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 text records Christ’s full rebuke and mission statement. The critical text says only that he turned and rebuked them, then they went to another village.
Variant class
Substitution or composite variation
2Textus Receptus
Greek reading
“Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. For the Son of man is not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them.”
Authorized Version
“Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. For the Son of man is not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them.” — Luke 9:55–56
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
Jesus “turned and rebuked them,” without the words of the rebuke.
Translation or explanation
Jesus “turned and rebuked them,” without the words of the rebuke.
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 likelihood of scribal or liturgical expansion; the printed confidence rating represented here is {C}. 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 9:55
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
No single doctrinal proposition is directly changed; the principal consequence is exegetical, historical, or cumulative.
Doctrinal analysis
The critical form still records that Christ opposed the disciples, but it withholds the theological explanation.
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 listLuke 9:55
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. 43
Textual wording marked in the source
Received/NKJV side: and said, ‘You do not know what manner of spirit you are of.
Westminster doctrines and propositions supported
WLC 105 — What are the sins forbidden in the first commandment?
Portion identified in the source as supported by this proof text:
- corrupt, blind, and indiscreet zeal;
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 Luke 9:55–56, 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 reports the rebuke but does not preserve its words. The critical form still records that Christ opposed the disciples, but it withholds the theological explanation.
Inconsistency
The criteria used at Luke 9:55–56 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 critical form still records that Christ opposed the disciples, but it withholds the theological explanation.
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
Different manuscripts also transmit the wording in different lengths, a sign that the expansion may have grown in stages. Jesus has come to seek and save the lost; at the cross he will pray for his executioners; Acts begins with witness rather than retaliatory force. Its versional and ecclesiastical reach prevents treatment as a very late invention.
Internal and transcriptional evidence
Once one line disappeared, copyists could reconstruct or abbreviate what remained.
Reception and ecclesiastical use
In the received text Jesus says, “Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. The fuller speech is readily understood as an ecclesiastical expansion: its contrast between destruction and salvation resembles other Gospel summaries, and marginal explanations often become direct speech. Its versional and ecclesiastical reach prevents treatment as a very late invention.
Providential-preservation analysis
Providential preservation is not used as a substitute for evidence at Luke 9:55–56. 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 reports the rebuke but does not preserve its words. The critical form still records that Christ opposed the disciples, but it withholds the theological explanation.
Passage-specific evidence from consulted works
Core 0.6.3 supplied-source audit complete: 2 passage-specific notes attached. Incidental citations and global-method sources are retained in the audit report rather than presented as local textual evidence.
The Revision RevisedPassage-specific traditional-text argument
John William Burgon — supplied PDF pp. 141, 140
Burgon directly discusses Luke 9:55. The local discussion treats Greek manuscript evidence, ancient versions, patristic citation as part of his case for the traditional form and challenges the sufficiency or interpretation of the evidence used for the rival reading.
Editorial use: Burgon’s witness lists and textual judgments are historical source claims. They are useful evidence and argument, but this release does not represent them as a fresh collation against the current ECM/NA apparatus.
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. 43
At Luke 9:55, it compares the NKJV/TR-oriented wording “But He turned and rebuked them, and said, ‘You do not know what manner of spirit you are of.’”” with the ESV/critical-text wording “But he turned and rebuked them.”” and associates the passage with WLC 105.
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
The received rebuke should remain. It gives a coherent reason for Jesus’ refusal and bears the marks of a memorable dominical saying rather than a mere moralizing gloss. Its versional and ecclesiastical reach prevents treatment as a very late invention. The critical form still records that Christ opposed the disciples, but it withholds the theological explanation.
The narrative closes quietly: “they went to another village.” That movement enacts the saying. Rejection does not provoke holy war; it sends the messengers onward. Salvation is offered elsewhere while the rejected Lord continues toward his own suffering.
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 9:55–56, the received text reads “Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. For the Son of man is not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them.” and its Authorized Version representation reads “Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. For the Son of man is not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them.” — Luke 9:55–56”. The assessed critical reading is “Jesus “turned and rebuked them,” without the words of the rebuke.”. 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 9:55–56, the received Hebrew/Greek form is “Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. For the Son of man is not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them.”; the Authorized Version represents it as “Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. For the Son of man is not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them.” — Luke 9:55–56”. The assessed critical form is “Jesus “turned and rebuked them,” without the words of the rebuke.”.
- 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 9:55–56, the received text reads “Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. For the Son of man is not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them.” and its Authorized Version representation reads “Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. For the Son of man is not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them.” — Luke 9:55–56”. The assessed critical reading is “Jesus “turned and rebuked them,” without the words of the rebuke.”. 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
- The Revision Revisedsupplied PDF pp. 141, 140 — Passage-specific traditional-text argument
- A List of Omissions and Changes Found in the Critical Text to Verses Used as Proof Texts in the Westminster Standardssupplied PDF pp. 43 — Westminster proof-text and translation comparison
Read the full research essay and its sources
Passage: Luke 9:55–56
Received reading: “Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. For the Son of man is not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them.”
Principal competing reading: Jesus “turned and rebuked them,” without the words of the rebuke.
Editorial status: Preliminary record accepted for staging; independent review remains pending.
“Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. For the Son of man is not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them.” — Luke 9:55–56
The variation after the Samaritan refusal is larger than the disputed Elijah clause. In the received text Jesus says, “Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. For the Son of man is not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them.” The critical text reports the rebuke but does not preserve its words.
The shorter narrative is early and strong. The fuller speech is readily understood as an ecclesiastical expansion: its contrast between destruction and salvation resembles other Gospel summaries, and marginal explanations often become direct speech. Different manuscripts also transmit the wording in different lengths, a sign that the expansion may have grown in stages.
Variation within a passage can, however, mark erosion as readily as growth. Once one line disappeared, copyists could reconstruct or abbreviate what remained. The full form’s fit with Luke is notable. Jesus has come to seek and save the lost; at the cross he will pray for his executioners; Acts begins with witness rather than retaliatory force.
Which spirit?
The first sentence has been understood in two ways. It may say that the disciples fail to recognize their present vindictive temper. Or it may contrast the Spirit governing Christ’s mission with the spirit shown in their request. In either case, supernatural zeal must be tested by the Lord’s purpose.
“Not come to destroy … but to save” does not erase judgment. Luke records warnings against unrepentant cities, Jerusalem’s coming desolation, and the Son of man’s future return. The sentence defines the saving purpose of the first advent and the apostles’ present task; it does not make evil inconsequential.
The received rebuke should remain. It gives a coherent reason for Jesus’ refusal and bears the marks of a memorable dominical saying rather than a mere moralizing gloss. Its versional and ecclesiastical reach prevents treatment as a very late invention. The critical form still records that Christ opposed the disciples, but it withholds the theological explanation.
The narrative closes quietly: “they went to another village.” That movement enacts the saying. Rejection does not provoke holy war; it sends the messengers onward. Salvation is offered elsewhere while the rejected Lord continues toward his own suffering.
Sources and further reading
- Luke 9:51–56; 13:1–5; 19:10, 27, 41–44; 23:34; John 3:17.
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-2093
- 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. 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
- The longer passage circulates in multiple forms; a full apparatus should distinguish the sentence in verse 55 from the mission statement in verse 56.
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 9:55–56 — “The Son of Man Is Not Come to Destroy Men’s Lives, but to Save Them”,” VAR-2093, Confessional Bibliology Research Center, version 1.0-staging, last revised 2026-07-22.
Revision history
- — Chris Thomas