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 received answer requires prayer and fasting. The critical text retains prayer but omits fasting, often treating it as an ascetic addition from later church practice.
Variant class
Punctuation
2Textus Receptus
Greek reading
“This kind can come forth by nothing, but by prayer and fasting.”
Authorized Version
“This kind can come forth by nothing, but by prayer and fasting.” — Mark 9:29
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
“This kind can come out by nothing except prayer,” omitting “and fasting.”
Translation or explanation
“This kind can come out by nothing except prayer,” omitting “and fasting.”
Metzger’s report of the UBS committee
Metzger reports the UBS4 committee's treatment of the variation unit. The note grounds the relevant decision in the weight and distribution of external attestation; the printed confidence rating represented here is {A}. This is a controlled synopsis rather than a quotation.
Locator: Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 2nd ed., note on Mark 9:29
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
No UBS6 / intended NA29 main-text change is recorded for this passage in the controlled 169-change ledger.
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.
Doctrinally significant variant listMark 9.29
Doctrinally Significant Variants Itemised
Anonymous compilation — supplied source file pp. 11
Doctrine or doctrinal consequence identified by the source
The Alexandrian Text also deletes any reference to fasting in Matthew 17.15, Acts 10.30, and 1 Corinthians 7.5, thus weakening that doctrine in the New Testament. As we noted above, both Matthew 17.15 and this verse (Mark 9.29) are cited by the 2nd century Church fathers Tatian by the 3rd century Church Father Tertullian, and so, the text has very early patristic support, earlier than Vaticanus and Sinaiticus.
Source-reported readings and witness argument
Received reading reported
And he said unto them, This kind can come forth by nothing, but by prayer and fasting. (Mark 9:29 Authorised Version)
Critical reading reported
He said to them, "This kind can come out only through prayer." (Mark 9:29 New Revised Standard) [COMMENT: Note that the Nestle-Aland Text deletes the reference to fasting.]
Manuscript and patristic support reported by the source
The deletion of the words 'and fasting' is supported by Codices Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. The inclusion of the words is supported universally by the Byzantine Text going back to Codex Alexandrinus, by Tatian's Diatessaron of the 2nd century A.D., and by Tertullian's Treatise on Fasting from the 3rd century A.D.
Editorial qualification: The compilation’s doctrinal inferences and witness claims are reported as its argument, not silently adopted as verified fact. Exact entailment is retained: weakening an explicit statement is not automatically a formal denial of the doctrine.
Bahnsen four-point examination
Arbitrariness
At Mark 9:29, the critical choice avoids arbitrariness only to the extent that it states public manuscript, transcriptional, and intrinsic grounds. Editorial status: Preliminary record accepted for staging; independent review remains pending. The critical text ends with prayer. The common critical explanation is historical.
Inconsistency
The criteria used at Mark 9:29 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
“And fasting” has broad, ancient ecclesiastical support and coheres with the church’s inherited reading. , The New Testament in the Original Greek according to the Text Followed in the Authorised Version (Cambridge, 1894).
Internal and transcriptional evidence
As fasting gained prominence in the early church, ascetic copyists added it beside prayer. That familiarity can explain addition, but it can also explain omission in communities where fasting was disputed, abbreviated, or no longer tied to the immediate event. A short final phrase can be lost after the longer word “prayer,” especially when a copyist knows a form of the saying that ends there.
Reception and ecclesiastical use
Jesus answers in the received text, “This kind can come forth by nothing, but by prayer and fasting.” As fasting gained prominence in the early church, ascetic copyists added it beside prayer. “And fasting” has broad, ancient ecclesiastical support and coheres with the church’s inherited reading.
Providential-preservation analysis
Providential preservation is not used as a substitute for evidence at Mark 9:29. 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
Editorial status: Preliminary record accepted for staging; independent review remains pending. The critical text ends with prayer. The common critical explanation is historical.
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.
Doctrinally Significant Variants ItemisedAttributed doctrinal and canonical-coherence argument
Anonymous compilation — supplied PDF pp. 11
Mark 9.29: It sets “And he said unto them, This kind can come forth by nothing, but by prayer and fasting. (Mark 9:29 Authorised Version)” against “He said to them, "This kind can come out only through prayer." (Mark 9:29 New Revised Standard) [COMMENT: Note that the Nestle-Aland Text deletes the reference to fasting.].” Its stated doctrinal argument is that The Alexandrian Text also deletes any reference to fasting in Matthew 17.15, Acts 10.30, and 1 Corinthians 7.5, thus weakening that doctrine in the New Testament. As we noted above, both Matthew 17.15 and this verse (Mark 9.29) are cited by the 2nd century Church fathers Tatian by the 3rd century Church Father Tertullian, and so, the text has very early patristic support, earlier than Vaticanus and Sinaiticus. The compilation appeals to The deletion of the words 'and fasting' is supported by Codices Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. The inclusion of the words is supported universally by the Byzantine Text going back to Codex Alexandrinus, by Tatian's Diatessaron of the 2nd century A.D.,xlvi and by Tertullian's Treatise on Fasting from the 3rd century A.D.xlvii
Editorial use: The compilation’s doctrinal inferences and witness claims are reported as its argument, not silently adopted as verified fact. Exact entailment is retained: weakening an explicit statement is not automatically a formal denial of the doctrine.
Conclusion
Early Christian fasting predates any supposed medieval ascetic corruption. Acts and the Didache show it embedded in primitive practice, which cuts both ways: the phrase could be added because fasting was familiar, or preserved because Jesus actually named it. Dating a practice early does not prove a reading, but it blocks the caricature that “and fasting” must be the product of a very late monastic atmosphere.
“And fasting” has broad, ancient ecclesiastical support and coheres with the church’s inherited reading. Its presence does not diminish prayer but guards prayer from becoming a last-second utterance detached from self-denial. The received pair should stand, accompanied by Christ’s own teaching that fasting must not be theatrical. A hidden discipline cannot merit power; it can train servants to seek the Lord whose power alone delivers.
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 Mark 9:29, the received text reads “This kind can come forth by nothing, but by prayer and fasting.” and its Authorized Version representation reads “This kind can come forth by nothing, but by prayer and fasting.” — Mark 9:29”. The assessed critical reading is “This kind can come out by nothing except prayer,” omitting “and fasting.”. 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 Mark 9:29, the received Hebrew/Greek form is “This kind can come forth by nothing, but by prayer and fasting.”; the Authorized Version represents it as “This kind can come forth by nothing, but by prayer and fasting.” — Mark 9:29”. The assessed critical form is “This kind can come out by nothing except prayer,” omitting “and fasting.”.
- 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 Mark 9:29, the received text reads “This kind can come forth by nothing, but by prayer and fasting.” and its Authorized Version representation reads “This kind can come forth by nothing, but by prayer and fasting.” — Mark 9:29”. The assessed critical reading is “This kind can come out by nothing except prayer,” omitting “and fasting.”. 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
- F. H. A. Scrivener, The New Testament in the Original Greek according to the Text followed in the Authorized VersionReceived Greek reading
- Digital ECM — Mark 9:29Current critical-edition, ECM, or editorial documentation
- Doctrinally Significant Variants Itemisedsupplied PDF pp. 11 — Attributed doctrinal and canonical-coherence argument
- German Bible Society — UBS6 publications and relation to NA29Current critical-edition, ECM, or editorial documentation
Read the full research essay and its sources
Passage: Mark 9:29
Received reading: “This kind can come forth by nothing, but by prayer and fasting.”
Principal competing reading: “This kind can come out by nothing except prayer,” omitting “and fasting.”
Editorial status: Preliminary record accepted for staging; independent review remains pending.
“This kind can come forth by nothing, but by prayer and fasting.” — Mark 9:29
The disciples ask privately why they failed. Jesus answers in the received text, “This kind can come forth by nothing, but by prayer and fasting.” The critical text ends with prayer. The difference has shaped Christian practice because the added discipline is not merely descriptive; it stands in Christ’s answer.
The common critical explanation is historical. As fasting gained prominence in the early church, ascetic copyists added it beside prayer. Matthew 17:21, a parallel verse also omitted from many critical texts, could reinforce the phrase.
Dependence that reaches the body
Prayer confesses that authority over evil does not belong to the disciple as a possession. Fasting can intensify that dependence by setting aside ordinary food for concentrated seeking of God. It is not a technique that forces divine action, and it does not imply that demons fear an empty stomach.
The two practices are paired throughout Scripture and early Christian life. That familiarity can explain addition, but it can also explain omission in communities where fasting was disputed, abbreviated, or no longer tied to the immediate event. A short final phrase can be lost after the longer word “prayer,” especially when a copyist knows a form of the saying that ends there.
The narrative itself supports a fuller discipline. Jesus has rebuked an unbelieving generation and exposed the disciples’ confidence after earlier success in casting out spirits. Their problem is not lack of a better formula. It is inadequate communion and humble preparation.
One must not build a classification of demon “kinds” beyond the text. Jesus may refer to the particular spirit or to this order of spiritual conflict. The practical command is clear enough: dependence must precede ministry.
Early Christian fasting predates any supposed medieval ascetic corruption. Acts and the Didache show it embedded in primitive practice, which cuts both ways: the phrase could be added because fasting was familiar, or preserved because Jesus actually named it. Dating a practice early does not prove a reading, but it blocks the caricature that “and fasting” must be the product of a very late monastic atmosphere.
“And fasting” has broad, ancient ecclesiastical support and coheres with the church’s inherited reading. Its presence does not diminish prayer but guards prayer from becoming a last-second utterance detached from self-denial. The received pair should stand, accompanied by Christ’s own teaching that fasting must not be theatrical. A hidden discipline cannot merit power; it can train servants to seek the Lord whose power alone delivers.
Sources and further reading
- F. H. A. Scrivener, ed., The New Testament in the Original Greek according to the Text Followed in the Authorised Version (Cambridge, 1894).
- Michael W. Holmes, ed., The Greek New Testament: SBL Edition (Society of Biblical Literature and Logos Bible Software, 2010), text and apparatus.
- Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 2nd ed., notes on the stated passage.
- Matthew 6:16–18; 17:14–21; Mark 2:18–22; 9:14–29; Acts 13:1–3.
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-2032
- Status
- Preliminary
- Version
- 1.1-dossier
- Review
- Level B — Editorial synthesis
- Editor
- Chris Thomas
- Reviewer
- Independent reviewer pending assignment
- First date
- 1st century · Date Range
- Last revised
- 2026-07-22
Evidence and editorial controls
- Verification
- Passage, principal readings, and stated editorial comparison checked against Scrivener’s received Greek text and the SBLGNT apparatus; exhaustive manuscript collation remains open. 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. Biblical readings are short scholarly quotations; cited editions and digital witnesses retain their stated rights and access conditions.
- Known limitations
- This staging record summarizes the principal variation unit and representative evidence. It is not a fresh collation of every extant manuscript, version, lectionary, or patristic citation.
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, “Mark 9:29 — “Prayer and Fasting”: What Did Christ Prescribe?,” VAR-2032, Confessional Bibliology Research Center, version 1.0-staging, last revised 2026-07-22.
Revision history
- — Chris Thomas