CBGM is an analytical tool; editorial committees—not the software—make textual decisions.
1Passage and issue
Passage
Issue
The phrase by them of old time is missing from the modern critical text and from the reconstructed Byzantine majority text.
Variant class
Punctuation
2Textus Receptus
Greek reading
The Textus Receptus stands here as a minority Greek reading, though it has early versional and patristic support.
Authorized Version
“Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery.” — Matthew 5:27
Edition note
The Research Center uses the received Greek text underlying the Authorized Version as its baseline; edition-specific differences are recorded when the variation unit requires them.
Historical annotation witness
Erasmus’s Annotationes
Erasmus’s printed Greek text, his Latin annotation, and the Research Center’s evaluation are distinct evidence. Each edition remains separately identified because Erasmus revised the Annotationes across his five editions.
Not yet assessed. No inference about Erasmus’s silence has been made. A Latin annotation and translation will appear here only after an edition and exact locus have been verified.
The Erasmus annotation audit has not yet been completed for this locus. Do not infer from this status that Erasmus was silent.
Westminster and Dutch annotation witnesses
Westminster Annotations
Not yet assessed. No inference from silence is made.
Dutch Annotations
Not yet assessed. No inference from silence is made.
3NA28 baseline and critical-text rationale
NA28 baseline reading
No distinct NA28 reading has been entered; the received and NA28 texts may agree at this unit.
Translation or explanation
The received and current critical texts may agree at this unit; consult the full essay for any versional or apparatus-only variation.
Metzger’s report of the UBS committee
No passage-specific Metzger synopsis has yet passed editorial verification for this record.
ECM / CBGM evidence and editors
No passage-specific ECM/CBGM editorial explanation is attached to this record. Official method sources describe the CBGM as a set of coherence procedures, not a decision-maker: editors define variation units and local stemmata and evaluate pre-genealogical, genealogical, and stemmatic coherence together with transcriptional, intrinsic, and other philological evidence.
4UBS6 and intended NA29 revision
UBS6 retains the NA28 / UBS5 Greek main-text wording in Matthew, so no main-text change is shown for this passage. The separate project ledger covers Acts, Mark, and Revelation.
No change row is attached to this passage.
UBS6 is published, and the German Bible Society identifies its Greek main text as identical to the intended NA29 main text. The complete NA29 volume and its apparatus remain forthcoming. Project-ledger rows retain their source and verification statements until they are checked against the published UBS6 text and, when available, the NA29 apparatus.
5Doctrinal and four-point analysis
Effect class
Exegetical or interpretive consequence
Exact proposition affected
No single doctrinal proposition is directly changed; the principal consequence is exegetical, historical, or cumulative.
Doctrinal analysis
Exegetical or interpretive consequence. The record does not establish that the variant by itself removes an entire Christian doctrine; explicit wording, exegesis, and cumulative testimony must be distinguished.
Controlled source-list matches
Doctrinal significance and Westminster use
This passage is listed in one or both controlling research files. Their claims are reported with exact source identity and confessional use; list membership does not by itself establish the original reading or the Research Center’s final entailment.
Westminster proof-text listMatthew 5:27
A List of Omissions and Changes Found in the Critical Text to Verses Used as Proof Texts in the Westminster Standards
Seth Stark — supplied source file pp. 8–9
Textual wording marked in the source
Received/NKJV side: to those of old
Westminster doctrines and propositions supported
WLC 99 — What rules are to be observed for the right understanding of the ten commandments?
Portion identified in the source as supported by this proof text:
- That it is spiritual, and so reacheth the understanding, will, affections, and all other powers of the soul; as well as words, works, and gestures.
Editorial qualification: This establishes a confessional proof-text and reception connection. It does not by itself establish the original reading, and its English-version comparison must be checked against the Greek variation unit.
Bahnsen four-point examination
Arbitrariness
At Matthew 5:27, the critical choice avoids arbitrariness only to the extent that it states public manuscript, transcriptional, and intrinsic grounds. The phrase by them of old time is missing from the modern critical text and from the reconstructed Byzantine majority text. Critics see a plain harmonization: a scribe carried the phrase six verses forward. Scrivener, A Plain Introduction to the Criticism of the New Testament.
Inconsistency
The criteria used at Matthew 5:27 must be applied to comparable readings as well. A principle such as age, difficulty, brevity, or coherence cannot be decisive here and quietly reversed elsewhere merely to escape a historical, grammatical, or theological difficulty.
Consequences
Exegetical or interpretive consequence: No single doctrinal proposition is directly changed; the principal consequence is exegetical, historical, or cumulative.
Preconditions of intelligibility
The argument presupposes stable authorship, meaningful language, objective logical norms, transmissible evidence, and a coherent account of how Scripture can be received and identified by the church. The analysis tests whether the method can make those conditions intelligible without reducing the text to an indefinitely revisable editorial construct.
This framework examines an argument and its conditions; it does not claim to read an editor's private motives.
6Argument for the received reading
External and historical evidence
The Textus Receptus stands here as a minority Greek reading, though it has early versional and patristic support. A defense of the received text cannot be reduced to “follow the most manuscripts.” The fuller reading nevertheless appears in early Latin and Syriac use and in ancient Christian citation.
Internal and transcriptional evidence
Critics see a plain harmonization: a scribe carried the phrase six verses forward. Its omission could arise because a familiar introduction seemed repetitive or because an eye moved from “it was said” to the command itself. The verse also tests how early evidence is described.
Reception and ecclesiastical use
The Textus Receptus stands here as a minority Greek reading, though it has early versional and patristic support. A defense of the received text cannot be reduced to “follow the most manuscripts.” The external case against the Textus Receptus is unusually broad.
Providential-preservation analysis
Providential preservation is not used as a substitute for evidence at Matthew 5:27. It supplies the confessional context in which manuscript transmission, broad reception, and the church's actual possession of Scripture are evaluated together.
Canonical coherence with the rest of Scripture
Canonical coherence remains an explicit test: a proposed reading must make grammatical and theological sense within the immediate context and the rest of Scripture. No conflict is asserted merely because two editions differ; the claimed incoherence must be demonstrated at this passage.
Canonical-coherence verdict
The Authorized Version is retained where its representation of the TR forms a coherent reading within the immediate context and the rest of Scripture. Any competing form must demonstrate an equal or better canonical fit rather than merely invoke an edition or method label.
Response to the principal critical argument
The phrase by them of old time is missing from the modern critical text and from the reconstructed Byzantine majority text. Critics see a plain harmonization: a scribe carried the phrase six verses forward. Scrivener, A Plain Introduction to the Criticism of the New Testament.
Passage-specific evidence from consulted works
Core 0.6.3 supplied-source audit complete: 1 passage-specific note attached. Incidental citations and global-method sources are retained in the audit report rather than presented as local textual evidence.
A List of Omissions and Changes Found in the Critical Text to Verses Used as Proof Texts in the Westminster StandardsWestminster proof-text and translation comparison
Seth Stark — supplied PDF pp. 8–9
At Matthew 5:27, it compares the NKJV/TR-oriented wording “You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’”” with the ESV/critical-text wording “You have heard that it was said, 'You shall not commit adultery.'” and associates the passage with WLC 99.
Editorial use: This establishes a confessional proof-text and reception connection. It does not by itself establish the original reading, and its English-version comparison must be checked against the Greek variation unit.
Conclusion
Early patristic and versional support for the long form matters because it pushes the reading behind the medieval Greek copies that now carry it. Latin or Syriac evidence does not outweigh Greek automatically; it shows that the longer Greek ancestor was old enough to be translated and quoted.
This is precisely the kind of place where a confessional judgment should be firm without theatrical certainty about every lost page. The received clause is publicly settled and historically defensible. Its defense rests on converging evidence, not on pretending the external count is easy.
Logical entailment
The Authorized Version serves as the faithful English representation. The preservation claim applies immediately to the authentic Hebrew and Greek texts—not to an English translation as though it were the inspired source.
Canonical-status rule: Physical printing is not canonical inclusion. If an edition prints a passage in double brackets while judging it secondary or non-original, it disagrees with the received text concerning the identity and extent of inspired Scripture.
Status: Established
Immediate textual or doctrinal consequence
At Matthew 5:27, the received text reads “The Textus Receptus stands here as a minority Greek reading, though it has early versional and patristic support.” and its Authorized Version representation reads “Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery.” — Matthew 5:27”. The assessed critical reading is “The received and current critical texts may agree at this unit; consult the full essay for any versional or apparatus-only variation.”. The immediate consequence is that the critical text no longer states the received wording at this locus. The immediate local effect is exegetical or interpretive; this argument does not claim that a distinct Christian doctrine disappears from the verse.
Necessary reasoning chain
- At Matthew 5:27, the received Hebrew/Greek form is “The Textus Receptus stands here as a minority Greek reading, though it has early versional and patristic support.”; the Authorized Version represents it as “Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery.” — Matthew 5:27”. The assessed critical form is “The received and current critical texts may agree at this unit; consult the full essay for any versional or apparatus-only variation.”.
- The received and critical forms are not the same at this locus. Therefore, if the competing critical form is original, the received form is secondary rather than the authentic wording at this place. The immediate consequence is: At Matthew 5:27, the received text reads “The Textus Receptus stands here as a minority Greek reading, though it has early versional and patristic support.” and its Authorized Version representation reads “Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery.” — Matthew 5:27”. The assessed critical reading is “The received and current critical texts may agree at this unit; consult the full essay for any versional or apparatus-only variation.”. The immediate consequence is that the critical text no longer states the received wording at this locus. The immediate local effect is exegetical or interpretive; this argument does not claim that a distinct Christian doctrine disappears from the verse.
- If the received form at this place is secondary rather than original, then the authentic Hebrew/Greek text was not kept pure at this place in the received textual tradition; therefore the unqualified confessional preservation claim must be denied or redefined.
Ultimate preservation consequence
If the competing reading is original and the received reading is secondary, then God did not preserve and keep pure the authentic text at this place in the received textual tradition. The unqualified confessional claim that Scripture was kept pure in all ages must therefore be denied or redefined.
Sources
- Westminster Confession of Faith (1647)Chapter 1, section 8 — Governing confessional preservation claim
- German Bible Society — UBS6 publications and relation to NA29Current critical-edition, ECM, or editorial documentation
- A List of Omissions and Changes Found in the Critical Text to Verses Used as Proof Texts in the Westminster Standardssupplied PDF pp. 8–9 — Westminster proof-text and translation comparison
- German Bible Society — The Sixth Edition of the Greek New TestamentCurrent critical-edition, ECM, or editorial documentation
- INTF — Online Tools for the ECMCurrent critical-edition, ECM, or editorial documentation
Read the full research essay and its sources
The phrase by them of old time is missing from the modern critical text and from the reconstructed Byzantine majority text. The Textus Receptus stands here as a minority Greek reading, though it has early versional and patristic support.
“Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery.” — Matthew 5:27
That fact matters. A defense of the received text cannot be reduced to “follow the most manuscripts.”
Verse 21 reads, “Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill.” The received verse 27 uses the same full introduction before the seventh commandment. Critics see a plain harmonization: a scribe carried the phrase six verses forward.
The late-second- or early-third-century papyrus formed by P64 and P67 supports the shorter wording. So do Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, Bezae, Washingtonianus, and the Byzantine majority. The external case against the Textus Receptus is unusually broad.
The fuller reading nevertheless appears in early Latin and Syriac use and in ancient Christian citation. It was not created by the first printed Greek edition. Its omission could arise because a familiar introduction seemed repetitive or because an eye moved from “it was said” to the command itself.
What Christ is opposing
“By them of old time” can mean “to the ancients” as well as “by the ancients.” Christ is not correcting Moses as though God’s command were defective. He is opposing the heard tradition that reduced adultery to the outward act while leaving lust unjudged.
The full formula helps maintain that frame across the antitheses. Jesus sets “ye have heard” against “but I say unto you.” He speaks as the Lawgiver who reveals the command’s reach into the heart.
This is the hardest received reading in the first part of Matthew because raw Greek count and early manuscript weight favor the shorter form. Its defense rests on the whole history: early non-Greek attestation, the plausibility of loss, the repeated Matthean form, and the ecclesiastical reception that fixed it in the Textus Receptus.
The evidence should be stated without bluff. Having stated it, the received clause remains the better ministerial judgment. The most manuscripts can witness a shared early shortening just as a few early witnesses can carry an old expansion. The Church receives words, not voting rules.
The verse also tests how early evidence is described. P64+67 is genuinely early, but it is fragmentary. Its presence proves that the short form circulated near the end of the second or start of the third century. It does not provide a complete family tree from Matthew’s pen, nor does it make every later witness dependent on that papyrus.
Early patristic and versional support for the long form matters because it pushes the reading behind the medieval Greek copies that now carry it. Latin or Syriac evidence does not outweigh Greek automatically; it shows that the longer Greek ancestor was old enough to be translated and quoted.
This is precisely the kind of place where a confessional judgment should be firm without theatrical certainty about every lost page. The received clause is publicly settled and historically defensible. Its defense rests on converging evidence, not on pretending the external count is easy.
Sources and further reading
- Exodus 20:14; Matthew 5:21–30.
- Papyrus 64+67 and the major Greek witnesses to Matthew 5:27.
- Frederick H. A. Scrivener, A Plain Introduction to the Criticism of the New Testament.
- John William Burgon and Edward Miller, The Traditional Text of the Holy Gospels.
7Related materials
Open a group to follow connected articles, books, biographies, media, research notes, variants, or downloads. Research Center relationships use permanent record IDs; external items retain their actual link.
- Record
- VAR-1018
- Status
- Preliminary
- Version
- 1.1-dossier
- Review
- Level B — Editorial synthesis
- Editor
- Chris Thomas
- Reviewer
- Independent reviewer pending assignment
- First date
- 2026-07-22 · Exact Day
- Last revised
- 2026-07-22
Evidence and editorial controls
- Verification
- Recovered project data; bibliographic and source-level verification remains record-specific. Metzger commentary entries were matched by exact passage where present; ECM/CBGM rationale is passage-specific only when an official editorial explanation is cited. Ledger rows are identified as UBS6 / intended NA29 data but retain their row-level verification caveats pending direct collation. Supplied-source audit completed in Core 0.6.3. Accepted local notes were matched by canonical passage and manually bounded; source claims remain attributed where current apparatus verification is pending.
- Rights and access
- Original editorial synthesis; cited sources retain their stated rights.
- Known limitations
- Staging record; independent review remains open.
Links from this record
No public outgoing links are recorded.
Records that cite or connect here
No public backlinks are recorded.
Corrections and evidence submissions
No correction submission is presently attached to this record. Submit evidence or read the correction policy.
Chris Thomas, “Matthew 5:27 — “Said by Them of Old Time”: The Fuller Introduction to the Seventh Commandment,” VAR-1018, Confessional Bibliology Research Center, version 1.0-staging.
Revision history
- — Chris Thomas
- — Chris Thomas