John 5:4 — the angel who troubled the water
Modern Bibles using Reading A omit the angel stirring the pool, while Reading B includes it. NA28 ends verse 3 after ξηρῶν; RP carries the fuller explanation.
What the APB prints.
Every witness, on the record.
What a blind committee did here.
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. Whatever it did at this verse, it did on the language alone — and its record is public.
“Included from the Faithlife/SBLGNT apparatus at John 5:3 as a traditional verse addition. Witnesses: RP.”
The blind committee record labels the item as a textual supplement and states: "Included from the Faithlife/SBLGNT apparatus at John 5:3 as a traditional verse addition." Its note identifies RP as the witness. For the pericope, the recorded audit verdict is clean.
The case for each reading.
If the angel is a gloss
Reading A ends the description at ξηρῶν: the sick are present, but the text gives no explanation for the water’s movement. NA28, identified here as a critical edition, reads this shorter form, and the packet says the critical editions end verse 3 there. The longer material adds waiting for the movement, the angel’s descent, the stirring, and the first person’s healing. The supplied difference describes that expansion as a scribe’s helpful insertion of a legend assumed in the paralytic’s words in verse 7. On this account, verse 7 can retain the assumption without verse 3–4 spelling it out.
If the verse belongs
Reading B preserves the explanation that the sick were waiting for the water’s movement: an angel went down into the pool, stirred the water, and the first person to enter afterward became well. RP supports this reading and is described as carrying verses 3b-4 in full. The raw apparatus likewise places the longer wording after ξηρῶν and attributes it to RP. The APB prints the waiting clause in John 5:3 and the angel-and-healing account in John 5:4. In this reading, the paralytic’s words in verse 7 are accompanied by the explanation they assume.
The packet presents two forms: one leaves the water’s movement unexplained, and one supplies the angel-and-healing account. It does not settle between them. Either way, the paralytic’s words in verse 7 are said to assume the legend. This variation changes whether that explanation appears in John 5:3–4; it does not by itself decide doctrine, since doctrines rest on many passages.
Asked plainly.
Why do some Bibles leave out John 5:4?
They use Reading A, represented here by NA28, which ends verse 3 after ξηρῶν and does not include the explanation of the water’s movement.
What does the longer reading say?
Reading B says that an angel went down into the pool from time to time, stirred the water, and that the first person to enter afterward became well.
Which witness includes the angel at the pool?
RP supports Reading B and carries verses 3b-4 in full. NA28 supports Reading A, where the explanation is absent.
More places where the manuscripts argue.
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. Nothing on this page declares a winner — the evidence is the point.
Weigh it yourself.
The registry doesn't tell you which reading is true. It puts every witness on one page, shows what a blind committee did with the same language, and leaves the verdict where it belongs — with the reader.