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
Matthew places the disciples in the dark with two vivid details.
Variant class
Punctuation
2Textus Receptus
Greek reading
The strong wind Peter saw Verse 30 in the Textus Receptus reads τὸν ἄνεμον ἰσχυρόν, “the wind strong.”
Authorized Version
“But the ship was now in the midst of the sea, tossed with waves.” — Matthew 14:24
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.
3NA28 baseline and critical-text rationale
NA28 baseline reading
No distinct NA28 reading has been entered; the received and NA28 texts may agree at this unit.
Translation or explanation
The received and current critical texts may agree at this unit; consult the full essay for any versional or apparatus-only variation.
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, a proposed mechanism of accidental omission, scribal harmonization to a parallel passage; 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 Matthew 14:24
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
UBS6 retains the NA28 / UBS5 Greek main-text wording in Matthew, 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
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 Matthew 14:24, the critical choice avoids arbitrariness only to the extent that it states public manuscript, transcriptional, and intrinsic grounds. Critical editions prefer “many furlongs distant from the land” in the first place and often mark “boisterous” as doubtful in the second. The critical reading gives a measured distance: the boat was many stadia from land. Critics therefore suspect that scribes replaced Matthew’s figure with Mark’s familiar phrase.
Inconsistency
The criteria used at Matthew 14:24 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: 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 Authorized Version says “the wind boisterous.” Important Egyptian witnesses omit the adjective, and some modern editions bracket it.
Internal and transcriptional evidence
Critics therefore suspect that scribes replaced Matthew’s figure with Mark’s familiar phrase. If a copyist wanted an exact measure, the Fourth Gospel stood ready. The Sea of Galilee is small enough that “in the midst” describes exposure, not a geometric center point.
Reception and ecclesiastical use
The received text says the boat was “in the midst of the sea.” The received phrase has broad church use and gives the story its simple force. The strong wind Peter saw Verse 30 in the Textus Receptus reads τὸν ἄνεμον ἰσχυρόν, “the wind strong.”
Providential-preservation analysis
Providential preservation is not used as a substitute for evidence at Matthew 14:24. 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
Critical editions prefer “many furlongs distant from the land” in the first place and often mark “boisterous” as doubtful in the second. The critical reading gives a measured distance: the boat was many stadia from land. Critics therefore suspect that scribes replaced Matthew’s figure with Mark’s familiar phrase.
Conclusion
Peter’s sinking also shows why the adjective is not mere spectacle. He begins upon Christ’s command, then attends to the strength of the wind. The threat has not changed; his object of sight has. “Boisterous” gives the distraction a named force before Jesus names his little faith.
The account should not be turned into a promise that faith makes physical danger imaginary. Peter actually sinks and actually needs rescue. The Lord’s hand, not the disciple’s mental steadiness, brings him into the boat. The received details make both danger and deliverance concrete.
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 Matthew 14:24, the received text reads “The strong wind Peter saw Verse 30 in the Textus Receptus reads τὸν ἄνεμον ἰσχυρόν, “the wind strong.” and its Authorized Version representation reads “But the ship was now in the midst of the sea, tossed with waves.” — Matthew 14:24”. The assessed critical reading is “The received and current critical texts may agree at this unit; consult the full essay for any versional or apparatus-only variation.”. 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 Matthew 14:24, the received Hebrew/Greek form is “The strong wind Peter saw Verse 30 in the Textus Receptus reads τὸν ἄνεμον ἰσχυρόν, “the wind strong.”; the Authorized Version represents it as “But the ship was now in the midst of the sea, tossed with waves.” — Matthew 14:24”. The assessed critical form is “The received and current critical texts may agree at this unit; consult the full essay for any versional or apparatus-only variation.”.
- 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 Matthew 14:24, the received text reads “The strong wind Peter saw Verse 30 in the Textus Receptus reads τὸν ἄνεμον ἰσχυρόν, “the wind strong.” and its Authorized Version representation reads “But the ship was now in the midst of the sea, tossed with waves.” — Matthew 14:24”. The assessed critical reading is “The received and current critical texts may agree at this unit; consult the full essay for any versional or apparatus-only variation.”. 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
- 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
- German Bible Society — Interview with Hugh HoughtonCurrent critical-edition, ECM, or editorial documentation
Read the full research essay and its sources
Matthew places the disciples in the dark with two vivid details. The received text says the boat was “in the midst of the sea.” When Peter walks toward Jesus, he sees the wind “boisterous.” Critical editions prefer “many furlongs distant from the land” in the first place and often mark “boisterous” as doubtful in the second.
“But the ship was now in the midst of the sea, tossed with waves.” — Matthew 14:24
“In the midst of the sea” agrees closely with Mark 6:47. The critical reading gives a measured distance: the boat was many stadia from land. Critics therefore suspect that scribes replaced Matthew’s figure with Mark’s familiar phrase.
But John 6:19 also gives a distance. If a copyist wanted an exact measure, the Fourth Gospel stood ready. The received wording is natural in Matthew’s scene and does not have to be copied from Mark. The Sea of Galilee is small enough that “in the midst” describes exposure, not a geometric center point. Land is far enough away; the wind is contrary; Jesus comes over the water.
The two forms may also reflect an early attempt to make a general description exact. Numbers can look more historical while still being secondary. The received phrase has broad church use and gives the story its simple force.
The strong wind Peter saw
Verse 30 in the Textus Receptus reads τὸν ἄνεμον ἰσχυρόν, “the wind strong.” The Authorized Version says “the wind boisterous.” Important Egyptian witnesses omit the adjective, and some modern editions bracket it. The noun alone still explains the waves, but the adjective explains Peter’s sudden fear.
No one sees wind as an object. Peter sees what the strong wind is doing to the sea and feels it against his body. He turns from Christ’s command to the danger. The added description is not gaudy. It links the conditions already stated in verse 24 to the disciple’s failure in verse 30.
An adjective can be added to heighten a story. It can also be dropped when the wind has already been described as contrary and its strength seems obvious. The wide support for “strong,” its narrative work, and its received use favor keeping it.
The two readings place the boat and name the threat. In the midst of the sea, under a boisterous wind, the disciples meet the Lord who says, “Be of good cheer; it is I; be not afraid.” Textual care should sharpen that scene, not drown it in apparatus.
The measured critical distance does not conflict with the received description at the level of history. A boat many stadia from shore may well be in the middle region of the lake. The textual question is which form Matthew wrote, not which geographic claim can be true.
Peter’s sinking also shows why the adjective is not mere spectacle. He begins upon Christ’s command, then attends to the strength of the wind. The threat has not changed; his object of sight has. “Boisterous” gives the distraction a named force before Jesus names his little faith.
The account should not be turned into a promise that faith makes physical danger imaginary. Peter actually sinks and actually needs rescue. The Lord’s hand, not the disciple’s mental steadiness, brings him into the boat. The received details make both danger and deliverance concrete.
Sources and further reading
- Matthew 14:22–33; Mark 6:45–52; John 6:16–21.
- Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, notes on Matthew 14:24 and 14:30.
- John William Burgon and Edward Miller, The Traditional Text of the Holy Gospels.
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-1054
- Status
- Preliminary
- Version
- 1.1-dossier
- Review
- Level B — Editorial synthesis
- Editor
- Chris Thomas
- Reviewer
- Independent reviewer pending assignment
- First date
- 2026-07-22 · Exact Day
- Last revised
- 2026-07-22
Evidence and editorial controls
- Verification
- Recovered project data; bibliographic and source-level verification remains record-specific. 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; cited sources retain their stated rights.
- Known limitations
- Staging record; independent review remains open.
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, “Matthew 14:24, 30 — “In the Midst of the Sea” and the “Boisterous” Wind: The Walking-on-the-Water Variants,” VAR-1054, Confessional Bibliology Research Center, version 1.0-staging.
Revision history
- — Chris Thomas
- — Chris Thomas

