Re: [textualcriticism] pericope de adultera and stemmatics
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stephen C. Carlson" <scarlson@...>
Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 7:10 PM
Subject: RE: [textualcriticism] pericope de adultera and stemmatics
> At 03:56 PM 12/7/2004 +0100, Wieland Willker wrote:
> >Andrew Criddle wrote:
> >> 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
> >> problem.
> >A stemma of John 4 can be found here:
> >mind possible wrap.
> The wrap should be less of a problem here at:
> 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.
The central point is that Codex Petropolitanus (N) in John 4 is classed
as a pre-Byzantine text (along with q in the Old Latin which also omits
the pericope). rather than as a primitive Byzantine text. as in Mark.
If this is valid then N is not evidence in John for the early Byzantine
text but rather for a precursor to that text. Hence it cannot be used
as direct evidence for the absence of the pericope in the early
Byzantine text proper.
However the apparent absence of the pericope in codex Alexandrinus
and its presence with obelisks IIUC in Codex Basiliensis (E)
together with its absence from the immediate precursor of the
Byzantine text, may indicate that the very early Byzantine text did
not contain the pericope.
- 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