Mark 9:44 & 46: the refrain of the undying worm
They are missing or bracketed in some modern Bibles because Reading A has no refrain at 44 and 46, while Reading B repeats it three times. The difference concerns how often the warning is heard in Mark 9:42-50.
The APB text at this verse
The manuscripts, editions, and versions
The committee record at this verse
The APB's translation committee works blind: it is never told it is translating the Bible, never given a book name or a verse number, and it never sees the witnesses above. Since revision 3.5, the places where the manuscripts disagree are decided before translation by three readers, Grok 4.3, GPT-6 Astra, and Claude Fable 5.1, who see the readings and the witnesses by age and class but never a reference or a manuscript name. Whatever was done at this verse was done on the language and the evidence alone, and the record is public.
Mark 9:44-46: set in brackets as a disputed passage, wording kept.
“This passage is not in the earliest copies of the text. The committee judged it a later addition and keeps it in brackets rather than removing it. The default wording is set aside. The shorter text is better attested by early and independent copies, and the longer text is easily explained as an expansion drawn from the refrain that closes the series, added to make the sayings on hand, foot and eye match one another. A reader wanting the fullest liturgical form will find the clause in the later tradition, but as a matter of what another writing first wrote, the absence is the stronger judgment.”
“The base text reads σε. The copies also carry the omission [later majority tradition]; the committee kept the base text. default wording chosen because the external evidence is early and independent while the internal evidence does not favor omission”
“The base text reads (nothing). The copies also carry εἰς τὸ πῦρ τὸ ἄσβεστον. [greek majuscule; early greek manuscript tradition; later majority tradition]; the committee kept the base text. The default wording has substantially stronger early support and offers the more persuasive explanation of the alternative.”
“The base text reads σε. The copies also carry σοι [later majority tradition]; the committee kept the base text. Default wording σε is strongly supported by both external distribution and internal probability.”
“The base text reads γέενναν. The copies also carry εἰς τὸ πῦρ τὸ ἄσβεστον 46 ὅπου ὁ σκώληξ αὐτῶν οὐ τελευτᾷ καὶ τὸ πῦρ οὐ σβέννυται [early greek manuscript tradition; later majority tradition]; the committee kept the base text. Default wording chosen because the external evidence favors γέενναν and the internal evidence supports γέενναν as the source of εἰς τὸ πῦρ τὸ ἄσβεστον 46 ὅπου ὁ σκώληξ αὐτῶν οὐ τελευτᾷ καὶ τὸ πῦρ οὐ σβέννυται.”
“Included from the Faithlife/SBLGNT apparatus at Mark 9:45 as a traditional verse addition. Witnesses: Treg, RP.”
The committee's decision set Mark 9:44-46 in brackets as a disputed passage while keeping its wording on the page. Its note states, "This passage is not in the earliest copies of the text." It further records that the committee "judged it a later addition and keeps it in brackets rather than removing it." The committee's own record labels Mark 9:46 "Textual supplement: Mark 9:46" and identifies Treg and RP for the traditional verse addition. Its audit verdict for the pericope is "clean."
The argument for each reading
If the refrain sounded once
Reading A leaves verses 44 and 46 without the refrain, so that it sounds once, at verse 48. WH reads γέενναν at the crux and reports the refrain absent at 44 and 46; its description associates the single occurrence at verse 48 with the earliest witnesses. The SBLGNT apparatus likewise places WH and NA28 on the side of γέενναν, without the longer material that includes verse 46. On this presentation, the sequence retains the warnings concerning hand, foot, and eye, while the Isaiah refrain closes the series rather than recurring after each warning. The case is therefore about the placement and frequency of the refrain, not about removing the warning itself.
If it tolled three times
Reading B gives the warning a repeated cadence: ὅπου ὁ σκώληξ αὐτῶν οὐ τελευτᾷ appears at 44, 46, and 48. Treg prints the refrain at all three locations, and its witness description says that Treg and the Byzantine text repeat it after each warning. The SBLGNT apparatus records a longer form after γέενναν, including εἰς τὸ πῦρ τὸ ἄσβεστον 46 ὅπου ὁ σκώληξ αὐτῶν οὐ τελευτᾷ καὶ τὸ πῦρ οὐ σβέννυται. In this form, each warning is followed by the same fearful refrain, creating a matched pattern across the series.
The surviving presentation leaves a real question about whether the refrain belonged after each warning or only at verse 48. What changes is the shape and repetition of the warning in Mark 9:42-50. Both forms retain the warning language and the refrain at verse 48. This variant does not by itself decide a doctrine; doctrines ordinarily rest on many passages, while this crux concerns the wording and arrangement of one passage.
Common questions
Why do some Bibles skip Mark 9:44 and 46?
Some editions follow Reading A, where the refrain appears only at verse 48. Others follow Reading B, where it is repeated at 44, 46, and 48. The APB prints 44 and 46 in brackets.
What words are at issue in Mark 9:46?
The disputed refrain is ὅπου ὁ σκώληξ αὐτῶν οὐ τελευτᾷ. In the longer apparatus form, it is joined by καὶ τὸ πῦρ οὐ σβέννυται.
Does this variant remove the warning in Mark 9:45?
No. The dispute concerns the repeated refrain at 44 and 46. The warning at Mark 9:45 remains, though the apparatus also records differences involving σε, σοι, γέενναν, and a longer addition.
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 as published scholarly fact with their sources linked above. The page does not declare which reading is original.
The registry gives no verdict
The registry does not say which reading is original. Each page lists the witnesses, shows what the committee did with the same text, and leaves the judgment to the reader.