RE: [textualcriticism] pericope de adultera and stemmatics
- At 03:56 PM 12/7/2004 +0100, Wieland Willker wrote:
>Andrew Criddle wrote:The wrap should be less of a problem here at:
>> If the history of the early text proposed for Mark by
>> Stephen Carlson on the basis of stemmatics is
>> applicable to John then this may throw light on the
>A stemma of John 4 can be found here:
>mind possible wrap.
Note that the John 4 stemma does not present the Byzantine text
in this part of John as a mixture of two different texts. I've
also improved my program since then, so perhaps I ought to rerun
it on the John 4 data to see if anything differs.
Stephen C. Carlson mailto:scarlson@...
"Poetry speaks of aspirations, and songs chant the words." Shujing 2.35
- Malcomb wrote:
<< One final note, the pericope presupposes that the Jews of Jesus'
ministry on earth had the authority to kill. This [is refuted]
elsewhere in the Gospel narrative.>>
There are a couple of problems with this assertion.
1) The text specifically says that this was a setup by the Scribes
and/or Pharisees. It should have been a lose/lose proposition for
Jesus: if he said "stone her," he would be in trouble with the Romans
for instigating a lynching, as alluded to in 18:31. If he said "free
her," he would be seen as "soft on crime" and loose popular support.
They did not, of course, forsee the third option, which made them out
to be the losers instead. But no authority under ROMAN law to execute
was ever claimed; only under MOSAIC law.
2) Lynchings by stoning did in fact occur during that era, as seen by
the examples of Stephen in Acts 7 and James in the History of