![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I've noticed some English translations including the KJV and the NIV only have 11 verses for this chapter instead of 12. It seems like they skipped the first verse. Is this common in Bible translation or is there a specific reason hey might have done this for this chapter? Rastanarcharismarx ( talk) 17:23, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
The following was added:
*Verse 5 is quoted in Matthew 26:38; Mark 14:34. - citing Kirkpatrick, A. F. (1901). The Book of Psalms: with Introduction and Notes. The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges. Vol. Book IV and V: Psalms XC-CL. Cambridge: At the University Press. p. 838. Retrieved February 28, 2019.
Problems: no context is given, the verse seems 6 rather than 5, the content is not equal, just similar, and the source should be given in Wikisource, not bibleverse (external). I commented it out for now, but it could easily be restored, fixing the problems. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 19:41, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
References
{{
cite book}}
: |volume=
has extra text (
help)
The issue of incipits is one that encompasses all of the psalm pages, not just this one. The problem is that every translation of a psalm will often create a new incipit. Listing all of these is not practical in the lead, but I feel that the major ones should be included. I question whether Tate and Brady's psalm translations are that widespread or important specifically, to deserve recognition in the lead. In my opinion, the major ones for the purposes of incipits at least are the KJV, Coverdale's BCP and the Vulgate, i.e. the Psalterium Gallicanum or Versio Gallicana. The BCP and Vulgate incipits are listed here: http://www1.cpdl.org/wiki/index.php/Psalm. Steepleman ( t) 08:03, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
There are numerous sources which say "some ancient Hebrew manuscripts have this Psalm combined with Psalm 42". While perhaps this view is disputed and does not belong in the lead section of the article, it might be worth a mention somewhere. Which section could it fit best in? Jel3456 ( talk) 20:52, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I've noticed some English translations including the KJV and the NIV only have 11 verses for this chapter instead of 12. It seems like they skipped the first verse. Is this common in Bible translation or is there a specific reason hey might have done this for this chapter? Rastanarcharismarx ( talk) 17:23, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
The following was added:
*Verse 5 is quoted in Matthew 26:38; Mark 14:34. - citing Kirkpatrick, A. F. (1901). The Book of Psalms: with Introduction and Notes. The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges. Vol. Book IV and V: Psalms XC-CL. Cambridge: At the University Press. p. 838. Retrieved February 28, 2019.
Problems: no context is given, the verse seems 6 rather than 5, the content is not equal, just similar, and the source should be given in Wikisource, not bibleverse (external). I commented it out for now, but it could easily be restored, fixing the problems. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 19:41, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
References
{{
cite book}}
: |volume=
has extra text (
help)
The issue of incipits is one that encompasses all of the psalm pages, not just this one. The problem is that every translation of a psalm will often create a new incipit. Listing all of these is not practical in the lead, but I feel that the major ones should be included. I question whether Tate and Brady's psalm translations are that widespread or important specifically, to deserve recognition in the lead. In my opinion, the major ones for the purposes of incipits at least are the KJV, Coverdale's BCP and the Vulgate, i.e. the Psalterium Gallicanum or Versio Gallicana. The BCP and Vulgate incipits are listed here: http://www1.cpdl.org/wiki/index.php/Psalm. Steepleman ( t) 08:03, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
There are numerous sources which say "some ancient Hebrew manuscripts have this Psalm combined with Psalm 42". While perhaps this view is disputed and does not belong in the lead section of the article, it might be worth a mention somewhere. Which section could it fit best in? Jel3456 ( talk) 20:52, 1 June 2020 (UTC)