Variant Exceptions

The UPDV Bible generally follows the recommendations of the Hebrew Old Testament Text Project (HOTTP), Critique textuelle de l'Ancien Testament (CTAT), and the United Bible Societies (UBS) apparatus. The following entries document some of the instances where the UPDV has followed a different reading than the primary recommendation of these critical projects. Each entry is organized by book. Additional departures are documented only in the footnotes at the relevant verses.

For Gospel decisions that cite the reconstructed baseline gospel text as *Ev, see The Reconstructed Baseline Gospel Text (*Ev).

🔗Gospel Variant Exceptions

Source-history note: for Gospel entries that invoke *Ev or the reconstructed baseline/source-history policy, the UPDV distinguishes direct patristic attestation, modern reconstruction, and source-critical inference. Harnack's verse-by-verse data, BeDuhn's and Roth's cautious reconstructions, and Klinghardt's and Vinzent's broader source-history models are weighed as related but not identical kinds of evidence. This matters especially where Mark is involved: Mark is not treated as an untouchable primitive bedrock, but a Markan exclusion must still be labeled as source-composition inference when no surviving Greek or versional witness omits the unit.

Matthew 1:16 — See footnote at this verse. The Greek followed is based on the textual apparatus mentioned there. However it is styled to NA28 for conjunctions and omits the intervening dialog by the speaker. See The Book of Matthew for full discussion.

Matthew 7:22 — See footnote at this verse. The Critical Text was not certain (Level C) of its choice of the reading "works" instead of "children." The UPDV Bible has chosen "children" due to the similarity of the words in Hebrew and Aramaic. It is easy to see how they would be confused by a translator from one of those languages into Greek. In Greek however, they are quite different and would not likely be mistaken for one another. Compare Luke 7:35 which also has the reading "children."

Synoptic Temptation Narrative — Canonical Matthew 4:1-11, Mark 1:12-13, and Luke 4:1-13 are excluded under the reconstructed baseline gospel text (*Ev) policy. Klinghardt reports that the whole Luke 3:1b-4:13 block was missing in *Ev, including the temptation story in all three Synoptic forms; Roth likewise lists Luke 4:1-13 among attested verses not present in the reconstructed text. John's opening day-chain (John 1:29, 1:35, 1:43; 2:1) supplies the convergence control: it moves from the Baptist's testimony to disciples already following Jesus and the Cana wedding without room for a forty-day wilderness interval. This is a category-A override of the entire surviving canonical manuscript tradition. See The Reconstructed Baseline Gospel Text (*Ev).

Mark 14:12-16 — Excluded under the reconstructed baseline/source-history policy as a critically inferred structural absence at the source-composition layer, not as a direct manuscript or versional omission. The surviving Greek and versional witnesses preserve the unit, so this decision works upstream of the extant manuscript tradition. Under this source-history decision, canonical Mark is not treated as automatically prior to the baseline gospel tradition; the Passover preparation scene is treated as a redactional expansion that supplies an explicit day/sacrifice preparation anchor parallel to Luke 22:7-13, and the UPDV resumes Mark at the evening meal in verse 17. See The Reconstructed Baseline Gospel Text (*Ev).

Mark 14:28 — Excluded as a secondary insertion. Many scholars (Bultmann, Lohmeyer, Humphrey) regard this verse ("But after I am raised up, I will go before you to Galilee") as intrusive to its context, breaking the flow between the scattering prophecy of v. 27 and Peter’s response in v. 29. It was composed in Greek to provide a preceding prophecy for the prospective reading of 16:7. Because the prospective reading of 16:7 reflects a translation fork from the original Aramaic tradition (see Mark 16:7 below), 14:28 has no basis in the original narrative.

Mark 16:7 — The standard Greek text reads prospectively: "he goes before you into Galilee" (προάγει ὑμᾶς εἰς τὴν Γαλιλαίαν). The UPDV adopts the retrospective reading ("Remember what he told you while he was still in Galilee") based on the Aramaic tradition behind the text.

The Aramaic root qdm (קדם) carries both a spatial sense ("to go before, precede") and a temporal sense ("previously, beforehand") — both widely attested throughout the Targum literature. The divergence between Mark 16:7 (prospective) and Luke 24:6 (retrospective: "remember how he spoke to you when he was yet in Galilee") is best explained as two independent Greek translations of a common Aramaic oral tradition, where the translator’s reading of the ambiguous verb was tipped by the preposition on "Galilee": ל (to) yielded the spatial reading, ב (in) the temporal. Luke 24:6 preserves the original retrospective meaning.

The Syriac Peshitta (5th century) independently confirms the retroversion: translating from Greek back into Syriac, the Peshitta renders προάγω as qdm (ܩܳܕ݂ܶܡ) at Mark 14:28 and 16:7, confirming the natural equivalence between the two. Within the same chapter, the Peshitta of Mark 14:8 uses qdm temporally (qadmat, "she did beforehand"), while 14:28 uses it spatially. This demonstrates that the single root qdm seamlessly covers both Greek verbs found in Mark: προέλαβεν at 14:8 (temporal) and προάγω at 14:28 (spatial). The fact that the temporal sense of qdm maps to a non-προάγω verb is entirely consistent with Luke’s use of μνήσθητε for the same temporal sense at 24:6.

The prospective reading also creates significant historical, narrative, and logistical difficulties:

• No text in the earliest sources narrates the disciples obeying a command to travel to Galilee. Matthew 28:16-20 and John 21, which do place appearances in Galilee, are later additions not included in the UPDV. No church father references the journey.
• Paul’s appearance tradition (1 Cor 15:5-8) contains no Galilee geography despite being received directly from the eyewitnesses. The early church was Jerusalem-centered from the beginning (Gal 1-2).
• The prospective reading requires the scattered disciples and grieving women to walk 80-90 miles to Galilee two days after an execution. The pilgrimage calendar (Passover to Pentecost, 50 days) would require three crossings of that distance in under seven weeks.
• Paul’s "500 at once" (1 Cor 15:6) is far easier to explain in Jerusalem during Passover, when thousands of Galilean pilgrims were already gathered, than in scattered Galilee villages after the festival.
• Mark’s own narrative arc — three passion predictions in Galilee (8:31, 9:31, 10:33), each met with explicit misunderstanding — is completed by the retrospective reading ("now you understand what he told you") rather than broken by a new unfulfilled promise.

Luke 3:23 — The phrase "as was supposed" is restored to "known as." The underlying Aramaic has two meanings; the Greek translator chose the wrong one, adding a nuance of doubt ("it was said to be, but wasn't really true") that was not intended. The word "began" (ἀρχόμενος) also appears to be a mistranslation of the Aramaic for "to be." See The Gospel of Luke for full discussion.

Luke 11:13 — The reading "good things" is restored in place of "Holy Spirit," based on the parallel in Matthew. The Greek word for "good" (ἀγαθόν) was likely misread as "holy" (ἅγιον), after which "spirit" was added to complete the phrase. See The Gospel of Luke.

Luke 11:42 — The UPDV reads "dill" instead of "rue," correcting a likely misread of the original Aramaic (שברא for שבתא). Rue was not subject to tithing according to the Mishnah. See Arndt, Danker, and Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, p. 810. See The Gospel of Luke.

Luke 22:7-13 — Excluded under the reconstructed baseline gospel text (*Ev) policy as a critically inferred structural absence. This is not a claim that the whole block is directly attested absent. Epiphanius Scholion 61 supplies a single late, loose notice at verse 8, with "Peter and the rest" rather than Luke's "Peter and John," and is discounted as a secure unit-presence anchor. Roth and BeDuhn classify the surrounding material as unattested while preserving the 22:8 notice; Klinghardt cautiously reconstructs the unit as probably present, so the modern reconstructions are weighed rather than treated as agreement on absence. Qualified silence in Tertullian's Against Marcion 4.40, source-critical tethering to the canonical Markan preparation scene, and the chronological pressure created by Luke's explicit day/sacrifice preparation anchor support removal under the case-by-case policy. The corresponding Markan preparation scene is now also excluded at Mark 14:12-16 under a separate Mark source-history decision. See The Reconstructed Baseline Gospel Text (*Ev) and The Gospel of Luke.

Luke 22:16-18 — Excluded under the reconstructed baseline gospel text (*Ev) policy. Verse 16 is directly attested absent by Epiphanius; verses 17-18 are removed with it under the policy's composite-seam rule, not because they are directly attested absent word-for-word. Early witnesses show incompatible repairs at the Last Supper cup/bread sequence: Codex Bezae and Old Latin witnesses omit verses 19b-20, Old Syriac witnesses relocate or redistribute the cup sayings, and apparatus/secondary reports include witnesses with only verses 19-20. These repairs converge on the existence and location of the seam while disagreeing about the exact repair. Removing verses 16-18 leaves Luke's bread-then-cup institution sequence (22:19-20) aligned with Mark 14:22-24 and the Pauline tradition in 1 Corinthians 11:23-25. See The Reconstructed Baseline Gospel Text (*Ev) and The Gospel of Luke.

John 1:1 — The UPDV translates λόγος as "Speech" rather than "Word," reflecting the Aramaic מלתא (memra). See The Gospel of John and The Speech of God: John 1:1 and the Aramaic Memra.

John 3:3, 7 — The Greek text uses ἄνωθεν with "be born" in both verses. In Greek the word can mean either "again/anew" or "from above," and Nicodemus's reply in verse 4 hears the temporal sense: "Can he enter a second time into his mother's womb?" Syriac Sinaiticus and the Peshitta both render verse 3 with ܡܢ ܕܪܫ / ܡܢ ܕܪܝܫ, "from the beginning/anew"; this supports the UPDV's verse 3 wording, "born all over again." The same Peshitta idiom is echoed in Galatians 4:9 (ܘܡܢ ܕܪܝܫ, "and from the beginning/anew"), Titus 3:5 (ܕܡܘܠܕܐ ܕܡܢ ܕܪܝܫ, "of birth from the beginning/anew"), and 1 Peter 1:3 and 1:23 with birth/begetting verbs (ܐܘܠܕܢ ܡܢ ܕܪܝܫ / ܕܡܢ ܕܪܝܫ ܐܬܝܠܕܬܘܢ); the UPDV mirrors that idiom with "all over again" / "born all over again" in those verses.

Diognetus 2:1 gives a related Greek Christian reception parallel; the UPDV renders the phrase "be born, as it were, a new man all over again" (καὶ γενόμενος ὥσπερ ἐξ ἀρχῆς καινὸς ἄνθρωπος), making the γενόμενος word-family and the temporal ἐξ ἀρχῆς frame visible without using ἄνωθεν. This is not a direct quotation of John and uses γίνομαι rather than γεννάω, but it supports the same new-beginning frame for Christian renewal.

The decisive verse 7 exception is narrower: the UPDV follows Syriac Sinaiticus, which lacks the repeated adverb. The Peshitta does not support that omission, since it repeats ܡܢ ܕܪܝܫ in verse 7; other Syriac witnesses use ܡܢ ܠܥܠ, "from above," there. This is an Aramaic/Syriac retroversion decision, not a Greek-manuscript omission claim or a Peshitta-omission claim. The Syriac witnesses use the spatial idiom in John 3:31. Pierre-Marin Boucher documents the Syriac reception split and cites Lagrange's observation that one cannot assign to ἄνωθεν "un mot araméen qui aurait deux sens" — an Aramaic word with both meanings ("ΓΕΝΗΘΗΝΑΙ ἌΝΩΘΕΝ: La valeur de l'adverbe ἄνωθεν en Jn 3,3 et 7. Ire partie: La réception chrétienne," Revue Biblique 115.2 [2008]: 198). See footnotes at John 3:3 and 3:7.

John 4:14 — Conjecturally reconstructed. The phrase "eternal life" is restored to "living water" based on the Liege Diatessaron, the immediate context (4:10–11), the Old Syriac evidence, and the likelihood of Aramaic confusion. See The Gospel of John.

John 6:27 — Conjecturally reconstructed on similar grounds to John 4:14. See The Gospel of John.

John 7:37–39 — Excluded. Traditional saying in an editorial frame with a Spirit gloss. See The Gospel of John.

John 19:14 — The phrase "it was about the sixth hour" is excluded under the reconstructed baseline gospel text (*Ev) policy as a critically inferred post-*Ev editorial timing notice, not as a direct Greek-manuscript omission. This is not a move to adopt Mark's "third hour" reading in John, nor a claim that *Ev preserves Mark 15:25's third-hour timestamp. The direct *Ev evidence for the passion timing is the sixth-hour darkness: BeDuhn reconstructs *Ev 23:44 as "Now it was already about the sixth hour, and a darkness fell..." after Jesus has been crucified at 23:33; Roth notes that Tertullian, Against Marcion 4.42.5, connects the darkness with the ὥρα ἕκτη, with further attestation from Eznik, Ephrem, and Epiphanius; and Klinghardt likewise reconstructs Jesus crucified before the sixth-hour darkness. John 19:14's sixth-hour notice instead places Jesus still before Pilate at that same hour, aligning the condemnation scene with John's Passover-preparation theology and breaking the baseline passion chronology. The UPDV therefore retains John's "Preparation of the Passover" setting but excludes only the hour notice as a post-*Ev timing layer. Virtually the whole Greek manuscript tradition reads "sixth hour"; the minority Greek "third hour" reading in John is treated as a harmonization to Mark 15:25 rather than as the reading adopted here. See The Reconstructed Baseline Gospel Text (*Ev).

🔗Revelation

Revelation 11:1 — See footnote at this verse. This change was made due to the likelihood of an original Aramaic text being slightly misread. For more information see: Jastrow pages 955–956; Payne Smith p. 361; and C. C. Torrey, The Apocalypse of John (Yale University Press, 1958), p. 120.

Revelation 19:13 — See footnote at this verse. The Greek title is "the Word of God" (ὁ λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ). UPDV renders this personal title "The Speech of God" for consistency with John's Logos/Memra usage (John 1:1; 1 John 1:1). The divine-warrior setting fits the Memra background rather than counting against it: Aune (WBC 52C on Revelation 19:13) notes Hayward's argument that Targumic Memra theology is probably reflected here, and Ronning connects Revelation 19:13 with Targum Isaiah's warrior/Memra passages (Tg. Isa. 59:17, 19; 63:5; WTJ 69 [2007]: 263-64). See The Speech of God: John 1:1 and the Aramaic Memra.

🔗Old Testament

Exodus 34:24 — See footnote at this verse. See also the note at Deuteronomy 31:11 for the pattern followed.

Deuteronomy 31:11 — See footnote at Exodus 34:24.

Joshua 19:7 — The UPDV Bible follows CTAT's reconstruction of the original text.

Judges 5:30 — The UPDV Bible follows a conjectural restoration noted in Keil and Delitzsch to read "the neck of the queen" instead of "the neck(s) of the spoil."

2 Samuel 4:6 — CTAT prefers the Masoretic reading with C-level confidence. However, due to similar reading in Ezekiel 23:40 along with witnesses of the Greek, Syriac, and Targum, and only a vocalization change required, the UPDV Bible has followed: "and, look, they."

2 Samuel 12:31 — This verse and the parallel passage at 1 Chronicles 20:3 are sometimes translated as the captured inhabitants being subject to various types of torture, such as being hacked with saws and axes or made to pass through a brickkiln. The ancient Greek, Latin, and Targumic witnesses generally read or interpret the passages in this severe direction, while the Syriac tradition is paraphrastic and in 1 Chronicles 20:3 explicitly says that David killed none of them. The UPDV Bible follows a reconstruction in which the captives were assigned to corvée labor with tools. This reconstruction is not directly attested by all ancient witnesses; it rests on re-evaluating the Hebrew parallels, the context, and similar vocabulary elsewhere in the Bible. There are three main parts of these verses which directed the translation:

a) There is a one letter difference between the Hebrew word in 2 Samuel "put [them]" (וישם) and 1 Chronicles "sawed [them]" (וישר). HOTTP rates the Masoretic reading of 1 Chronicles 20:3 (וישר, "and he sawed") with A-level confidence and suggests "and he sawed (them)." HOTTP also notes that Chronicles may reflect a misunderstanding of the 2 Samuel idiom "he placed them in/at the saw," that is, "he forced them to work with saws." The UPDV follows the non-torture sense represented by 2 Samuel, marking the supplied idea with brackets.

b) There is a one letter difference between the Hebrew word in 2 Samuel "axes of iron" (במגזרות הברזל) and 1 Chronicles "saws" (ובמגרות). The UPDV follows the more comprehensive parallel in 2 Samuel and renders "axes" in 1 Chronicles, understanding the repeated "saws" in 1 Chronicles as likely arising from the difficulty of the passage. HOTTP rates the 1 Chronicles reading with C-level confidence and suggests "stone-cutter's saws"; CTAT notes that the textual tradition does not remove the difficulty of the repeated instrument name.

c) Only the passage in 2 Samuel contains "made them serve making bricks." This is sometimes translated as "made them pass through the brickkiln." The difference is due to the verb in Hebrew currently reading העביר (passed through, made to pass). HOTTP rates the Masoretic reading with A-level confidence and suggests "and he sent them to the brickkiln," while noting that העביד (made to serve) may probably represent the original text but is not attested by old textual witnesses. The UPDV follows the conjectural reading because it fits the context and matches similar wording and vocabulary about being made to serve making bricks at Exodus 1:13. Making captives serve in a particular function is similar to that found at Joshua 9:21.

1 Chronicles 4:32 — The UPDV Bible follows CTAT's reconstruction of the original text. The same note as above regarding 2 Samuel 12:31 applies to 1 Chronicles 20:3.

1 Chronicles 20:3 — See note above at 2 Samuel 12:31.

Psalm 2:9 — See footnote at this verse. The UPDV Bible has followed the Hebrew text with different vowel pointing in accordance with the LXX reading.

Psalm 106:20 — See footnote at this verse. Also see Jeremiah 2:11. This verse is on ancient rabbinical lists of euphemisms in the Bible. "Their glory" appears to be a euphemism to avoid directly referencing God in this context. See the discussion in CTAT at Psalm 106:20.

Jeremiah 2:11 — See footnote at this verse. Also see Psalm 106:20. This verse is on ancient rabbinical lists of euphemisms in the Bible. A translation such as "their glory" appears to be a euphemism to avoid directly saying that God could be exchanged for something. "His glory" also seems out of place given the first person surrounding context. See the discussion in CTAT at Psalm 106:20 and the footnote in the text of the Word Biblical Commentary at Jeremiah 2:11.

Jeremiah 22:18 — See footnote at this verse. This reading was followed for reasons which include the following:

a) The Hebrew word for "sister" is similar to one meaning "brotherhood" as in Zechariah 11:14.

b) A lament in this form is nearly always addressed to the person who would be dead. There is no dead woman in the context who would be called "sister."

c) When two phrases are next to each other in a lament, generally the second phrase is either a duplication of the first; a further identification of the first; or an emphasis of the first. In this verse, "my brother" is emphasized as "best brother." And, "lord" is emphasized as "his excellence."

For further reference, see Theodor H. Gaster, Myth, Legend, and Custom in the Old Testament, page 604. Also see the historical examples in Mark E. Cohen's The Canonical Lamentations of Ancient Mesopotamia. And also see the Syriac at this verse.

Jeremiah 27:1 — See footnote at this verse. The UPDV Bible has followed an optional recommendation in HOTTP.

Jeremiah 28:1 — CTAT indicates the LXX is nearly certain to have the earlier reading, and that the MT appears to have text inserted in this verse at a later time by a secondary source. CTAT still recommends the MT based on textual criticism. However, based on all factors, the UPDV Bible has followed the LXX. See footnote at this verse. See also CTAT.

Ezekiel 27:19 — The UPDV Bible follows CTAT's conjectural restoration of the original text.