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 calls Jesus the Father’s “beloved” Son. The critical text reads “my Son, the Chosen One,” a form with strong early support and a possible echo of Isaiah’s servant.
Variant class
Punctuation
2Textus Receptus
Greek reading
“This is my beloved Son; hear him.”
Authorized Version
“This is my beloved Son: hear him.” — Luke 9:35
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
“This is my Son, the Chosen One; hear him.”
Translation or explanation
“This is my Son, the Chosen One; hear him.”
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 balance of external and internal evidence described in the entry; the printed confidence rating represented here is {B}. 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 9:35
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 9:35, 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 reads “This is my Son, the Chosen One.” The critical form has early and substantial documentary support.
Inconsistency
The criteria used at Luke 9:35 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
That agreement supports a coherent Synoptic witness, but it also creates the standard case for harmonization. The law and prophets bear witness to him, and disciples are commanded to listen as he sets his face toward the cross.
Internal and transcriptional evidence
That agreement supports a coherent Synoptic witness, but it also creates the standard case for harmonization. A copyist encountering Luke’s less familiar “chosen” could replace it with the wording known from the other Gospels. It is not a random weakening invented by modern editors, and a complete Research Center record should preserve its Isaiah connection, early support, and harmonization argument.
Reception and ecclesiastical use
The received text says “This is my beloved Son.” Its broad ecclesiastical transmission cannot be dismissed merely because it agrees with parallels, and Luke has already placed the same paternal description at the baptism.
Providential-preservation analysis
Providential preservation is not used as a substitute for evidence at Luke 9:35. 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 reads “This is my Son, the Chosen One.” The critical form has early and substantial documentary support.
Conclusion
Still, “chosen” is among the more serious rivals in Luke. It is not a random weakening invented by modern editors, and a complete Research Center record should preserve its Isaiah connection, early support, and harmonization argument. Confessional judgment is strongest when it can state that evidence without anxiety.
The final imperative is uncontested: “hear him.” Peter has proposed three tabernacles, placing Jesus beside Moses and Elijah. The voice refuses that leveling. Whether the adjective is beloved or chosen, one Son remains when the cloud passes. The law and prophets bear witness to him, and disciples are commanded to listen as he sets his face toward the cross.
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 9:35, the received text reads “This is my beloved Son; hear him.” and its Authorized Version representation reads “This is my beloved Son: hear him.” — Luke 9:35”. The assessed critical reading is “This is my Son, the Chosen One; hear him.”. 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 9:35, the received Hebrew/Greek form is “This is my beloved Son; hear him.”; the Authorized Version represents it as “This is my beloved Son: hear him.” — Luke 9:35”. The assessed critical form is “This is my Son, the Chosen One; hear him.”.
- 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 9:35, the received text reads “This is my beloved Son; hear him.” and its Authorized Version representation reads “This is my beloved Son: hear him.” — Luke 9:35”. The assessed critical reading is “This is my Son, the Chosen One; hear him.”. 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
- 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 9:35
Received reading: “This is my beloved Son; hear him.”
Principal competing reading: “This is my Son, the Chosen One; hear him.”
Editorial status: Preliminary record accepted for staging; independent review remains pending.
“This is my beloved Son: hear him.” — Luke 9:35
On the mountain, Moses and Elijah speak with Jesus about the “decease” he will accomplish at Jerusalem. A cloud overshadows the disciples, and the voice identifies the one they must hear. The received text says “This is my beloved Son.” The critical text reads “This is my Son, the Chosen One.”
“Beloved” agrees with the heavenly declaration at Jesus’ baptism and with the transfiguration accounts in Matthew and Mark. That agreement supports a coherent Synoptic witness, but it also creates the standard case for harmonization. A copyist encountering Luke’s less familiar “chosen” could replace it with the wording known from the other Gospels.
The critical form has early and substantial documentary support. “Chosen One” may echo Isaiah 42:1, where the Lord delights in his chosen servant. Luke has already used servant-shaped language and will present Jesus as God’s chosen Messiah at the cross, though there the title is spoken mockingly.
Neither reading lowers Christ. “Beloved Son” expresses unique filial delight; “my Son, the Chosen One” joins sonship to the mission appointed by the Father. Election here would not mean that Jesus is merely one creature selected from others. The noun “Son” and the glory of the scene prevent that reduction.
The received “beloved” should remain. Its broad ecclesiastical transmission cannot be dismissed merely because it agrees with parallels, and Luke has already placed the same paternal description at the baptism. Repetition at the two great revelations—Jordan and mountain—is narratively purposeful.
Still, “chosen” is among the more serious rivals in Luke. It is not a random weakening invented by modern editors, and a complete Research Center record should preserve its Isaiah connection, early support, and harmonization argument. Confessional judgment is strongest when it can state that evidence without anxiety.
The final imperative is uncontested: “hear him.” Peter has proposed three tabernacles, placing Jesus beside Moses and Elijah. The voice refuses that leveling. Whether the adjective is beloved or chosen, one Son remains when the cloud passes. The law and prophets bear witness to him, and disciples are commanded to listen as he sets his face toward the cross.
Sources and further reading
- Isaiah 42:1; Matthew 17:1–8; Mark 9:2–8; Luke 3:22; 9:28–36; 23:35.
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-2091
- 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
- This staging record summarizes the principal variation unit and representative evidence. It is not a fresh collation of every extant manuscript, version, lectionary, or patristic citation.
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 9:35 — Beloved Son or Chosen Son? The Voice from the Cloud,” VAR-2091, Confessional Bibliology Research Center, version 1.0-staging, last revised 2026-07-22.
Revision history
- — Chris Thomas