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
A single final sigma changes the last word from nominative “good will” to genitive “of good will.” The received text announces peace and good will toward men; the critical text speaks of peace among people of God’s favor.
Variant class
Addition / omission
2Textus Receptus
Greek reading
“On earth peace, good will toward men,” with nominative εὐδοκία.
Authorized Version
“Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.” — Luke 2:14
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
“On earth peace among men of favor,” with genitive εὐδοκίας.
Translation or explanation
“On earth peace among men of favor,” with genitive εὐδοκίας.
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, a proposed mechanism of accidental omission, the comparative difficulty of the readings, possible theological pressure in transmission; the printed confidence rating represented here is {B}. 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 Luke 2:14
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 Luke, 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
The triune identity of the Father, the Son/Word, and the Holy Ghost.
Doctrinal analysis
The rival is ancient and theologically intelligible.
Bahnsen four-point examination
Arbitrariness
At Luke 2:14, 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 genitive joins the last words: peace among people of favor. The genitive has strong ancient support, and its awkwardness in some languages helps explain why copyists might prefer the smoother nominative.
Inconsistency
The criteria used at Luke 2:14 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: The rival is ancient and theologically intelligible.
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 genitive has strong ancient support, and its awkwardness in some languages helps explain why copyists might prefer the smoother nominative. The rival is ancient and theologically intelligible.
Internal and transcriptional evidence
The genitive has strong ancient support, and its awkwardness in some languages helps explain why copyists might prefer the smoother nominative. The final noun answers the first two without limiting peace to a class described by an unexplained genitive. Conversely, a copyist can attach sigma under the influence of a familiar Semitic construction or the nearby plural ending in anthrōpois.
Reception and ecclesiastical use
The received text announces God’s benevolent disposition and the arrival of messianic peace; the Gospel itself shows that many reject the Saviour. It is the church’s broadly received form, gives the hymn transparent syntax, and declares the outward movement of divine mercy without making peace an abstraction.
Providential-preservation analysis
Providential preservation is not used as a substitute for evidence at Luke 2:14. 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 genitive joins the last words: peace among people of favor. The genitive has strong ancient support, and its awkwardness in some languages helps explain why copyists might prefer the smoother nominative.
Conclusion
The nominative should remain. It is the church’s broadly received form, gives the hymn transparent syntax, and declares the outward movement of divine mercy without making peace an abstraction. The angels do not promise the end of earthly conflict that night. They announce the person in whom reconciliation with God has entered the world.
One letter must not be treated lightly, but it must be treated honestly. The rival is ancient and theologically intelligible. The received reading is no sentimental mistranslation: it is a coherent Greek text whose threefold praise has sounded through Christian worship for centuries.
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 Luke 2:14, the received text reads “On earth peace, good will toward men,” with nominative εὐδοκία.” and its Authorized Version representation reads “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.” — Luke 2:14”. The assessed critical reading is “On earth peace among men of favor,” with genitive εὐδοκίας.”. 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 Luke 2:14, the received Hebrew/Greek form is “On earth peace, good will toward men,” with nominative εὐδοκία.”; the Authorized Version represents it as “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.” — Luke 2:14”. The assessed critical form is “On earth peace among men of favor,” with genitive εὐδοκίας.”.
- 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 Luke 2:14, the received text reads “On earth peace, good will toward men,” with nominative εὐδοκία.” and its Authorized Version representation reads “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.” — Luke 2:14”. The assessed critical reading is “On earth peace among men of favor,” with genitive εὐδοκίας.”. 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
- German Bible Society — UBS6 publications and relation to NA29Current critical-edition, ECM, or editorial documentation
- 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
Passage: Luke 2:14
Received reading: “On earth peace, good will toward men,” with nominative εὐδοκία.
Principal competing reading: “On earth peace among men of favor,” with genitive εὐδοκίας.
Editorial status: Preliminary record accepted for staging; independent review remains pending.
“Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.” — Luke 2:14
The difference between eudokia and eudokias is one letter. Its effect reaches the whole cadence of the angelic hymn. The received nominative gives three proclamations: glory to God, peace on earth, good will toward men. The critical genitive joins the last words: peace among people of favor.
The genitive has strong ancient support, and its awkwardness in some languages helps explain why copyists might prefer the smoother nominative. “Men of good will” was once heard as people who possess virtuous intentions, but that is not the necessary meaning. In Luke, divine eudokia is God’s gracious pleasure. The critical form can therefore mean those upon whom his favor rests.
The hymn’s balance
The received reading produces a stately three-part movement. Glory rises to God in the highest; peace descends upon earth; goodwill reaches humanity. The final noun answers the first two without limiting peace to a class described by an unexplained genitive.
The missing or added sigma is also the sort of change that need not be ideological. At the end of a line, a final letter can be overlooked. Conversely, a copyist can attach sigma under the influence of a familiar Semitic construction or the nearby plural ending in anthrōpois. External evidence must therefore be weighed without inventing motives.
Neither form teaches universal salvation. The received text announces God’s benevolent disposition and the arrival of messianic peace; the Gospel itself shows that many reject the Saviour. Nor does the genitive teach salvation by human moral quality. Read in Luke’s vocabulary, the favor is God’s.
The nominative should remain. It is the church’s broadly received form, gives the hymn transparent syntax, and declares the outward movement of divine mercy without making peace an abstraction. The angels do not promise the end of earthly conflict that night. They announce the person in whom reconciliation with God has entered the world.
One letter must not be treated lightly, but it must be treated honestly. The rival is ancient and theologically intelligible. The received reading is no sentimental mistranslation: it is a coherent Greek text whose threefold praise has sounded through Christian worship for centuries.
Sources and further reading
- Luke 2:8–20; 10:21; 12:32; 19:38; Ephesians 2:13–18.
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-2068
- 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 text and 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.
- 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, “Luke 2:14 — “Good Will toward Men” or “among Men of Good Will”?,” VAR-2068, Confessional Bibliology Research Center, version 1.0-staging, last revised 2026-07-22.
Revision history
- — Chris Thomas