A controlled dossier for covering readings, translations, original-language evidence, manuscripts, versions, patristic testimony, reception, printed editions, internal considerations, and doctrinal consequence.
1. The Competing Readings
The Received Text includes :
“Howbeit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting.”
The principal modern critical text omits the verse. The variation therefore concerns the presence or absence of an entire saying, not merely the spelling of a word.
The parallel account in reads “This kind can come forth by nothing, but by prayer and fasting” in the received form; some critical witnesses to Mark omit “and fasting.” The two Gospel variation units are related, but they must not be collapsed into one without analysis.
2. English Translations Affected
The Authorized Version and translations based on the Received Text number and print . Many modern translations omit the verse from the main text and place the traditional wording in a footnote. Their numbering may therefore move directly from verse 20 to verse 22.
A footnote preserves awareness of the traditional reading but does not give it the same canonical or liturgical status as main text.
3. Greek Evidence
The received Greek reads:
τοῦτο δὲ τὸ γένος οὐκ ἐκπορεύεται εἰ μὴ ἐν προσευχῇ καὶ νηστείᾳ.
The expression “this kind” refers most naturally to the demonic affliction in the preceding account. Prayer and fasting are presented not as a mechanical technique but as expressions of dependence upon God.
Because Mark contains a close parallel, verbal agreement can be used to argue that a copyist supplied the saying in Matthew from memory or a parallel Gospel. The existence of a possible source for addition is important; it does not by itself demonstrate that the addition occurred.
4. Manuscript Evidence
Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus omit the verse, and the omission is represented in other early witnesses. The Byzantine tradition includes it broadly. The external pattern consequently places significant early evidence for omission against the later broad Greek and ecclesiastical reception of inclusion.
The case cannot be described accurately as though the verse had no early history. Nor can the broad Byzantine support make the earlier omissions disappear. The question is which transmission history best accounts for the full pattern.
5. Versional Evidence
Ancient versional and harmonized Gospel evidence must be examined by form. Tatian’s Diatessaron is cited in the project record as an early witness to the saying, but a Gospel harmony may preserve the words without proving that its source placed them specifically in Matthew rather than Mark.
Latin and other versional witnesses should be cited from identified editions. The phrase “all ancient versions” is too imprecise for a controlled dossier.
6. Patristic Evidence
Origen discusses the saying in material associated with his commentary on Matthew, and Tertullian cites the prayer-and-fasting tradition. These witnesses demonstrate early Christian knowledge and use of the words.
Patristic evidence requires the same location question as the Diatessaron: a Father may quote Matthew, Mark, a harmony, or a remembered Gospel form. The exact quotation and context must therefore accompany any final witness list.
7. Lectionary and Ecclesiastical Use
The received Greek ecclesiastical tradition includes . Its presence in the continuous Byzantine text and in the tradition received by the Reformation gives it a stable ecclesiastical history.
Lectionaries may be affected by the boundaries of the appointed reading and should not be counted without confirming that the verse falls within the relevant lesson.
8. Printed-Text History
The principal Received Text editions print , and the Authorized Version follows them. Modern critical editions omit the verse from the main text and record it in the apparatus.
The common critical explanation is assimilation from . That is a coherent proposed history because a close parallel exists. It remains a proposal that must be weighed against the early use and broad reception of the Matthean form.
9. Reformation-Era Reception
Reformation and post-Reformation Protestant Bibles received the verse as part of Matthew. It consequently appears in Protestant preaching and teaching about prayer, fasting, unbelief, and dependence upon God.
This reception matters within a confessional doctrine of preservation, but it does not authorize exaggerated claims that no early witness omits the verse.
10. Internal Considerations
Two principal histories compete:
- Addition: A copyist or harmonizer supplied Matthew with the familiar saying from , perhaps including “and fasting” from the received form of Mark.
- Omission: The verse was lost or deliberately passed over in an early line of transmission and later remained absent in witnesses descending from that form.
The addition theory has an identifiable parallel source. The omission theory has no single demonstrable mechanical trigger in the immediate Matthean wording, though accidental loss remains possible and proposed theological or ascetical motives have been advanced.
The earlier project article suspected heretical motive from the doctrinal effect of the omission. That suspicion should not be published as fact. The loss of a reference to fasting is an effect; it does not identify the copyist, date, place, or intention responsible for the shorter form.
11. Doctrinal and Exegetical Consequences
The verse joins prayer and fasting to spiritual dependence in the face of severe demonic oppression. It should not be read as teaching that fasting compels God or operates as an exorcistic formula.
The doctrine and practice of fasting do not depend upon alone. and other biblical passages remain. The textual difference nevertheless affects whether Christ gives this particular instruction in the immediate account.
12. Confessional Conclusion
Confessional Bibliology retains . The judgment gives weight to the received and broad Byzantine text, early knowledge of the saying, the verse’s ecclesiastical reception, and the burden required before an inferred harmonization removes words long received as Scripture.
The critical case must be represented fairly: Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, and other early evidence omit the verse, and Mark supplies a plausible source for addition. The confessional conclusion does not require denying those facts or alleging a corrupt motive. It requires placing them within a doctrine of preservation and treating the proposed direction of change as an argument rather than an artifact.
13. Related Articles
- Matthew 17:21: Original Archive Article
- Gospels and Acts Textual Issues
- Key Textual Differences and Their Doctrinal Consequences
14. Books and Papers
- Current Greek New Testament apparatuses for the exact witnesses to inclusion and omission.
- Tatian, Diatessaron, in an edition that permits the location and form of the saying to be checked.
- Origen, Commentary on Matthew, with book, chapter, and edition identified.
- Tertullian, On Fasting, with the quotation distinguished from the Gospel parallel.
15. Audio and Video
No original Confessional Bibliology episode dedicated solely to has yet been entered in the controlled Media catalogue. A future episode should include a transcript and apparatus-based source list.
16. Comparison Chart
| Question | Inclusion | Omission |
|---|---|---|
| Received Text and AV | Verse printed | — |
| Modern critical text | Apparatus/footnote | Main text omits |
| External pattern | Broad Byzantine and ecclesiastical support; early knowledge of saying | Significant early Greek support, including Sinaiticus and Vaticanus |
| Main proposed history | Authentic verse omitted in an early line | Saying supplied from |
| Doctrinal effect | Prayer and fasting stated in this account | This instruction absent from Matthew; fasting remains elsewhere in Scripture |
| Confessional judgment | Retain | Record and examine |
This table is the current web comparison. A versioned downloadable chart should be released through the Downloads and Citation Center.
Source Record
- Master corpus record 0142, “,” originally published September 25, 2022