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
Twice near the opening of the Galilean ministry, some witnesses omit the name Jesus.
Variant class
Omission / addition
2Textus Receptus
Greek reading
The Textus Receptus names Jesus in both places and, at verse 23, says he went about all Galilee.
Authorized Version
“Now when Jesus had heard that John was cast into prison, he departed into Galilee.” — Matthew 4:12
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
Critics can therefore reverse the explanation and call the names clarifying additions.
Translation or explanation
Critics can therefore reverse the explanation and call the names clarifying additions.
Metzger’s report of the UBS committee
No passage-specific Metzger synopsis has yet passed editorial verification for this record.
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 4:12, the critical choice avoids arbitrariness only to the extent that it states public manuscript, transcriptional, and intrinsic grounds. Critics can therefore reverse the explanation and call the names clarifying additions. The critical form uses a preposition, “in all Galilee.” An editor should not remove a frame simply because an author uses it twice.
Inconsistency
The criteria used at Matthew 4:12 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
Twice near the opening of the Galilean ministry, some witnesses omit the name Jesus. Scrivener, The New Testament in the Original Greek according to the Text Followed in the Authorised Version.
Internal and transcriptional evidence
That is a plausible mechanism, not a record of what a known scribe did. Critics can therefore reverse the explanation and call the names clarifying additions. Both describe wide travel.
Reception and ecclesiastical use
The Textus Receptus names Jesus in both places and, at verse 23, says he went about all Galilee. John William Burgon, The Causes of the Corruption of the Traditional Text of the Holy Gospels.
Providential-preservation analysis
Providential preservation is not used as a substitute for evidence at Matthew 4:12. 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
Critics can therefore reverse the explanation and call the names clarifying additions. The critical form uses a preposition, “in all Galilee.” An editor should not remove a frame simply because an author uses it twice.
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.
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. 6
At Matthew 4:12, it compares the NKJV/TR-oriented wording “Now when Jesus heard that John had been put in prison, He departed to Galilee.”” with the ESV/critical-text wording “Now when he heard that John had been arrested, he withdrew into Galilee.”” and associates the passage with WLC 48.
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
Matthew 9:35 later repeats much of the summary after the calling and early miracles. That later frame can be a source of scribal assimilation, but it can also show Matthew’s own plan. The matching summaries enclose a major section of teaching and works. An editor should not remove a frame simply because an author uses it twice.
The phrase “all Galilee” is likewise rhetorical geography. It tells the reach and public character of the ministry. The Gospel will name particular towns, yet no town-by-town list could equal the simple picture of Jesus moving through the region under the light Isaiah promised.
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 4:12, the received text reads “The Textus Receptus names Jesus in both places and, at verse 23, says he went about all Galilee.” and its Authorized Version representation reads “Now when Jesus had heard that John was cast into prison, he departed into Galilee.” — Matthew 4:12”. The assessed critical reading is “Critics can therefore reverse the explanation and call the names clarifying additions.”. 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 4:12, the received Hebrew/Greek form is “The Textus Receptus names Jesus in both places and, at verse 23, says he went about all Galilee.”; the Authorized Version represents it as “Now when Jesus had heard that John was cast into prison, he departed into Galilee.” — Matthew 4:12”. The assessed critical form is “Critics can therefore reverse the explanation and call the names clarifying additions.”.
- 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 4:12, the received text reads “The Textus Receptus names Jesus in both places and, at verse 23, says he went about all Galilee.” and its Authorized Version representation reads “Now when Jesus had heard that John was cast into prison, he departed into Galilee.” — Matthew 4:12”. The assessed critical reading is “Critics can therefore reverse the explanation and call the names clarifying additions.”. 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
- A List of Omissions and Changes Found in the Critical Text to Verses Used as Proof Texts in the Westminster Standardssupplied PDF pp. 6 — Westminster proof-text and translation comparison
- 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
Read the full research essay and its sources
Twice near the opening of the Galilean ministry, some witnesses omit the name Jesus. Verse 12 becomes “when he heard,” and verse 23 becomes “he went about in all Galilee.” The Textus Receptus names Jesus in both places and, at verse 23, says he went about all Galilee.
“Now when Jesus had heard that John was cast into prison, he departed into Galilee.” — Matthew 4:12
In continuous Greek the name stands between words that begin with the same round letter. At verse 12, ὁ Ἰησοῦς lies near ὅτι; at verse 23 it lies near ὅλην. An eye moving through repeated shapes can pass over the name. That is a plausible mechanism, not a record of what a known scribe did.
The shorter forms also read easily because Jesus is already the subject. Critics can therefore reverse the explanation and call the names clarifying additions. At verse 23 they may also see influence from Matthew 9:35, which repeats Jesus’ circuit through cities and villages.
Matthew’s repetition is meaningful. Verse 12 begins the ministry after John’s imprisonment. Verse 23 summarizes its reach before the crowds gather. Naming Jesus at both points frames the section: Jesus hears, Jesus withdraws, Jesus goes about, Jesus teaches and heals.
The received construction takes all Galilee as the field Jesus traverses. The critical form uses a preposition, “in all Galilee.” Both describe wide travel. The direct received phrase is more vigorous: he went about the whole region.
The small grammatical difference does not decide whether every village received a visit. Biblical “all” can name the region in its breadth without turning the verse into a travel ledger.
The explicit subjects and the direct object have wide transmission and a repeated omission route. They also give Matthew’s opening its firm actor. John is imprisoned; darkness lies over the land; Jesus enters Galilee, calls disciples, teaches, preaches, and heals. The names are not padding. They keep the light fixed on the one who came.
The two locations also stand at different narrative levels. Verse 12 tells one decision: Jesus hears and withdraws. Verse 23 surveys an extended ministry: Jesus traverses Galilee, teaches in synagogues, preaches the kingdom, and heals disease. Repeating his name helps the reader move from episode to summary.
Matthew 9:35 later repeats much of the summary after the calling and early miracles. That later frame can be a source of scribal assimilation, but it can also show Matthew’s own plan. The matching summaries enclose a major section of teaching and works. An editor should not remove a frame simply because an author uses it twice.
The phrase “all Galilee” is likewise rhetorical geography. It tells the reach and public character of the ministry. The Gospel will name particular towns, yet no town-by-town list could equal the simple picture of Jesus moving through the region under the light Isaiah promised.
Further reading
- Isaiah 9:1–2; Matthew 4:12–25; 9:35.
- Frederick H. A. Scrivener, The New Testament in the Original Greek according to the Text Followed in the Authorised Version.
- John William Burgon, The Causes of the Corruption of 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-1014
- 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 4:12, 23 — “Jesus Heard” and “All Galilee”: Two Variants at the Opening of the Ministry,” VAR-1014, Confessional Bibliology Research Center, version 1.0-staging.
Revision history
- — Chris Thomas
- — Chris Thomas