- Just to clarify, could this mean that he did in fact find it in John *as well as* some other gospels (I know some mss. have it in Luke) or could mean he foundMessage 1 of 60 , Oct 10, 2008View SourceJust to clarify, could this mean that he did in fact find it in John *as well as* some other
gospels (I know some mss. have it in Luke) or could mean he found it in gospels other than
John? Am I correct in concluding that we don't actually know what gospels he found it in?
On 10 Oct 2008 at 14:14, Bart Ehrman wrote:
> Yes, let me stress that Didymus end of fourth century, does not indicate that he found it in
> John, but in "some Gospels" (note, he does *not* sayin "some manuscripts of the Gospel"!).
> -- BDE
> Bart D. Ehrman
> James A. Gray Professor
> Department of Religious Studies
> University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
> From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf
> Of Wieland Willker
> Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 2:12 PM
> To: email@example.com
> Subject: [textualcriticism] Re: The Pericope de Adultera and Greek Lectionary influence
> Please distinguish between the story as such and the story
> IN JOHN.
> The earliest external evidence shows no knowledge of the
> pericope in John. The earliest clear evidence for the PA in
> John is from the 4th CE. Our earliest MSS are from the 5th
> On the other hand a story of this kind was known from the
> earliest times (Papias, Didaskalia). The PA entered the
> Gospel of John probably somewhere in the 3rd CE, but
> remained in dispute. It took a long time until its
> There is no convincing evidence that the PA was originally
> part of the Gospel of John.
> The history of the PA remains largely in darkness. We have
> only occasional spots of light, but the connecting lines are
> Regarding St. Pelagia please check this list at message 294
> (follow-up of # 286) by Steve Puluka. It's dubious evidence.
> http://groups. yahoo.com/group/textualcriticism/message/294
> Best wishes
> Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
> Textcritical Commentary:
> http://www.uni-bremen.de/ ~wie/TCG/index.html
"I'll hold the nail. And when I nod my head, you hit it with the hammer."
- Malcomb wrote:Message 60 of 60 , Oct 15, 2008View SourceMalcomb 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