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 rebuke is ὕπαγε ὀπίσω μου, Σατανᾶ: “Go behind me, Satan.”
Variant class
Punctuation
2Textus Receptus
Greek reading
The exact TR reading has not yet been entered in the structured field.
Authorized Version
“Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God.” — Matthew 4:10
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
The critical text omits “behind me” and reads simply, “Go, Satan.”
Translation or explanation
The critical text omits “behind me” and reads simply, “Go, Satan.”
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, the comparative difficulty of the readings; the printed confidence rating represented here is {B}. 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 4:10
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
A shorter reading can thus survive precisely because it is excellent Greek and sound theology.
Bahnsen four-point examination
Arbitrariness
At Matthew 4:10, the critical choice avoids arbitrariness only to the extent that it states public manuscript, transcriptional, and intrinsic grounds. The critical text omits “behind me” and reads simply, “Go, Satan.” Critics see the wilderness form as assimilation to that later rebuke. The critical text still speaks with force, and no one should claim it welcomes Satan.
Inconsistency
The criteria used at Matthew 4:10 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 shorter reading can thus survive precisely because it is excellent Greek and sound theology.
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
A source-level external-evidence synopsis remains open; consult the full essay and cited apparatus.
Internal and transcriptional evidence
A phrase that appears in both scenes could be copied into one; it could also be removed from one by a scribe who suspected repetition. The repeated phrase binds temptations together while the contexts govern its force. The omission is particularly easy at the level of sense.
Reception and ecclesiastical use
The received reading and its ecclesiastical use require passage-specific documentation; the age of a witness and the age of a reading must not be confused.
Providential-preservation analysis
Providential preservation is not used as a substitute for evidence at Matthew 4:10. 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 omits “behind me” and reads simply, “Go, Satan.” Critics see the wilderness form as assimilation to that later rebuke. The critical text still speaks with force, and no one should claim it welcomes Satan.
Conclusion
The omission is particularly easy at the level of sense. “Go, Satan” is a complete and forceful command. A reader does not pause over missing grammar, and a copyist who knows the later “behind me” may even suspect the words if they appear in his exemplar. A shorter reading can thus survive precisely because it is excellent Greek and sound theology.
The full rebuke also answers the first temptation’s question of sonship. The Son does not prove himself by grasping, spectacle, or compromise. He remains before the Father in worship and obedience. Satan belongs behind that road; Christ will not step behind the tempter’s shortcut.
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 4:10, the received text reads and its Authorized Version representation reads “Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God.” — Matthew 4:10”. The assessed critical reading is “The critical text omits “behind me” and reads simply, “Go, Satan.”. 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 4:10, the received Hebrew/Greek form is ; the Authorized Version represents it as “Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God.” — Matthew 4:10”. The assessed critical form is “The critical text omits “behind me” and reads simply, “Go, Satan.”.
- 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 4:10, the received text reads and its Authorized Version representation reads “Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God.” — Matthew 4:10”. The assessed critical reading is “The critical text omits “behind me” and reads simply, “Go, Satan.”. 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
The received rebuke is ὕπαγε ὀπίσω μου, Σατανᾶ: “Go behind me, Satan.” The critical text omits “behind me” and reads simply, “Go, Satan.” Both dismiss the tempter. The received form gives the direction of his place.
“Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God.” — Matthew 4:10
At Matthew 16:23 Jesus says to Peter, “Get thee behind me, Satan.” Critics see the wilderness form as assimilation to that later rebuke. The early support for the shorter command, including Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, gives the argument weight.
But Matthew has reason to link the scenes. In the wilderness Satan offers a crown without the cross. At Caesarea Philippi Peter resists the cross after confessing the King. Jesus answers the temptation with the same command: behind me. The disciple must follow; the adversary must not lead.
Justin Martyr knew the longer wilderness rebuke early, and the wider Greek transmission carries it. A phrase that appears in both scenes could be copied into one; it could also be removed from one by a scribe who suspected repetition.
“Behind me” is not a charm. Christ defeats temptation by faithful obedience to the written Word. The phrase locates Satan’s proposal: it belongs behind the Son’s path, rejected and passed.
The rebuke also prepares the call of disciples later in the chapter. Jesus says, “Follow me.” Peter will hear both summons and correction. The rightful place behind Christ is discipleship; Satan’s attempt to direct Christ receives expulsion.
The critical text still speaks with force, and no one should claim it welcomes Satan. The question is the full force Matthew recorded. The longer reading is old, broad, thematically joined to the Gospel, and easy to shorten once its parallel raised suspicion.
Christ does not bargain after the third temptation. He sends Satan behind him and then names the worship due to God alone. The received command belongs to that finality.
The parallel at chapter 16 also keeps the two speakers distinct. Peter is not transformed into Satan, and Satan is not invited into discipleship. Peter voices an adversarial proposal when he urges a kingdom without the cross, so Christ sends that proposal to the place already assigned in the wilderness. The repeated phrase binds temptations together while the contexts govern its force.
The omission is particularly easy at the level of sense. “Go, Satan” is a complete and forceful command. A reader does not pause over missing grammar, and a copyist who knows the later “behind me” may even suspect the words if they appear in his exemplar. A shorter reading can thus survive precisely because it is excellent Greek and sound theology.
The full rebuke also answers the first temptation’s question of sonship. The Son does not prove himself by grasping, spectacle, or compromise. He remains before the Father in worship and obedience. Satan belongs behind that road; Christ will not step behind the tempter’s shortcut.
Sources and further reading
- Deuteronomy 6:13; Matthew 4:1–11; 16:21–26.
- Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, references to the temptation.
- Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, note on Matthew 4:10.
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-1013
- 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 4:10 — “Get Thee Hence, Satan”: The Full Force of Christ’s Rebuke,” VAR-1013, Confessional Bibliology Research Center, version 1.0-staging.
Revision history
- — Chris Thomas
- — Chris Thomas