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 “and both are preserved,” “straightway,” and the full closing judgment that the old is better. Critical editions vary across these smaller units but retain the distinctive saying about preferring old wine.
Variant class
Omission / addition
2Textus Receptus
Greek reading
New wine belongs in new skins “and both are preserved”; no one “straightway” desires new wine, “for he saith, The old is better.”
Authorized Version
“But new wine must be put into new bottles; and both are preserved. No man also having drunk old wine straightway desireth new: for he saith, The old is better.” — Luke 5:38–39
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
A shorter verse 38 without “and both are preserved,” with variation over “straightway” and the adjective rendered “better/good” in verse 39.
Translation or explanation
A shorter verse 38 without “and both are preserved,” with variation over “straightway” and the adjective rendered “better/good” in verse 39.
Metzger’s report of the UBS committee
Metzger reports the UBS4 committee's treatment of 4 variation units within this record's range. The notes ground the relevant decisions in the weight and distribution of external attestation, a proposed mechanism of accidental omission, scribal harmonization to a parallel passage, the likelihood that the competing form is a scribal correction or emendation; the printed confidence ratings represented here are {C}, {B}. This is a controlled synopsis rather than a quotation.
Locator: Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 2nd ed., notes on Luke 5:38, 5:38, 5:39, 5:39
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
Exegetical or interpretive consequence. The record does not establish that the variant by itself removes an entire Christian doctrine; explicit wording, exegesis, and cumulative testimony must be distinguished.
Bahnsen four-point examination
Arbitrariness
At Luke 5:38–39, 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. — Luke 5:38–39 The wineskin sayings appear in all three Synoptic Gospels, but only Luke closes with the drinker who prefers old wine. Critical editions therefore commonly omit “and both are preserved.”
Inconsistency
The criteria used at Luke 5:38–39 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 triune identity of the Father, the Son/Word, and the Holy Ghost.
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 Authorized Version follows the received comparative reading.
Internal and transcriptional evidence
That parallel gives a simple reason for addition to Luke. The Matthew-like ending of verse 38 faces a stronger harmonization objection than Luke’s independent verse 39.
Reception and ecclesiastical use
The received text says that new wine must enter new skins “and both are preserved.” Different units, different weights These clauses should remain in the received text, with the unequal evidence recorded.
Providential-preservation analysis
Providential preservation is not used as a substitute for evidence at Luke 5:38–39. 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. — Luke 5:38–39 The wineskin sayings appear in all three Synoptic Gospels, but only Luke closes with the drinker who prefers old wine. Critical editions therefore commonly omit “and both are preserved.”
Passage-specific evidence from consulted works
Core 0.6.3 supplied-source audit complete: 1 passage-specific note 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. 158
Burgon directly discusses Luke 5:39. The local discussion treats Greek manuscript evidence, ancient versions 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.
Conclusion
These clauses should remain in the received text, with the unequal evidence recorded. The Matthew-like ending of verse 38 faces a stronger harmonization objection than Luke’s independent verse 39. A database that assigns one confidence label to the whole paragraph would conceal that difference.
Luke’s final line is the surprise. Jesus knows why settled religious habits resist his arrival. The answer is neither contempt for the past nor refusal of the new covenant. The old Scriptures themselves prepare for the Bridegroom, and faithful readers must let his presence determine the season.
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 5:38–39, the received text reads “New wine belongs in new skins “and both are preserved”; no one “straightway” desires new wine, “for he saith, The old is better.” and its Authorized Version representation reads “But new wine must be put into new bottles; and both are preserved. No man also having drunk old wine straightway desireth new: for he saith, The old is better.” — Luke 5:38–39”. The assessed critical reading is “A shorter verse 38 without “and both are preserved,” with variation over “straightway” and the adjective rendered “better/good” in verse 39.”. 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 5:38–39, the received Hebrew/Greek form is “New wine belongs in new skins “and both are preserved”; no one “straightway” desires new wine, “for he saith, The old is better.”; the Authorized Version represents it as “But new wine must be put into new bottles; and both are preserved. No man also having drunk old wine straightway desireth new: for he saith, The old is better.” — Luke 5:38–39”. The assessed critical form is “A shorter verse 38 without “and both are preserved,” with variation over “straightway” and the adjective rendered “better/good” in verse 39.”.
- 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 5:38–39, the received text reads “New wine belongs in new skins “and both are preserved”; no one “straightway” desires new wine, “for he saith, The old is better.” and its Authorized Version representation reads “But new wine must be put into new bottles; and both are preserved. No man also having drunk old wine straightway desireth new: for he saith, The old is better.” — Luke 5:38–39”. The assessed critical reading is “A shorter verse 38 without “and both are preserved,” with variation over “straightway” and the adjective rendered “better/good” in verse 39.”. 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. 158 — Passage-specific traditional-text argument
- German Bible Society — The Sixth Edition of the Greek New TestamentCurrent critical-edition, ECM, or editorial documentation
Read the full research essay and its sources
Passage: Luke 5:38–39
Received reading: New wine belongs in new skins “and both are preserved”; no one “straightway” desires new wine, “for he saith, The old is better.”
Principal competing reading: A shorter verse 38 without “and both are preserved,” with variation over “straightway” and the adjective rendered “better/good” in verse 39.
Editorial status: Preliminary record accepted for staging; independent review remains pending.
“But new wine must be put into new bottles; and both are preserved. No man also having drunk old wine straightway desireth new: for he saith, The old is better.” — Luke 5:38–39
The wineskin sayings appear in all three Synoptic Gospels, but only Luke closes with the drinker who prefers old wine. Within Luke’s wording, several smaller variations cluster together. The received text says that new wine must enter new skins “and both are preserved.” It adds that a person who has drunk old wine does not “straightway” desire new, because he says, “The old is better.”
The first disputed clause closely resembles Matthew 9:17, where preservation of wine and skins completes the comparison. That parallel gives a simple reason for addition to Luke. Mark lacks the clause, and the shorter Luke remains grammatically complete. Critical editions therefore commonly omit “and both are preserved.”
Verse 39 has a different profile. Luke’s final saying is not borrowed from Matthew or Mark, and the main critical texts retain it. Variation concerns the adverb “immediately” and whether the old is called better or simply good. The Authorized Version follows the received comparative reading.
A saying that resists a slogan
Jesus is answering a question about fasting. Bridegroom, garment, wine, and wineskins warn against treating his presence as a patch placed upon an old arrangement. Yet verse 39 acknowledges human attachment to familiar forms. A drinker accustomed to old wine does not instantly ask for new.
That observation can be read ironically, sympathetically, or as a warning. It should not be converted into the claim that the old covenant is morally superior to Christ. Nor does “new” mean that every novelty is good. The images concern the fittingness of practices to the messianic moment.
The received fuller wording can be defended unit by unit rather than as an all-or-nothing block. “Both are preserved” gives the wineskin comparison its stated consequence; its Matthean parallel explains either genuine Synoptic affinity or scribal supplementation. “Straightway” sharpens the realism of acquired taste. “Better” explains the drinker’s expressed preference more directly than “good,” though both make sense.
Different units, different weights
These clauses should remain in the received text, with the unequal evidence recorded. The Matthew-like ending of verse 38 faces a stronger harmonization objection than Luke’s independent verse 39. A database that assigns one confidence label to the whole paragraph would conceal that difference.
Luke’s final line is the surprise. Jesus knows why settled religious habits resist his arrival. The answer is neither contempt for the past nor refusal of the new covenant. The old Scriptures themselves prepare for the Bridegroom, and faithful readers must let his presence determine the season.
Sources and further reading
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-2080
- 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
- This record groups several adjacent subvariants whose documentary profiles are not identical; verse 38 and verse 39 should remain separately searchable in a full apparatus.
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 5:38–39 — New Wine, New Bottles, and the Entire Disputed Final Saying,” VAR-2080, Confessional Bibliology Research Center, version 1.0-staging, last revised 2026-07-22.
Revision history
- — Chris Thomas