Kinney : Pericope Adulturae

[하토브.]

Will Kinney

trsodSnopeu0g 17i2b2l8a60r 22cl3hi4il6eca26aD050e301938,me20  · 

John 7:53-8:11 the woman taken in adultery.

Edward F. Hills, in his book The King James Version Defended, and many others who defend the traditional text of the Reformation Bibles all basically tell us the following: The story of the woman taken in adultery in John 7:53-8:11 is called the pericope de adultera.

Why the Story of the Woman Caught in Adultery Belongs in the Bible by Dr. Edward F. Hills, The King James Version Defended, pp. 150-159.

https://purelypresbyterian.com/.../defense-of-the.../

Modernistic scholars have attempted to remove this whole passage from the Bible. According to Westcott, “This account of a most characteristic incident in the Lord’s life is certainly not a part of John’s narrative.” Not only has it been said that the pericope de adultera was not a part of John’s Gospel, both Westcott and Hort insisted that the story “has no right to a place in the text of the four Gospels.”

The Westcott-Hort based NIV has this misleading statement concerning the authenticity of John 7:53-8:11: “[The earliest and most reliable manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not have John 7:53-8:11].” What are these so called “earliest” and “most reliable” manuscripts which do not have the pericope de adultera? They are Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus, both 4th century manuscripts. Those who reject the pericope de adultera do so on a presuppositional bias that these 2 codices which omit it are superior manuscripts.

Are the above codices really reliable? According to Dean Burgon, a renowned Bible defender of the last century, the codices Vaticanus and Sinaiticus are among “the most corrupt copies in existence.”

Burgon wrote, “I am able to demonstrate that every one of them singly is in a high degree corrupt, and is condemned upon evidence older than itself”.

Although these two codices may be “earliest” they are by no means “most reliable.”

See some clear and concrete examples of the true nature of these so called “oldest and best manuscripts” by seeing how they actually read in my comparative study here -

“The Oldest and Best Manuscripts?”

The true character of the so called "Oldest and Best Manuscripts" Part One - Matthew thru Luke.

http://brandplucked.com/oldest-and-best-one.html

The True Character of the so called "oldest and best" manuscripts Part Two - John to Revelation.

http://brandplucked.com/oldest-and-best-part-2.html

There is abundant evidence in support of the authenticity of John 7:53-8:11. All these verses are found (1) in many Greek uncials [D, E, G, H, K, M, S, T, U, Gamma, Lambda, Pi] and minuscules mainly of the Majority or Byzantine text-type, (2) in the ancient versions or translations: Old Latin [aur, b, c, d, e, ff2, j, g1, r1], Latin Vulgate, Syriac Peshitta [Lamsa 1933, Murdock's Translation of the Aramaic N.T. 1852], Coptic Boharic, Armenian, and Ethiopic, and (3) in the writings of the Church Fathers: Didascalia, Ambrosiaster, Apostolic Constitutions, Ambrose, Jerome, and Augustine.

Jerome (AD 340-420), the translator of the Latin Bible called the Vulgate, said this about the pericope de adultera: “. . . in the Gospel according to John IN MANY MANUSCRIPTS, BOTH GREEK AND LATIN, IS FOUND THE STORY OF THE ADULTEROUS WOMAN who was accused before the Lord.” Jerome considered the pericope genuine, and included it in his Vulgate.

Bible critics like James White and Dan Wallace, who couldn’t tell you where to get a copy of the infallible Bible they both PROFESS to believe in if their lives depended on it, tell us: “This text has no place in Scripture; I will never preach from it!,” should heed the words of Calvin who said: “it has always been received by the Latin Churches, AND IS FOUND IN MANY OLD GREEK MANUSCRIPTS, and contains nothing unworthy of an Apostolic Spirit, there is no reason why we should refuse to apply it to our advantage.”

The textual evidence for the inclusion of John 7:53 to John 8:11 is both massive and widespread. According to Jack Moorman, it is the reading found in the vast Majority of all remaining Greek manuscripts that we have today, including the uncial copies of D, E, G, H, K, M, S, U, Gamma, Lambda, Pi and Omega. It is found in the remaining copies of the Old Latin aur, b, c, d, e, ff2, j, g1, and r1. (See Early Manuscripts and the Authorized Version, A Closer Look, by Jack A. Moorman)

It is also found in the Syriac Palestinian version, some Coptic Boharic copies, the Armenian and Ethiopic ancient versions as well as the early Latin Vulgate of 385 A.D. and 415 A.D. It is also in Murdock’s 1852 and Lamsa’s 1933 translation of the Syriac Peshitta. They are also included in the Aramaic Bible in Plain English 2011, the Greek Bibles used all over the world by the Greek Orthodox churches and are in the Modern Hebrew Bibles as well.

As noted by many textual scholars, perhaps the reason it had disappeared from some copies was due to the nature of the text itself in that Jesus freely forgave a woman taken in the very act of adultery.

Augustine (354-430 A.D.) wrote: "Some of little faith, I suppose from a fear lest their wives should gain impunity in sin, REMOVED FROM THEIR MSS THE LORD'S ACT OF INDULGENCE TO THE ADULTERESS."

Paul J. Barth, in a debate with James White, writes:

http://confessionalbibliology.com/.../response-to-james.../

Paul J. Barth writes: "I will list some early church testimony that sufficiently disproves Dr. White’s assertion that the Pericope Adulterae did not exist until the 5th century. The Diatesseran (a harmony of the Gospels from the 2nd century) quotes it (although Schaff’s publication doesn’t contain it because it was based on a single Arabic manuscript, nearly all other Diatessaran manuscripts that have been discovered since have included it). The Didaskalia (3rd century) and the Apostolic Constitutions (4th century) quote it. Jerome and Augustine both comment on it, and Augustine SAID WICKED SCRIBES WERE REMOVING IT. Didymus the Blind (a Greek father) in the 4th century quotes it and Papias (2nd century) references it. Considering these things it would seem that the account was in manuscripts before the 5th century that are no longer extant.

In short, we have no legitimate reason to doubt Augustine’s testimony about the passage being removed from manuscripts and certainly no reason to dismiss it out of hand without at least serious consideration.”

The entire passage is found in the following Bible translations - The Anglo Saxon Gospels Corpus Christi Manuscript 140, circa 1000 A.D., Wycliffe’s Bible 1395, Tyndale 1525, Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew’s Bible 1549, the Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Douay-Rheims 1582, the Geneva Bible 1587, the Beza N.T. 1599, Mace’s N.T. 1729, Whiston’s N.T. 1745, John Wesley’s N.T. 1755, the Living Oracles 1835, the Revised Version 1881, Darby 1890, Young’s 1898, ASV 1901, the Aramaic Bible in Plain English, Weymouth, NRSV, ESV, NASB, NIV, Holman Standard, ISV (International Standard Version) 2014, Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011, St. Joseph NAB 1970, New Jerusalem bible 1985 and Dan Wallace’s NET version (though he denies that it is inspired Scripture)

Other Bibles that include John 7:52-8:11 are The Word of Yah 1993, the Interlinear Greek N.T. 1997 (Larry Pierce), the Lawrie Translation 1998, The Koster Scriptures 1998, God's First Truth 1999, The Last Days N.T. 1999, The Sacred Scriptures Family of Yah 2001, The Apostolic Polyglot Bible 2003, The Resurrection Life N.T. 2005, Green's Literal 2005, The Pickering N.T. 2005, the Concordant Version 2006, the Context Group Version 2007, The Bond Slave Version 2008, the Faithful N.T. 2009, The English Majority Text Version 2009, World English Bible 2000, the New European Version 2010, The Holy Scriptures VW Edition 2010, the Online Interlinear 2010 (André de Mol), the Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, Biblos Interlinear Bible 2011, A Translation For Translators 2011, The Far Above All Translation 2011, The Common English Bible 2011, The Mounce N.T. 2011, The Work of God's Children Illustrated Bible 2011, The Voice 2012, The Lexham English Bible 2012, The Voice 2012, The Concordant Version 2012, the Interlinear Hebrew-Greek Scriptures 2012, the World English Bible 2012, The English Majority Text N.T. 2013, The Hebrew Names Version 2014, The Open English Bible 2014, The Pioneer's N.T. 2014, The Modern Literal N.T. 2014, The New International Reader's Version 2014, The International Standard Version 2014, the Modern English Bible 2014 and The Hebraic Roots Bible 2015.

Many of the modern Vatican Versions, which are based on the UBS/Nestle-Aland/Vatican critical Greek texts, like the ESV, NIV, NASB, NET and Holman include all these verses but they [bracket them] to indicate doubt as to their authenticity. IF they really do not believe they are inspired Scripture, let let them be honest and consistent about it and simply remove them as the liberal RSV did back in 1946.

This IS the text of ALL Reformation Bible in all languages and it is still the text of the Greek Orthodox churches around the world today. All these verses are also included in the Modern Hebrew Bible and in the Aramaic New Testament 2011.

Among Foreign Language Bibles, all these verses are found in the following Bible translations: Luther’s German Bible 1545 and the German Schlachter bible of 2000, the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1569, Cipriano de Valera 1602, Reina Valera 1909-1995, the French Martin 1744, French Ostervald 1996 and French Louis Second 2007, Afrikaans Bible 1953, the Dutch Staten Vertaling Bible, the Russian Synodal Bible, the Swedish Bible 1917, the Tagalog Ang Dating Bible, the Turkish bible, Ukranian Bible, Vietnamese Bible, Chinese Union Traditional Bible, the Arabic Bible, the Albanian bible, Bavarian, Bulgarian, Czech, Croatian and Danish Bibles, the Hungarian Karoli bible, the Romanian Fidela Bible 2014, Finnish bible, and the Italian Diodati 1649, Nuova Diodati 1991 and Riveduta Bible of 2007, the Portuguese O Livro 2000 and the Almeida Bible 2009, the Romanian Fidela Bible 2014.

Virtually every Bible in all languages on the earth throughout history contain these verses from John 7:53 to John 8:11, and yet we have many Bible critics among us today like James White, Dan Wallace and other new Vatican Version promoters telling even those who are using these modern, inferior UBS/Nestle-Aland critical text versions that they aren’t really the 100% pure and infallible words of the living God.

And then they hypocritically will stand in the pulpit and issue dire warnings about how the Bible is under attack today like at no other time in history and they are here to defend it. Yet is they themselves who couldn’t show you or anybody else ANY Bible in ANY language that they PROFESS (and lie about) to believe is the infallible words of God. Don’t believe me? Then simply ask either one of these men to tell you where you can get a copy of this infallible Bible they both SAY they believe in. They will NEVER do it.

Get yourself a copy of the only Bible believed by multiplied thousands of God’s blood bought children to be the complete, inspired and 100% true and infallible words of the living God and the one He has born witness to in history like no other - the Authorized King James Holy Bible. It is always right.

“He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.” Luke 8:8

“Thy words were found, and I did eat them; and thy word was unto me the joy and rejoicing of mine heart; for I am called by thy name, O LORD God of hosts.” Jeremiah 15:16

confessionalbibliology.com

Response to James White on Augustine and the Pericope Adulterae

Response to James White on Augustine and the Pe

https://www.facebook.com/willjkinney/posts/pfbid0BTxfKDr25xJrSGFbtVDUKvHUCLMisqBrmBiNC5UtoCNLjx4QHLL1VpDonRPSRKAQl

로그인 또는 가입하여 보기