Luke 22:43-44: the angel and the bloody sweat
Whether the angel and sweat like drops of blood belong to Luke is disputed: Reading A includes the verses, while Reading B omits them. The witnesses preserve both a printed text and an omission.
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.
Luke 22:43-44: set in brackets as a disputed passage, wording kept.
“The base text reads ὤφθη δὲ … ἐπὶ τὴν γῆν. The copies also carry ⟦⟧ [greek majuscule; greek papyrus; early greek manuscript tradition]; the committee kept the base text. Evidence is close; another reader might reasonably prefer ⟦⟧.”
“The base text reads ἀπʼ. The copies also carry ἀπὸ τοῦ ⟦⟧ [greek majuscule; early greek manuscript tradition]; the committee kept the base text. The external evidence slightly favors ἀπὸ τοῦ ⟦⟧ because of its two early witnesses, yet the internal evidence favors ἀπʼ as the harder reading that best explains the rise of ἀπὸ τοῦ ⟦⟧. The balance is close, hence the modest confidence.”
“The base text reads καὶ ἐγένετο ⟦⟧. The copies also carry ἐγένετο δὲ [early greek manuscript tradition; later majority tradition]; the committee kept the base text. The evidence favors καὶ ἐγένετο ⟦⟧ but is not overwhelming because the early support for ἐγένετο δὲ is still early.”
“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 committee departed from the default because the earliest and most widespread copies here lack the passage and the habit of copyists to add rather than remove favors its later entry. Yet the split among the 2nd-4th c. AD witnesses is real, and a theologically motivated deletion of a scene showing weakness in Him cannot be excluded, so another reader should weigh this before treating the judgement as settled.”
In APB 3.5, the blind committee set Luke 22:43-44 in brackets while keeping its wording. Its decision says, "The committee judged it a later addition and keeps it in brackets rather than removing it." The note also says, "Evidence is close; another reader might reasonably prefer ⟦⟧." The readers had witnesses only by class and date, without a reference or manuscript names. The pericope's audit verdict is "clean."
The argument for each reading
If the verses are Luke's
Reading A is represented in the printed text of Tregelles, NA28, and the Byzantine text. In the supplied apparatus, Treg, NA28, and RP stand together for the passage, whereas WH encloses it in double brackets. The wording itself supplies a continuous scene in which an angel appears and strengthens Jesus, followed by intensified prayer and sweat like drops of blood. Westcott-Hort's double brackets do not erase the material from the apparatus; their treatment identifies it as an early tradition, even while describing it as non-Lukan. For those weighing A, the question is whether this transmitted and printed form belongs within Luke's account, rather than whether the scene was known in the textual tradition.
If they entered later
Reading B has the omission of Papyrus 75, Vaticanus, and others. Their row identifies Papyrus 75 as the earliest Luke papyrus and says that Vaticanus also lacks the verses. The committee's textual note similarly says that the passage is absent from the earliest copies and that the earliest and most widespread copies lack it. The report that some later manuscripts move the material into Matthew's Gethsemane also raises a question about the verses' placement in transmission. For B, the prayer scene proceeds from Luke 22:42 without the angel, the anguish, or the sweat imagery, and the omission is treated as a substantive alternative rather than a minor wording change.
The uncertainty concerns both the verses' presence and their location in the transmission: the packet reports omission in early witnesses and movement into Matthew's Gethsemane in some later manuscripts. The committee also allows that a deletion motivated by the scene's portrayal of weakness cannot be excluded. What changes is whether this particular angel-and-sweat scene appears in Luke's prayer narrative. No doctrine can be settled from this unit alone; most doctrines rest on many passages.
Common questions
Do all early witnesses contain Luke 22:43-44?
No. Papyrus 75 and Vaticanus omit the verses, while NA28 and Tregelles print them. The packet describes the evidence as divided.
Why are the angel and sweat verses bracketed in the APB text?
APB 3.5 keeps the wording in brackets because its committee judged the passage a later addition, while also stating that the split among early witnesses is real.
What changes if Luke 22:43-44 are omitted?
The prayer scene runs without an angel strengthening Jesus and without the description of sweat like drops of blood. Luke 22:42 remains in the committee's printed text.
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.