Luke 23 is missing verse 17

Page 1 of 1 (17 items)
This post has 16 Replies | 1 Follower

Posts 23670
Forum MVP
MJ. Smith | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Apr 15 2014 9:38 PM

This is not an error - it is removed from many versions based upon text criticism - see NRSV, NAB, NET, NJB . . .

Orthodox Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."

Posts 18075
Rosie Perera | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Apr 15 2014 10:02 PM

Here's the text-critical note on that missing verse from the NET Bible:

Posts 4
Mikala Streeter | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Apr 15 2014 11:02 PM

Thanks for clarifying. I didn't realize that. Are there other verses like this? Why isn't anything returned for verse 17? Even to say that it's been omitted.

Posts 23670
Forum MVP
MJ. Smith | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Apr 15 2014 11:08 PM

from Wikipedia:

NIV omits

Other English translations

O = omitted in main text.
B = bracketed in the main text – The translation team and most biblical scholars today believe were not part of the original text. However, these texts have been retained in brackets in the NASB and the Holman CSB.[30]
F = omission noted in the footnote.
B+F = bracketed in the main text and omission noted in the footnote.

Bible translation
Passage NIV NASB NKJV RSV NRSV ESV NCV TLB REB HCSB AMP CEB CJB CEV ERV GW EXB GNT Knox LEB MSG Mounce NET NIrV NLV NLT OJB
Matthew 9:34 F
Matthew 12:47 O F F F F O F F F F
Matthew 17:21 O B F O O F O F F B F O O O F O O O O O F
Matthew 18:11 O B F O O F O F F B F O O O O F O O O O O O
Matthew 21:44 F O F F F B F O F F F F O F
Matthew 23:14 O B F O O F O F B F O O O O F O O O O O O
Mark 7:16 O B F O O F O O F B F O O O F F O O O O O O
Mark 9:44 O B F O O F O O F B O O O O O F O O O O O O
Mark 9:46 O B F O O F O O F B O O O O O F O O O O O O
Mark 11:26 O B F O O F O O F B F O O O O F O O O O O O B
Mark 15:28 O B F O O F O F F B F O O O O F O O O O O O B
Mark 16:9–20 F B F F F B F F B F B F F B F B B B B
Luke 17:36 O B F O O F F B F O O O O F O O O O O O
Luke 22:20 F F F O F
Luke 22:43 F B F O F B F F F B+F B F
Luke 22:44 F B F O F B F F F F B+F B F
Luke 23:17 O B F O O F O O F B F O O F O O F O O O O O O B
Luke 24:12 O F F O F
Luke 24:40 F F F F F
John 5:4 O B F O O F O F F B O O O O F O O O O O B O B
John 7:53–8:11 F B F O F B F F B F B B+F B
Acts 8:37 O B F O F F O F F B F O O O O F O O O O O B O B
Acts 15:34 O B F O O F O O F O F O O O O F O O O O O O B
Acts 24:7 O B F O O F O F B O O O O O O O O O B
Acts 28:29 O B F O O F O O F B F O O O O F O O O O O O B
Romans 16:24 O B F O O F O F B F O O O O F O O O O O B

 

Orthodox Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."

Posts 2113
Lee | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Apr 16 2014 12:21 AM

Mikala Streeter:

Thanks for clarifying. I didn't realize that. Are there other verses like this? Why isn't anything returned for verse 17? Even to say that it's been omitted.

In some versions, there is a footnote or typographical feature to clarify the status of verse 17. In other versions, all mention of the verse is omitted.

I would prefer a footnote or something like that, since a verse number is skipped.

Posts 4349
David Paul | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Apr 16 2014 12:29 AM

Lee:

Mikala Streeter:

Thanks for clarifying. I didn't realize that. Are there other verses like this? Why isn't anything returned for verse 17? Even to say that it's been omitted.

In some versions, there is a footnote or typographical feature to clarify the status of verse 17. In other versions, all mention of the verse is omitted.

I would prefer a footnote or something like that, since a verse number is skipped.

It is almost inexcusable that any Bible textual committee would choose to excise a verse without an explanation. Whether it belongs or does not, it is practically malpractice to not explain the decision and the condition which warranted it to the reader-patient.

Posts 17862
Forum MVP
Graham Criddle | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Apr 16 2014 12:35 AM

David Paul:

It is almost inexcusable that any Bible textual committee would choose to excise a verse without an explanation. Whether it belongs or does not, it is practically malpractice to not explain the decision and the condition which warranted it to the reader-patient.

A footnote is present in the LEB as below

I think Mikala's point was more about why this information isn't returned through the API

Mikala Streeter:
Why isn't anything returned for verse 17?

which is a different issue and something we would need Logos to comment on.

Posts 2113
Lee | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Apr 16 2014 12:52 AM

Perhaps there is something special in the way the footnote is coded. Or perhaps the API only returns main text.

I was wrong to say that "In some versions, there is a footnote or typographical feature to clarify the status of verse 17". It is more accurate to say: “In most versions..."

Posts 23670
Forum MVP
MJ. Smith | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Apr 16 2014 1:00 AM

Okay folks - check the facts before getting hot around the collar or spreading misinformation:

From Biblia:

Orthodox Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."

Posts 2113
Lee | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Apr 16 2014 1:44 AM

The OP was talking about returns from a Biblia API call on the LEB text.

Who's spreading what misinformation?

Posts 18075
Rosie Perera | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Apr 16 2014 1:47 AM

I don't know the Biblia API, but one of the parameters was style=oneVersePerLine. Maybe this parameter precludes including any footnote material.

EDIT: OK, here we go.

But I tried http://api.biblia.com/v1/bible/content/LEB.txt.txt?passage=Luke23&footnotes=true...  and still there's no footnote explaining the omission of that verse. Hmm...

Posts 2113
Lee | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Apr 16 2014 2:03 AM

Specifying style=fullyFormattedwithFootnotes should be the solution, but it does not work now. Confused

Posts 23670
Forum MVP
MJ. Smith | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Apr 16 2014 2:11 AM

Rosie Perera:

adding &fullText=true gets you the indicator for the footnote ... but not the footnote itself. But we're a far afield from the original question of why no verse 17 although we appear to have identified a bug.

Orthodox Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."

Posts 8472
Denise | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Apr 16 2014 7:21 AM

Of course one could simply use the most popular and fastest growing (per ABS) version on planet earth.  The statistics don't count any other planets. (That'd be the correct version, whose name begins with the match to 'messiah').


Posts 4
Mikala Streeter | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Apr 16 2014 9:14 AM

Thanks guys. This was helpful. I'll just add in a check in my code to make sure verses aren't omitted, or add in a note for the user if they are. Like - 

16 ... text

17 ... (Omitted. Many manuscripts do not contain this verse.)

18 ... text

Thoughts?

Posts 4
Mikala Streeter | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Apr 16 2014 10:03 AM

@key used in OP: It's not my key (though thanks for checking). It's used in the example post in the API documentation (see: http://api.biblia.com/docs/Bible_Content). If you click the link on that page, you'll see the key used in the browser. 

Page 1 of 1 (17 items) | RSS
Copyright 1992-2015 Faithlife / Logos Bible Software.