Luke 10:1 (UBS/NA 27) Μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα ἀνέδειξεν ὁ Κύριος [omits καὶ] ἑτέρους ἑβδομήκοντα, καὶ ἀπέστειλεν αὐτοὺς ἀνὰ δύο πρὸ προσώπου αὐτοῦ εἰς πᾶσαν πόλιν καὶ τόπον οὗ ἤμελλεν αὐτὸς ἔρχεσθαι.
Luke 10:1 (Byz) μετα δε ταυτα ανεδειξεν ο κυριος και ετερους εβδομηκοντα και απεστειλεν αυτους ανα δυο προ προσωπου αυτου εις πασαν πολιν και τοπον ου εμελλεν αυτος ερχεσθαι
[Hint: See the [omits] for the textual variant in the verse.]
[Hint #2: ἑβδομήκοντα is the same in both verses.]
Luke 10:17 (UBS) ῾Υπέστρεψαν δὲ οἱ ἑβδομήκοντα μετὰ χαρᾶς λέγοντες· Κύριε, καὶ τὰ δαιμόνια ὑποτάσσεται ἡμῖν ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί σου.
Luke 10:17 (Byz) υπεστρεψαν δε οι εβδομηκοντα μετα χαρας λεγοντες κυριε και τα δαιμονια υποτασσεται ημιν εν τω ονοματι σου.
[Hint #1: No textual variants.]
[Hint #2: compare εβδομηκοντα to εβδομηκοντα in verse 1.]
Ah hah! But read verse 1 (or 17) in an NA pre 27th edition and we find Μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα ἀνέδειξεν ὁ Κύριος [omits καὶ] ἑτέρους ἑβδομήκοντα
δυο, καὶ ἀπέστειλεν αὐτοὺς ἀνὰ δύο πρὸ προσώπου αὐτοῦ εἰς πᾶσαν πόλιν καὶ τόπον οὗ ἤμελλεν αὐτὸς ἔρχεσθαι.
Now for a little study. SEVENTY (ἑβδομήκοντα) is found in the majority of all manuscripts. The problem is a few respected manuscripts include the word
δυο after the word εβδομηκοντα making it ready SEVENTY TWO. The word δυο is omitted in א (appeared only in the hand of a marginal corrector) A C L W Θ Ξ Ψ families 1 &13 the Majority, f q and various others. Prior to NA 27 the reading was considered canon, but after NA 27 the reading is considered spurious. As both the NIV and the RSV (from which the ESV was edited) pre-date NA 27, it stands to reason they would follow the older conventional wisdom and include the δυο. Newer, more accurate, versions rightly omit the δυο and read SEVENTY.
And, low and behold, verse 17 has the same scribal error! Do I smell a rat? Probably. Keep reading!
This is a fairly common scribal error called "Transposition" because a word is moved (or transposed) from one spot in the text, where it belongs, to another spot in the text where it does not belong. The word δυο belongs in the text where it says they were sent out "two up" (ανα δυο) but was transposed to where it caused the later confusion. But what about verse 17? This appears to be scribal harmonization. As he continued his copying he noticed the two verses did not say the same thing so he "fixed" verse 17 when he should have "fixed" verse 1.
So the whole cabalistic thesis based on spurious numerology and an even more spurious scribal error is proven to be without merit.