Luke 3:22 - Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.

Steven Avery

Luke 3:22 (AV)
And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him,
and a voice came from heaven, which said,
Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.

Massive evidence for the pure Bible text.



Shown similarly massive on
Bruce Terry


Revision Revised
John William Burgon



This is Burgon's humorous classical ad hominem approach where he points out the inconsistency of the Revisionists. He did not have to defend the traditional text because the potential Hortian corruption was rejected.
Last edited:

Steven Avery


Grantley tries to be a mini-Ehrman

Facebook- Textus Receptus Academy

Let's take the example of Lk 3:22 (discussed by Ehrman on pp. 62–67). We find that the Apostolic fathers, later church writers (both Greek and Latin) and even some apocryphal authors usually quote the verse in the form "You are my Son, today I have begotten you". This reading is also transmitted in the Old Latin translation. The evidence of the early citations, preceding our earliest biblical manuscripts, suggests strongly that this is the original reading. It is attested from the Asia Minor to Spain. It is clearly a reminiscence of Scripture, namely Ps 2:7. In itself a citation from Scripture would seem to be a good thing. However, later sources cite the verse as "You are my beloved Son, in you I am well pleased." Faced with the existence of such variants, we must ask how they came about. This reading was evidently introduced to harmonise the passage with Mk 1:11, possibly even quite early in some places. (It is for example attested in the third-century manuscript 𝕻4. Scribes frequently harmonised passages in the synoptic Gospels to make them resemble each other more closely. This is an indisputable fact observable in lots of manuscripts. However, the reading "You are my Son, today I have begotten you" is problematic, because it seems inconsistent with the notion that Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit of the Virgin Mary. It could also lead to the suspicion that Jesus was adopted at the baptism. A simple harmonisation with Mark was all that was required to avoid both these difficulties. We needn't attribute evil motives to scribes who harmonised. They thought they were safeguarding orthodoxy. But the point remains that they did change the text.

James William Sheffield
Grantley Robert McDonald Did these Ninja scribes use pixie dust to fly around to change the majority of Apostolic Church texts?

And my response:

Steven Avery

Luke 3:22 (AV)
And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him,
and a voice came from heaven, which said,
Thou art my beloved Son;
in thee I am well pleased.

James William Sheffield - Grantley took a funny example, a bit similar to Mark 1:41. Virtually no support in the Greek mss. Not even Vaticanus. It would be hard to find it in any Greek or English NT editions (or Latin.)

Ehrman likes virtually-no-Greek, no Vulgate, early western readings on occasion, and this one has a special pizazz because it is supported by the Gospel of the Ebionites!

It has Bezae and a bit more, a piddle corruption in some Old Latin that was fixed by the Vulgate of Jerome.

Augustine even tells us that the early Greek mss. have " in thee I am well pleased", rather than the "begotten" text.

And the textcrit dupes really do not understand the basic dynamic of omission/inclusion verses.

How unlikely it would be to add text in many diverse far distant languages and lines.

Go Ninjas, Go!


Luke 3:22 - Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.
Last edited:

Steven Avery


The words of God the father at the baptism of Jesus according to most manuscripts:

Συ ει ο υιος μου ο αγαπητος· εν σοι ευδοκησα.
You are my beloved son. In you I am well pleased.

Compare Mark 1.11.

The words of God the father at the baptism of Jesus according to codex Bezae (D):

Υιος μου ει συ· εγω σημερον γεγεννηκα σε.
You are my son. I today have begotten you.

Steven Avery

Explicit References to New Testament Variant Readings Among Greek and Latin Church Fathers - Volume I
Amy Donaldson - p. 172-173

At Luke 3:22 (§65), Augustine appeals also to the age of the Greek MSS. In this context, he is comparing the words spoken from heaven at the baptism of Jesus in the various Synoptic accounts, explaining how their differences are not contradictory for our understanding of the event. However, there is one reading that does stand out as contradictory, which is a variant found in some copies (nonnulli codices [presumably Latin, but perhaps both Greek and Latin]) saying, “You are my Son, today I have begotten you.” He points out that this is not the reading found in the more ancient Greek copies (in antiquioribus codicibus Graecis); but, he adds, if the reading is found in any reputable manuscripts (si aliquibus fide dignis exemplaribus confirmari possit), then is must be given serious consideration as a second statement made at the baptism. Since, however, Augustine does not dwell on this reading, it seems that he is merely giving it a nod rather than serious consideration.

In Augustine‟s work on the Harmony of the Gospels, he frequently notes a variant in one of the Gospels when comparing the parallel accounts. While for Matt 10:3 (§23) and Mark 8:10 (§52) the variant appears simply to provide additional information alongside the Synoptic parallels (in both cases, Augustine determines that it is not problematic for a person or place to go by two different names), the variant in Luke 3:22(§65) seems to present yet another parallel reading that he must explain (he judges that the voice from heaven may have 240spoken more than one statement at the baptism of Jesus, if this reading is found in reliable MSS). p. 239-240

Similar in Part 2, p. 412-413


Metzger shows the Augustine usage


Last edited:

Steven Avery

Tommy Wassermans shows how Ehrman overrates the Luke 3:22 evidences for the ultra-minority text.

The Origen citation is a disaster,
the Justin reference is questionable,
Clement of Alexandria is a conflated reading
Ehrman simply ignored the powerful Augustine specific reference on early Greek mss.
and there is more.

Facebook - TRA


Misquoting Manuscripts? The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture Revisited
Tommy Wasserman

p. 334 - then in pages 335-337 Wasserman shows how Ehrman really skews the evidences.
Last edited: