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
> “And Jesus knowing their thoughts said, Wherefore think ye evil in your hearts?”
Variant class
Punctuation
2Textus Receptus
Greek reading
The exact TR reading has not yet been entered in the structured field.
Authorized Version
“And Jesus knowing their thoughts said, Wherefore think ye evil in your hearts?” — Matthew 9:4
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 scribal harmonization to a parallel passage, the likelihood that the competing form is a scribal correction or emendation; the printed confidence rating represented here is {C}. 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 9:4
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 9:4, the critical choice avoids arbitrariness only to the extent that it states public manuscript, transcriptional, and intrinsic grounds. The main critical text agrees on that participle. At verse 8 there is a true printed difference: the Textus Receptus says the crowds marveled; the critical text says they feared. Here the Textus Receptus and major critical editions agree against the smoother word.
Inconsistency
The criteria used at Matthew 9:4 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
— Matthew 9:4 The Authorized Version says knowing, but the received Greek literally says seeing. The Authorized Version’s “knowing” gives that force to English readers without replacing the underlying participle. At verse 8, fear may sound more reverent than marvel, but emotional intensity cannot decide a manuscript reading.
Internal and transcriptional evidence
Jesus sees what the scribes reason in their hearts. “Marveled” may seem softened or harmonized to nearby miracle responses. A faithful version may choose a contextual English verb where a gloss would mislead.
Reception and ecclesiastical use
At verse 8 there is a true printed difference: the Textus Receptus says the crowds marveled; the critical text says they feared. Here the Textus Receptus and major critical editions agree against the smoother word.
Providential-preservation analysis
Providential preservation is not used as a substitute for evidence at Matthew 9:4. 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 main critical text agrees on that participle. At verse 8 there is a true printed difference: the Textus Receptus says the crowds marveled; the critical text says they feared. Here the Textus Receptus and major critical editions agree against the smoother word.
Conclusion
At verse 8, fear may sound more reverent than marvel, but emotional intensity cannot decide a manuscript reading. Matthew uses wonder repeatedly after acts and teaching of Jesus. The crowd’s glorifying God keeps the response from becoming mere curiosity, even if it falls short of the faith Jesus later demands.
This passage is a warning against building textual claims from English alone. Before comparing translations, identify their Greek sources and their freedom to render an idiom. A faithful version may choose a contextual English verb where a gloss would mislead.
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 9:4, the received text reads and its Authorized Version representation reads “And Jesus knowing their thoughts said, Wherefore think ye evil in your hearts?” — Matthew 9:4”. 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 9:4, the received Hebrew/Greek form is ; the Authorized Version represents it as “And Jesus knowing their thoughts said, Wherefore think ye evil in your hearts?” — Matthew 9:4”. 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 9:4, the received text reads and its Authorized Version representation reads “And Jesus knowing their thoughts said, Wherefore think ye evil in your hearts?” — Matthew 9:4”. 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
“And Jesus knowing their thoughts said, Wherefore think ye evil in your hearts?” — Matthew 9:4
The Authorized Version says knowing, but the received Greek literally says seeing. The main critical text agrees on that participle. At verse 8 there is a true printed difference: the Textus Receptus says the crowds marveled; the critical text says they feared.
Greek can use see for mental perception. Jesus sees what the scribes reason in their hearts. Translating the sense as “knowing” is faithful English, not evidence for a different Greek verb.
A rival form does use the ordinary participle for knowing. It is easier and more expected. The received “seeing” is the stronger image and has the broad support. Here the Textus Receptus and major critical editions agree against the smoother word.
This distinction guards against false comparison charts. “KJV: knowing; critical: seeing” confuses translation with text.
After the paralytic rises, the received crowd marvels and glorifies God. The critical crowd fears and glorifies God. Both reactions fit a healing joined to a claim of authority to forgive sins.
Critics favor “feared” on early evidence and because Matthew often joins fear with divine acts. “Marveled” may seem softened or harmonized to nearby miracle responses. Yet astonishment is also Matthew’s repeated word for the crowds, and the following praise gives the marvel a Godward direction.
Fear and wonder can coexist. The textual question is which one Matthew named, not whether the other emotion was absent from every heart. The wide transmission and narrative pattern support marveled.
The two verses teach a useful discipline. An English synonym may conceal no variant at all, while one Greek verb may mark a real choice. Jesus sees the invisible accusation; the crowd marvels at the visible command. Both acts point beyond ordinary human power.
The object of “seeing” is not a visible face alone but evil reasoning in the heart. Matthew’s metaphor therefore says more than ordinary observation. Jesus perceives the inner charge and answers it before it is spoken. The Authorized Version’s “knowing” gives that force to English readers without replacing the underlying participle.
At verse 8, fear may sound more reverent than marvel, but emotional intensity cannot decide a manuscript reading. Matthew uses wonder repeatedly after acts and teaching of Jesus. The crowd’s glorifying God keeps the response from becoming mere curiosity, even if it falls short of the faith Jesus later demands.
This passage is a warning against building textual claims from English alone. Before comparing translations, identify their Greek sources and their freedom to render an idiom. A faithful version may choose a contextual English verb where a gloss would mislead.
Sources and further reading
- Matthew 8:27; 9:1–8, 33; 15:31.
- Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, notes on Matthew 9:4 and 9:8.
- Frederick H. A. Scrivener, The New Testament in the Original Greek according to the Text Followed in the Authorised Version.
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-1039
- 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 9:4, 8 — Jesus’ Knowledge and the Crowd’s Response: Seeing, Fearing, or Marveling?,” VAR-1039, Confessional Bibliology Research Center, version 1.0-staging.
Revision history
- — Chris Thomas
- — Chris Thomas