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 locates the danger in trusting riches. The critical form says simply that entering God’s kingdom is hard, a more general statement that explains the disciples’ astonishment differently.
Variant class
Omission / addition
2Textus Receptus
Greek reading
“How hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God!”
Authorized Version
“How hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God!” — Mark 10:24
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.
Historical annotation witness
Erasmus’s Annotationes
Erasmus’s printed Greek text, his Latin annotation, and the Research Center’s evaluation are distinct evidence. Each edition remains separately identified because Erasmus revised the Annotationes across his five editions.
Not yet assessed. No inference about Erasmus’s silence has been made. A Latin annotation and translation will appear here only after an edition and exact locus have been verified.
The Erasmus annotation audit has not yet been completed for this locus. Do not infer from this status that Erasmus was silent.
Westminster and Dutch annotation witnesses
Westminster Annotations
Not yet assessed. No inference from silence is made.
Dutch Annotations
Not yet assessed. No inference from silence is made.
3NA28 baseline and critical-text rationale
NA28 baseline reading
“How hard it is to enter into the kingdom of God,” omitting the qualification.
Translation or explanation
“How hard it is to enter into the kingdom of God,” omitting the qualification.
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 authorial usage, grammar, or immediate context; 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 Mark 10:24
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
No UBS6 / intended NA29 main-text change is recorded for this passage in the controlled 169-change ledger.
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 may also prefer the universal theological maxim and treat the intervening words as an explanatory gloss.
Controlled source-list matches
Doctrinal significance and Westminster use
This passage is listed in one or both controlling research files. Their claims are reported with exact source identity and confessional use; list membership does not by itself establish the original reading or the Research Center’s final entailment.
Doctrinally significant variant listMark 10.24
Doctrinally Significant Variants Itemised
Anonymous compilation — supplied source file pp. 13–14
Doctrine or doctrinal consequence identified by the source
Jesus has told the people in Matthew 11.29 that 'his burden is easy, and his yoke is light.' Accordingly, it is not from difficulties on Christ's side that entering the kingdom of God is difficult, no, not even for the rich young ruler. To the contrary, the way of the kingdom of God is a way of life and of grace. For the rich young ruler also Christ's yoke would be easy, and His burden light – if he would be but willing to forsake all, and follow Him. No, it was the rich man's trusting in his riches that made it impossible for him to enter the kingdom of God. Accordingly, the Alexandrian Text is doctrinally in error, because it makes entering the kingdom of God generally difficult, as though Jesus had made it so, instead of man's making it so by his inordinate love of temporal things.
Source-reported readings and witness argument
Received reading reported
But Jesus answereth again, and saith unto them, Children, how hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God! (Mark 10:24 Authorised Version)
Critical reading reported
But Jesus answered again and said to them, "Children, how hard it is to enter the kingdom of God! (Mar 10:24 New American Standard) (COMMENT: the Critical Text omits the all-important words 'that trust in riches'. It makes entering the kingdom of God generally difficult, whereas, Christ is telling his disciples that trusting in riches is what makes entering the kingdom of God difficult.)
Manuscript and patristic support reported by the source
The deletion of the words 'trust in riches' is supported by Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, and their allies. The inclusion of the words is supported by the universal witness of the Byzantine going back to Codex Alexandrinus, by the Caesarean Text, by Tatian's Diatessaron in the 2nd century, and by Clement of Alexandria in the 2nd century in his work 'Who is the Rich Man that Shall be Saved?'
Editorial qualification: 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.
Bahnsen four-point examination
Arbitrariness
At Mark 10:24, 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, “How hard it is to enter the kingdom of God.” Critics argue that scribes softened it by limiting the difficulty to those who trust wealth.
Inconsistency
The criteria used at Mark 10:24 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 may also prefer the universal theological maxim and treat the intervening words as an explanatory gloss.
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
Other witnesses add different qualifications—“a rich man” or “those who possess riches”—showing that readers tried to connect the broad saying more closely to its context. , The New Testament in the Original Greek according to the Text Followed in the Authorised Version (Cambridge, 1894).
Internal and transcriptional evidence
Critics argue that scribes softened it by limiting the difficulty to those who trust wealth. Other witnesses add different qualifications—“a rich man” or “those who possess riches”—showing that readers tried to connect the broad saying more closely to its context. Omission is easy because the sentence remains complete after “how hard it is.”
Reception and ecclesiastical use
The received text specifies, “How hard is it for them that trust in riches.” A genuine clause can be paraphrased in rival forms once part of the tradition loses it.
Providential-preservation analysis
Providential preservation is not used as a substitute for evidence at Mark 10:24. 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, “How hard it is to enter the kingdom of God.” Critics argue that scribes softened it by limiting the difficulty to those who trust wealth.
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.
Doctrinally Significant Variants ItemisedAttributed doctrinal and canonical-coherence argument
Anonymous compilation — supplied PDF pp. 13–14
Mark 10.24: It sets “But Jesus answereth again, and saith unto them, Children, how hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God! (Mark 10:24 Authorised Version)” against “But Jesus answered again and said to them, "Children, how hard it is to enter the kingdom of God! (Mar 10:24 New American Standard) (COMMENT: the Critical Text omits the all- important words 'that trust in riches'.….” Its stated doctrinal argument is that Jesus has told the people in Matthew 11.29 that 'his burden is easy, and his yoke is light.' Accordingly, it is not from difficulties on Christ's side that entering the kingdom of God is difficult, no, not even for the rich young ruler. To the contrary, the way of the kingdom of God is a way of life and of grace. For the rich young ruler also Christ's yoke would be easy, and His burden light – if he would be but willing to forsake all, and follow Him. No, it was the rich man's trusting in his riches that made it impossible for him to enter the kingdom of God.… The compilation appeals to The deletion of the words 'trust in riches' is supported by Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, and their allies. The inclusion of the words is supported by the universal witness of the Byzantine going back to Codex Alexandrinus, by the Caesarean Text, by Tatian's Diatessaron in the 2nd century,lvii and by Clement of Alexandria in the 2nd century in his work 'Who is the Rich Man that Shall be Saved?'lviii
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 qualification has a pastoral edge that the substitute expansions blur. “Those who have possessions” describes an economic condition; “those who trust in riches” describes worship. Scripture can address wealthy believers such as Joseph of Arimathea without declaring possession itself proof of exclusion. The received phrase locates the danger where Jesus located the man’s sorrow: confidence and identity fastened to treasure rather than to God.
The full reading should stay. It retains the impossibility of salvation by human power while identifying the idol in view. Riches are not condemned as material objects; trust in them is. That distinction makes the word more penetrating, not less. A person can possess little and still trust money, while another can steward much without treating it as an entrance token to God’s kingdom.
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.
Canonical-status rule: Physical printing is not canonical inclusion. If an edition prints a passage in double brackets while judging it secondary or non-original, it disagrees with the received text concerning the identity and extent of inspired Scripture.
Status: Established
Immediate textual or doctrinal consequence
At Mark 10:24, the received text reads “How hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God!” and its Authorized Version representation reads “How hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God!” — Mark 10:24”. The assessed critical reading is “How hard it is to enter into the kingdom of God,” omitting the qualification.”. 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 Mark 10:24, the received Hebrew/Greek form is “How hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God!”; the Authorized Version represents it as “How hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God!” — Mark 10:24”. The assessed critical form is “How hard it is to enter into the kingdom of God,” omitting the qualification.”.
- 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 Mark 10:24, the received text reads “How hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God!” and its Authorized Version representation reads “How hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God!” — Mark 10:24”. The assessed critical reading is “How hard it is to enter into the kingdom of God,” omitting the qualification.”. 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
- Digital ECM — Mark 10:24Current critical-edition, ECM, or editorial documentation
- Doctrinally Significant Variants Itemisedsupplied PDF pp. 13–14 — Attributed doctrinal and canonical-coherence argument
- German Bible Society — UBS6 publications and relation to NA29Current critical-edition, ECM, or editorial documentation
Read the full research essay and its sources
Passage: Mark 10:24
Received reading: “How hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God!”
Principal competing reading: “How hard it is to enter into the kingdom of God,” omitting the qualification.
Editorial status: Preliminary record accepted for staging; independent review remains pending.
“How hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God!” — Mark 10:24
After the rich man leaves sorrowful, Jesus says wealth makes entry into God’s kingdom difficult. The disciples are astonished, so he speaks again. The received text specifies, “How hard is it for them that trust in riches.” The critical text reads, “How hard it is to enter the kingdom of God.”
The shorter form is severe and universal. Critics argue that scribes softened it by limiting the difficulty to those who trust wealth. Other witnesses add different qualifications—“a rich man” or “those who possess riches”—showing that readers tried to connect the broad saying more closely to its context.
Qualification or definition?
The received words do not make entry easy for poor people. Scripture repeatedly exposes trust in self, works, rank, and human strength. Here Jesus names the form of false confidence displayed by the departing man. The camel saying then returns to the rich specifically.
“Trust in riches” also explains the disciples’ amazement. Material abundance was often read as divine blessing. If those visibly blessed cannot rely on that standing, who can be saved? Jesus answers, “With men it is impossible, but not with God.” Salvation remains divine work in either reading.
The existence of several expansions deserves weight, but it does not prove every qualification secondary. A genuine clause can be paraphrased in rival forms once part of the tradition loses it. The received wording is more exact than the substitutes and echoes biblical warnings against making wealth a strong city.
Omission is easy because the sentence remains complete after “how hard it is.” A scribe may also prefer the universal theological maxim and treat the intervening words as an explanatory gloss.
The qualification has a pastoral edge that the substitute expansions blur. “Those who have possessions” describes an economic condition; “those who trust in riches” describes worship. Scripture can address wealthy believers such as Joseph of Arimathea without declaring possession itself proof of exclusion. The received phrase locates the danger where Jesus located the man’s sorrow: confidence and identity fastened to treasure rather than to God.
The full reading should stay. It retains the impossibility of salvation by human power while identifying the idol in view. Riches are not condemned as material objects; trust in them is. That distinction makes the word more penetrating, not less. A person can possess little and still trust money, while another can steward much without treating it as an entrance token to God’s kingdom.
Sources and further reading
- F. H. A. Scrivener, ed., The New Testament in the Original Greek according to the Text Followed in the Authorised Version (Cambridge, 1894).
- Michael W. Holmes, ed., The Greek New Testament: SBL Edition (Society of Biblical Literature and Logos Bible Software, 2010), text and apparatus.
- Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 2nd ed., notes on the stated passage.
- Psalm 49; Proverbs 10:15; Mark 10:17–31; 1 Timothy 6:6–19.
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-2038
- 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 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 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, “Mark 10:24 — “For Them That Trust in Riches”: Qualification or Authentic Saying?,” VAR-2038, Confessional Bibliology Research Center, version 1.0-staging, last revised 2026-07-22.
Revision history
- — Chris Thomas