Talk:Matthew 17

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.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Christianity: Jesus Top‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is within the scope of the Jesus work group, a task force which is currently considered to be inactive.

Religious texts (defunct)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religious texts, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.Religious textsWikipedia:WikiProject Religious textsTemplate:WikiProject Religious textsReligious texts

Bible Top‑importance

	Bible portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bible, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Bible on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BibleWikipedia:WikiProject BibleTemplate:WikiProject BibleBible
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Somebody should check Nestle-Alland maybe, but it seems that Vaticanus is *not* complete, but lacks 17:21 (as does Sinaiticus). https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Codex_Vaticanus and some other googling affirm thi, at least. Adam.gibson (talk) 17:21, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Matthew_18#Verse_11 . Many modern translations in English omit v21 on this basis. Adam.gibson (talk) 14:36, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]