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’s crossing contains a crowd of small variants: many crowds or one, his disciples or disciples, the ship or a ship, Gergesenes or Gadarenes, and “permit us to go” or “send us.”
Variant class
Punctuation
2Textus Receptus
Greek reading
The country across the water The Textus Receptus reads Gergesenes; the critical text usually Gadarenes; Mark and Luke have further variation around Gerasenes.
Authorized Version
“And when he was entered into a ship, his disciples followed him.” — Matthew 8:23
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 also prints the article, despite omission in Sinaiticus and Vaticanus.
Translation or explanation
The critical text also prints the article, despite omission in Sinaiticus and Vaticanus.
Metzger’s report of the UBS committee
Metzger reports the UBS4 committee's treatment of 6 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 {B}, {D}, {C}. 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 8:18, 8:18, 8:21, 8:23, 8:25, 8:25
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
The received details give Matthew’s own cadence without pretending that every article or place name carries a separate doctrine.
Bahnsen four-point examination
Arbitrariness
At Matthew 8:18–32, the critical choice avoids arbitrariness only to the extent that it states public manuscript, transcriptional, and intrinsic grounds. The critical form has one crowd. The critical text also prints the article, despite omission in Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. The country across the water The Textus Receptus reads Gergesenes; the critical text usually Gadarenes; Mark and Luke have further variation around Gerasenes.
Inconsistency
The criteria used at Matthew 8:18–32 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 received details give Matthew’s own cadence without pretending that every article or place name carries a separate doctrine.
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
At verse 23 the received Greek has the article, the ship, even though the Authorized Version naturally says “a ship.” The exact ancient boundaries are not fully recoverable from a modern map. The place-name problem is made harder because ancient writers could name a district by its chief city, a nearby town, or a local village.
Internal and transcriptional evidence
Matthew often uses the fuller expression, which can invite addition; similar endings can also drop one word. The critical text also prints the article, despite omission in Sinaiticus and Vaticanus.
Reception and ecclesiastical use
— Matthew 8:23 Verse 18 reads “great multitudes”—literally many crowds—in the Textus Receptus. The country across the water The Textus Receptus reads Gergesenes; the critical text usually Gadarenes; Mark and Luke have further variation around Gerasenes. The received Gergesenes has geographic sense and long ecclesiastical use.
Providential-preservation analysis
Providential preservation is not used as a substitute for evidence at Matthew 8:18–32. 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 form has one crowd. The critical text also prints the article, despite omission in Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. The country across the water The Textus Receptus reads Gergesenes; the critical text usually Gadarenes; Mark and Luke have further variation around Gerasenes.
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. 12–13
At Matthew 8:31, it compares the NKJV/TR-oriented wording “So the demons begged Him, saying, ‘If You cast us out, permit us to go away into the herd of swine.’”” with the ESV/critical-text wording “And the demons begged him, saying, ‘If you cast us out, send us away into the herd of pigs.’”” and associates the passage with WLC 19.
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
The famous objection about one demoniac in Mark and Luke also lies outside this textual cluster. Matthew says two; the other Evangelists concentrate on the one who speaks and later bears witness. Mentioning one does not deny a companion. The manuscripts of Matthew do not need to be rewritten to solve a contradiction the sentences do not assert.
The demons’ fuller request exposes their dependence. They cannot choose the herd as an escape route and merely notify Jesus. They ask permission. The final command is one word, “Go,” and the whole violent company obeys. Whatever small wording is weighed, that authority dominates the shore.
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 8:18–32, the received text reads “The country across the water The Textus Receptus reads Gergesenes; the critical text usually Gadarenes; Mark and Luke have further variation around Gerasenes.” and its Authorized Version representation reads “And when he was entered into a ship, his disciples followed him.” — Matthew 8:23”. The assessed critical reading is “The critical text also prints the article, despite omission in Sinaiticus and Vaticanus.”. 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 8:18–32, the received Hebrew/Greek form is “The country across the water The Textus Receptus reads Gergesenes; the critical text usually Gadarenes; Mark and Luke have further variation around Gerasenes.”; the Authorized Version represents it as “And when he was entered into a ship, his disciples followed him.” — Matthew 8:23”. The assessed critical form is “The critical text also prints the article, despite omission in Sinaiticus and Vaticanus.”.
- 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 8:18–32, the received text reads “The country across the water The Textus Receptus reads Gergesenes; the critical text usually Gadarenes; Mark and Luke have further variation around Gerasenes.” and its Authorized Version representation reads “And when he was entered into a ship, his disciples followed him.” — Matthew 8:23”. The assessed critical reading is “The critical text also prints the article, despite omission in Sinaiticus and Vaticanus.”. 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. 12–13 — 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
Matthew’s crossing contains a crowd of small variants: many crowds or one, his disciples or disciples, the ship or a ship, Gergesenes or Gadarenes, and “permit us to go” or “send us.” They do not form one textual event, so they should not receive one stock answer.
“And when he was entered into a ship, his disciples followed him.” — Matthew 8:23
Verse 18 reads “great multitudes”—literally many crowds—in the Textus Receptus. The critical form has one crowd. Matthew often uses the fuller expression, which can invite addition; similar endings can also drop one word.
Verse 21 calls a hesitant follower “another of his disciples.” The pronoun sharpens the irony: a man already within the disciple circle delays obedience.
At verse 23 the received Greek has the article, the ship, even though the Authorized Version naturally says “a ship.” The critical text also prints the article, despite omission in Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. English articles cannot be forced backward into a Greek apparatus.
The country across the water
The Textus Receptus reads Gergesenes; the critical text usually Gadarenes; Mark and Luke have further variation around Gerasenes. Gadara was a known city whose territory could reach the lake. Gergesa was associated in Christian memory with a shore site suited to tombs and a steep descent.
The exact ancient boundaries are not fully recoverable from a modern map. The received Gergesenes has geographic sense and long ecclesiastical use. Gerasa, far inland, likely reflects the pull of a more famous regional name.
What the demons ask
The received text gives “suffer us to go away into the herd of swine.” The critical form is the shorter “send us into the herd.” Both confess that the demons cannot move without Christ’s leave. The fuller request may be accused of expansion; the shorter imperative may arise from compression toward Mark and Luke.
Across the cluster, Christ remains the fixed actor. Disciples follow him, waves obey him, demons beg him, and the herd moves only when he says “Go.” The received details give Matthew’s own cadence without pretending that every article or place name carries a separate doctrine.
The place-name problem is made harder because ancient writers could name a district by its chief city, a nearby town, or a local village. “Country of the Gadarenes” need not place the event inside Gadara’s walls. Gergesa can identify the shore location while a broader regional name remains intelligible. Modern precision should not be imposed upon ancient territorial speech.
The famous objection about one demoniac in Mark and Luke also lies outside this textual cluster. Matthew says two; the other Evangelists concentrate on the one who speaks and later bears witness. Mentioning one does not deny a companion. The manuscripts of Matthew do not need to be rewritten to solve a contradiction the sentences do not assert.
The demons’ fuller request exposes their dependence. They cannot choose the herd as an escape route and merely notify Jesus. They ask permission. The final command is one word, “Go,” and the whole violent company obeys. Whatever small wording is weighed, that authority dominates the shore.
Sources and further reading
- Matthew 8:18–34; Mark 4:35–5:20; Luke 8:22–39.
- Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, notes on Matthew 8.
- Historical geography of Gadara and the eastern shore of Galilee.
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-1037
- 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 8:18–32 — Multitudes, Disciples, the Ship, and the Demons’ Plea: A Cluster of Variants,” VAR-1037, Confessional Bibliology Research Center, version 1.0-staging.
Revision history
- — Chris Thomas
- — Chris Thomas