Mark 7:16, “if anyone has ears to hear, let him hear”
Mark 7:16 is missing from some modern Bibles because textual witnesses differ: Westcott-Hort and NA28 continue without the call to hear, while Robinson-Pierpont includes it. The APB prints the refrain in brackets.
The APB text at this verse
The manuscripts, editions, and versions
The committee record at this verse
The APB is translated by a committee of language models that works blind. The translators are never told they are translating the Bible, never given a book name or a verse number, and never shown the witnesses listed above. Where the manuscripts disagree, the choice between readings is made before translation by the same kind of translator working the same way: it sees the competing readings and the witnesses by age and class, but never a reference or a manuscript name. There are 14,877 such places. For APB 4.0 every one was decided again in October 2026. GPT-6.1 Sol decided every one first. Claude Fable 5.1, from another model family, decided 2,483 of them second, including every place where the first translator left the base text. A departure from the base text needs both translators to agree and the first to be at least 0.8 confident. There is no third translator, so the base text stands when the two disagree. APB 4.0 is translated over those decisions. Whatever was done at this verse was done on the language and the evidence alone, and the record is public.
Mark 7:16: set in brackets as a disputed passage, wording kept.
“The base text reads ὃς ἔχει. The copies also carry αὐτοῖς· [later majority tradition], the omission [greek majuscule; later majority tradition]; the committee kept the base text. The default has the strongest supplied evidence.”
“The base text reads Ὃς ἔχει. The copies also carry Ὃ ἔχων [greek majuscule; later majority tradition]; the committee kept the base text. The early manuscript and citation classes favor the default, though their exact independence is unspecified.”
“The base text reads ἐκ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐκπορευόμενά. The copies also carry ἐκ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐκπορευόμενά ἐκεῖνά [early greek manuscript tradition], ἐκπορευόμενα ἀπʼ αὐτοῦ ἐκεῖνά [greek majuscule; later majority tradition]; the committee kept the base text. The repetitive wording is original and the others polish it. Support for it is early and broad.”
“The base text reads ἄνθρωπον. The copies also carry ἄνθρωπον 16 Εἴ τις ἔχει ὦτα ἀκούειν ἀκουέτω [early greek manuscript tradition; later majority tradition]; the committee kept the base text. The addition is early, but the broader support and plausible expansion favor the default.”
“The base text reads ἐκ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐκπορευόμενά. The copies also carry ἐκπορευόμενά ἀπ᾽ ἐκεῖνά [later majority tradition], ἐκπορευόμενά ἀπ᾽ αὐτοῦ ἐκεῖνά [greek majuscule; later majority tradition], ἐκ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐκπορευόμενά ἐκεῖνά [greek majuscule; early greek manuscript tradition]; the committee kept the base text. The earliest broad support and plausible expansions favor the default.”
The APB 4.0 committee kept the wording of Mark 7:16 and set it in brackets as a disputed passage. Its textual decision retained the base text without the refrain and explained: "The addition is early, but the broader support and plausible expansion favor the default." GPT-6.1 Sol (OpenAI) served as the first translator, and Claude Fable 5.1 (Anthropic) served as the second translator. The committee's printed text preserves the entire sentence in brackets.
The argument for each reading
If the refrain echoed in
The case for moving directly from verse 15 to verse 17 rests on both textual support and a possible explanation for the refrain's presence. Westcott-Hort and NA28 do not have the sentence at this point. The teaching can continue without an added call to hear: verse 15 has already stated the contrast between what enters a person and what comes out.
The parallels in Mark 4:9 and Mark 4:23 offer a possible route for expansion. A familiar saying could have been repeated at another fitting point. That possibility explains how the longer reading might have arisen; it does not establish that the refrain was added.
If Mark wrote it here
The case for including the refrain begins with its presence in the textual tradition. Robinson-Pierpont Byzantine Textform includes it as verse 16, and Tregelles also includes it. The committee's textual note acknowledges that the addition is early, so the case cannot be reduced to a contrast between early absence and late presence.
The sentence also fits the immediate setting. Jesus has called the crowd to listen and understand, and the refrain renews that appeal after the teaching about uncleanness. Its parallels in Mark 4:9 and Mark 4:23 make repetition plausible within the book. That fit supports taking the longer reading seriously, although it also leaves room for the expansion proposed by the other case.
The uncertainty concerns the refrain's place in this passage. Its familiarity can support two explanations: Jesus repeats the appeal, or the saying enters the passage through textual expansion. The editions establish a difference in wording but cannot by themselves settle its history. The teaching about uncleanness remains in verse 15 with either reading, and the call to hear remains in Mark 4:9 and Mark 4:23.
Related entries
Witness readings for critical editions are quoted from the SBLGNT apparatus (CC BY 4.0); Hebrew text from the Westminster Leningrad Codex (Open Scriptures Hebrew Bible). Readings of ancient manuscripts and versions are cited from the sources linked above.