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 final comparison varies.
Variant class
Substitution or composite variation
2Textus Receptus
Greek reading
The Textus Receptus reads “your brethren,” as do major early witnesses and the critical text.
Authorized Version
“And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so?” — Matthew 5:47
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, scribal harmonization to a parallel passage; 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 5:47
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 5:47, the critical choice avoids arbitrariness only to the extent that it states public manuscript, transcriptional, and intrinsic grounds. The Textus Receptus says publicans; the critical text says Gentiles. Critics prefer Gentiles because a copyist could repeat the nearby noun and flatten two examples into one. The Textus Receptus reads “your brethren,” as do major early witnesses and the critical text.
Inconsistency
The criteria used at Matthew 5:47 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 Textus Receptus reads “your brethren,” as do major early witnesses and the critical text. At “brethren” it stands with early critical witnesses against “friends”; at “publicans” it differs from the critical choice. Scrivener, The New Testament in the Original Greek according to the Text Followed in the Authorised Version.
Internal and transcriptional evidence
Critics prefer Gentiles because a copyist could repeat the nearby noun and flatten two examples into one. A scribe seeking variety might replace the second publicans with Gentiles, another familiar outsider in Jewish speech.
Reception and ecclesiastical use
The Textus Receptus says publicans; the critical text says Gentiles. The Textus Receptus reads “your brethren,” as do major early witnesses and the critical text. The Textus Receptus is not simply identical to whatever reading wins a Byzantine count.
Providential-preservation analysis
Providential preservation is not used as a substitute for evidence at Matthew 5:47. 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 Textus Receptus says publicans; the critical text says Gentiles. Critics prefer Gentiles because a copyist could repeat the nearby noun and flatten two examples into one. The Textus Receptus reads “your brethren,” as do major early witnesses and the critical text.
Conclusion
The publicans comparison is therefore not permission to despise tax collectors. Matthew himself will be called from the receipt of custom and welcomed at Christ’s table. The men used as a moral baseline in chapter 5 become visible trophies of mercy in chapter 9. Enemy-love creates new brethren.
The textual choice keeps that narrative echo available. Gentiles would make sound sense and a true comparison. Publicans, however, stand close to Matthew’s own story and repeat the social category Jesus is about to cross. The received noun is not simply the smoother option; it has a Gospel-wide resonance.
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 5:47, the received text reads “The Textus Receptus reads “your brethren,” as do major early witnesses and the critical text.” and its Authorized Version representation reads “And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so?” — Matthew 5:47”. 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 5:47, the received Hebrew/Greek form is “The Textus Receptus reads “your brethren,” as do major early witnesses and the critical text.”; the Authorized Version represents it as “And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so?” — Matthew 5:47”. 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 5:47, the received text reads “The Textus Receptus reads “your brethren,” as do major early witnesses and the critical text.” and its Authorized Version representation reads “And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so?” — Matthew 5:47”. 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
The final comparison varies. The Textus Receptus says publicans; the critical text says Gentiles. A second, less noticed difference concerns the people greeted: most texts read brethren, while a substantial Byzantine line reads friends.
“And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so?” — Matthew 5:47
No form permits narrow love. Christ asks what his disciples do beyond ordinary social return.
Publicans or Gentiles
Verse 46 has already named publicans: if disciples love those who love them, they have no greater reward than tax collectors. Repeating publicans in verse 47 creates a tight pair. Critics prefer Gentiles because a copyist could repeat the nearby noun and flatten two examples into one.
The repetition can be deliberate. Loving and greeting are related acts, and the same despised group supplies an obvious measure for both. A scribe seeking variety might replace the second publicans with Gentiles, another familiar outsider in Jewish speech.
The received form also keeps the paragraph’s rebuke local and concrete. Publicans were visible neighbors whose compromised work and social circles made them objects of contempt. Jesus asks his hearers to look at conduct they already judged insufficient.
The Textus Receptus reads “your brethren,” as do major early witnesses and the critical text. The Byzantine majority’s “friends” probably explains the sense: those within one’s chosen circle. It is a useful gloss, but it narrows the family word Matthew wrote.
Greeting brethren only can include religious, ethnic, and household boundaries. Christ’s disciples must not let the holiness of the community become an excuse for coldness toward those outside it.
The variant also corrects another shortcut. The Textus Receptus is not simply identical to whatever reading wins a Byzantine count. At “brethren” it stands with early critical witnesses against “friends”; at “publicans” it differs from the critical choice.
The received sentence has the stronger joined shape. Brethren names the favored circle; publicans repeat the comparison that carries the paragraph. Christ’s question remains uncomfortable: if grace has reached us, where is the love that grace alone can explain?
“Salute” also means more than saying hello in a hallway. A greeting in that world acknowledged relationship, peace, and social welcome. Refusing it could mark a boundary of contempt. Christ asks whether his disciples merely circulate honor inside the group that will return it.
The publicans comparison is therefore not permission to despise tax collectors. Matthew himself will be called from the receipt of custom and welcomed at Christ’s table. The men used as a moral baseline in chapter 5 become visible trophies of mercy in chapter 9. Enemy-love creates new brethren.
The textual choice keeps that narrative echo available. Gentiles would make sound sense and a true comparison. Publicans, however, stand close to Matthew’s own story and repeat the social category Jesus is about to cross. The received noun is not simply the smoother option; it has a Gospel-wide resonance.
Sources and further reading
- Matthew 5:43–48; 9:9–13; Luke 6:32–36.
- Frederick H. A. Scrivener, The New Testament in the Original Greek according to the Text Followed in the Authorised Version.
- Robinson–Pierpont, The New Testament in the Original Greek: Byzantine Textform, Matthew 5:47.
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-1022
- 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 5:47 — Publicans or Gentiles? Identifying Christ’s Comparison,” VAR-1022, Confessional Bibliology Research Center, version 1.0-staging.
Revision history
- — Chris Thomas
- — Chris Thomas