The reading orgistheis 'becoming angry' has become very popular amongst commentators and has received recent impetus through adoption in the SBL Greek New Testament and in the 2011 edition of the NIV. Despite the fact that external attestation is considerably stronger for splagchnistheis 'filled with compassion', scholars have tended to be swayed by the consideration that they cannot imagine how any scribe might change the text towards the allegedly 'harder' reading orgistheis. However, this paper will argue that it is far easier to conceive of someone replacing splagchnistheis by orgistheis than the reverse for a range of reasons, including the currency of the term orgistheis in contrast to the rarity of the term splagchnistheis. Considerations of morphologically related terms suggests that if splagchnistheis were to be corrupted by accident, the form ending is –istheis that it would be most likely to become is none other than orgistheis. Moreover, if orgistheis were the authorial text, the existence of such a convenient substitute as splagchnistheis is hard to account for by mere appeal to chance. This paper also considers methodological double standards which are sometimes applied in the advocacy of orgistheis.