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
Herod either acted on many of John’s words or was greatly perplexed by them. The difference between the two Greek verbs creates distinct portraits, though both end with his willing attention.
Variant class
Punctuation
2Textus Receptus
Greek reading
“When he heard him, he did many things, and heard him gladly” (πολλὰ ἐποίει).
Authorized Version
“When he heard him, he did many things, and heard him gladly.” — Mark 6:20
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
“When he heard him, he was greatly perplexed, and heard him gladly” (πολλὰ ἠπόρει).
Translation or explanation
“When he heard him, he was greatly perplexed, and heard him gladly” (πολλὰ ἠπόρει).
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, authorial usage, grammar, or immediate context; the printed confidence rating represented here is {D}. 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 6:20
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
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 6:20, 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 says he “was greatly perplexed.” Critics call “did many things” banal and prefer the unusual adverbial use “was much perplexed.”
Inconsistency
The criteria used at Mark 6:20 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: No single doctrinal proposition is directly changed; the principal consequence is exegetical, historical, or cumulative.
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 broad Greek and versional support for epoiei is substantial, and the similar shape of the verbs permits ordinary transcriptional confusion. , The New Testament in the Original Greek according to the Text Followed in the Authorised Version (Cambridge, 1894).
Internal and transcriptional evidence
The broad Greek and versional support for epoiei is substantial, and the similar shape of the verbs permits ordinary transcriptional confusion. This is not a case where one side has impossible grammar.
Reception and ecclesiastical use
In the middle of that contradiction, the Textus Receptus says Herod “did many things.” The broad Greek and versional support for epoiei is substantial, and the similar shape of the verbs permits ordinary transcriptional confusion.
Providential-preservation analysis
Providential preservation is not used as a substitute for evidence at Mark 6:20. 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 says he “was greatly perplexed.” Critics call “did many things” banal and prefer the unusual adverbial use “was much perplexed.”
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. 116
Burgon directly discusses Mark 6:20. The local discussion treats Greek manuscript evidence, ancient versions, patristic citation, internal and transcriptional considerations 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
The Greek adverb polla can modify either verb naturally enough to permit both readings. This is not a case where one side has impossible grammar. The decision rests on the shapes of epoiei and ēporei, their distribution, and narrative fit. Treating the critical reading as psychologically superior risks replacing textual method with a reviewer’s preference for a more sophisticated character portrait.
The received verb should stand because it gives the episode its most searching irony. Herod was not a man untouched by John. He feared him, protected him, listened to him, and acted on much that he heard. Nevertheless, at a banquet he valued his oath and reputation above righteousness. Many reforms could not replace the repentance he withheld.
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 6:20, the received text reads “When he heard him, he did many things, and heard him gladly” (πολλὰ ἐποίει).” and its Authorized Version representation reads “When he heard him, he did many things, and heard him gladly.” — Mark 6:20”. The assessed critical reading is “When he heard him, he was greatly perplexed, and heard him gladly” (πολλὰ ἠπόρει).”. 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 6:20, the received Hebrew/Greek form is “When he heard him, he did many things, and heard him gladly” (πολλὰ ἐποίει).”; the Authorized Version represents it as “When he heard him, he did many things, and heard him gladly.” — Mark 6:20”. The assessed critical form is “When he heard him, he was greatly perplexed, and heard him gladly” (πολλὰ ἠπόρει).”.
- 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 6:20, the received text reads “When he heard him, he did many things, and heard him gladly” (πολλὰ ἐποίει).” and its Authorized Version representation reads “When he heard him, he did many things, and heard him gladly.” — Mark 6:20”. The assessed critical reading is “When he heard him, he was greatly perplexed, and heard him gladly” (πολλὰ ἠπόρει).”. 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 6:20Current critical-edition, ECM, or editorial documentation
- The Revision Revisedsupplied PDF pp. 116 — Passage-specific traditional-text 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 6:20
Received reading: “When he heard him, he did many things, and heard him gladly” (πολλὰ ἐποίει).
Principal competing reading: “When he heard him, he was greatly perplexed, and heard him gladly” (πολλὰ ἠπόρει).
Editorial status: Preliminary record accepted for staging; independent review remains pending.
“When he heard him, he did many things, and heard him gladly.” — Mark 6:20
Herod fears John, protects him, and listens gladly—yet ultimately orders his death. In the middle of that contradiction, the Textus Receptus says Herod “did many things.” The critical text says he “was greatly perplexed.” The verbs differ by only a few letters in Greek and both make sense of his divided response.
Perplexity gives a psychologically polished portrait. Herod is fascinated by the prophet but trapped by lust, pride, and political display. Luke 9:7 uses a related verb for Herod’s confusion about Jesus, which may support the reading—or may have influenced it.
Partial reform is not repentance
“Did many things” is morally sharper. John’s preaching produced visible action, perhaps changes in administration or personal conduct, while Herod refused the command that touched his unlawful marriage. He could obey in many safer matters and still silence the preacher who named the one sin he would not surrender.
This reading fits a recurring biblical danger. A hearer may receive the word with pleasure, perform selected duties, and remain unconverted at the point where obedience costs most. Herod’s many acts do not purchase innocence for keeping Herodias or murdering John.
Critics call “did many things” banal and prefer the unusual adverbial use “was much perplexed.” Literary taste cannot decide the text. The broad Greek and versional support for epoiei is substantial, and the similar shape of the verbs permits ordinary transcriptional confusion. Memory of Luke supplies a specific route from doing to perplexity.
The rival does not absolve Herod. Confusion can itself expose a will that refuses clear truth. But “he did many things” explains why Mark also says he heard John gladly: the preaching seemed fruitful until the ruler’s cherished transgression was threatened.
The Greek adverb polla can modify either verb naturally enough to permit both readings. This is not a case where one side has impossible grammar. The decision rests on the shapes of epoiei and ēporei, their distribution, and narrative fit. Treating the critical reading as psychologically superior risks replacing textual method with a reviewer’s preference for a more sophisticated character portrait.
The received verb should stand because it gives the episode its most searching irony. Herod was not a man untouched by John. He feared him, protected him, listened to him, and acted on much that he heard. Nevertheless, at a banquet he valued his oath and reputation above righteousness. Many reforms could not replace the repentance he withheld.
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 6:14–29; Luke 3:18–20; 9:7–9.
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-2019
- 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 6:20 — Did Herod “Do Many Things” or Remain “Greatly Perplexed”?,” VAR-2019, Confessional Bibliology Research Center, version 1.0-staging, last revised 2026-07-22.
Revision history
- — Chris Thomas