Matthew 24:36, “nor the Son”: the phrase scribes couldn't bear
Matthew 24:36 includes “nor the Son” in NA28 and the APB; the Robinson-Pierpont Byzantine Textform omits it. The difference concerns whether Jesus explicitly includes the Son among those who do not know the day and hour.
The APB text at this verse
The manuscripts, editions, and versions
The committee record at this verse
The APB is translated by a committee of language models that works blind. The translators are never told they are translating the Bible, never given a book name or a verse number, and never shown the witnesses listed above. Where the manuscripts disagree, the choice between readings is made before translation by the same kind of translator working the same way: it sees the competing readings and the witnesses by age and class, but never a reference or a manuscript name. There are 14,877 such places. For APB 4.0 every one was decided again in October 2026. GPT-6.1 Sol decided every one first. Claude Fable 5.1, from another model family, decided 2,483 of them second, including every place where the first translator left the base text. A departure from the base text needs both translators to agree and the first to be at least 0.8 confident. There is no third translator, so the base text stands when the two disagree. APB 4.0 is translated over those decisions. Whatever was done at this verse was done on the language and the evidence alone, and the record is public.
“The base text reads πατὴρ. The copies also carry πατὴρ μου [later majority tradition]; the committee kept the base text. Retain the default with strong confidence.”
“The base text reads (nothing). The copies also carry τῆς [greek majuscule; later majority tradition]; the committee kept the base text. Earlier support and a plausible grammatical expansion favor the default.”
“The base text reads οὐδὲ ὁ υἱός. The copies also carry the omission [greek majuscule; early greek manuscript tradition; later majority tradition]; the committee kept the base text. The stronger early evidence and clear motives for omission favor the default.”
“The base text reads (nothing). The copies also carry μου [greek majuscule; later majority tradition]; the committee kept the base text. The early and independent witnesses lack the pronoun. Its addition is an ordinary expansion.”
“The base text reads οὐδὲ ὁ υἱός. The copies also carry the omission [greek majuscule; early greek manuscript tradition; later majority tradition]; the committee kept the base text. The harder wording and stronger early support favor retention.”
The APB 4.0 translation committee retained the phrase. Its textual decision states: "The harder wording and stronger early support favor retention." GPT-6.1 Sol (OpenAI) served as the first translator, and Claude Fable 5.1 (Anthropic) served as the second translator. The committee's printed text includes "neither the angels of heaven nor the Son, except the Father alone." This makes the Son's inclusion explicit in the APB's translation.
The argument for each reading
If “nor the Son” belongs
Nestle-Aland 28 prints οὐδὲ ὁ υἱός, as does WH. The phrase has support from the earliest uncials. With these words included, Jesus explicitly places the Son among those who do not know the day and hour. That wording also gives a plausible reason for omission: a copyist could remove the phrase to ease the difficulty it raises about the Son's knowledge. This argument combines early support with a possible explanation for the shorter reading. The proposed motive remains an inference about why the text changed.
If it was never in Matthew
The Robinson-Pierpont Byzantine Textform and Tregelles omit the phrase. The committee's textual note also associates omission with Greek majuscule, early Greek manuscript, and later majority traditions. The shorter reading therefore has support across more than one witness class. If the phrase was never in Matthew, its absence preserves a sentence that names no one and the angels before reserving knowledge to the Father. The difficulty is explaining the phrase's presence in the earliest uncials. The omission's distribution establishes a serious alternative, but it does not by itself settle the direction of change.
The uncertainty concerns both the wording and the reason for its transmission in two forms. Early support for the phrase and the possibility of doctrinal relief support retention, but a possible motive does not establish what any copyist intended. Both readings reserve knowledge of the day and hour to the Father. The variant changes whether the Son is explicitly named; broader claims about the Son's knowledge require more than this verse.
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 from the sources linked above.