Sections missing in MNTC - Matthew 9

Sections missing in MNTC - Matthew 9.

The first one is on page 114, Matthew 9:37a:

The second one is on page 115, Matthew 9:37a:

Note: There are about 4 lines missing in the first section, and there is only the last line missing in the second section.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Greg

Yes the green highlighted words below are in MTNC, but the red word is different and a few sentences are missing where the red highlighted word appears.

Could it be that in Logos we have an older or newer version of the MTNC in Logos than your physical / paper copy?

My Logos version was copyrighted as follows.

THE MOODY BIBLE INSTITUTE OF CHICAGO

JOHN MACARTHUR

MacArthur, J. F., Jr. (1985). Matthew (Vol. 1, p. ii). Moody Press.

When was your physical / paper copy copyrighted?

Kenute P. Curry

My physical / paper copy has the same copyright as logos - 1985 -1989 THE MOODY BIBLE INSTITUTE OF CHICAGO.

Anna Adent

Hi Kenute. Thanks for notifying us. We're looking into this.

Kenute P. Curry

Thank you very much 🙂

Mattillo

Hi Kenute. Thanks for notifying us. We're looking into this.

Thank you

Anna Adent

Kenute, thanks for your patience. We have discovered that the publisher supplied us with files of a different edition. We are working closely with them to receive the correct files in order to get this resource corrected. It may take some time still, but we're working on it!

Kenute P. Curry

Thank you very much Anna Adent. It is much appreciated.

Mattillo

Kenute, thanks for your patience. We have discovered that the publisher supplied us with files of a different edition. We are working closely with them to receive the correct files in order to get this resource corrected. It may take some time still, but we're working on it!

Any updates on this?

Mattillo

Any updates on this?

Hayley R Price

Thanks for checking in on this! Despite delays, we are in the process of producing the 25th edition to replace our current, troubled edition. We have the materials from the publisher and things are moving forward.

I realize that's not a lot of information, so I thought you might be interested in some background details. Specifically, the version in Logos right now: It exists! We actually have it as a hard copy.

The copyright information matches the volumes described upthread, but the actual text is different. Maybe one was accidentally published using older proofs? Or maybe one quietly incorporated later revisions? It's impossible to tell, whatever happened here happened back in 1986. Here, I brought the evidence:

Here's our hardcopy. Maybe the changes snuck in as part of this particular set?

Here's the copyright page for maximum identification.

And here we have the relevant pages. The bold text on "harvest" makes it easy to spot the contested text.

Here, too.

Personally, I find all this fascinating—This kind of confusion is exactly why you don't make textual changes within an edition. In scholarship and in library science, there is no text unimportant enough that it won't be worth a forum discussion thirty years later. At the same time, I can't be frustrated with something that allows me to play "Library Detective" for a day or two.