Jhn 5:3 #781
Labels
No Label
After June_2023 merge
Audio Waiting
Drew
Henry
Info - different
Info - missing
Info added
John
Needs TN
No Audio Yet
Not Urgent
Rendering
Susan
Tom
unreadable
No Milestone
No Assignees
4 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference: WycliffeAssociates/en_ulb#781
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
No description provided.
Delete Branch "%!s(<nil>)"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
The text note does not fit the current ULB text.
@hmw3 Are you refrering to the footnote in John 5:3?
\v 2 Now in Jerusalem by the sheep gate there is a pool, which in the Aramaic language is called Bethesda, and it has five roofed porches.
\v 3 A large number of people who were sick, blind, lame, or paralyzed were lying there. \f + \ft The best ancient copies do not have the phrase, \fqa waiting for the moving of the water \fqa*. \f*
\v 4 \f + \ft The best ancient copies do not have verse 4, \fqa For an angel of the Lord went down and stirred up the water at certain times and whoever stepped in while the water was stirring was healed from whatever disease he suffered from \fqa*. \f*
Um, yeah, 5:3 (blush).
John 5:2to John 5:3I think the text note does fit the current ULB text. The reason "waiting for the moving of the water" is not in the ULB is that it is not in the best ancient copies.
Many of the notes that start with "The best ancient copies" explain why something people might expect is not in the ULB.
The OGNT has it.
@drewcurley, are you saying that "waiting for the moving of the water" is in the OGNT? I don't see it there.
https://opengnt.com/index.html?OGNTint&43.5.3
Sorry, typo.
My objection was to the wording of the note noting that words that ancient manuscripts don't have words not in the ULB. My first thought was, "Why should they? They're not here."
Consider phrasing the situation positively:
\f + \ft Some ancient copies have the following words after "paralyzed": \fqa ... were lying there, waiting for the moving of the water \fqa. \f
\v 4 \f + \ft Some ancient copies contain verse 4, \fqa For an angel of the Lord went down and stirred up the water at certain times and whoever stepped in while the water was stirring was healed from whatever disease he suffered from \fqa. \f
It's wordier but certainly clearer. If we do this we should probably check the rest of the footnotes that have "The best ancient copies" and "the best ancient Greek copies". There are 29 altogether.
John 5:3to Jhn 5:3If we change the wording from "the best ancient copies do not have" to "some ancient copies have," will that raise the question about why it is not in the ULB?
If we use Henry's suggestion, should we add this at the end of the note: These words are not in the ULB because they are not in the best ancient copies of the Bible.
I do not think we should undermine the authority of the ULB. What is lost is worse than what is gained, if that makes sense.
I'm fine leaving the footnotes as is.
What are your thoughts, Susan?
@SusanQuigley
I'm fine with leaving it (and other like it) as is.