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 includes Jesus’ prayer for his executioners. Several important early witnesses omit it, while other early and broad streams retain it; modern critical editions have differed between brackets and inclusion.
Variant class
Punctuation
2Textus Receptus
Greek reading
“Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.”
Authorized Version
“Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.” — Luke 23:34
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.
3NA28 baseline and critical-text rationale
NA28 baseline reading
The narrative moves directly from crucifixion to the division of Jesus’ garments.
Translation or explanation
The narrative moves directly from crucifixion to the division of Jesus’ garments.
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. 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 23:34
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
A scribe could supply a saying that perfectly embodies Luke’s theology, perhaps under the influence of Stephen’s death.
Bahnsen four-point examination
Arbitrariness
At Luke 23:34, 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. Modern editors have not been unanimous: the Nestle-Aland line has bracketed it, while the Tyndale House Greek New Testament retains it. Evangelical Textual Criticism, “Father, Forgive Them: The Variant in Luke 23:34,” https://evangelicaltextualcriticism.
Inconsistency
The criteria used at Luke 23:34 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: A scribe could supply a saying that perfectly embodies Luke’s theology, perhaps under the influence of Stephen’s death.
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
Papyrus 75, Vaticanus, and several other important witnesses omit the sentence. Their early, diverse attestation and exact fit with Jesus’ character outweigh the omission stream.
Internal and transcriptional evidence
That fit can support authenticity or explain addition. A scribe could supply a saying that perfectly embodies Luke’s theology, perhaps under the influence of Stephen’s death. Omission has its own historical pressure.
Reception and ecclesiastical use
— Luke 23:34 As soldiers crucify Jesus, the received text records his prayer: “Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.” It is present in Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus, Bezae, and a broad early tradition.
Providential-preservation analysis
Providential preservation is not used as a substitute for evidence at Luke 23:34. 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. Modern editors have not been unanimous: the Nestle-Aland line has bracketed it, while the Tyndale House Greek New Testament retains it. Evangelical Textual Criticism, “Father, Forgive Them: The Variant in Luke 23:34,” https://evangelicaltextualcriticism.
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. 130
Burgon directly discusses Luke 23:34. The local discussion treats the local documentary and contextual evidence 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.
Doctrinally Significant Variants ItemisedAttributed doctrinal and canonical-coherence argument
Anonymous compilation — supplied PDF pp. 19–20
Luke 23.34: It sets “Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do (Luk 23:34 Authorised Version)” against “The NA27 includes the words, but double-brackets them, to indicate that, in the opinion of the editors of the NA27, the words did not occur in the original.….” Its stated doctrinal argument is that The doctrinal difference here is critical to the Gospel itself. Without this text, the Gospel itself is seriously altered. The seven words in Greek in this verse which express the heart of Christ in this verse speak mountains on the mercy and love of God for poor sinners, as well as His sincere good wishes for the Jewish people who will one day come to repentance, in answer to Christ's prayer, as promised in Romans 11.25-26. We cannot but attribute the deletion of this text to the anti- Semitism which arose in the early Church, particularly in the days of the heretic Marcion, as we have already detailed in Chapter 6 of this book.… The compilation appeals to The omission of these words is supported by 𝔓75, Codex Vaticanus, and Codex Bezae. Codex Sinaiticus includes the words, but the second corrector has marked them with an obelisk as doubtful. (The third corrector then removed the obelisks inserted by the second corrector.) The verse is also omitted by the Sahidic Coptic translation, and by some Old Italic manuscripts.…
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
The words should remain. Their early, diverse attestation and exact fit with Jesus’ character outweigh the omission stream. The possibility of anti-Jewish or rigorist suppression is historically credible, though it cannot be proven for every missing copy.
One should not use the prayer to assign collective guilt to an ethnicity. Jesus addresses actual agents within a Roman execution enabled by leaders and crowd pressure. The received sentence turns the cross away from vengeance: while human beings divide his clothing, the crucified Son intercedes with the Father for mercy grounded in the sacrifice he is making.
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.
Status: Established
Immediate textual or doctrinal consequence
At Luke 23:34, the received text reads “Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.” and its Authorized Version representation reads “Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.” — Luke 23:34”. The assessed critical reading is “The narrative moves directly from crucifixion to the division of Jesus’ garments.”. 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 23:34, the received Hebrew/Greek form is “Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.”; the Authorized Version represents it as “Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.” — Luke 23:34”. The assessed critical form is “The narrative moves directly from crucifixion to the division of Jesus’ garments.”.
- 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 23:34, the received text reads “Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.” and its Authorized Version representation reads “Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.” — Luke 23:34”. The assessed critical reading is “The narrative moves directly from crucifixion to the division of Jesus’ garments.”. 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. 130 — Passage-specific traditional-text argument
- Doctrinally Significant Variants Itemisedsupplied PDF pp. 19–20 — Attributed doctrinal and canonical-coherence argument
Read the full research essay and its sources
Passage: Luke 23:34
Received reading: “Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.”
Principal competing reading: The narrative moves directly from crucifixion to the division of Jesus’ garments.
Editorial status: Preliminary record accepted for staging; independent review remains pending.
“Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.” — Luke 23:34
As soldiers crucify Jesus, the received text records his prayer: “Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.” Papyrus 75, Vaticanus, and several other important witnesses omit the sentence. It is present in Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus, Bezae, and a broad early tradition. Modern editors have not been unanimous: the Nestle-Aland line has bracketed it, while the Tyndale House Greek New Testament retains it.
The prayer is unmistakably Lukan in theme. Jesus commands love for enemies, teaches prayer for abusers, welcomes sinners, and in Acts Stephen prays for his killers. That fit can support authenticity or explain addition. A scribe could supply a saying that perfectly embodies Luke’s theology, perhaps under the influence of Stephen’s death.
Omission has its own historical pressure. After Jerusalem’s destruction and amid deepening Christian-Jewish conflict, some readers may have concluded that the prayer was not answered or that Jesus should not be shown interceding for those responsible. The pronoun “them” is broad enough to provoke debate: soldiers, rulers, the crowd, or all participating agents may be in view.
Ignorance does not create innocence
Jesus’ reason does not acquit the executioners automatically. In Luke and Acts, ignorance mitigates knowledge but still calls for repentance. Peter can say that rulers acted ignorantly and then summon hearers to turn so that sins may be blotted out.
The prayer’s answer begins in the Gospel’s own future: a centurion glorifies God, crowds return beating their breasts, and Acts records repentance in Jerusalem, including among priests. Divine forgiveness is offered through the death being inflicted.
The prayer in Luke’s passion
The words should remain. Their early, diverse attestation and exact fit with Jesus’ character outweigh the omission stream. The possibility of anti-Jewish or rigorist suppression is historically credible, though it cannot be proven for every missing copy.
One should not use the prayer to assign collective guilt to an ethnicity. Jesus addresses actual agents within a Roman execution enabled by leaders and crowd pressure. The received sentence turns the cross away from vengeance: while human beings divide his clothing, the crucified Son intercedes with the Father for mercy grounded in the sacrifice he is making.
Sources and further reading
- Luke 6:27–36; 23:26–49; Acts 3:17–20; 6:7; 7:60.
- Evangelical Textual Criticism, “Father, Forgive Them: The Variant in Luke 23:34,” https://evangelicaltextualcriticism.blogspot.com/2018/03/father-forgive-them-variant-in-luke.html.
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-2122
- 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 omission is ancient and significant; motive theories remain inferential, and the scope of “them” is an exegetical question rather than a manuscript variant.
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 23:34 — “Father, Forgive Them”: Is Christ’s Prayer from the Cross Authentic?,” VAR-2122, Confessional Bibliology Research Center, version 1.0-staging, last revised 2026-07-22.
Revision history
- — Chris Thomas