looking for Lk 17:36 in Research

[Kristin]

Reading through Lk we got to Lk 17:35, then Lk 17:37, and my student asked where vs. 36 was. So I opened the KJV, and to my surprise, it wasn't there. So then I opened up the so-called Text Browser and couldn't find any version with the verse. The Douay-Rheims had the text, but glued vs. 36 to vs.35 and so they didn't have the verse either.

 

So then I went to research and typed in 17:36 expecting to get vs. 36 in other books also, but I would be able to weed through it. So my surprise, however, I got a "no results" with Research. Um, so NO Bible has a 36th verse of chapter 17 in ANY book of the Bible? If that is so, why is it even listed as a vs.36?

I could at least find it in a few Gk mss in CNTTS, but I am looking for which actual Bibles have it, not the mss per se.

So then I did a test of 1:1 in Research, and apparently no Bible translation has a verse one of any first chapter in the entire Bible either.

I thus have two questions:

1) Does anyone know which Bibles have Lk 17:36, and not just the text glued to vs. 35?

2) Why can't I search for verses, such as 17:36 or 1:1 set to "verses" in Research?

 

Thanks,

Kristin

 

 

[Donald Cobb]

Hi Kristin,

 

It's a text-critical problem. Verse 36 is missing from most early mss. So if the resource the navigator is tied with doesn't have it (e.g., NA28), the navigator won't bring it up (and you won't find it in a verse search). So you have to use as your primary version one that has it. If you open up KJV, for example, you can go to it, and then in the Navigator, the other versions will either have the verse of dashes, indicating they don't have it.

[Kristin]

Hi @Donald Cobb,

Thank you for the reply. I was first confused since the KJV did NOT contain it, but now I see it does, but only in Research.

 

The first of my questions concerned which Bibles contain Lk 17:36, as NO Bible in parallel had it. For example, the first thing I did was open the KJV as I assumed it would be there, but it was not. So then I opened Webster, but he didn't have it either. So then I opened the Text Browser, and same thing, NO Bible had Lk 17:36.

 

But in Research I see the KJV DOES contain it.

 

Thus the first question is now modified to ask why the KJV does not show its verse in parallel. The fact that it omits it makes it literally impossible to compare texts in parallel. I assume it would show it if I started with the KJV, but that would only work if you have it as your base text, and would not work to just have as a reference in parallel. This seems like a cross between a bug and a feature request.

The second question is thankfully resolved. It was why 17:36 in Research did not work. It occurred to me that it needed the "Luke" part too. I had first left it off since I wanted to capture foreign Bibles too, but now I see that all versions, regardless of the language, recognize "Luke 17:36" (and thankfully Lk 17:36!).

Attached is a screenshot showing the KJV did not have it, provoking my post, and then what it looks like with Research, which ONLY works with the book name too. Apparently no book of the Bible had a verse 1:1 since I needed to specify the book too, which is fine once I know.

 

[pder3571]

According to Bruce Metzger,

 

17.36  omit verse {A}

    Although it is possible that ver. 36, δύο ἐν ἀγρῷ. εἷς παραλημφθήσεται καὶ ὁ ἕτερος ἀφεθήσεται, may have been  [p. 143]  accidentally omitted through homoeoteleuton (an accident that happened to ver. 35 in ℵ* and a few other witnesses), in view of the weighty manuscript authority supporting the shorter text (𝔓75 ℵ A B L W Δ Θ Ψ ƒ1 28 33 565) it is more probable that copyists assimilated the passage to Mt 24.40.

[Donald Cobb]

13 hours ago, Kristin said:

Hi @Donald Cobb,

Thank you for the reply. I was first confused since the KJV did NOT contain it, but now I see it does, but only in Research.

 

The first of my questions concerned which Bibles contain Lk 17:36, as NO Bible in parallel had it. For example, the first thing I did was open the KJV as I assumed it would be there, but it was not. So then I opened Webster, but he didn't have it either. So then I opened the Text Browser, and same thing, NO Bible had Lk 17:36.

 

But in Research I see the KJV DOES contain it.

 

Thus the first question is now modified to ask why the KJV does not show its verse in parallel. The fact that it omits it makes it literally impossible to compare texts in parallel. I assume it would show it if I started with the KJV, but that would only work if you have it as your base text, and would not work to just have as a reference in parallel. This seems like a cross between a bug and a feature request.

The second question is thankfully resolved. It was why 17:36 in Research did not work. It occurred to me that it needed the "Luke" part too. I had first left it off since I wanted to capture foreign Bibles too, but now I see that all versions, regardless of the language, recognize "Luke 17:36" (and thankfully Lk 17:36!).

Attached is a screenshot showing the KJV did not have it, provoking my post, and then what it looks like with Research, which ONLY works with the book name too. Apparently no book of the Bible had a verse 1:1 since I needed to specify the book too, which is fine once I know.

 

 

Kristin, what version are you using as your search version? Judging from your screen shot, it looks like it's the ESV. Try opening the KJV in a new workspace and the your text navigator. If I do that, I find Luk 17.36 alongside the other verses. If I then open up the text navigator, I find that the majority of the versions that open don't have it. Here's what I get when I do that:

 

 

 

So apparently, if you're using as your primary version a text that is omitted for text-critical reasons, that will not bring up the verse in the other versions, since the navigator "has nothing to look for." I find that logical. But obviously, it implies that you are either 1) using a version that is based on the majority text, or 2) that you are aware of the difficulties connected with such verses, using an addition in which the problems are pointed out (through brackets, textual information or some such).

 

 

Edited March 6, 2023 by Donald Cobb

[Kristin]

Hi @Donald Cobb,

Thanks for the screenshots, and yes, I was using the ESV. What I had expected is that I could open the KJV as a parallel and see the verse, but then the KJV did not contain it, and NO Bible in the Text Browser contained it, provoking my post.

 

Through Research I discovered that as well, that if I start with the KJV it will show, but I had not realized that Accordance actually deletes verses when in parallel mode. While I can understand why you say it is logical, I suppose in my mind it is not logical, as the whole point of putting another version in parallel is to compare and contrast them, but if the version you are comparing is shown in a truncated view, it drastically hinders your ability to compare.

 

I understand I could start with the KJV and see the verses, but there are a couple problems with that. First, if I am actively working with a version, it is not realistic to flip to another. Second, even if I did start with the KJV, I don't have a guarantee of what other versions have, since if another version different from the KJV any way, I wouldn't know it unless I start with that new version.

 

A long time ago I used to actually have the KJV as a parallel, but I got rid of it since it "wasn't working" since Accordance was omitting the KJV verses. I thus think it would be helpful if there was an option in settings, to either omit extra verses in parallel versions, or to include them.

[Donald Cobb]

49 minutes ago, Kristin said:

Hi @Donald Cobb,

Thanks for the screenshots, and yes, I was using the ESV. What I had expected is that I could open the KJV as a parallel and see the verse, but then the KJV did not contain it, and NO Bible in the Text Browser contained it, provoking my post.

 

Through Research I discovered that as well, that if I start with the KJV it will show, but I had not realized that Accordance actually deletes verses when in parallel mode. While I can understand why you say it is logical, I suppose in my mind it is not logical, as the whole point of putting another version in parallel is to compare and contrast them, but if the version you are comparing is shown in a truncated view, it drastically hinders your ability to compare.

 

I understand I could start with the KJV and see the verses, but there are a couple problems with that. First, if I am actively working with a version, it is not realistic to flip to another. Second, even if I did start with the KJV, I don't have a guarantee of what other versions have, since if another version different from the KJV any way, I wouldn't know it unless I start with that new version.

 

A long time ago I used to actually have the KJV as a parallel, but I got rid of it since it "wasn't working" since Accordance was omitting the KJV verses. I thus think it would be helpful if there was an option in settings, to either omit extra verses in parallel versions, or to include them.

 

Interestingly, I find get the same results as you. I just tried starting with the ESV and adding the KJV, and here is what I get: the ESV has a break, the KJV has the verse. However—and here, my results are parallel to yours—in the text navigator, there are no breaks. I'm not sure what settings are different between your version and mine:

 

[Gary Raynor]

Must be similar to what happens in the ESV Reading Plan in the Psalms particularly.

A number of the psalms are missing the first verse

However the Hebrew version in a linked tab contains the missing verse

[Donald Cobb]

2 hours ago, Donald Cobb said:

 

Interestingly, I find get the same results as you. I just tried starting with the ESV and adding the KJV, and here is what I get: the ESV has a break, the KJV has the verse. However—and here, my results are parallel to yours—in the text navigator, there are no breaks. I'm not sure what settings are different between your version and mine:

 

 

CORRECTION: I meant to say "Interestingly, I don't get the same results as you. I just tried starting with the ESV and adding the KJV, and here is what I get: the ESV has a break, the KJV has the verse. However—and here, my results are parallel to yours—in the text navigator, there are no breaks. I'm not sure what settings are different between your version and mine:"

[JonathanHuber]

5 hours ago, Gary Raynor said:

Must be similar to what happens in the ESV Reading Plan in the Psalms particularly.

A number of the psalms are missing the first verse

However the Hebrew version in a linked tab contains the missing verse

The verse numbering in the Psalms is often different in English vs Hebrew because of the way they handle the titles. The Hebrew text treats the titles as verse 1. The English numbering doesn’t include the titles, so Accordance has handled that by adding them as verse 0. This causes a mismatch in the numbering, but the program still aligns the text, as you can see by checking the cross-highlighting. 

[Kristin]

8 hours ago, Donald Cobb said:

 

CORRECTION: I meant to say "Interestingly, I don't get the same results as you. I just tried starting with the ESV and adding the KJV, and here is what I get: the ESV has a break, the KJV has the verse. However—and here, my results are parallel to yours—in the text navigator, there are no breaks. I'm not sure what settings are different between your version and mine:"

Hi @Donald Cobb,

Thank you for clarifying, and yes, I assumed that is what you meant. Anyway, the way your text handles it is for sure how I wish mine did. I don't a clue either what setting could be different.