Spurious Bible Texts

Certain, Disputed, and Suspected

Over the years, some fake words have been added to the Bible text. Most modern translations quietly remove many of them. But we take a different approach – we gray them out.

Most of these are just:

Repeating what is said elsewhere
Clarifying what is being said
Someone’s notes accidentally copied into the main text

However, a small number are more serious, and some have not been removed. Why not? Because most Bible translations are sponsored by churches or denominational committees who pressure translators to keep certain verses – even when they know they’re not genuine.

Some fake words even serve as well-used proof texts. For example, the famous text ‘these three are one’, was added many centuries after the original text was written.

However, some texts are just popular passages that people enjoy reading, like the story of the woman caught in adultery (‘Let he who is without sin cast the first stone’ etc.). Sure, it could be a true folktale about Jesus, but it’s was never part of the original text.

We’re different from most translations. We have no denominational pressures or constraints from donors. We’re happy to ~~gray-out~~ any words that are known or suspected fakes. Indeed, our volunteers have identified some spurious texts that no other translation marks – not even with a footnote.

Index

Old Testament

In the Historical Books

Joshua 10:15 – The Early Return to Gilgal
Ezra (Alpha) 8:6 – The Second Year of Artaxerxes’ Reign

In the Prophets

Isaiah 9:6 – Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace
Jeremiah 27:1 – The Incorrect Dating
Daniel (Old Greek) 3:69 — Duplicate of Icy Cold and Frosts
Daniel (Old Greek) 4:1 — In the 18^th Year of Nebuchadnezzar’s Reign
Daniel (Old Greek) 11:37 — Mighty Nations Subject to Him

New Testament

How do we identify spurious texts?

We look for multiple lines of evidence before declaring text spurious. Here’s what we check:

Manuscript Evidence

Missing from prominent old manuscripts, especially the great codexes. This is evidence that the words were not accepted by the early church.
Different fundamental meanings in different manuscripts. This suggests there was no original to check against, and could be someone’s notes in the margin.
Words that jump around to different places in different manuscripts. This suggests that earlier copyists knew they were unoriginal, so put them in different places as notes.

Internal Evidence

Text breaks the narrative flow or context. Original words should not do this.
Contains factual errors or doesn’t make sense. Later persons committing fraud or scribal errors are more likely to say things that are wrong or illogical.
Reflects later religious beliefs not known at the time. An original text should not reflect later beliefs.
Removing the words improves the passage flow. Often, if a passage is better without the words, this suggests the words were not original.

A single piece of evidence usually isn’t enough – we look for combinations of these factors before graying anything out.

Famous Examples of Spurious Texts

The Woman Caught in Adultery

While this story might very well preserve a genuine folk tale about Jesus, it’s not present in the oldest complete copies of John’s Gospel.

You’ll find the entire passage grayed-out in our translation, with a note explaining why.

Read the entry for this passage

The ‘Trinity’ Verse

Does this sound familiar?

‘For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.’

This famous text first appeared in Latin manuscripts during the Middle Ages. However, it’s not found in any early Greek manuscripts. It’s the most well-known fake text in the Bible.

Read the entry for this verse

The Long Ending of Mark

Did you know that the ending to Mark’s Gospel is missing? Yes, it even seems to end mid-sentence…

Additional verses were added later to provide a more ‘satisfying’ ending. But the earliest and best manuscripts end with the women fleeing from the tomb in fear.

Read the entry for this verse

Frequently Asked Questions

Why Do We Gray-Out Instead of Remove?

It’s better to ~~gray out~~ than remove for these reasons:

It alerts readers to the presence of spurious text
Readers can see what other people are reading in their Bibles
It preserves the traditional chapter and verse numbering
We might be wrong about it being spurious

Are the spurious words important?

To us, every spurious word is important. Each one must be hunted down and marked.

However, let’s not overstate the problem. Most spurious words just repeat what is said elsewhere, or clarify what is being said. Therefore, they do no actual harm. Most of these are removed from popular translations, and many have never appeared in any English translation.

Only a small number are serious enough to mislead sincere Christians. For example, the baptism instructions in Matthew 28:19 are used by Churches worldwide, yet there are genuine suspicions that it was added some time after Matthew was written.

Some spurious texts may be correct in what they say but are still not part of the original text. For example, the conclusions to Mark seem to be genuine efforts to complete the unfinished Gospel. The story of the woman caught in adultery may be true, passed down as a folktale; it just wasn’t part of the original text. These additions are not evil; they contain valuable historical information. So we don’t throw them away; we just understand that they were never originally part of the Bible.

How much of the Bible text is spurious?

Compared to the great length of the Bible text, very little is spurious, and as stated above, most of them just duplicate what is said elsewhere.

If you want an exact number, it is hard to say, as there are many different ways to count ‘spurious words’:

Would you count both the long and short endings of Mark, or just one?
Which language would you count in? Words like ‘and’ and ‘with’ are prefixes in Aramaic, but not Greek.
Are you counting all spurious words ever added, or just those that remain in modern translations?
Are you counting from the King James Version or modern translations like the NIV?

Whatever the number, it’s low compared to the total, and very few spurious words have a significant effect on the fundamental message of the Bible. Other things, such as bias, mistranslation, ignorance of the context, and Church dogmas, have a much greater negative influence.

How do spurious texts get in the Bible in the first place?

Most were likely the personal notes of a preacher scribbled in the margins, which were then accidentally moved to the main text upon copying. This is called interpolation. See the translator note.

Is the Bible text like a game of ‘telephone’ or ‘Chinese whispers?’

No, it’s the opposite. Thanks to modern technology and manuscript finds (e.g. the Dead Sea Scrolls), translations like ours are now closer to the original text than ever before in our lifetimes. So rather than the ‘signal’ degrading with time and distance (like on an old telephone), the ‘signal’ is getting clearer.

Will we find more spurious texts in the future?

We hope so. We want to find them all. We will identify more as manuscripts continue to be discovered and made available to researchers.

Later spurious additions are easier to identify than earlier ones because later times have more manuscripts from more locations. Spurious additions made in the late 1^st and early 2^nd centuries would be extremely difficult to identify. We can only identify early ones via internal reasons.

That’s why it’s very risky to base an entire religious doctrine on just one ‘proof text,’ or on a single word, as many religious leaders have often done (e.g. claiming the world will end within a single generation).

List of Spurious Texts

Below, we are compiling a catalog of all suspected spurious texts in the Bible. Each entry includes our certainty level, the evidence for why we believe it’s spurious, and any relevant historical context that may explain why it was added.

In Joshua

Joshua 10:15 – The Early Return to Gilgal

Certainty Level: Good

‘Then Joshua returned, and all Israel with him, to the camp at Gilgal.’

This verse appears to be an accidental duplication of Joshua 10:43, where Joshua and his army actually return to Gilgal after completing their southern campaign.

Present in most translations but removed from the NIV.

Evidence

Creates a logical contradiction with the rest of the narrative.
The army couldn’t have returned to Gilgal as the battle was still ongoing.
The next verses (16-42) continue describing the same military campaign.
Verse 10:43 provides the proper return to Gilgal at the campaign’s end.

Historical Context

This verse likely originated as a scribal error, where a copyist accidentally inserted the concluding statement too early in the narrative. The surrounding context makes it clear that Joshua’s forces continued their southern campaign without returning to Gilgal until verse 43.

In Ezra (Alpha)

Ezra (Alpha) 8:6 – The Second Year of Artaxerxes’ Reign

Certainty Level: Good

Note that ‘Ezra (Alpha)’ is not the universally accepted version of Ezra, that would be ‘Ezra (Beta)’ and the Hebrew version. So whether you count this as a truly ‘spurious Bible text’ is debatable.

The text says:

‘This was the king’s second year.’

This phrase creates a direct contradiction within the same verse, which first dates the event to the seventh year of King Artaxerxes’s reign. It is widely considered a scribal error, where someone’s marginal note was copied into the main text.

Present in all translations of Ezra (Alpha), though often with a footnote.

Evidence

Creates a direct contradiction with the preceding phrase.
The more widely accepted book of Ezra (Ezra 7:7-8) confirms the event took place in the seventh year.
It breaks the narrative flow of the sentence.
It’s likely a marginal note (a gloss) from a confused scribe that was later copied into the text.

Historical Context

Ezra (Alpha) has a complex, non-chronological structure. A scribe, possibly confused by the timeline, may have written a note in the margin questioning the date. A later copyist then likely incorporated this marginal note into the main text, creating the contradiction we see today.

All other sources give the date as the seventh year of Artaxerxes I (around 458 BC).

In Isaiah

Isaiah 9:6 – Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace

Certainty Level: Suspicious

‘Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace.’

These divine titles are mysteriously absent from the Septuagint (LXX), our oldest Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible. While they appear in the Dead Sea Scrolls, their history presents an intriguing puzzle.

Present in all translations.

Evidence

Completely absent from the Septuagint translation.
Not quoted by early Christians until after AD 325.
When found in supposedly early writings, these appear in known forgeries (like Pseudo-Ignatius).
However, the words are present in the Dead Sea Scrolls Hebrew text.
The Aramaic Targum of Isaiah has these as titles for God, and the child is given the title ‘prince of peace’ (usually identified as King Hezekiah).

Historical Context

The Aramic Targum of Isaiah reveals that the ancient people understood these words as titles for God, not the Messiah. Therefore, we understand why early Christians never quoted it as a Messianic prophecy — because they simply didn’t believe it was one! The absence of the most famous words from the Greek Septuagint supports this, as it’s very unusual for a Messianic prophecy to be missing from the Greek text.

Where did the words come from?

Could someone have added these words to the Hebrew text between the time of the Greek Septuagint translation and the writing of the Dead Sea Scrolls? Perhaps. Or could someone have removed the titles from the Septuagint because they were considered heretical? Again, perhaps.

We really know very little:

Were the words added to the Hebrew text or removed from the Greek?
If they were added or removed, who did so?
Was it deliberate or an accidental scribal error?

Nobody knows the answers to these questions.

Given our growing confidence in the Septuagint’s reliability, we suspect that either these titles weren’t in the original Hebrew text or the Hebrew was garbled at some point. Whatever happened, the Septuagint might well preserve a more accurate reading. Yet without further manuscript discoveries, we can’t really know what happened.

We ~~gray-out the words~~ in our translation to bring the uncertainty to your attention.

See our catalog of Messianic Prophecies for more information.

In Jeremiah

Jeremiah 27:1 – The Incorrect Dating

Certainty Level: Good

‘It was at the beginning of the reign of JehoiAkim (son of JosiAh) the king of Judah, that these words came to JeremiAh from Jehovah.’

This verse appears to be a scribal error that incorrectly dates the prophecy. The narrative that follows clearly takes place during Zedekiah’s reign, not Jehoiakim’s.

Present in all major translations.

Evidence

Missing from the Greek Septuagint version.
Creates a chronological contradiction with the rest of the chapter.
Verse 3 explicitly mentions King Zedekiah.
Verse 12 shows Jeremiah speaking directly to Zedekiah.

Historical Context

This verse likely began as a marginal note that was accidentally copied into the main text by later scribes. The error is particularly obvious because the rest of the chapter repeatedly mentions Zedekiah as the current king.

In Daniel (Old Greek)

Daniel (Old Greek) 3:69 — Duplicate of Icy Cold and Frosts

Certainty Level: Good

‘Praise the Lord, icy cold and frosts!
Sing praises to Him and lift Him high for all time!’

This verse is just a duplicate of verse 67, and this repetition is missing in the Theodotion version of Daniel. So it’s a classic case of scribal repetition.

Daniel (Old Greek) 4:1 — In the 18^th Year of Nebuchadnezzar’s Reign

Certainty Level: Good

‘Now in the 18^th year of King NebuChadnezzar’s reign, he said:’

Here in this Old Greek version of Daniel, the first line of verse 1 could be a scribal mistake, as it seems to be repeating the first line from 3:1.

Also, it’s not likely that NebuChadnezzar could be writing this letter in his 18^th year, since there’s no time for him to spend seven years in the wilderness. So this reenforces our suspicions that this line is just a scribal mistake, a repetition from 3:1.

The ‘Old Greek’ version of Daniel is unusual among Bible manuscripts, in that we have very, very few copies of it. So it’s much more likely to have silly scribal errors than other Bible books. Indeed, the Old Greek version of Daniel chapter 11 in particular has many differences to the Hebrew version that are explained by silly scribal errors.

Daniel (Old Greek) 11:37 — Mighty Nations Subject To Him

Certainty Level: Suspicious

‘…and mighty nations will be subjected to him.’

This extra detail does not appear in the Hebrew version of Daniel, which, in itself is not unusual. There are many interesting differences between the two versions.

However, what makes us suspect this to be a later addition is that what it says isn’t really true. The king being discussed here is obviously Antiochus IV Epiphanes, who did not really subject any nations to himself, other than some temporary victories. Indeed, the context of the prophecy is very detailed in describing how his invasion of Egypt will fail, and how he will also fail to conquer small regional kingdoms like Edom and Moab.

So we suspect that this was added to the Old Greek, perhaps even a marginal note that was later copied into the text, by some group who perhaps interpreted the Kings of the North and South prophecy entirely differently.

We have a translator note explaining more.

In Matthew

Matthew 6:13 – The Ending to the Lord’s Prayer

Certainty Level: High

‘For yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen.’

This famous ending to the Lord’s Prayer isn’t found in our earliest and best manuscripts. It first appears in later copies, likely added as a liturgical response during church services.

Removed from nearly all modern translations, but present in the KJV.

Evidence

Missing from Codex Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, and other early manuscripts.
Absent from Luke’s version of the Lord’s Prayer.
Shows clear influence from later church liturgy.
Not quoted by early Church Fathers when discussing the Lord’s Prayer.

Historical Context

Early Christians would often add ‘For yours is the kingdom…’ as a response after reciting the Lord’s Prayer in worship services. Over time, scribes began adding this familiar response directly into their copies of Matthew’s Gospel. This practice was especially common in the Eastern Church.

Matthew 6:25 – The Added Phrase About Drink

Certainty Level: Fair

‘or what you will drink’

This brief phrase appears to be a later addition to Jesus’ teaching about anxiety, possibly added to create symmetry with the references to food and clothing.

Present in all major translations.

Evidence

Missing from the Codex Sinaiticus, our oldest complete New Testament.
Creates a redundancy since drinking is implied in eating.

Historical Context

Early scribes often sought to harmonize parallel passages between the Gospels or to make teachings more explicit. This addition may represent an attempt to clarify that Jesus’ teaching about anxiety covered all basic needs.

Matthew 10:8 – Disciples Raising the Dead

Certainty Level: Fair

‘raise the dead’

These words appear to be a later addition to Jesus’ instructions about healing the sick and casting out demons. While Jesus did raise the dead, there’s no record of the disciples doing so during this particular mission.

Present in most translations.

Evidence

Missing from several important early manuscripts.
Creates an oddity in the narrative as no resurrections are recorded during this mission.
The disciples show surprise later when Jesus himself raises the dead.
The parallel accounts in Mark 6:7-13 and Luke 9:1-6 don’t mention raising the dead.

Historical Context

Early scribes often sought to expand lists of miraculous powers, perhaps influenced by later accounts of apostolic miracles in Acts. This addition may reflect later church practices of collecting and expanding Jesus’ teachings.

Matthew 16:2-3 – The Weather Signs

Certainty Level: Fair

‘When evening comes, you say, ‘It will be fair weather, for the sky is red,’ and in the morning, ‘Today it will be stormy, for the sky is red and overcast.’ You know how to interpret the appearance of the sky, but you cannot interpret the signs of the times.’

These verses about reading weather signs appear to be a later addition, possibly borrowed from similar sayings of Jesus recorded elsewhere.

Present in most translations but marked as doubtful in some.

Evidence

Missing from several important early manuscripts including Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus.
Absent from most ancient manuscripts of the Eastern Church.
Uses vocabulary patterns uncommon in Matthew’s Gospel.
Could be adapted from Luke 12:54-56, but with significant modifications.

Historical Context

While Jesus did speak about discerning signs (as recorded in Luke), this specific weather-saying appears to have been added to Matthew’s account later. It likely started as a preacher’s note written in the margin, which was later accidentally copied into the main text sometime in the early decades of Christianity (an interpolation).

Matthew 17:21 – The Added Fasting Requirement

Certainty Level: High

‘However, this kind does not go out except by prayer and fasting.’

If these words sound familiar, it’s because they’re borrowed from Mark’s account (Mark 9:29), where Jesus explains why the disciples couldn’t cast out a demon. It’s missing from the oldest and best manuscripts of Matthew.

Removed from most modern translations but present in the KJV.

Evidence

Missing from critical early manuscripts including Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus.
Appears to be harmonization with Mark 9:29.
Creates redundancy with Jesus’ previous explanation.
Shows signs of later ascetic influence emphasizing fasting.

Historical Context

Early Christian scribes often sought to harmonize parallel accounts between the Gospels. This verse likely entered Matthew’s text when a scribe, familiar with Mark’s account, added the explanation about prayer and fasting in the margin. Later copyists probably just copied the note into the main text accidentally (an interpolation).

Matthew 18:11 – The Added Mission Statement

Certainty Level: High

‘For the Son of Man came to save that which was lost.’

This verse appears to be borrowed from Luke 19:10, where Jesus makes this statement in the story of Zacchaeus. It’s missing from our earliest and best manuscripts of Matthew.

Removed from most modern translations but present in the KJV.

Evidence

Missing from the earliest manuscripts including Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus.
Appears to be harmonization with Luke 19:10.
Interrupts the flow of Jesus’ teaching about ‘little ones’.
Shows characteristics of scribal insertion to provide explanation.

Historical Context

Early scribes often added explanatory statements from other Gospels to provide context. This verse was likely added to explain why Jesus was talking about not despising ‘little ones,’ by connecting it to his mission of seeking the lost.

Matthew 18:12 – Into the Mountains

Certainty Level: Good

‘into the mountains’

This brief phrase shows significant variation in ancient manuscripts, with some placing it with the sheep being left and others with the search location. It’s entirely missing from our oldest manuscripts.

Present in most translations but with varying placement.

Evidence

Missing from our oldest manuscripts (Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus).
Shows instability in placement between manuscripts.
Some manuscripts attach it to ‘leave the ninety-nine’.
Others attach it to ‘go and search’.
Such textual instability often indicates a later addition.

Historical Context

The variation in placement suggests this detail was originally a marginal note that different scribes incorporated into different parts of the verse. The parallel passage in Luke 15:4 mentions leaving the sheep ‘in the wilderness,’ which may have influenced preachers to add a marginal note here which was later accidentally copied into the main text (an interpolation).

Matthew 20:16 – The Copied and Misplaced Saying

Certainty Level: Good

‘for many are called, but few chosen’

While these words are genuine words of Jesus (found in Matthew 22:14), they appear to have been incorrectly copied here from that later passage. They’re missing from our oldest and best manuscripts at this location.

Present in the KJV but removed from most modern translations.

Evidence

Missing from Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus.
Absent from several ancient translations.
Identical to Matthew 22:14, where it fits the context better.
Shows characteristics of scribal harmonization.

Historical Context

Early scribes or preachers often copied memorable sayings of Jesus to multiple locations, especially when they seemed to fit thematically. In this case, the famous ‘many are called, but few chosen’ saying was likely added here because it seemed to reinforce the parable’s message about the workers in the vineyard. If it were added as a note, it was likely accidentally copied into the main text (an interpolation).

Matthew 23:14 – The Copied Condemnation

Certainty Level: High

‘Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you devour widows’ houses, and for a pretense make long prayer. Therefore, you shall receive the greater damnation.’

This entire verse appears to be borrowed from Luke 20:47. Its unstable position in different ancient manuscripts and absence from our oldest sources strongly suggests it wasn’t part of Matthew’s original text.

Present in the KJV but removed from most modern translations.

Evidence

Missing from Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus.
Absent from several ancient translations.
Shows instability in manuscript placement (sometimes appears before verse 13).
Appears to be harmonization with Luke 20:47.
Creates an irregularity in Matthew’s sequence of ‘woes’.

Historical Context

Early scribes or preachers often sought to harmonize parallel accounts between the Gospels. This verse was likely added to Matthew’s Gospel as a marginal note to make it harmonize with Luke’s account more closely, and was later accidentally copied into the text (an interpolation). The varying placement of the verse in different ancient manuscripts suggests scribes weren’t certain where it belonged, a common indication of later addition.

Matthew 24:3 – The End of the World

Certainty Level: Fair

‘…of your coming and the end of the world?’

These words could be a later addition to the disciples’ question about the temple’s destruction. The parallel accounts in Mark and Luke don’t mention these words, despite their incredible significance: the end of the world, no less!

However, a more accurate translation would be end of the age.

Present in all major translations.

Evidence

Missing from parallel accounts in Mark 13:4 and Luke 21:7.
Creates an oddity in the narrative - such an important question about the world’s end is absent from other Gospel accounts.
Removing the words allows the passage to flow better with the context.
The disciples show no other indication of expecting the end of the world at this point.

Historical Context

In the late 1^st and early 2^nd centuries AD, various theories and expectations for Christ’s return had developed. One of which was that Jesus’ words were not merely about the destruction of the temple, but also about the end of the world in some kind of double-prophecy that would have two fulfilments, one in the destruction of Jerusalem by Rome, and a later one in the end of the entire world.

Early Christian teachers may have made comments to that effect when reading this part of the Olivet Discourse, and these comments were added as marginal notes. Later, these comments were accidentally copied into the main text (an interpolation).

Matthew 24:41 – Women Grinding Grain

Certainty Level: Fair

‘women shall be’

These words appear to be a later clarification, though they may correctly reflect the original meaning since the Aramaic text uses feminine forms of the words here.

Present in most translations.

Evidence

Missing from the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus Codexes.
May be an attempt to clarify what was already implied in the Aramaic version of Matthew.
Shows characteristics of explanatory additions.

Historical Context

Early teachers and scribes often added clarifying words or marginal notes. In this case, the feminine form used in the Aramaic text specifies the gender of the person who are grinding grain. Remember, Jesus was probably speaking Aramaic when he spoke these words, and there’s a good chance that Matthew, at the very least, was originally written in Aramaic.

Matthew 27:52-53 — The Mass Resurrection

Certainty Level: Good

‘and the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised and came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many’

These verses describe an incredible mass resurrection event during Jesus’ execution that, surprisingly, no other Gospel writer mentions. Despite its dramatic nature, this event is absent from parallel accounts and seems to create theological contradictions with other New Testament teachings.

Present in all major translations, though some scholars question its authenticity.

Evidence

Missing from the parallel account in Luke 23:45, despite its extraordinary nature.
Not mentioned anywhere else in the Bible or any contemporary historical records.
Creates a chronological problem within the narrative (bodies rise before Jesus’ resurrection but wait to emerge after).
Contradicts Paul’s teaching in 1 Corinthians 15 that Christ was the ‘firstfruits’ of resurrection.
Shows textual variations in early manuscripts, particularly in Codex Sinaiticus.
Breaks the flow of the crucifixion narrative.

Historical Context

This passage likely entered Matthew’s text during a crucial period in the late 1^st or early 2^nd centuries when copies of Matthew were scarce. At this time, Matthew’s Gospel existed primarily as communal documents used in worship services, where teachers would add marginal notes and explanations.

In ancient cultures, it was common to surround the deaths of great figures with extraordinary events — the Oxford Bible Commentary notes how people would ‘encircle the ends of great figures with extraordinary events,’ such as trees blooming out of season or the heavens shaking.

The corruption likely occurred when these manuscripts needed to be recopied. Since the early original of Matthew had so few copies, scribal notes explaining the cosmic significance of Jesus’ death may have been accidentally incorporated into the main text (an interpolation).

This happened quite early - the passage is quoted by Ignatius around AD 107, suggesting the addition occurred within 50-75 years of Jesus’ execution. Matthew’s text shows more provable corruptions than any other Gospel, likely due to this early period when copies were scarce and, if early writers are to be believed, the text was still being translated from Aramaic to Greek.

Matthew 28:19 — The Trinitarian Baptism Formula

Certainty Level: Fair

‘baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit’

These words, known as the ‘trinitarian baptism formula,’ appear in all modern Bible translations but the real possibility exists that it’s a later addition. While present in all surviving manuscripts, historical evidence suggests the original text may have simply said ‘in my name.’

Present in all major translations, though scholars have raised significant questions about its authenticity.

Evidence

Missing from all parallel accounts of baptism in the New Testament (Acts 2:38, 8:15-16, 10:48, 19:5; Romans 6:3; Galatians 3:27).
Absent from parallel accounts of Jesus’ final instructions (Luke 24:47; Acts 1:8).
Eusebius, a 4th-century bishop, quoted this verse 18 times without the formula before the Council of Nicaea, but suddenly included it afterward.
The parallel account in Luke 24:47 only mentions preaching ‘in his name’.
Every other baptism recorded in the New Testament is performed only ‘in the name of Jesus’.
No surviving manuscripts of this verse exist from before the 4^th century AD.

Historical Context

The trinitarian formula likely entered the text during the 2^nd or 3^rd centuries when Christianity was still a small community. Early church leaders may have introduced it to differentiate orthodox Christian baptisms from Gnostic ones.

Gnostic groups also baptized in Jesus’ name but held different views about the Father (whom they saw as a lesser god) and the holy spirit (whom some viewed as a feminine divine being). The formula could have started as a way to affirm orthodox beliefs about all three persons, showing that the baptized person accepted the Father as God, Jesus as the Son, and the Spirit as God’s breath that descended upon Jesus at his baptism.

In Mark

Mark 4:37 — How Full Was the Boat?

Certainty Level: Fair

‘until it was (nearly) full’

This brief phrase about the boat’s condition shows significant variation between manuscripts, with some saying it was ‘full’ and others ‘nearly full.’ The phrase is entirely absent from our oldest complete New Testament manuscript.

Present in most translations but with varying wording.

Evidence

Missing from Codex Sinaiticus, our oldest complete New Testament.
Shows significant variation between manuscripts (‘full’ vs ‘nearly full’).
Creates redundancy with the following statement about the boat being in danger.
The detail isn’t necessary for understanding the story’s drama.

Historical Context

Early teachers likely added explanatory notes in the margins to help emphasize the danger Jesus and his disciples were in. Different scribes may have interpreted these notes differently when copying them into the main text, leading to the variations we see. This kind of accidental incorporation of marginal notes into the main text was common (an interpolation).

Mark 6:11 — The Added Sodom Warning

Certainty Level: Good

‘Truly I say to you, it shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrah in the Day of Judgement, than for that city.’

This warning about Sodom and Gomorrah appears to be borrowed from Matthew 10:15, where Jesus makes a similar statement. It’s missing from our oldest and most trusted manuscripts of Mark.

Present in the KJV but removed from most modern translations.

Evidence

Missing from Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, our oldest complete New Testament manuscripts.
Absent from several ancient translations.
Appears to be harmonization with Matthew 10:15.
Creates redundancy with Mark’s simpler style of reporting Jesus’ words.

Historical Context

Early Christian teachers often added cross-references to parallel passages in other Gospels as teaching aids. In this case, a teacher likely noted Matthew’s more detailed version in the margin of Mark’s simpler account. Later, when the manuscript needed to be recopied, this marginal note was accidentally incorporated into the main text (an interpolation).

Mark 7:16 — The Added Hearing Formula

Certainty Level: Good

‘If any man have ears to hear, let him hear.’

This saying, while genuine words of Jesus found elsewhere in Mark’s Gospel, appears to have been copied here. It’s missing from our oldest and most trusted manuscripts.

Present in the KJV but removed from most modern translations.

Evidence

Missing from Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, our oldest complete New Testament manuscripts.
Appears to be copied from Mark 4:9 or 4:23, where it fits the context better.
Creates an unnecessary interruption in the flow of Jesus’ teaching about clean and unclean foods.
Shows characteristics of scribal harmonization.

Historical Context

Early Christian teachers often added cross-references to similar passages as teaching aids. This famous saying of Jesus (‘If anyone has ears to hear…’) appears multiple times in Mark’s Gospel, which likely led a teacher to add it here as a marginal note. Later, when the manuscript was recopied, this note was accidentally incorporated into the main text (an interpolation).

Mark 9:44 — The Extra Worms and Fire

Certainty Level: Good

‘Where the worm doesn’t die, and the fire isn’t quenched.’

These words, while genuine in verse 48, appear to have been copied here as a poetic repetition. They’re missing from our oldest and most trusted manuscripts.

Present in the KJV but removed from most modern translations.

Evidence

Missing from Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, our oldest complete New Testament manuscripts.
Identical to verse 48, where the words are genuine.
Creates an artificial poetic structure not typical of Mark’s writing style.
Shows characteristics of scribal repetition for emphasis.

Historical Context

Early Christian teachers often added emphasis to particularly important passages through repetition. In this case, Jesus’ warning about eternal punishment was likely emphasized by a teacher repeating the phrase in the margin. Later, when the manuscript was recopied, this marginal note was accidentally incorporated into the main text (an interpolation).

Mark 9:46 — Another Extra Worms and Fire

Certainty Level: Good

‘Where the worm doesn’t die, and the fire isn’t quenched.’

This verse is identical to verse 44, and appears to be another poetic repetition of verse 48’s genuine warning.

Present in the KJV but removed from most modern translations.

Evidence

Missing from Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus.
Identical to verse 48, where the words are genuine.
Creates an artificial poetic structure not typical of Mark’s writing style.
Shows characteristics of scribal repetition for emphasis.

Historical Context

Like verse 44, this appears to be another instance of early Christian teachers emphasizing Jesus’ warning about eternal punishment through repetition. The warning was likely added as a marginal note that was later accidentally incorporated into the main text (an interpolation).

Mark 10:30 — More Rewards

Certainty Level: Fair

‘houses and brethren and sisters and mothers and children and lands with persecutions’

This extended list of family members and possessions appears to be a later addition to Jesus’ promise about rewards for following him. The simpler version may have been expanded to match similar passages at Matthew 19:29 and Luke 18:29-30.

Present in most translations.

Evidence

Missing from the Codex Sinaiticus.
Creates an unusually detailed list compared to Mark’s typically concise style.
Shows characteristics of harmonization with parallel passages.

Historical Context

Early Christian teachers often expanded Jesus’ sayings with explanatory details, especially when teaching about rewards for discipleship. This expanded list may have begun as a marginal note explaining the types of relationships and possessions Jesus was referring to, before being accidentally incorporated into the main text (an interpolation).

Mark 11:26 — The Added Forgiveness Warning

Certainty Level: Good

‘But if you don’t forgive others, your Father in heaven won’t forgive your sins.’

While these words express a genuine teaching of Jesus (found in Matthew 6:15), they appear to have been copied here long after the original text was written to create a symmetry with Jesus’ teaching about prayer and forgiveness.

Present in the KJV but removed from most modern translations.

Evidence

Missing from Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus.
Absent from several ancient translations.
Appears to be copied directly from Matthew 6:15.
Creates an unnecessary repetition of Jesus’ teaching.

Historical Context

Early Christian teachers often added cross-references to similar teachings as study aids. In this case, a teacher likely noted Matthew’s parallel teaching about forgiveness in the margin. Later, when the manuscript needed to be recopied, this marginal note was accidentally incorporated into the main text (an interpolation).

Mark 15:28 — The Added Prophecy Fulfillment

Certainty Level: Good

‘And the scripture was fulfilled, which says, ‘And he was numbered with the transgressors.’’

This statement about prophecy fulfillment was not originally in Mark, but appears to have been copied from Luke 22:37, where Jesus himself quotes this prophecy before his arrest. It’s missing from our earliest manuscripts of Mark.

Present in the KJV but removed from most modern translations.

Evidence

Missing from Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus.
Absent from all manuscripts prior to the late 6^th century.
Appears to be copied directly from Luke 22:37.
Creates an unnecessary repetition of prophecy fulfillment.

Historical Context

Early Christian teachers often added cross-references to similar passages as study aids. In this case, a teacher likely noted Luke’s parallel reference to Isaiah’s prophecy in the margin. Later, when the manuscript needed to be recopied, this marginal note was accidentally incorporated into the main text (an interpolation).

Mark 16 – The ‘Short Ending’

Certainty Level: High

‘But they reported briefly to Peter and those with him all that they had been told. And after this, Jesus himself (appeared to them and) sent out by means of them, from east to west, the sacred and imperishable proclamation of eternal salvation.’

This alternative ending to Mark’s Gospel appears in only a handful of manuscripts, attempting to provide a more satisfactory conclusion than the abrupt ending at verse 8.

Present in very few manuscripts. Most manuscripts that continue past verse 8 contain the ‘Long Ending’ instead.

Evidence

Missing from Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, plus the vast majority of manuscripts.
The Codex Vaticanus deliberately leaves a blank column where the Gospel’s ending should be.
Ancient writers Eusebius and Jerome explicitly state that any text after verse 8 is spurious.
Shows characteristics of later theological development and writing style.
Only appears in a very small number of manuscripts.

Historical Context

The Gospel of Mark appears to have been left unfinished, ending abruptly at verse 8. This created discomfort among early Christians, leading to at least two different attempts to provide a proper ending. This ‘Short Ending’ represents one such attempt, likely composed in the early 2^nd century. Like many spurious additions, it probably began as a marginal note that was later accidentally copied into the main text (an interpolation).

Mark 16:9-20 – The ‘Long Ending’

Certainty Level: High

⁹ Now when Jesus had risen early on the first day of the week, he first appeared to Mary Magdalene, from out of whom he had cast seven demons. ¹⁰ And she went and told them that had been with him, as they mourned and wept. ¹¹ When they had heard that he was alive, and that she’d seen him, they didn’t believe it.

¹² After that, he appeared in another form to two of them as they walked, and went into the country. ¹³ So they went and told it to the others: who didn’t believe them either.

¹⁴ Afterwards, he appeared to the eleven as were eating a meal, and scolded them for their disbelief and hardness of heart, because they didn’t believe the ones who saw him after he had risen.

¹⁵ And he said to them:

‘Go into all the world, and preach the gospel to everyone. ¹⁶ He that believes and is baptized shall be saved; but he that doesn’t believe will be damned. ¹⁷ And these signs will follow those who believe: In my name they’ll cast out demons; they’ll speak in different languages; ¹⁸ they’ll pick up snakes; and if they drink something poisonous, it won’t hurt them; they’ll lay their hands on sick people, and they’ll recover. ¹⁹ Then, after the Lord had spoken to them, he rose up into heaven, and sat at the right hand of God. ²⁰ And they went out and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them, and confirming his words with miraculous signs. Amen.’

The original Gospel of Mark ended at verse 16:8 with the women fleeing from the tomb. These additional twelve verses were added later to provide a more complete resurrection narrative.

Most modern translations include these verses but set them apart with brackets or notes. Some (like the RSV) place them in a footnote.

Evidence

Missing from our oldest and most trusted manuscripts (Sinaiticus and Vaticanus).
Absent from the Syriac Sinaiticus and the two oldest Georgian manuscripts.
No known papyrus fragments contain these verses (unusual for genuine text).
Many ancient manuscripts mark these verses as different through spacing or notation.
Multiple ancient writers (Eusebius, Jerome, Gregory of Nyssa, Hesychius of Jerusalem, and Severus of Antioch) explicitly state these words aren’t original.
One Armenian manuscript (Matenadaran 2374, AD ~989) attributes these words to ‘Ariston the Priest,’ traditionally a colleague of Peter.
Writing style differs significantly from Mark’s usual style.
Contains vocabulary not found elsewhere in Mark’s Gospel.
Creates a contradiction with Mark 16:2 regarding Mary Magdalene’s encounter with Jesus.
References later 2nd-century beliefs about miracle signs (snake handling, poison drinking).

Historical Context

Early Christians were uncomfortable with Mark’s abrupt ending at verse 8. Several different endings were created to resolve this, with this ‘Long Ending’ becoming the most popular. The original ending may have been lost (perhaps through martyrdom of Mark in Rome or physical damage to the manuscript), or the Gospel may have been intentionally left unfinished. The current ending appears to be a second-century summary of resurrection appearances found in the other Gospels.

In Luke

Luke 4:8 – The Added Rebuke to Satan

Certainty Level: Good

‘Get behind me, Satan, for…’

These words appear to be borrowed from similar encounters between Jesus and Satan recorded in Matthew 4:10 or Mark 8:33. They’re missing from our oldest and most trusted manuscripts of Luke.

Present in most translations.

Evidence

Missing from the Codex Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus, and Vaticanus, plus many other manuscripts.
Shows characteristics of harmonization with Matthew 4:10 and Mark 8:33.
Creates redundancy in Jesus’ response to Satan.
Breaks the flow of Luke’s typically concise narrative style.

Historical Context

Early Christian teachers often sought to harmonize parallel accounts between the Gospels. In this case, a teacher likely added Jesus’ more forceful rebuke from Matthew or Mark as a marginal note to emphasize Jesus’ authority over Satan. Later, when the manuscript needed to be recopied, this marginal note was accidentally incorporated into the main text (an interpolation).

Luke 9:55-56 – The Added Rebuke About Spirit

Certainty Level: Good

‘and said, ‘You don’t know what kind of spirit you are. For the Son of man didn’t come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them.’’

These words appear to be a later addition to Jesus’ response when James and John wanted to call down fire from heaven. While the sentiment matches Jesus’ character, the words are missing from our earliest manuscripts.

Present in the KJV but removed from most modern translations.

Evidence

Missing from the Codex Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus, and Vaticanus, plus many other manuscripts.
Shows characteristics of explanatory additions.
Creates a break in the narrative flow.
Uses vocabulary patterns uncommon in Luke’s writing.

Historical Context

Early Christian teachers likely added these words as a marginal note to explain why Jesus rebuked his disciples. The note probably aimed to emphasize Jesus’ mission of salvation rather than destruction. Later, when the manuscript needed to be recopied, this marginal note was accidentally incorporated into the main text (an interpolation).

Luke 17:12 – The Added Distance Detail

Certainty Level: Fair

‘who stood at a distance’

This brief phrase about the position of the infected men (incorrectly called ‘lepers’ in most translations) appears to be a later addition, though it may correctly reflect what actually happened since people with skin infections were required by law to maintain distance from others.

Present in most translations.

Evidence

Missing from the Codex Sinaiticus.

Historical Context

Early Christian teachers often added explanatory notes to help readers understand Jewish customs. In this case, a teacher likely added a note explaining why the lepers weren’t approaching Jesus directly. Later, when the manuscript needed to be recopied, this marginal note was accidentally incorporated into the main text (an interpolation).

Luke 17:36 — The Added Field Workers

Certainty Level: Good

‘Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.’

This verse appears to be borrowed from Matthew 24:40, where Jesus makes an identical statement. It’s missing from our earliest and best manuscripts of Luke.

Present in the KJV but removed from most modern translations.

Evidence

Missing from most Greek manuscripts, including the Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus.
Identical to Matthew 24:40, where the words are genuine.
Shows characteristics of scribal harmonization between Gospels.
Creates an unnecessary repetition of Jesus’ teaching.

Historical Context

Early Christian teachers often added cross-references to similar passages as study aids. In this case, a teacher likely noted Matthew’s parallel teaching in the margin of Luke’s account. Later, when the manuscript needed to be recopied, this marginal note was accidentally incorporated into the main text (an interpolation).

Luke 22:44-45 — The Sweat Like Drops of Blood

Certainty Level: High

‘Then a messenger from the heavens appeared to him, and this gave him strength. Yet, because he was still in agony, he prayed even harder, and his sweat became like drops of blood falling to the ground.’

This dramatic description of Jesus’ agony in Gethsemane, while powerful, appears to be a later addition. The passage describes a unique physiological phenomenon not mentioned anywhere else in scripture.

Present in most translations but often marked with brackets or footnotes indicating doubt about authenticity.

Evidence

Missing from critical early manuscripts including Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus.
Absent from the oldest Aramaic translation, the Syriac Sinaiticus.
Many manuscripts that include these verses mark them with asterisks or other symbols indicating doubt.
Shows textual instability - appears in Matthew’s Gospel in one manuscript.
Creates a break in Luke’s typically smooth narrative flow.

Historical Context

The medical condition described (Hematidrosis — sweating blood) was known to ancient writers, and a teacher may have added this detail to emphasize Jesus’ extreme distress. Indeed, we’re not saying that it didn’t happen, it may indeed have happened and been passed down as a tradition; it’s just not original to Luke’s Gospel.

Like many such additions, these notes were likely accidentally incorporated into the main text during copying (an interpolation).

Luke 23:5 — The Added Teaching Detail

Certainty Level: Fair

‘teaching’

This brief word appears to be a later clarification of how Jesus was stirring up the people, though it may correctly reflect what was happening.

Present in most translations.

Evidence

Missing from the Codex Sinaiticus.
Shows characteristics of explanatory additions.

Historical Context

Early Christian teachers often added clarifying words as marginal notes to help explain the text to their congregations. In this case, a teacher likely added a note to specify how Jesus was ‘stirring up the people.’ Later, when the manuscript needed to be recopied, this marginal note was accidentally incorporated into the main text (an interpolation).

Luke 23:17 — The Required Release

Certainty Level: High

‘For of necessity he must release one unto them at the feast.’

This verse claims Pilate was required to release a prisoner, contradicting the other Gospel accounts which describe it as a custom rather than a requirement. The verse shows significant instability in manuscript placement (sometimes appearing after verse 18) — a typical sign of an interpolation.

Present in the KJV but removed from most modern translations.

Evidence

Missing from the Codex Alexandrinus and Vaticanus, plus several other manuscripts.
Shows instability in placement between manuscripts, sometimes appearing after verse 18.
Contradicts Matthew 27:15, Mark 15:6, and John 18:39, which all describe this as a custom rather than a requirement.
Creates an unnecessary interruption in the narrative flow.

Historical Context

Early Christian teachers likely added explanatory notes about Pilate’s prisoner release custom when teaching from Luke’s Gospel. Since Luke’s account was briefer than the others regarding this detail, teachers may have added marginal notes to provide context from the other Gospels. However, they accidentally exaggerated it to be a requirement rather than a custom.

Later, when manuscripts needed to be recopied, these marginal notes were accidentally incorporated into the main text (an interpolation).

Luke 23:34 — Father, Forgive Them

Certainty Level: Fair

‘Then said Jesus, ‘Father, forgive them; they don’t know what they’re doing.’’

These famous words of Jesus from the cross, while beautiful and consistent with his character, are missing from some of our oldest manuscripts. However, they are present in some even earlier papyrus fragments, making this a complex case.

Present in all major translations, though some include footnotes about manuscript variations.

Evidence

Missing from the Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus.
Present in earlier papyrus fragments like P75 (variously dated from 2^nd to 4^th century).
Shows some variation in manuscript placement.
Creates a slight break in the narrative flow between the crucifixion and the division of garments.

Historical Context

Some argue that the complex manuscript evidence suggests this may be a genuine saying of Jesus that was accidentally omitted from some manuscripts rather than added later.

If it is a spurious addition, it likely began as a marginal note recording an authentic oral tradition about Jesus’ words on the cross, before being accidentally incorporated into the main text (an interpolation).

So did Jesus say those words? We don’t know. The sentiment certainly matches Jesus’ teaching about forgiveness and loving one’s enemies.

In John

John 4:9 — No Dealings With Samaritans

Certainty Level: Good

‘Jews have no dealings with Samaritans’

This brief explanatory note appears to be a later addition meant to explain the woman’s surprise at Jesus’ request. However, it’s both missing from our earliest manuscripts and contradicts known historical facts about Jewish-Samaritan relations.

Present in most translations.

Evidence

Missing from Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus.
Contradicts historical evidence of regular Jewish-Samaritan interactions.
Shows characteristics of explanatory additions.
Creates an unnecessary interruption in the dialogue.

Historical Context

Early Christian teachers, especially those teaching Gentile converts, often added explanatory notes about Jewish customs and relationships. In this case, a teacher likely oversimplified the complex Jewish-Samaritan relationship with a marginal note. While Jews and Samaritans certainly had tensions, they did regularly interact for trade and travel. Later, when the manuscript needed to be recopied, this marginal note was accidentally incorporated into the main text (an interpolation).

John 5:3-4 — How the Pool Miracles Worked

Certainty Level: High

‘…waiting for the moving of the water. For at a certain time, an Angel would go into the pool and disturb the water; whoever was first to step in the water after its disturbance was cured of whatever disease he had.’

This description of a miraculous healing pool appears to be a later addition explaining local folklore about the pool of Bethesda. The passage uses vocabulary unique to this section and not found elsewhere in John’s writings.

Present in the KJV but removed from most modern translations.

Evidence

Missing from Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, plus Alexandrinus in its original hand.
Absent from many other early manuscripts.
Shows significant variation in wording between manuscripts that include it.
Uses vocabulary and terms not found anywhere else in John’s Gospel.
Creates an unnecessary break in the narrative flow.

Historical Context

Early Christian teachers likely added explanatory notes to help their congregations understand why sick people gathered at this pool. The story about an angel stirring the waters may reflect local folklore that was initially added as a marginal note to explain the cultural context. Later, when manuscripts needed to be recopied, these marginal notes were accidentally incorporated into the main text (an interpolation).

John 5:25 — And It Is Now

Certainty Level: Good

‘and it is now’

These words create a self-contradiction in Jesus’ statement about the hour that ‘is coming’ by claiming it is also happening ‘now.’ The contradiction suggests a later addition.

Present in most translations.

Evidence

Missing from the Codex Sinaiticus.
Creates a logical contradiction between ‘is coming’ and ‘is now’.
Shows characteristics of explanatory additions.
Breaks the flow of Jesus’ prophetic statement.

Historical Context

Early Christian teachers often added explanatory notes to help their congregations understand that prophecies were being fulfilled in their own time. In this case, a teacher likely added a marginal note to suggest the prophecy was already beginning to be fulfilled. Later, when the manuscript needed to be recopied, this marginal note was accidentally incorporated into the main text (an interpolation).

John 5:53 — And Everyone Went Home

Certainty Level: Good

‘And every man went to his own home.’

This brief concluding statement appears to be a later addition to provide a natural break in the narrative. It’s missing from our oldest and most trusted manuscripts.

Present in some translations but removed from many modern ones.

Evidence

Missing from Codex Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, and Alexandrinus.
Absent from the Aramaic text.
Creates an unnecessary break in the narrative flow.
Shows characteristics of explanatory additions.

Historical Context

Early Christian teachers often added transitional phrases to help break up long passages for public reading. This verse could have begun as a marginal note to give a more satisfying end to public readings. Later, when the manuscript needed to be recopied, this marginal note was accidentally incorporated into the main text (an interpolation).

John 8:1-11 — Woman Caught in Adultery (Pericope Adulterae)

Certainty Level: High

Jesus went to the mount of Olives.

And early in the morning, he again went into the temple, and all the people came to him. He then sat down and taught them.

Then the scribes and Pharisees brought to him a woman who was found committing adultery. After they’d presented her to everyone, they say to him:

‘Master, this woman was found committing adultery, caught in act! Now, in the Law, Moses commanded us that such a person should be stoned [to death]; but what do you say?’

They asked this to trap him, so they might get [something] to accuse him with. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as if he hadn’t heard them. So when they continued asking him, he lifted himself up, and said to them:

‘Whoever among you that has no sin, let him be the first one throw a stone at her.’

And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground. And those who heard him, being convicted by their own conscience, went away, one by one; first the oldest, right up to the last one. Then Jesus was left alone, with the woman standing there.

When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw nobody except the woman, he said to her:

‘Woman, where are your accusers? Has anyone condemned you?’

She said:

‘No one, Lord.’

And Jesus said unto her:

‘Neither do I condemn you. Go, and don’t sin anymore.’

This famous story, known as the Pericope Adulterae, is widely regarded as a later addition to John’s Gospel. While the story itself may preserve a genuine tradition about Jesus, the textual evidence strongly suggests it was not originally part of John’s account.

Present in nearly all translations, but often marked with brackets or footnotes indicating doubt about authenticity.

Evidence

Missing from Codex Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, and Alexandrinus.
Absent from the Aramaic text.
Shows manuscript instability - appears in different locations, with some manuscripts placing it in Luke’s Gospel instead.
Creates a narrative discontinuity - before and after this passage Jesus is speaking to the same group of Pharisees, yet this account implies a day has passed in between.
Writing style differs from John’s usual manner.

Historical Context

Early Christian teachers likely preserved this story as an oral tradition about Jesus’ mercy and wisdom. It could be genuine, just not original to John’s Gospel.

It may have begun as a marginal note in a manuscript of John’s Gospel, perhaps added to illustrate Jesus’ teaching about not judging others. Later, when manuscripts needed to be recopied, this marginal note was accidentally incorporated into the main text (an interpolation).

The story’s movement between different locations in various manuscripts suggests that early scribes were uncertain about where it belonged.

John 21:25 — Not Enough Books in the World

Certainty Level: Good

‘And there are many other things that Jesus did, and if they were all written down, I suppose that even the world itself couldn’t contain the books that would be written. Amen.’

This dramatic concluding statement appears to be a later addition attempting to emphasize the vastness of Jesus’ unrecorded works through hyperbole. It’s missing from our oldest and most trusted manuscripts.

Present in most translations.

Evidence

Missing from Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus.
Uses hyperbolic language not characteristic of John’s usual style.
Creates an illogical statement (even if meant metaphorically).
Shows characteristics of concluding flourishes often added by later scribes.

Historical Context

Early Christian teachers often added dramatic conclusions to emphasize the importance of their texts. In this case, a teacher likely added a marginal note expressing the impossibility of recording all of Jesus’ works. Later, when the manuscript needed to be recopied, this marginal note was accidentally incorporated into the main text (an interpolation).

In Acts

Acts 7:16 — The Confused Burials

Certainty Level: High

‘And their bodies were taken to Shechem, where they were laid in the tomb that Abraham had purchased with silver from the sons of Hamor in Shechem.’

This verse appears to be a confused combination of two separate burial accounts from Genesis, containing multiple factual errors and breaking the chronological flow of Stephen’s speech.

Present in all major translations.

Evidence

Multiple manuscript families contradict each other in both wording and meaning.
Greek sources say ‘they’ were buried, while Aramaic says ‘he’ was buried.
Contains factual errors: Abraham did not buy the tomb in Shechem (Jacob did, according to Genesis 33:18-19).
Some manuscripts say ‘in Shechem’ while others say ‘of Shechem’ (as if Shechem were a person).
Creates a chronological break in Stephen’s otherwise sequential historical account.
First-century historian Josephus only mentions burials at Hebron, not Shechem.
Removing the verse improves the narrative flow.

Historical Context

Early Christian teachers often added explanatory notes about Old Testament events. In this case, a teacher likely confused two separate burial accounts: Jacob’s burial in Hebron (in the cave Abraham bought) and Joseph’s later burial in Shechem (in land Jacob bought). This confused note was probably written in the margin or between lines, before being accidentally incorporated into the main text (an interpolation).

Acts 8:37 — ‘If You Believe It with All Your Heart…’

Certainty Level: High

And Philip said:

‘If you believe it with all your heart, you may.’

And he answered and said:

‘I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.’

Known as the ‘Confession of the Ethiopian Eunuch’, these words, while expressing genuine Christian belief, appears to be a later addition to the story of Philip and the Ethiopian eunuch. It’s missing from all early manuscripts and ancient translations.

Present in the KJV but removed from most modern translations.

Evidence

Missing from all early manuscripts of Acts.
Absent from all ancient translations.
Shows characteristics of liturgical additions.
Creates a break in the narrative flow.

Historical Context

This addition likely began as a baptismal formula used in early Christian communities. A teacher probably added it as a marginal note to explain what kind of confession was expected before baptism. The words entered Western European Bibles only after the 15^th century AD when scholar Erasmus found them scribbled in the margin of a manuscript and included them in his Greek New Testament (an interpolation).

Acts 9:5-6 — Duplicate Kicking

Certainty Level: High

‘It’s hard for you to kick against the cattle prods.’ And he, trembling and astonished, said, ‘Lord, what would you have me do?’ And the Lord said to him:’

These words are a combination of two genuine accounts of Paul’s conversion from later in Acts (Acts 22:10 and Acts 26:14). These words, in this location, are not found in any ancient manuscripts.

Removed from most modern translations. Present in the KJV.

Evidence

Found in no ancient manuscripts whatsoever.
Only present in Western Bibles.
Appears to be copied and combined from Acts 22:10 and Acts 26:14.
Only entered Western European Bibles in the 15^th century AD through the theologian Erasmus.
Creates an unnecessary interruption in the narrative flow.

Historical Context

These words were inserted into Western Bibles through the work of the 15th-century Dutch scholar Erasmus, who combined elements from Paul’s later retellings of his conversion experience.

Acts 13:42 — The Added Synagogue Details

Certainty Level: High

‘…the Jews … the Synagogue … the Gentiles…’

These words appear to be later clarifications about who was present at the synagogue meeting. They’re missing from all manuscripts prior to the 9^th century AD.

Present in most translations.

Evidence

Missing from every manuscript prior to the 9^th century AD.
Shows characteristics of explanatory additions.
Creates an unnecessary interruption in the narrative flow.
Has been used to support doctrinal arguments that the original text doesn’t support.

Historical Context

This is an extremely late addition; it’s not clear why it was added.

Some modern groups have used these spurious words to argue that Gentile Christians should worship on the Sabbath, since the added text places Gentiles in the synagogue.

Acts 15:34 — The Added Silas Detail

Certainty Level: Good

‘However, it seemed good to Silas to remain there.’

This brief note about Silas’s decision appears to be a later addition attempting to explain why only Judas returned to Jerusalem. While the information may be historically accurate, it’s missing from our earliest manuscripts.

Present in the KJV but removed from most modern translations.

Evidence

Missing from all the oldest manuscripts.
Absent from several ancient translations.
Shows significant variation between manuscripts - some add ‘and Judas traveled alone’ or ‘to Jerusalem.’
Shows characteristics of explanatory additions.

Historical Context

Early Christian teachers often added explanatory notes to help their congregations understand the movements of various characters in Acts. In this case, a teacher likely added a marginal note to explain why Silas stayed behind while Judas returned alone. Later, when the manuscript needed to be recopied, this marginal note was accidentally incorporated into the main text (an interpolation).

Acts 23:9 — The Added Warning About Fighting God

Certainty Level: High

‘Let us not fight against God.’

These words, while expressing a genuine sentiment found elsewhere in Acts 5:39, appear to be a later addition to the Pharisees’ statement about Paul. They’re missing from all manuscripts prior to the 9^th century AD.

Present in the KJV but removed from most modern translations.

Evidence

Missing from all manuscripts prior to the 9^th century AD.
Likely copied from Acts 5:39.

Historical Context

This is an extremely late addition; it’s not clear why it was added.

Acts 24:6-8 — The Added Details About Lysias

Certainty Level: Good

‘…and would have judged according to our law. But the chief captain, Lysias, came upon us, and with great violence took him away out of our hands, commanding his accusers to come to you…’

These additional details about Claudius Lysias’s intervention appear to be a later addition explaining the events. While the information may be historically accurate, it’s missing from our earliest manuscripts.

Present in the KJV but removed from most modern translations.

Evidence

Missing from all the oldest manuscripts.
Shows variations in wording between manuscripts that include it.
Shows characteristics of explanatory additions.

Historical Context

Early Christian teachers often added explanatory notes to provide historical context for their congregations. In this case, a teacher likely added details about Lysias’s intervention that were known through tradition. Later, when the manuscript needed to be recopied, this marginal note was accidentally incorporated into the main text (an interpolation).

Acts 28:29 — The Jews Left, Arguing Among Themselves

Certainty Level: Good

‘And when he had said these words, the Jews left, and greatly arguing among themselves.’

This brief concluding statement about the Jews’ departure appears to be a later addition to provide narrative closure. While the description may be historically accurate, it’s missing from our earliest manuscripts.

Present in the KJV but removed from most modern translations.

Evidence

Missing from all the oldest manuscripts.
Absent from many ancient translations.
Shows characteristics of explanatory additions.
Creates an unnecessary break in the narrative flow.

Historical Context

Early Christian teachers often added explanatory notes to provide narrative closure or to explain what happened next. In this case, a teacher likely added a marginal note to describe the Jews’ reaction to Paul’s words. It may have worked better in public readings. Later, when the manuscript needed to be recopied, this marginal note was accidentally incorporated into the main text (an interpolation).

In Romans

Romans 11:6 — But If It Be of Works

Certainty Level: Good

‘But if it be of works, then it is no more grace; otherwise work is no more work.’

This apparent clarification of Paul’s teaching about grace versus works appears to be a later addition, possibly copied from similar statements elsewhere in Romans.

Present in most translations.

Evidence

Missing from the Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus.
Creates an unnecessary repetition of Paul’s teaching about grace versus works.
Shows characteristics of explanatory additions.

Historical Context

Early Christian teachers often added explanatory notes to help their congregations understand passages. Later, when the manuscript needed to be recopied, this marginal note was accidentally incorporated into the main text (an interpolation).

Romans 16:24-27 — The Long-Winded Ending

Certainty Level: Good (verse 24), Fair (verses 25-27)

²⁴ So may the loving care of our Lord Jesus the Anointed One be with you all. Amen.

²⁵ Now, to the One that can make you strong in the good news that I declare through my preaching about Jesus the Anointed One and about the revelation of the mystery that has remained a secret through the ages, ²⁶ but which have now been made known through the prophetic scriptures and which is being seen among all the nations by the command of the God of ageless time to promote obedience by faith; ²⁷ Yes, to God who is the only truly wise One, be the glory through Jesus (the Anointed) through the ages. May it be so.

This very wordy and flowery ending appears to be a later addition, possibly created in the 2^nd century AD. While verse 24 shows strong evidence of being spurious, the evidence for verses 25-27 is less certain.

Present in all major translations, though some modern versions omit verse 24.

Evidence

Verse 24 is missing from all the oldest manuscripts.
Verse 24 shows significant variations between manuscripts - some omit ‘Christ’ or ‘Amen.’
Verse 24 largely duplicates verse 20 of the same chapter.
The position of verse 24 varies, sometimes appearing after verse 27.
Verse 25 appears after verse 14 in some manuscripts.
Fifteen different versions of these verses exist in various manuscripts.
Contains unique phrases not found elsewhere in Paul’s writings, such as ‘God of ageless time’ and ‘obedience by faith.’
Creates an unnecessary second ending after the complete goodbye in verses 20-23.
Shows different writing style from Paul’s usual manner.

Historical Context

Around AD 144, Marcion, founder of the Marcionite sect, removed chapters 15 and 16 from Romans and placed a version of these words at the end of chapter 14. Marcion was later excommunicated for his Gnostic-like beliefs that Jesus’ Father was different from the God of the Old Testament. He may have taken offense to Romans 15:20 or 16:17-18, leading him to remove these chapters and create a new ending.

Even if the sentiments expressed by the words are true, that’s irrelevant to whether the words are original to Paul’s letter, and it seems they probably are not.

This is the first of two suspected interpolations of Paul’s letters by the Marcionites. The second is the addition of the verse talking about baptism for the dead.

In 1 Corinthians

1 Corinthians 14:34-35 — The Silencing of Women

Certainty Level: Good

³⁴ The women should remain silent in the congregation… they shouldn’t be allowed to speak out. Rather (as the Law says), they should be submissive. ³⁵ And if they wish to know something, let them ask their men [when they get] home; for it’s disgraceful for a woman to speak out in a congregation.

These verses, while present in all manuscripts, show signs of being a possible later addition. They directly contradict Paul’s own instructions about women speaking in church and contain a false claim about what the Law says.

Present in all major translations, though some modern versions include footnotes about manuscript variations in placement.

Evidence

Shows manuscript instability — appears at the end of chapter 14 in some manuscripts.
Directly contradicts Paul’s own instructions about women prophesying in church (1 Corinthians 11:5, 13).
Contains a factual error by claiming the Law requires women’s silence (no such law exists), which one would expect Paul to know.
Creates a break in Paul’s discussion about orderly worship.
Removing these verses allows the passage to flow more naturally.

Historical Context

Early Christian teachers, perhaps those influenced by Greek and Roman cultural norms about women’s roles, likely added marginal notes reflecting their own cultural views. The fact that these verses appear in different locations in different manuscripts is a classic sign that they began as marginal notes before being accidentally incorporated into the main text (an interpolation).

1 Corinthians 15:29 — Baptized For the Dead

Certainty Level: Good

‘Also, if none of the dead will be raised, then what will those who are baptized for the dead do? Yes, why are they baptized for the dead?’

This unique verse appears to refer to a practice of baptizing living people on behalf of dead people — something completely foreign to early Christian teaching and practice. While there’s no manuscript evidence against it (our oldest manuscripts of 1 Corinthians are from the 4^th century AD), historical context suggests this may be a Marcionite interpolation.

Present in all translations.

Evidence

Contains a practice (baptism for the dead) found nowhere else in scripture.
Contradicts basic Christian teaching about baptism requiring faith and repentance.
Shows characteristics of Gnostic influence.
Creates a break in Paul’s logical argument about resurrection.

Historical Context

The Marcionites, a 2nd-century sect founded by Marcion of Sinope, were known for two things: they promoted Paul’s letters as scripture (making copies and distributing them), and they practiced baptism for the dead. This verse may have begun as a marginal note by a Marcionite teacher, before being accidentally incorporated into the main text (an interpolation), or it may have been deliberately added to the text to support their beliefs. We don’t know.

The Marcionites operated in both Greek and Aramaic-speaking regions (Marcion himself was from Pontus in modern Turkey), explaining why this addition appears in both Greek and Aramaic manuscripts. Their role in preserving and distributing Paul’s letters made them uniquely positioned to accidentally (or deliberately) introduce interpolations into the text.

This is the second suspected corruption of Paul’s letters by the Marcionites. The first was the removal of chapters 15 and 16 from Romans and the addition of a new ending at the end of chapter 14, now erroneously placed at the end of chapter 16 in modern Bibles.

Could there be other fake additions by Marcion? Perhaps, but not very likely. Paul had a very strong personality and a distinctive writing style. A sudden change of style (as happens at the end of Romans) or a completely unexpected statement that doesn’t make sense (like in this verse) is easy to spot.

In Colossians

Colossians 1:14 — The Duplicated Blood Reference

Certainty Level: High

‘through his blood’

These words appear to be borrowed from Ephesians 1:7, where they are genuine. They’re missing from our oldest and most reliable manuscripts.

Present in the KJV but removed from most modern translations.

Evidence

Missing from all the oldest manuscripts.
Identical to Ephesians 1:7, where the words are genuine.
Shows characteristics of scribal harmonization between letters.
Creates an unnecessary repetition of Paul’s teaching.

Historical Context

Early Christian teachers often added cross-references to similar passages as study aids. In this case, a teacher likely noted the parallel teaching from Ephesians in the margin of Colossians. Later, when the manuscript needed to be recopied, this marginal note was accidentally incorporated into the main text (an interpolation).

In 1 John

1 John 5:7-8 — ‘These Three are One’ (Johannine Comma)

Certainty Level: As high as it gets

‘For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.’

This text is the most famous and well-documented spurious verse in all of Bible history.

It isn’t found in any early Greek manuscripts. It first appeared in Latin manuscripts during the Middle Ages, likely as a marginal note that later got incorporated into the main text. The addition also breaks John’s logical flow about the three earthly witnesses of Jesus (water, spirit, and blood).

Found only in the King James Version and the New King James Version. All other modern translations remove it.

Evidence

Missing from every ancient Greek, Aramaic, Syriac, Slavic, Georgian, Coptic, and Arabic manuscript.
Were first inserted into the Latin Vulgate Bible sometime in the early AD 500s.
Missing from the oldest Latin Vulgate manuscripts (Codex Fuldensis and Codex Amiatinus).
Doesn’t appear in any Greek manuscript until the 14th-15^th century AD (1,400 years after John wrote).
One 10th-century manuscript contains it, but analysis shows that someone added them during the 19^th century.
Shows three significant variants between manuscripts that include it.
Not quoted by early Church fathers, even when collecting Trinity ‘proof texts’.
Missing from Clement of Alexandria’s quotation of these verses.
First appears in the 4th-century sermon Liber Apologeticus by the Roman nobleman Priscillian of Ávila (AD 340-385).
Creates an illogical break in John’s discussion of the three earthly witnesses.

Historical Context

These words began as a marginal note in Latin manuscripts, possibly reflecting theological developments during Trinitarian debates. The Catholic Church later incorporated them into the Latin Vulgate, though they were absent from Jerome’s original translation. A supposed quote from Jerome mentioning these words is now believed to be from a later impostor.

This is easily the most well-known spurious addition to the Bible, with entire books written about it. Even several modern Catholic translations now omit it, including the Jerusalem Bible and New American Bible. Scholars refer to this addition as the Johannine Comma.

In Revelation

Revelation 1:11 — An Extra Alpha and Omega

Certainty Level: High

‘I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last’

These words appear to be copied from elsewhere in Revelation where they are genuine. The addition may reflect early Modalist theological biases (a precursor to the Trinity, which came later).

Present in the KJV but removed from most modern translations.

Evidence

Missing from the majority of Greek manuscripts.
Absent from all Aramaic manuscript families.
Shows characteristics of harmonization with other passages in Revelation.
Creates an unnecessary repetition of Jesus’ titles.

Historical Context

Early Christian teachers, particularly those engaged in theological debates about the nature of Christ, often added cross-references to similar passages as study aids. In this case, a teacher likely noted the parallel passage from Revelation 22:13 where it appears that Jesus applies these titles to Himself, although he may have been speaking on God’s behalf.

Later, when the manuscript needed to be recopied, this marginal note was accidentally incorporated into the main text (an interpolation).

Revelation 5:13 — Under the Ground

Certainty Level: Suspicious

‘under the ground’

This phrase does not appear in our source manuscript, the very ancient Codex Sinaiticus. It may be a later interpolation, originally a marginal note by a preacher.

It may have been added to the text to support a particular interpretation that the dead were also praising the lamb, Jesus. On the other hand, it may just have been missed out by mistake. However, the Sinaiticus went through proofreading (we can see the corrections made by the scribe), and the phrase was not inserted, despite the scribal proofreading generally being extremely thorough.

Evidence

Missing from the Codex Sinaiticus, perhaps our oldest copy of Revelation.
The proofreading scribe did not attempt to insert the phrase.
Shows characteristics of explanatory additions.

Historical Context

As beliefs in the immortal soul spread from the 2^nd century onward, some preachers may have, out of necessity, wished to mention that the souls must also have been praising the little lamb, Jesus, as their omission may have been viewed as contradicting their viewpoint.

Early Christian teachers often added explanatory notes to clarify the meaning of passages. Later, when manuscripts needed to be recopied, these marginal notes were accidentally incorporated into the main text (an interpolation).

Revelation 6:4 — The Peace Removed From the Earth

Certainty Level: Suspicious

‘peace from the earth’

This phrase does not appear in our source manuscript, the very ancient Codex Sinaiticus. It may be a later interpolation, originally a marginal note by a preacher. Since it merely clarifies the (very likely correct) meaning of the verse, it doesn’t matter much.

Since the Sinaiticus is unique in missing this out, it’s possible that the words are original and should be there, and were merely accidentally left out of this manuscript. However, the Sinaiticus also went through several rounds of proofreading and correction by multiple scribes, and not one of them added the phrase. Evidently, none of them thought anything was missing.

So we don’t know, we only have suspicions.

Evidence

Missing from the Codex Sinaiticus.
No evidence of any attempt to add it by multiple proofreading scribes.
Shows characteristics of explanatory additions.

Historical Context

Revelation 16:11 — The Added Sores and Deeds

Certainty Level: Fair

‘of their sores … of their deeds’

These brief clarifying phrases appear to be later additions to specify what the people were blaspheming about.

Present in most translations.

Evidence

Missing from the Codex Sinaiticus.
Shows characteristics of explanatory additions.

Historical Context

Early Christian teachers often added explanatory notes to clarify the reasons for people’s actions. Later, when manuscripts needed to be recopied, these marginal notes were accidentally incorporated into the main text (an interpolation).

Revelation 16:17 — The Added Throne Detail

Certainty Level: Good

‘from (before) the throne’

This brief phrase shows significant variation between manuscripts, with some also adding ‘before’ and others omitting the phrase entirely.

Present in most translations.

Evidence

Missing from the Codex Sinaiticus.
Shows variation between manuscripts, with some adding ‘before’.
Shows characteristics of explanatory additions.

Historical Context

Early Christian teachers likely added marginal notes to clarify where the voice was coming from. The variation in wording suggests multiple scribes trying to clarify the same point. Later, when manuscripts needed to be recopied, these marginal notes were accidentally incorporated into the main text (an interpolation).

Revelation 18:12-13 — The Missing Marble and Amomum

Certainty Level: Suspicious

‘marble … amomum’

Usually, ‘amomum’ is translated as ‘spice’ or ‘cardamom’.

These two items don’t appear in our source manuscript, the very ancient Codex Sinaiticus. It may be a later interpolation, originally a marginal note by a preacher. We don’t know.

Present in most translations.

Evidence

Missing from the Codex Sinaiticus, but present in Codex Vaticanus.
Another item on the list, ‘marble’, was removed by a proofreader, which suggests the scribes were working from older, now lost, manuscripts.

Historical Context

The Sinaiticus has several differences from other manuscripts, with many corrections made by proofreading scribes. The vast majority of these corrections are things we’d agree with and things that make sense, so when they correct the text in an unexpected way, it’s worth seriously considering if they knew something we don’t.

Revelation 18:22 — Millstone Heard No More

Certainty Level: Good

‘of whatsoever craft he be … and the stone of a millstone shall be heard no more at all in thee’

These phrases appear to be later additions expanding on the types of craftsmen and sounds that would cease in Babylon.

Present in most translations.

Evidence

Missing from the Codex Sinaiticus.
Absent from the Aramaic texts.
Shows characteristics of explanatory additions.
Creates unnecessary repetition in the list of judgments.

Historical Context

Early Christian teachers often added explanatory notes to expand biblical lists for completeness or emphasis. Later, when manuscripts needed to be recopied, these marginal notes were accidentally incorporated into the main text (an interpolation).

Revelation 20:2 — For 1,000 Years, And Threw Him

Certainty Level: Suspicious

‘…for 1,000 years, and threw him…’

This is an additional mention of the 1,000 years, meaning that most Bibles show three mentions of it. However, this first mention does not appear in our source manuscript, the very ancient Codex Sinaiticus. It may be a later interpolation, originally a marginal note by a preacher. We don’t know.

It doesn’t really make any difference to the text whether it’s included or not; the flow of the passage doesn’t really change in meaning.

Evidence

Missing from the Codex Sinaiticus.
May show characteristics of explanatory additions or an attempt to harmonize the text.

Historical Context

It’s common to see little marginal notes here and there attempting to clarify the text or create a harmony. These are sometimes accidentally copied into the main text (an interpolation).

Revelation 20:5 — The Rest of the Dead Didn’t Come to Life

Certainty Level: High

‘The rest of the dead didn’t come to life until the end of the thousand years’

This statement about the timing of the second resurrection appears to be a later addition attempting to clarify the sequence of events in John’s vision. However, the words were likely added over 400 years after Revelation was written.

Present in most translations.

Evidence

Missing from the Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus.
Absent from the Aramaic texts.
Creates a chronological break in the narrative flow.
Shows characteristics of explanatory additions.

Historical Context

There has always been great interest in the chronology of the end times, and in some people’s interpretations, they decided that some resurrections would occur at the end of the ‘thousand years’. It seems that these words may have been added to Revelation to support that interpretation.

Were the words originally a marginal note accidentally moved into the main text (an interpolation) upon copying? Or were they deliberately inserted into the text by some group to support their doctrine? We don’t know. All we know is that they’re not found in any of the earlier manuscripts, nor the Aramaic version, and were added centuries after Revelation was written.

Revelation 21:6 — ‘It has been accomplished!’

Certainty Level: Suspicious

‘It has been accomplished!’

This was deleted by a proofreader in the Sinaiticus manuscript. This suggests they knew something we don’t, such as it not being present in older manuscripts. However, without anything more to go on, we can’t be sure.

Present in most translations.

Evidence

Missing from the Codex Sinaiticus.
Could, perhaps, show characteristics of explanatory additions.

Historical Context

It may have reflected the view of a preacher that at this point in the text, all the important events had happened. So it could have been a note to remind himself at what point he believed that to be.

Revelation 22:2 — ‘Tree of Life’

Certainty Level: Suspicious

‘Tree of Life’

This phrase does not appear in this verse in our source manuscript, the very ancient Codex Sinaiticus. It does appear elsewhere, just not in this particular verse.

Here, it may be a later interpolation, originally a marginal note by a preacher. The odd grammar of it would support this idea, since it hardly flows well.

Present in most translations.

Evidence

Missing from the Codex Sinaiticus.
Creates some odd grammar, removing it makes it flow better.
Shows characteristics of explanatory additions.

Historical Context

A preacher may have interpreted the fruits and the leaves as describing what the ‘Tree of Life’ from Genesis 2:9 was producing, also linking it with the other mentions of it in Revelation, and then wrote ‘Tree of Life’ here as a marginal note to remind himself of this.

However, with so little manuscript evidence, we can’t be sure. We mark it as possibly spurious in our translation to bring the possibility to your attention.

Chapters

Verses

Display Mode

Typeface

CamelCase names

Text Subheadings

Illustrations

God’s Name Circumlocutions

Name of God’s Son

Menu

Texts