Luke 24:6, 12 — “He Is Risen” and Peter at the Empty Tomb

Passage

Luke 24:6

Issue

The received text contains both “but is risen” and Peter’s run to the tomb. Westcott and Hort treated these among the Western non-interpolations, while current critical editions generally retain the words, sometimes with brackets or apparatus caution.

Variant class

Omission / addition

Greek reading

Include “but is risen” and the complete account of Peter running, seeing the linen cloths, and marveling.

Authorized Version

“He is not here, but is risen. … Then arose Peter, and ran unto the sepulchre.” — Luke 24:6, 12

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.

NA28 baseline reading

Omit the resurrection clause and/or the whole Peter verse in the shorter Western form.

Translation or explanation

Omit the resurrection clause and/or the whole Peter verse in the shorter Western form.

Effect class

Weakening of explicit biblical testimony

Exact proposition affected

The bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Doctrinal analysis

Principal competing reading: Omit the resurrection clause and/or the whole Peter verse in the shorter Western form. — Luke 24:6, 12 Two resurrection units once stood near the center of the “Western non-interpolations” theory. The resurrection clause and Peter’s run now stand in the major critical texts, though typographical brackets may signal residual uncertainty.

External and historical evidence

Luke preserves the slow education of witnesses, which argues against a triumphalist harmonizing gloss.

Internal and transcriptional evidence

Peter’s visit resembles John 20, giving a second harmonization theory. Luke preserves the slow education of witnesses, which argues against a triumphalist harmonizing gloss.

Reception and ecclesiastical use

The received text includes both. On those grounds, an older critical approach sometimes preferred the spare Western text even against broad Greek support. A theory revised by later editors Westcott and Hort regarded a small cluster near Luke’s end as places where the non-Western tradition had added material.

Providential-preservation analysis

Providential preservation is not used as a substitute for evidence at Luke 24:6. 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 critical editions have moved substantially toward inclusion. On those grounds, an older critical approach sometimes preferred the spare Western text even against broad Greek support.

Conclusion

This paired record is not evidence that critical editions never omit received words. It is evidence that “the critical text” changes when editors judge the documents differently. The current agreement should be stated as plainly as the historical dispute.

The received narrative moves in measured stages: proclamation, remembered words, testimony dismissed, tomb inspected, Scripture opened, risen Christ encountered. “He is risen” gives the fact; Peter’s run begins the apostolic reckoning with it.