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
After stilling the storm, Jesus asks either why the disciples have no faith or whether they still have no faith. The difference is one small adverb with a real effect on the rebuke’s timing.
Variant class
Punctuation
2Textus Receptus
Greek reading
“Why are ye so fearful? How is it that ye have no faith?” (πῶς οὐκ ἔχετε πίστιν;).
Authorized Version
“Why are ye so fearful? how is it that ye have no faith?” — Mark 4:40
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
“Why are ye fearful? Have ye not yet faith?” (οὔπω ἔχετε πίστιν;).
Translation or explanation
“Why are ye fearful? Have ye not yet faith?” (οὔπω ἔχετε πίστιν;).
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 {A}. 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 4:40
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
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 Mark 4:40, 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 asks, “Have ye not yet faith?” The critical form looks backward over time.
Inconsistency
The criteria used at Mark 4:40 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
Critics, however, regard oupō as the better-attested and more characteristic wording. , The New Testament in the Original Greek according to the Text Followed in the Authorised Version (Cambridge, 1894).
Internal and transcriptional evidence
Mark uses temporal adverbs elsewhere to mark the disciples’ slow understanding, and a copyist might expect one here. The evangelists may preserve distinct wording from a single event, and copyists may move one account toward another.
Reception and ecclesiastical use
The Textus Receptus asks, “How is it that ye have no faith?”
Providential-preservation analysis
Providential preservation is not used as a substitute for evidence at Mark 4:40. 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 asks, “Have ye not yet faith?” The critical form looks backward over time.
Conclusion
Matthew and Luke phrase the rebuke differently, but all three accounts connect fear with deficient faith. Mark’s variant therefore should not be decided by forcing exact Synoptic agreement. The evangelists may preserve distinct wording from a single event, and copyists may move one account toward another. The received “how is it” has no exact need of either parallel; it stands as Mark’s own pointed response to the disciples’ accusation.
The received question has a force well suited to the scene. It does not console the disciples with an implied future improvement; it makes them face the irrationality of fearing destruction in the presence of the Lord who commands wind and sea. Their final question—“What manner of man is this?”—shows why the rebuke must remain sharp. They had not yet grasped who was asleep beside them.
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 4:40, the received text reads “Why are ye so fearful? How is it that ye have no faith?” (πῶς οὐκ ἔχετε πίστιν;).” and its Authorized Version representation reads “Why are ye so fearful? how is it that ye have no faith?” — Mark 4:40”. The assessed critical reading is “Why are ye fearful? Have ye not yet faith?” (οὔπω ἔχετε πίστιν;).”. 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 4:40, the received Hebrew/Greek form is “Why are ye so fearful? How is it that ye have no faith?” (πῶς οὐκ ἔχετε πίστιν;).”; the Authorized Version represents it as “Why are ye so fearful? how is it that ye have no faith?” — Mark 4:40”. The assessed critical form is “Why are ye fearful? Have ye not yet faith?” (οὔπω ἔχετε πίστιν;).”.
- 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 4:40, the received text reads “Why are ye so fearful? How is it that ye have no faith?” (πῶς οὐκ ἔχετε πίστιν;).” and its Authorized Version representation reads “Why are ye so fearful? how is it that ye have no faith?” — Mark 4:40”. The assessed critical reading is “Why are ye fearful? Have ye not yet faith?” (οὔπω ἔχετε πίστιν;).”. 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 4:40Current critical-edition, ECM, or editorial documentation
- 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
Read the full research essay and its sources
Passage: Mark 4:40
Received reading: “Why are ye so fearful? How is it that ye have no faith?” (πῶς οὐκ ἔχετε πίστιν;).
Principal competing reading: “Why are ye fearful? Have ye not yet faith?” (οὔπω ἔχετε πίστιν;).
Editorial status: Preliminary record accepted for staging; independent review remains pending.
“Why are ye so fearful? how is it that ye have no faith?” — Mark 4:40
The sea is calm before Jesus turns to the disciples. His second question appears in two forms. The Textus Receptus asks, “How is it that ye have no faith?” The critical text asks, “Have ye not yet faith?” The difference between ouk and oupō is only a few letters, but “not” and “not yet” do not sound the same.
The critical form looks backward over time. After hearing the parables and seeing earlier works, do they still lack faith? The received form concentrates on the present contradiction: with Christ in the boat, how can fear govern them as though he were absent?
A rebuke framed by their own cry
The disciples had awakened Jesus with, “Master, carest thou not that we perish?” Their panic was not merely an incomplete stage of growth. It accused him of indifference. “How is it that ye have no faith?” answers that moral failure directly.
The phrase “not yet” is easy to introduce as a softening or explanatory gloss. Mark uses temporal adverbs elsewhere to mark the disciples’ slow understanding, and a copyist might expect one here. Critics, however, regard oupō as the better-attested and more characteristic wording. The case cannot be decided by tone alone.
The physical similarity also permits accidental movement in either direction. A short word can lose or acquire its final syllable, and the sentence remains grammatical. External evidence therefore matters, but it should be weighed with the exact narrative rather than with a general preference for the earliest surviving codices.
Neither reading says saving faith was wholly absent from every disciple. Biblical narrative can rebuke people for “no faith” in a particular crisis while still presenting them as followers who trust imperfectly. Jesus exposes the operative unbelief that filled the boat with terror after the waves no longer did.
Matthew and Luke phrase the rebuke differently, but all three accounts connect fear with deficient faith. Mark’s variant therefore should not be decided by forcing exact Synoptic agreement. The evangelists may preserve distinct wording from a single event, and copyists may move one account toward another. The received “how is it” has no exact need of either parallel; it stands as Mark’s own pointed response to the disciples’ accusation.
The received question has a force well suited to the scene. It does not console the disciples with an implied future improvement; it makes them face the irrationality of fearing destruction in the presence of the Lord who commands wind and sea. Their final question—“What manner of man is this?”—shows why the rebuke must remain sharp. They had not yet grasped who was asleep beside them.
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.
- Mark 4:35–41; Matthew 8:23–27; Luke 8:22–25.
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-2013
- 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.
- 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 4:40 — “How Is It That Ye Have No Faith?” The Full Rebuke after the Storm,” VAR-2013, Confessional Bibliology Research Center, version 1.0-staging, last revised 2026-07-22.
Revision history
- — Chris Thomas