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 passion narrative carries several famous variants.
Variant class
Omission / addition
2Textus Receptus
Greek reading
The Textus Receptus reads simply Barabbas.
Authorized Version
“They gave him vinegar to drink mingled with gall: and when he had tasted thereof, he would not drink.” — Matthew 27:34
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
The critical text gives Jesus wine rather than vinegar at Golgotha, omits Matthew’s explicit fulfillment about divided garments, and removes the mocking if from “If he be the King of Israel.”
Translation or explanation
The critical text gives Jesus wine rather than vinegar at Golgotha, omits Matthew’s explicit fulfillment about divided garments, and removes the mocking if from “If he be the King of Israel.”
Metzger’s report of the UBS committee
Metzger reports the UBS4 committee's treatment of 12 variation units within this record's range. The notes ground the relevant decisions in the weight and distribution of external attestation, a proposed mechanism of accidental omission, scribal harmonization to a parallel passage, the likelihood that the competing form is a scribal correction or emendation; the printed confidence ratings represented here are {C}, {B}. This is a controlled synopsis rather than a quotation.
Locator: Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 2nd ed., notes on Matthew 27:16, 27:17, 27:23, 27:24, 27:28, 27:29, 27:35, 27:40, 27:42, 27:43, 27:46, 27:49
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
The triune identity of the Father, the Son/Word, and the Holy Ghost.
Doctrinal analysis
The theology of substitution comes from the event, not the uncertain name.
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.
Westminster proof-text listMatthew 27:34
A List of Omissions and Changes Found in the Critical Text to Verses Used as Proof Texts in the Westminster Standards
Seth Stark — supplied source file pp. 29–30, 30, 30–31
Textual wording marked in the source
Received/NKJV side: sour
Westminster doctrines and propositions supported
WCF 8.4 — Of Christ the Mediator
Portion identified in the source as supported by this proof text:
- and most painful sufferings in His body;
WLC 49 — How did Christ humble himself in his death?
Portion identified in the source as supported by this proof text:
- condemned by Pilate, and tormented by his persecutors;
Editorial qualification: This establishes a confessional proof-text and reception connection. It does not by itself establish the original reading, and its English-version comparison must be checked against the Greek variation unit.
Westminster proof-text listMatthew 27:35
A List of Omissions and Changes Found in the Critical Text to Verses Used as Proof Texts in the Westminster Standards
Seth Stark — supplied source file pp. 29–30, 30, 30–31
Textual wording marked in the source
Received/NKJV side: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet: ‘They divided My garments among them, and for My clothing they cast lots.’
Westminster doctrines and propositions supported
WCF 8.4 — Of Christ the Mediator
Portion identified in the source as supported by this proof text:
- and most painful sufferings in His body;
WLC 49 — How did Christ humble himself in his death?
Portion identified in the source as supported by this proof text:
- condemned by Pilate, and tormented by his persecutors;
Editorial qualification: This establishes a confessional proof-text and reception connection. It does not by itself establish the original reading, and its English-version comparison must be checked against the Greek variation unit.
Westminster proof-text listMatthew 27:42
A List of Omissions and Changes Found in the Critical Text to Verses Used as Proof Texts in the Westminster Standards
Seth Stark — supplied source file pp. 29–30, 30, 30–31
Textual wording marked in the source
Received/NKJV side: If
Westminster doctrines and propositions supported
WCF 8.4 — Of Christ the Mediator
Portion identified in the source as supported by this proof text:
- and most painful sufferings in His body;
WLC 49 — How did Christ humble himself in his death?
Portion identified in the source as supported by this proof text:
- condemned by Pilate, and tormented by his persecutors;
Editorial qualification: This establishes a confessional proof-text and reception connection. It does not by itself establish the original reading, and its English-version comparison must be checked against the Greek variation unit.
Bahnsen four-point examination
Arbitrariness
At Matthew 27:16–49, the critical choice avoids arbitrariness only to the extent that it states public manuscript, transcriptional, and intrinsic grounds. The critical text gives Jesus wine rather than vinegar at Golgotha, omits Matthew’s explicit fulfillment about divided garments, and removes the mocking if from “If he be the King of Israel.” A spear thrust copied from John appears in several of the very old codices but in neither the Textus Receptus nor the standard critical text. Modern editors sometimes print or bracket it, arguing that reverent scribes removed the holy name from Barabbas.
Inconsistency
The criteria used at Matthew 27:16–49 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 theology of substitution comes from the event, not the uncertain name.
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
Some early manuscripts call the released prisoner Jesus Barabbas. — Matthew 27:34 No single manuscript supplies an oracle here. Critical witnesses omit the formula, and John 19:24 supplies an obvious source for addition.
Internal and transcriptional evidence
Modern editors sometimes print or bracket it, arguing that reverent scribes removed the holy name from Barabbas. Reverence may explain omission, but a guessed motive cannot establish an uncertain name. Both describe a bitter offered drink; Matthew’s wording makes the scriptural echo plain without adding a formula.
Reception and ecclesiastical use
A spear thrust copied from John appears in several of the very old codices but in neither the Textus Receptus nor the standard critical text. Jesus Barabbas At verses 16–17 a part of the early tradition reads “Jesus Barabbas.” The Textus Receptus reads simply Barabbas.
Providential-preservation analysis
Providential preservation is not used as a substitute for evidence at Matthew 27:16–49. 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
The critical text gives Jesus wine rather than vinegar at Golgotha, omits Matthew’s explicit fulfillment about divided garments, and removes the mocking if from “If he be the King of Israel.” A spear thrust copied from John appears in several of the very old codices but in neither the Textus Receptus nor the standard critical text. Modern editors sometimes print or bracket it, arguing that reverent scribes removed the holy name from Barabbas.
Passage-specific evidence from consulted works
Core 0.6.3 supplied-source audit complete: 2 passage-specific notes attached. Incidental citations and global-method sources are retained in the audit report rather than presented as local textual evidence.
The Traditional Text of the Holy GospelsDedicated appendix on Matthew 27:34
John William Burgon; edited by Edward Miller — supplied PDF Appendix II, scan pp. 279–286
Burgon’s appendix compares “vinegar” with “wine” at Matthew 27:34. He argues from the Greek manuscript total known to him, patristic evidence, and the relation to the Psalm and crucifixion narrative that ὄξος, represented by the Authorized Version’s “vinegar,” should be retained.
Those critics … who would substitute “wine” for “vinegar” in St. Matt. xxvii. 34 have clearly no case.
Editorial use: The numerical and witness claims are historical and require current-apparatus verification; the card may use them as Burgon’s argument, not as an unqualified modern count.
A List of Omissions and Changes Found in the Critical Text to Verses Used as Proof Texts in the Westminster StandardsWestminster proof-text and translation comparison
Seth Stark — supplied PDF pp. 29–30, 30, 30–31
At Matthew 27:34, it compares the NKJV/TR-oriented wording “they gave Him sour wine mingled with gall to drink. But when He had tasted it, He would not drink.”” with the ESV/critical-text wording “they offered him wine to drink, mixed with gall, but when he tasted it, he would not drink it.”” and associates the passage with WCF 8.4, WLC 49. At Matthew 27:35, it compares the NKJV/TR-oriented wording “Then they crucified Him, and divided His garments, casting lots, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet: ‘They divided My garments among them, and for My clothing they cast lots.’”” with the ESV/critical-text wording “And when they had crucified him, they divided his garments among them by casting lots.”” and associates the passage with WCF 8.4, WLC 49. At Matthew 27:42, it compares the NKJV/TR-oriented wording “He saved others; Himself He cannot save. If He is the King of Israel, let 29 Him now come down from the cross, and we will believe Him.”” with the ESV/critical-text wording “He saved others; he cannot save himself. He is the King of Israel; let him come down now from the cross, and we will believe in him.”” and associates the passage with WCF 8.4, WLC 49.
Editorial use: This establishes a confessional proof-text and reception connection. It does not by itself establish the original reading, and its English-version comparison must be checked against the Greek variation unit.
Conclusion
Vinegar and wine need not describe chemically unrelated liquids in ancient speech. Sour wine could be called vinegar, and different stages of the crucifixion include more than one offered drink. The textual choice still matters because Matthew’s vinegar carries Psalm 69 into the scene while Mark’s wine and myrrh carries his own wording.
The spear addition is the cluster’s clearest methodological check. Its early codices, dramatic detail, and agreement with a true event in John cannot rescue its wrong location in Matthew. A fact can be canonical in one Gospel and corrupt in another. The received text preserves both the fact in John and the order in Matthew.
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 Matthew 27:16–49, the received text reads “The Textus Receptus reads simply Barabbas.” and its Authorized Version representation reads “They gave him vinegar to drink mingled with gall: and when he had tasted thereof, he would not drink.” — Matthew 27:34”. The assessed critical reading is “The critical text gives Jesus wine rather than vinegar at Golgotha, omits Matthew’s explicit fulfillment about divided garments, and removes the mocking if from “If he be the King of Israel.”. 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 27:16–49, the received Hebrew/Greek form is “The Textus Receptus reads simply Barabbas.”; the Authorized Version represents it as “They gave him vinegar to drink mingled with gall: and when he had tasted thereof, he would not drink.” — Matthew 27:34”. The assessed critical form is “The critical text gives Jesus wine rather than vinegar at Golgotha, omits Matthew’s explicit fulfillment about divided garments, and removes the mocking if from “If he be the King of Israel.”.
- 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 27:16–49, the received text reads “The Textus Receptus reads simply Barabbas.” and its Authorized Version representation reads “They gave him vinegar to drink mingled with gall: and when he had tasted thereof, he would not drink.” — Matthew 27:34”. The assessed critical reading is “The critical text gives Jesus wine rather than vinegar at Golgotha, omits Matthew’s explicit fulfillment about divided garments, and removes the mocking if from “If he be the King of Israel.”. 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
- The Traditional Text of the Holy Gospelssupplied PDF Appendix II, scan pp. 279–286 — Dedicated appendix on Matthew 27:34
- A List of Omissions and Changes Found in the Critical Text to Verses Used as Proof Texts in the Westminster Standardssupplied PDF pp. 29–30, 30, 30–31 — Westminster proof-text and translation comparison
- 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
The passion narrative carries several famous variants. Some early manuscripts call the released prisoner Jesus Barabbas. The critical text gives Jesus wine rather than vinegar at Golgotha, omits Matthew’s explicit fulfillment about divided garments, and removes the mocking if from “If he be the King of Israel.” A spear thrust copied from John appears in several of the very old codices but in neither the Textus Receptus nor the standard critical text.
“They gave him vinegar to drink mingled with gall: and when he had tasted thereof, he would not drink.” — Matthew 27:34
No single manuscript supplies an oracle here. The readings must be weighed one by one.
Jesus Barabbas
At verses 16–17 a part of the early tradition reads “Jesus Barabbas.” Origen knew the form and objected that the name Jesus should not belong to a sinner. Modern editors sometimes print or bracket it, arguing that reverent scribes removed the holy name from Barabbas.
The Textus Receptus reads simply Barabbas. The longer form has limited and unstable support; in some copies the name appears in one verse but not the other. A marginal clarification, a repeated Jesus from the nearby “Jesus which is called Christ,” or a local naming tradition can explain it. Reverence may explain omission, but a guessed motive cannot establish an uncertain name.
Vinegar, gall, and fulfilled Scripture
The received vinegar mingled with gall echoes Psalm 69:21: “in my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink.” The critical reading “wine mingled with gall” may reflect Mark’s wine mingled with myrrh. Both describe a bitter offered drink; Matthew’s wording makes the scriptural echo plain without adding a formula.
After the soldiers divide Christ’s garments, the received text explicitly cites the prophet: “They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast lots.” Critical witnesses omit the formula, and John 19:24 supplies an obvious source for addition. Yet the words come from Psalm 22, the psalm already sounding through the crucifixion scene. Similar endings around the casting of lots can cause loss, and fulfillment formulas are a mark of Matthew from the first chapter onward.
“If he be the King”
The received mockery is conditional: “If he be the King of Israel, let him now come down from the cross.” The critical text reads, “He is the King of Israel; let him now come down.” Critics prefer the biting irony of the declaration and explain if as an echo from verse 40.
The echo may be deliberate speech. Both taunts challenge Jesus to prove his claim by descent from the cross. The conditional form fits the mockers’ unbelief and the repeated “if” of the temptation narrative. They demand a sign that would cancel the saving work occurring before them.
The spear thrust that does not belong
After verse 49, Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, and other early witnesses add: “And another took a spear and pierced his side, and there came out water and blood.” The sentence comes from John 19:34, but it is placed in Matthew before Jesus yields up the ghost. That order creates a needless historical strain.
Here modern critical editors reject the addition despite its impressive codices. So does the received text. The case is a needed check on slogans. “Oldest” does not mean “original,” and an editor who follows Vaticanus in one verse may reject it in the next.
The received passion account should stand: Barabbas without the borrowed sacred name; vinegar and gall; the fulfillment from the Psalms; the mockers’ conditional taunt; no misplaced spear thrust. These judgments arise from different evidence, but they converge on a narrative whose words and order have been publicly read for centuries.
Barabbas already functions as a grim exchange without sharing Jesus’ name. The guilty prisoner is released while Jesus called Christ is condemned. Adding the name can make the contrast rhetorically sharper—Jesus son of the father versus Jesus the true Son—which is another reason a local expansion could appeal. The theology of substitution comes from the event, not the uncertain name.
Vinegar and wine need not describe chemically unrelated liquids in ancient speech. Sour wine could be called vinegar, and different stages of the crucifixion include more than one offered drink. The textual choice still matters because Matthew’s vinegar carries Psalm 69 into the scene while Mark’s wine and myrrh carries his own wording.
The spear addition is the cluster’s clearest methodological check. Its early codices, dramatic detail, and agreement with a true event in John cannot rescue its wrong location in Matthew. A fact can be canonical in one Gospel and corrupt in another. The received text preserves both the fact in John and the order in Matthew.
Sources and further reading
- Psalm 22:16–18; 69:21; Matthew 27:15–54; Mark 15:21–39; John 19:23–37.
- Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, notes on Matthew 27:16–17, 27:34–35, 27:42, and 27:49.
- John William Burgon, The Causes of the Corruption of the Traditional Text of the Holy Gospels.
- Frederick H. A. Scrivener, A Plain Introduction to the Criticism of the New Testament.
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-1074
- 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. 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; 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 27:16–49 — Jesus Barabbas, Vinegar and Gall, Divided Garments, the King of Israel, and the Spear Thrust,” VAR-1074, Confessional Bibliology Research Center, version 1.0-staging.
Revision history
- — Chris Thomas
- — Chris Thomas