321BibleStudy.net
| Textual Criticism of the New Testament |
| Pericopa de Adultera (John 7:53-8:11) |
The passage of scripture containing the account of the woman taken in
adultery -- John 7:53-8:11 -- is called the Pericopa de Adultera. This
passage is double-bracketed (which means the passage is regarded as a
later addition to the text, but of evident antiquity and importance) by the
Westcott-Hort Greek Text, omitted by the Nestle's Greek Text,
double-bracketed by the United Bible Society Texts (2nd & 3rd editions),
single-bracketed (which means the passage is regarded as having
dubious textual validity) by the American Standard Version,
single-bracketed by the New American Standard Bible, single-bracketed
by the New International Version, and omitted by the Revised Standard
Version. The passage is included in the Textus Receptus, in the Majority
Text, in the King James Version and in the New King James Bible.
The question is: Does the passage belong to the word of God? or, has it
been incorrectly added to the Gospel of John?
The first matter of business in determining the validity of a passage is
realizing what evidence needs to be examined in order to come to a
conclusion. [We will discuss these further as we examine them.] There
are three things that most textual critics examine. 1. Does the passage
fit into the flow of the context? 2. Is the literary style of the passage
compatible with the supposed author? And, lastly and most
importantly, 3. What evidence do we find for the passage in the
manuscripts, lectionaries, ancient versions, and quotations of early
writers?
We shall look at each of these three areas in determining the textual
validity, or authenticity and genuineness of John 7:53-8:11, the
Pericopa de Adultera.
1. DOES THE PASSAGE FIT INTO THE FLOW OF THE CONTEXT?
Those who reject this passage as being authentic rely heavily upon the
alleged incongruity of this story with the context. They feel the story of
the woman taken in adultery interrupts the "flow of Jesus" sojourn in
Jerusalem. However, a careful reading of the passage where it is found
shows it to be perfectly compatible to the context which surrounds it, and
even helpful in completing the picture.
In verse 32 of the 7th chapter, we read: "The Pharisees heard that the
people murmured such things concerning Him [i.e., indicating He was the
Christ] and the Pharisees and chief priests sent officers to take Him."
Beginning with verse 45 these officers report back to the Pharisees. This
meeting between the chief priests and the Pharisees and the officers is
still in progress in verse 52.
Without the passage in question (7:53-8:11), the next verse (8:12) would
begin: "Then spake Jesus again unto them,..." There is no end to the
conspiracy meeting of the chief priests, Pharisees and officers. There is
no context for the place of Jesus' words beginning at 8:12. There is no
contrast between the light which Jesus is, and the darkness which the
scribes and the Pharisees have shown themselves to be by their sinful
conduct.
"Nor is the narrative improperly suited to the place where it is found in
the overwhelming majority of the nine hundred copies which contain it.
On the contrary, a setting at the Feast of Tabernacles (cf. 7:2,14) is ideal
for the story. It was on just such an occasion, when Jerusalem was
crowded with pilgrims, that strangers might be thrown together with the
resulting sin around which the story centers. An interview with a
woman in a court of the temple would likely have been in the Court of the
Women. And this evidently where Jesus was, as the reference to the
'treasury' in 8:20 indicates. Moreover, the way in which the woman's
accusers are driven to cover by the moral exposure which Jesus brings
upon them furnishes a suggestive introduction to the initial Johannine
reference to the Lord as the Light of the World (8:12). The setting of the
incident at daybreak is likewise suitable (cf. 8:2) since the rising sun
furnishes the natural backdrop for the same title. It is in fact to the sun
(not the temple candelabra, as Hort thought) that the title Light of the
World refers (cf. 9:4,5; 11:9). Finally, as the Qumran find have shown (cf.
1QS iii 6-7), the thought of forgiveness of sin experienced here by the
woman is properly linked to the phrase 'light of life' (8:12)." [The Greek
New Testament According to the Majority Text; edited by Zane C.
Hodges and Arthur L. Farstad; Thomas Nelson Publishers; 1982; p. xxiv].
The context suffers not by the addition of the passage (7:53-8:11), but its
omission.
There is no justification for the rejection of the passage upon the grounds
of interrupting the flow of thought. In fact, contextual considerations
favor its inclusion.
By the way, upon what basis is the assumption made that contextual
considerations made by men would be superior to the contextual
selection of the Holy Spirit? The idea that men, upon the basis of literary
context, can determine where a passage belongs in the Bible is rather
presumptuous. That would mean we can determine what and how the
Holy Spirit would say something. That is not in the natural man (1
Corinthians 2:14).
2. Is the literary style of the passage compatible with the supposed
author?
In the case of John 7:53-8:11, this means: Is the passage written in the
same style as John wrote the rest of his Gospel? Those who reject the
passage claim that the style (i.e., the choice of words and the use of
grammar) of these verses is contrary to that found in the remainder of the
book. Thus, they claim the passage not to be a part of the Gospel of John.
"There is no compelling reason to doubt that the story is originally
Johannine, despite the prevailing contrary opinion. Among the marks of
Johannine style which it exhibits, none is clearer than the phrase in 8:6:
touto de elegon peirazontes auton. This is a pure and simple
Johannism, which is evident by comparison with 6:6; 7:39; 11:51;
12:6,33; and 21:19. Likewise the use of the vocative gunai (8:10) by
Jesus to address a woman is a Johannine characteristic (cf. 2:4; 4:21;
19:26; CF. ALSO 20:13,15). The phrase uaketi amartane (8:11) occurs
nowhere else in the New Testament, except John 5:14, and the historic
present of agousi (8:3) is consonant with John's frequent use of this
idiom." [Ibid.; pp. xxiii-xxiv].
"In view of the features of Johannine style that have been noted and the
narrative's almost unique suitability to this context, the idea that the
passage isnot authentically Johannine must finally be dismissed. If it is
not an original part of the Fourth Gospel, its writer would have to be
viewed as a skilled Johannine imitator, and its placement in this context
as the shrewdest piece of interpolation in literary history!" [Ibid.; p. xxiv].
3. What evidence do we find for the passage in the manuscripts
(papyri, uncials, minuscules), lectionaries, ancient versions and
quotations of early writers?
The passasge is found in twelve (12) uncial manuscripts [dating from the
6th through the 9th centuries] and thirty-five (35) minuscules [dating
from the 9th through the 15th centuries], plus the majority of the
Byzantine manuscripts, which are not included in the above count. This
brings the count of manuscripts to more than nine hundred (900) which
include the passage.
The majority of the passage (8:1-11 in one, and 8:3-11 in the others) is
found in six (6) lectionaries, though it is missing in the majority of
lectionaries. However, this is not surprising since lectionaries only
include select readings.
The passage is found in fourteen (14) ancient versions [Syriac, Coptic,
Old Latin, Armenian and Ethiopic -- dating from the 2nd century to the
13th century].
Seven (7) early writers quote the passage [from the 3rd century to 430
a.d.].
It is interesting to note that from the 9th century on, the passage is firmly
accepted on the evidence available. It waits until the 19th century to say
the passage is fraudulent.
The manuscript evidence, excluding the Byzantine texts (which
comprise the vast majority -- up to 95% -- of manuscripts extant), is
numerically seventy-five (75) to fifty (50) in favor of the inclusion of the
passage.
Once the testimony of the Byzantine texts is added, the result is more
than nine hundred (900) manuscripts, plus versions, lictionaries, and
early writers in favor of the passage. Therefore, unless one arbitrarily
determines the Egyptian texts to contain the purest text, the passage is
overwhelmingly verified as part of the original text.
The conclusion
Therefore, utilizing all three areas of textual criticism, the Pericopa de
Adultera belongs in the Gospel According to John following 7:52. Those
who remove it are in error. They are guilty of subtracting from the word
of God, and have the anathema of God upon them unless they repent.
"I marvel that you are so soon removed from Him that called you into the
grace of Christ unto another gospel: which is not another; but there be some
that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or
an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we
have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I
now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that which we
have received, let him be accursed." (Galatians 1:6-10)
"For I testify unto every man that hears the words of the prophecy of this
book, if any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the
plagues that are written in this book: and if any man shall take away from
the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of
the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are
written in this book." (Revelation 22:18,19)
adultery -- John 7:53-8:11 -- is called the Pericopa de Adultera. This
passage is double-bracketed (which means the passage is regarded as a
later addition to the text, but of evident antiquity and importance) by the
Westcott-Hort Greek Text, omitted by the Nestle's Greek Text,
double-bracketed by the United Bible Society Texts (2nd & 3rd editions),
single-bracketed (which means the passage is regarded as having
dubious textual validity) by the American Standard Version,
single-bracketed by the New American Standard Bible, single-bracketed
by the New International Version, and omitted by the Revised Standard
Version. The passage is included in the Textus Receptus, in the Majority
Text, in the King James Version and in the New King James Bible.
The question is: Does the passage belong to the word of God? or, has it
been incorrectly added to the Gospel of John?
The first matter of business in determining the validity of a passage is
realizing what evidence needs to be examined in order to come to a
conclusion. [We will discuss these further as we examine them.] There
are three things that most textual critics examine. 1. Does the passage
fit into the flow of the context? 2. Is the literary style of the passage
compatible with the supposed author? And, lastly and most
importantly, 3. What evidence do we find for the passage in the
manuscripts, lectionaries, ancient versions, and quotations of early
writers?
We shall look at each of these three areas in determining the textual
validity, or authenticity and genuineness of John 7:53-8:11, the
Pericopa de Adultera.
1. DOES THE PASSAGE FIT INTO THE FLOW OF THE CONTEXT?
Those who reject this passage as being authentic rely heavily upon the
alleged incongruity of this story with the context. They feel the story of
the woman taken in adultery interrupts the "flow of Jesus" sojourn in
Jerusalem. However, a careful reading of the passage where it is found
shows it to be perfectly compatible to the context which surrounds it, and
even helpful in completing the picture.
In verse 32 of the 7th chapter, we read: "The Pharisees heard that the
people murmured such things concerning Him [i.e., indicating He was the
Christ] and the Pharisees and chief priests sent officers to take Him."
Beginning with verse 45 these officers report back to the Pharisees. This
meeting between the chief priests and the Pharisees and the officers is
still in progress in verse 52.
Without the passage in question (7:53-8:11), the next verse (8:12) would
begin: "Then spake Jesus again unto them,..." There is no end to the
conspiracy meeting of the chief priests, Pharisees and officers. There is
no context for the place of Jesus' words beginning at 8:12. There is no
contrast between the light which Jesus is, and the darkness which the
scribes and the Pharisees have shown themselves to be by their sinful
conduct.
"Nor is the narrative improperly suited to the place where it is found in
the overwhelming majority of the nine hundred copies which contain it.
On the contrary, a setting at the Feast of Tabernacles (cf. 7:2,14) is ideal
for the story. It was on just such an occasion, when Jerusalem was
crowded with pilgrims, that strangers might be thrown together with the
resulting sin around which the story centers. An interview with a
woman in a court of the temple would likely have been in the Court of the
Women. And this evidently where Jesus was, as the reference to the
'treasury' in 8:20 indicates. Moreover, the way in which the woman's
accusers are driven to cover by the moral exposure which Jesus brings
upon them furnishes a suggestive introduction to the initial Johannine
reference to the Lord as the Light of the World (8:12). The setting of the
incident at daybreak is likewise suitable (cf. 8:2) since the rising sun
furnishes the natural backdrop for the same title. It is in fact to the sun
(not the temple candelabra, as Hort thought) that the title Light of the
World refers (cf. 9:4,5; 11:9). Finally, as the Qumran find have shown (cf.
1QS iii 6-7), the thought of forgiveness of sin experienced here by the
woman is properly linked to the phrase 'light of life' (8:12)." [The Greek
New Testament According to the Majority Text; edited by Zane C.
Hodges and Arthur L. Farstad; Thomas Nelson Publishers; 1982; p. xxiv].
The context suffers not by the addition of the passage (7:53-8:11), but its
omission.
There is no justification for the rejection of the passage upon the grounds
of interrupting the flow of thought. In fact, contextual considerations
favor its inclusion.
By the way, upon what basis is the assumption made that contextual
considerations made by men would be superior to the contextual
selection of the Holy Spirit? The idea that men, upon the basis of literary
context, can determine where a passage belongs in the Bible is rather
presumptuous. That would mean we can determine what and how the
Holy Spirit would say something. That is not in the natural man (1
Corinthians 2:14).
2. Is the literary style of the passage compatible with the supposed
author?
In the case of John 7:53-8:11, this means: Is the passage written in the
same style as John wrote the rest of his Gospel? Those who reject the
passage claim that the style (i.e., the choice of words and the use of
grammar) of these verses is contrary to that found in the remainder of the
book. Thus, they claim the passage not to be a part of the Gospel of John.
"There is no compelling reason to doubt that the story is originally
Johannine, despite the prevailing contrary opinion. Among the marks of
Johannine style which it exhibits, none is clearer than the phrase in 8:6:
touto de elegon peirazontes auton. This is a pure and simple
Johannism, which is evident by comparison with 6:6; 7:39; 11:51;
12:6,33; and 21:19. Likewise the use of the vocative gunai (8:10) by
Jesus to address a woman is a Johannine characteristic (cf. 2:4; 4:21;
19:26; CF. ALSO 20:13,15). The phrase uaketi amartane (8:11) occurs
nowhere else in the New Testament, except John 5:14, and the historic
present of agousi (8:3) is consonant with John's frequent use of this
idiom." [Ibid.; pp. xxiii-xxiv].
"In view of the features of Johannine style that have been noted and the
narrative's almost unique suitability to this context, the idea that the
passage isnot authentically Johannine must finally be dismissed. If it is
not an original part of the Fourth Gospel, its writer would have to be
viewed as a skilled Johannine imitator, and its placement in this context
as the shrewdest piece of interpolation in literary history!" [Ibid.; p. xxiv].
3. What evidence do we find for the passage in the manuscripts
(papyri, uncials, minuscules), lectionaries, ancient versions and
quotations of early writers?
The passasge is found in twelve (12) uncial manuscripts [dating from the
6th through the 9th centuries] and thirty-five (35) minuscules [dating
from the 9th through the 15th centuries], plus the majority of the
Byzantine manuscripts, which are not included in the above count. This
brings the count of manuscripts to more than nine hundred (900) which
include the passage.
The majority of the passage (8:1-11 in one, and 8:3-11 in the others) is
found in six (6) lectionaries, though it is missing in the majority of
lectionaries. However, this is not surprising since lectionaries only
include select readings.
The passage is found in fourteen (14) ancient versions [Syriac, Coptic,
Old Latin, Armenian and Ethiopic -- dating from the 2nd century to the
13th century].
Seven (7) early writers quote the passage [from the 3rd century to 430
a.d.].
It is interesting to note that from the 9th century on, the passage is firmly
accepted on the evidence available. It waits until the 19th century to say
the passage is fraudulent.
The manuscript evidence, excluding the Byzantine texts (which
comprise the vast majority -- up to 95% -- of manuscripts extant), is
numerically seventy-five (75) to fifty (50) in favor of the inclusion of the
passage.
Once the testimony of the Byzantine texts is added, the result is more
than nine hundred (900) manuscripts, plus versions, lictionaries, and
early writers in favor of the passage. Therefore, unless one arbitrarily
determines the Egyptian texts to contain the purest text, the passage is
overwhelmingly verified as part of the original text.
The conclusion
Therefore, utilizing all three areas of textual criticism, the Pericopa de
Adultera belongs in the Gospel According to John following 7:52. Those
who remove it are in error. They are guilty of subtracting from the word
of God, and have the anathema of God upon them unless they repent.
"I marvel that you are so soon removed from Him that called you into the
grace of Christ unto another gospel: which is not another; but there be some
that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or
an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we
have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I
now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that which we
have received, let him be accursed." (Galatians 1:6-10)
"For I testify unto every man that hears the words of the prophecy of this
book, if any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the
plagues that are written in this book: and if any man shall take away from
the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of
the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are
written in this book." (Revelation 22:18,19)