John 7:53-8:11 — the woman caught in adultery
Reading A omits the story, while reading B includes it; the witnesses preserve both forms. At John 7:52, the question is whether the text moves directly onward or carries the account of the woman.
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 Faithlife/SBLGNT John.txt as part of the bracketed Pericope Adulterae supplement. Witnesses: Faithlife/SBLGNT v1.2, RP.”
The blind committee record identifies its work as a textual supplement and says the material was included from Faithlife/SBLGNT John.txt as part of a bracketed supplement. It lists Faithlife/SBLGNT v1.2 and RP as witnesses. Its audit verdict for the pericope is "flagged." That record describes an inclusion decision in the committee’s supplied source material; it does not settle the competing witness forms.
The case for each reading.
If it is a later insertion
Reading A points to the witness row for P66 P75 ℵ B, which says that the passage is absent and that these are the earliest witnesses to John. NA28 likewise has the text move from 7:52 directly to 8:12. Its row further states that none of the critical editions carry the passage as original text. The apparatus presents a form in which ἐγείρεται is followed without the added account. On this reading, the issue is not a small change in wording: the narrative about the woman is not present at this location. The stated difference also describes the story as absent from the earliest witnesses and as appearing in different later locations.
If the story belongs to John
Reading B is represented by RP, whose row says that 7:53–8:11 stands as Scripture and that the Byzantine text includes the story where English Bibles print it. The apparatus explicitly marks the addition after the variant at 7:52 and supplies the full narrative. Within that account appears Ὁ ἀναμάρτητος ὑμῶν, πρῶτον ἐπʼ αὐτὴν τὸν λίθον βαλέτω. This reading therefore preserves a continuous scene after the dialogue at 7:52: people depart, a woman is brought forward, accusations are made, and the scene concludes with an instruction to depart and not continue in sin. Its case rests on a textual form that contains the story at this place.
The packet establishes that the story is absent in one set of witnesses and present in another, but it does not provide a complete account of every manuscript or of how the differing locations developed. The immediate difference is whether this narrative appears here. The packet gives no basis for deciding a doctrine from the variant; doctrines rest on many passages, and this page records a textual question rather than a doctrinal verdict.
Asked plainly.
Is the story included in the Byzantine Textform?
Yes. RP reads 7:53–8:11 and says that the Byzantine text includes the story where English Bibles print it.
Why do some texts omit the story?
The packet says P66 P75 ℵ B lack the passage, and NA28 joins 7:52 directly to 8:12. Reading A therefore presents no story at this location.
What does the variant change?
It changes whether the narrative about the woman appears after 7:52. The packet describes the story as occurring in differing later locations, but does not provide grounds for a doctrinal conclusion.
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.