Complete textual-variant dossier
No adverse entailment · agrees with the received text
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 and principal critical texts agree on the heavenly voice. An ancient Western reading instead quotes Psalm 2:7, “Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.”
Variant class
Omission / addition
2Textus Receptus
Greek reading
“Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.”
Authorized Version
“Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.” — Luke 3:22
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
“Thou art my Son; today I have begotten thee,” in Codex Bezae and a limited Western stream.
Translation or explanation
“Thou art my Son; today I have begotten thee,” in Codex Bezae and a limited Western stream.
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 {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 3:22
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
Weakening of explicit biblical testimony
Exact proposition affected
The identity and divine sonship of Jesus Christ.
Doctrinal analysis
That theological danger may have pressured transmission, though it does not tell us which wording came first. Luke’s theology also supplies its own boundary.
Bahnsen four-point examination
Arbitrariness
At Luke 3:22, 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. That sentence stands in the Textus Receptus and in the leading modern critical editions. The famous alternative is ancient, but it is not the modern critical text.
Inconsistency
The criteria used at Luke 3:22 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
Weakening of explicit biblical testimony: That theological danger may have pressured transmission, though it does not tell us which wording came first. Luke’s theology also supplies its own boundary.
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 famous alternative is ancient, but it is not the modern critical text. — Luke 3:22 Codex Bezae and several Old Latin witnesses give the voice in the words of Psalm 2:7: “Thou art my Son; today I have begotten thee.”
Internal and transcriptional evidence
A scribe might remove the Psalm form to prevent misuse. Another might introduce it from well-known baptismal preaching or from a Gospel harmony. Harmonization to Matthew and Mark is possible, but so is Western replacement with a direct proof text.
Reception and ecclesiastical use
That sentence stands in the Textus Receptus and in the leading modern critical editions. The Psalm form belongs in the history of the verse and in any responsible apparatus; it should not displace the wording preserved across the main Greek tradition.
Providential-preservation analysis
Providential preservation is not used as a substitute for evidence at Luke 3:22. 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. That sentence stands in the Textus Receptus and in the leading modern critical editions. The famous alternative is ancient, but it is not the modern critical text.
Conclusion
The documentary balance favors the shared received and critical reading. The Psalm form belongs in the history of the verse and in any responsible apparatus; it should not displace the wording preserved across the main Greek tradition.
Luke’s theology also supplies its own boundary. The baptism manifests the Son; it does not create him. Gabriel has already announced that Mary’s child “shall be called the Son of God.” At Jordan, the Father publicly delights in the beloved Son as his messianic ministry begins.
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.
No adverse entailment: agrees with the received text.
Necessary reasoning chain
- The current critical main-text reading assessed at Luke 3:22 agrees with the received Hebrew/Greek reading at the variation unit governed by this card.
- An adverse preservation entailment at this locus would require the current critical form to displace a different received reading.
- Because no such displacement occurs at the assessed locus, no adverse preservation consequence follows here.
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 3:22
Received reading: “Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.”
Principal competing reading: “Thou art my Son; today I have begotten thee,” in Codex Bezae and a limited Western stream.
Editorial status: Preliminary record accepted for staging; independent review remains pending.
At Jesus’ baptism the Spirit descends bodily like a dove, and the Father speaks from heaven: “Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.” That sentence stands in the Textus Receptus and in the leading modern critical editions. The famous alternative is ancient, but it is not the modern critical text.
“Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.” — Luke 3:22
Codex Bezae and several Old Latin witnesses give the voice in the words of Psalm 2:7: “Thou art my Son; today I have begotten thee.” Early Christian writers knew that form, and its age prevents dismissal as a medieval novelty. It also suits Luke’s interest in the royal psalm, which appears again in Acts.
Psalm 2 announces the enthronement of the Lord’s anointed king. Applied to Christ, “today I have begotten thee” need not mean that he first came into existence at baptism. Acts 13:33 relates the psalm to the public accomplishment of God’s promise in the risen Messiah, and Hebrews uses it in a larger argument about sonship and exaltation.
Nevertheless, the baptismal placement could be heard in an adoptionist sense: Jesus became God’s Son on that day. That theological danger may have pressured transmission, though it does not tell us which wording came first. A scribe might remove the Psalm form to prevent misuse. Another might introduce it from well-known baptismal preaching or from a Gospel harmony.
The broadly transmitted “beloved Son” joins themes from Psalm 2 and Isaiah’s servant without mechanically reproducing either text. It also agrees with the voice in the Synoptic parallels and with Luke’s earlier identification of Jesus as Son before birth. Harmonization to Matthew and Mark is possible, but so is Western replacement with a direct proof text.
The documentary balance favors the shared received and critical reading. The Psalm form belongs in the history of the verse and in any responsible apparatus; it should not displace the wording preserved across the main Greek tradition.
Luke’s theology also supplies its own boundary. The baptism manifests the Son; it does not create him. Gabriel has already announced that Mary’s child “shall be called the Son of God.” At Jordan, the Father publicly delights in the beloved Son as his messianic ministry begins.
Sources and further reading
- Psalm 2:7; Isaiah 42:1; Matthew 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 1:35; Acts 13:33; Hebrews 1:5.
- Codex Bezae (GA 05), Luke 3:22.
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-2073
- 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
- The Psalm 2 reading is ancient and important, but it is confined chiefly to the Western tradition and is not the standard modern critical text.
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 3:22 — “Thou Art My Beloved Son” or “This Day Have I Begotten Thee”?,” VAR-2073, Confessional Bibliology Research Center, version 1.0-staging, last revised 2026-07-22.
Revision history
- — Chris Thomas