Talk:Matthew 17
Appearance
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Matthew 17 article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Somebody should check Nestle-Alland maybe, but it seems that Vaticanus is *not* complete, but lacks 17:21 (as does Sinaiticus). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_Vaticanus and some other googling affirm thi, at least. Adam.gibson (talk) 17:21, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
- I checked the digitized manuscripts directly. No surprise that 17:21 is omitted from the text of Vaticanus as Sinaiticus. Not a missing piece of vellum, but simply not included in the text, passing from 20 to 22 directly. This wouldn't have to be mentioned at this point in the article. But, rather than remove the comment from Sinaiticus I made a parallel comment for Vaticanus. The issue probably *should* be discussed later in the article as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_18#Verse_11 . Many modern translations in English omit v21 on this basis. Adam.gibson (talk) 14:36, 17 March 2022 (UTC)