All About GOD - Growing Relationships with Jesus and Others
Pericope Adulterae: In or Out?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_and_the_woman_taken_in_adultery#...
We've discussed some the textual foundations upon which rest different Bible versions.
Earliest reference to the beloved story of the woman taken into adultery is late 4th/early 5th century. It doesn't appear in Bibles before that.
Should this passage be in the NIV?
With it bracketed in the NIV is it really "in" anyhow?
In the NIV deletion thread, David described "inerrancy" as applying to the original texts. Does that thus, make this passage other than inerrant Scripture?
Thoughts?
I'm interested in hearing various perspectives.
Views: 246
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Rita Cullimore on
-
Because the Bible is the inspired Word of God and we get all our TRUTH from it, and it is TRUTH from Genesis to Revelation, why would you care to track something outside of the Book?
Why would you care what man said?
Writers write what they think, whether it is TRUTH or fiction. They call it truth but is it? It is their truth as they see truth. Why not study a complete Bible (there are many out there, not just KJV) and learn God's TRUTH?
Somewhere along the line, NIV has edited the contents of the Bible to read as MAN wants it to read. What about what God wants? Where does He come into all this? Where do you let Him come in?
Jehovah's Witnesses (I don't thinkk so!) have so altered their Bible until it is just another work of fiction. But in their religion they are not allowed to use the real Bible.
When one uses a version of the Bible that isn't literal translation, they miss much of the TRUTH in God's Word.
Through prayer, the Holy Spirit will lead you to the REAL Book, with God's TRUTH all through it, and I would suggest that you stick with that to know what happened during Bible times and what didn't.
In the Bible are 66 books with over 40 writers, yet they don't contradict one another. That is my proof that God authored the Bible and inspired men to write it and to put it together as He would have it.
I pray blessings on you in the Name of Jesus, and pray that you will thirst for God's TRUTH as He wants it understood by us, His Children.
Rita
-
Permalink Reply by David Velasquez on
-
Until recently, it was not thought that any Greek Church Father had taken note of the passage before the 12th Century; but in 1941 a large collection of the writings of Didymus the Blind (ca. 313- 398) was discovered in Egypt, including a reference to the pericope adulterae as being found in "several copies"; and it is now considered established that this passage was present in its canonical place in many Greek manuscripts known in Alexandria and elsewhere from the 4th Century onwards. In support of this it is noted that the 4th century Codex Vaticanus, which was written in Egypt, marks the end of John chapter 7 with an "umlaut", indicating that an alternative reading was known at this point.
Jerome reports that the pericope adulterae was to be found in its canonical place in "many Greek and Latin manuscripts" in Rome and the Latin West in the late 4th Century. This is confirmed by the consensus of Latin Fathers of the 4th and 5th Centuries CE; including Ambrose, and Augustine. The latter claimed that the passage may have been improperly excluded from some manuscripts in order to avoid the impression that Christ had sanctioned adultery:
"Certain persons of little faith, or rather enemies of the true faith, fearing, I suppose, lest their wives should be given impunity in sinning, removed from their manuscripts the Lord's act of forgiveness toward the adulteress, as if he who had said, Sin no more, had granted permission to sin."[9]
[edit] History of textual criticism on John 7:53-8:11
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_and_the_woman_taken_in_adultery#...
By the early 200's, Origen of Alexandria may have been using the same 27 books found in modern New Testament editions, though there were still disputes over the canonicity of Hebrews, James, II Peter, II and III John, and Revelation (see also Antilegomena).[16] Likewise by 200 the Muratorian fragment shows that there existed a set of Christian writings somewhat similar to what is now the New Testament, which included four gospels and argued against objections to them.[17] Thus, while there was a good measure of debate in the Early Church over the New Testament canon, the major writings were accepted by almost all Christians by the middle of the third century.[18]
-
Permalink Reply by Leonard T on
-
Gary,
The NIV includes it in the same manner that it includes all of the other verses found in the later Greek manuscripts with a note to the reader for clarity. Does this passage in anyway cross Scripture, contradict or change the truth of God's Word as a whole? No it does not.
The recognition of God's word being inerrant "as originally given" means that the Word spoken to and recorded by the NT writers was absolutely the Words of God Himself as He intended. We do not have the originals, but we have thousands of manuscripts based upon the originals. Do we treat them as second had information? No, because of the profund accuracy between all of the manuscripts that are avaialble. Where a person chooses to focus in on a change of a word or number from one manuscipt to another in light of the rest of the text saying the same thing is quite ironic. Even in the areas where there are variations none of them change one doctrine of Scripture. The passage that speaks of the woman caught in adultery does not change or alter one doctrine, but aligns with the rest of Scripture. I appreciate the fact that the NIV lets us know that this is not found, for whatever reason, in the earliest known Scripture.
How is inerrancy affected by translators? Man, as careful he tries to be, will struggle to get it perfect when translating from Greek to English. They make a decision based upon the best information, context, definition, language rules, etc, to choose the correct word to use in completing the translation. Sometimes they seem to have not always chosen the best option. This does not diminish thier work, nor does it change the value of Scripture.
Lord Bless,
LT
-
Permalink Reply by Sharon Theresa Theil on
-
Does this passage in anyway cross Scripture, contradict or change the truth of God's Word as a whole? No it does not.
Actually, I think it does. Earlier in Matthew Jesus seems to support the stoning of a child who curses their parents, and again during the Sermon on the Mount Jesus states that His words should not be misconstrued as changing the Law in fact Jesus would condemn anyone who would change one dot of the Law! And part of that Law, that Jesus will not have changed, is the punishment for adultary-death.
Of course I could be totally wrong!
-
-
Sharon,
The short response to your comment is that I accept that there is an Old Covenant and New Covenant as described in Scripture. In fact God has actually given numerous covenants throughout time with each building on the prior leading up to the fulfillment in Christ that brings forth the New Covenant. Jesus did not change or as the Scripture says "did not come to abolish" the old. He came to fulfill it and establish the New Covenant. The Book of Hebrews speaks clearly of this especailly in chapters 7-10. The Books of Romans and Galatians are heavily focused on this while the Booke of Ephesians and Colossians make direct reference to it as well.
The principles of the moral law still exist, but the penalty has been nailed to the cross for the believer. The ceremonial law is complete in Christ and no further sacrifice is accepted. The civil law was given for Israel as the laws by which they would govern a nation. The church is not a geographical nation, but the body of Christ.
The Matthew 15 passage is Jesus rebuking the leaders for having forsaken the law of God and establishing their own rule to enable them to keep what they had and not be required to care for their elderly parents. He is quoting OT that still applied at the time as it was prior to His deatha nd resurrection.
Did Jesus condone adultery in the John passage in question? No. He chose to not condemn her to death by stoning. He did tell her that she must go and sin no more, implying the she was guilty of sin. The accusers are wrong in part by the fact that she was said to have been caught in adultery. That requires two people. Where is the man? By the OT Law he was to be stoned too. The whole premise of the group appears to have been to trap Jesus. His response leaves them speechless and actionless.
Lord Bless,
LT
-
-
LT,
Thank you! You have shed new light on this passage of scripture for me.
Sharon.
-
Permalink Reply by Gary on
-
I'm struggling interpretting these response.
Do you consider this passage:
- Inspired?
- God-breathed?
- Inerrant?
- Historical?
Feel free to define any of those terms if need be.
Yes?
No?
Maybe?
Dunno?
-
-
Gary,
The answer, as you already know, is that because of it absence from the earliest documents it leaves this one in doubt as to whether it is from God or added by man. We simply cannot know unless further historical evidence comes forth. That is the reason the NIV has chosen to mark it in the manner they have. The KJV included it based upon the information they had at the time. The question is not is it God breathed since at this time we cannot know for sure, but does it change any doctrine and how should it be taught and used?
Now many will try to run the trail backwards, and I hope that is not your intent. The story goes like this. If this is not God breathed and included how can we trust any of Scripture? They attack this point in order to attempt to undermine the whole of God's Word. Foolish attempt. The thousands of manuscripts available support with solid evidence, with minor variances, that the Scripture is God's Word as originally given and trustworthy.
Lord Bless,
LT
-
-
Good books to read are The Case for Christ (Lee Strobel) and Evidence that Demands a Verdict (Josh McDowell).
Lord Bless,
LT
-
-
LT, so if I interpret that as a "dunno" would that be fair? "Dunno" if it is inspired.
Would you say "dunno" too on whether or not it is historical?
Welcome to
All About GOD
The Good News
Meet Face-to-Face & Collaborate
© 2024 Created by AllAboutGOD.com.
Powered by
