Manuscript question! help needed

i have a question....
in the KJV in Luk 9:55 But He turned and rebuked them and said, You do not know of what spirit you are.
Luk 9:56 For the Son of Man has not come to destroy men's lives, but to save. And they went to another village.

now I'm reading my Swedish version and the verses are not there? in the old version they are.... now I'm wondering why did they take them out? the old Swedish version is based upon the same manuscripts as the KJV, i know that,,,but now this version I'm reading is sort of NKJV in swedich...but I'm just wondering if anyone knows what manuscripts leave those verses out?

Best I can find is that the omitted text was probably a marginal note from Luke 19:10:
10For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost.

Luke 9:55-56
55But he turned, and rebuked them, and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of.
56For the Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them. And they went to another village.

The reason the newer translations do not have the text is because it is missing from most early manuscripts.

I ran across this on a website:

Luke 9:55-56:
TEXT: "he turned and rebuked them. ·And they went"
EVIDENCE: p45 p75 S A B C L W X Delta Xi Psi 28 33 565 892 1010 1241 some Byz most Lect one lat syr(s) most cop
TRANSLATIONS: ASV RSV NASV NIV NEB TEV
RANK: C
NOTES: "he turned and rebuked them and he said, 'plYou do not know what kind of spirit plyou are of; ·for the Son of man did not come to destroy men's lives but to save [them].' And they went"
EVIDENCE: K Theta Pi f1 f13 700 some Byz some Lect most lat vg syr(c,p,h) some cop(north)
TRANSLATIONS: KJV ASVn RSVn NASVn NIVn NEBn TEVn

NOTES: "he turned and rebuked them and he said, 'plYou do not know what kind of spirit plyou are of.' ·And they went"
EVIDENCE: D one lat
TRANSLATIONS: ASVn

COMMENTS: The additional wording is missing from most early manuscripts. Although it is possible that it was accidently omitted when copyists' eyes jumped from "and" to "and," there is no good reason why manuscript D should have accidently omitted the material in verse 56. That material seems to have come from Luke 19:10. It is likely that all the material was a marginal gloss that was added to the text by some copyists.

http://web.ovc.edu/terry/tc/lay07luk.htm