Luke 22:43-44 — the angel and the bloody sweat
The angel and blood-like sweat are present in reading A and absent in reading B; the supplied witnesses preserve both. The question is whether the verses stand in Luke’s prayer scene or entered it later.
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.
The committee record supplies no rationale note for this crux, and the pericope’s audit verdict is “clean.” The APB text prints the angel from heaven who strengthens him and then prints the description of anguish, earnest prayer, and sweat like drops of blood. The record does not provide further explanation.
The case for each reading.
If the verses are Luke's
Reading A retains the two verses within the prayer scene: an angel appears from heaven and strengthens Jesus, followed by anguished prayer and sweat like drops of blood falling to the earth. NA28 prints the verses, and the supplied apparatus line places Tregelles and RP with NA28 for ὤφθη δὲ … ἐπὶ τὴν γῆν. The witness summary also says that the Byzantine text prints them. On this reading, the scene includes both divine strengthening and the physical image of intense anguish. The apparatus nonetheless records a different presentation in Westcott-Hort, where the verses are double-bracketed as an early, non-Lukan tradition.
If they entered later
Reading B lets the prayer scene run directly from the surrounding material without the angel or the sweat-like-blood description. Papyrus 75 and Vaticanus are listed as omitting the verses, and their witness row dates them 3rd-4th century A.D. That row characterizes Papyrus 75 as the earliest Luke papyrus and notes that some later manuscripts move the verses into Matthew’s Gethsemane. The supplied description also says the verses are absent from many early witnesses and float in others. On this reading, the omission is not merely a shortened wording within the verses: the two verses themselves are absent.
The supplied evidence leaves a real question about whether these vivid verses stood in Luke’s prayer scene or entered it later. What changes is the presence or absence of the angel, strengthening, and sweat-like-blood image in this location. The packet does not settle the question. Doctrinal conclusions do not hinge on this variant alone; most doctrines rest on many passages.
Asked plainly.
Do all listed witnesses include the angel and the sweat like blood?
No. NA28 prints the verses, while Papyrus 75 and Vaticanus omit them. The witness summary also says Tregelles and the Byzantine text print them.
What changes if the verses are absent?
The prayer scene runs without the angel who strengthens Jesus and without the description of sweat like drops of blood falling to the earth.
Why are the verses discussed as a textual variant?
The packet reports that they are absent from many early witnesses and that some later manuscripts move them into Matthew’s Gethsemane.
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.