John 1:34, the Son of God, or the Chosen One?
John 1:34 is transmitted as “the Son of God” and “the Chosen One of God.” The Baptist’s testimony divides between ὁ υἱός and ὁ ἐκλεκτός.
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.
“The base text reads υἱὸς. The copies also carry the omission [greek majuscule; greek papyrus; early greek manuscript tradition]; the committee kept the base text. The evidence favors υἱὸς but the early support for the omission is not negligible so another reader would be welcome.”
“The base text reads ἐκλεκτὸς. The copies also carry υἱὸς [greek majuscule; greek papyrus; early greek manuscript tradition; later majority tradition]; the committee kept the base text. The evidence favors ἐκλεκτὸς, but the gap in attestation is not overwhelming, so a second reader would be welcome.”
The committee’s printed text for John 1:34 is Chosen One of God. Its 3.5 record, however, contains two textual-decision notes: one says the base text is υἱὸς, and another says ἐκλεκτὸς. The latter states, "The base text reads ἐκλεκτὸς. The copies also carry υἱὸς" and says the committee kept that base text. The pericope audit verdict is 'clean,' with no matching rationale note.
The argument for each reading
If “Chosen One”
The case for ὁ ἐκλεκτός begins with P5 ℵ*, dated 3rd-4th century A.D., which is listed for that reading. The SBL Greek New Testament (Holmes) also prints ἐκλεκτὸς, and its apparatus sets ἐκλεκτὸς with Holmes and WHmarg against υἱὸς with WH, Treg, NA28, and RP. The packet describes the early Egyptian evidence as carrying Chosen One and frames the scribal question this way: the competing title is one every scribe expected, while Chosen One is one almost none would invent. On that account, the reading’s unusual wording and its early support give the case its shape.
If “Son”
The case for ὁ υἱός rests on the stated alignment of NA28 with the Son reading and on the wider apparatus support listed for WH, Treg, NA28, and RP. NA28 is dated 2012 and prints υἱὸς; its witness row also associates Son with the Byzantine text. In the SBLGNT apparatus, υἱὸς stands as the alternative to Holmes and WHmarg, so the disagreement is plainly registered rather than concealed. The packet also describes Son as the title every scribe expected. That expectation belongs in the assessment because it explains why the titles may have moved toward a familiar form, even while the listed support for Son remains substantial.
Uncertainty remains because the supplied 3.5 record preserves decisions with different base readings, while the listed witnesses divide between the titles. The variant changes the Baptist’s climactic title in John 1:34: Chosen One or Son. It does not settle a doctrine here; most doctrines rest on many passages. The packet supplies no further rationale note for resolving the split.
Common questions
Does John 1:34 say Son or Chosen One?
The supplied witnesses divide: ὁ υἱός is the Son reading, while ὁ ἐκλεκτός is the Chosen One reading.
Which reading does the APB print in John 1:34?
The APB printed text reads Chosen One of God.
Why does the committee record contain two readings?
The supplied 3.5 record has two textual-decision notes with different base readings. It provides no matching rationale note for this crux.
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.