|
|
 | | From: | admin | | Subject: | The Appendix A- Which Version #3 | | Date: | Tue, 23 Nov 2004 00:08:57 GMT |
|
|
 | This a continuing post from the Book "Which Version is the
Bible" by Floyd Nolen Jones. Appendix A, pages 121-141
Which Version is the Bible?
Copyright 1995 · Floyd Jones Ministries, Inc.
All Rights Reserved. This book may be freely reproduced in any form as long
as it is not distributed for any material gain or profit.
Majestically, we have seen the Lord Jesus the Christ in an awesome display
of wisdom, mercy, love and compassion employ only several Scriptures from
the Law and merely 15 words (only 9 in the Greek) to vanquish the wicked.
Then with only 21 words (Greek = 18), He both judged and restored a sinning
saint. Truly - He is Worthy!
BACK TO THE PROBLEM Why then was the story deleted or footnoted? Again, no
name was given for the man but had he not been influential (even a scribe or
Pharisee) he would have been brought out with the woman. Perhaps a certain
religious Gnostic (Origen) who walked about castrated and barefoot while
trying to work his way into the Kingdom of God might be offended by a story
which, as originally written, exposed a religious leader as having committed
adultery. Of this we are not certain, but as to the interpretation of the
story given above, that we proclaim to the glory of God.
Tragically, most naturalistic scholars today feel so certain that the
pericope is not genuine that they regard further discussion of the matter as
unprofitable. Their arguments against the authenticity of the section are
largely arguments from silence and the most telling of these silences is
generally thought to be that of the Greek Church "Fathers". Bruce Metzger
(1964) affirms that no Greek Father refers to the pericope until the first
part of the 12th century. For the critic, this frail external evidence is
conclusive. However, Constantine von Tischendorf lists nine manuscripts of
the 9th century which contain the verses under discussion and also one which
may be of the 8th century. Yet not one Father commented upon these verses
from the 9th until the 12th century, demonstrating that silence is not a
trustworthy measure upon which to place one's confidence. The entire matter
of this silence is of no force whatsoever as we shall demonstrate.
First, we remind the reader that many of the Greek Fathers may well have
been influenced against the pericope by the moralistic prejudice of which we
have spoken; also, some may have been intimidated by the fact that several
manuscripts known to them omitted it. Augustine wrote that these verses were
being left out by some "lest their wives should be given impunity in
sinning." Hills adds that a 10th century Greek named Nikon accused the
Armenians of removing the account because "it was harmful for most persons
to listen to such things".
Burgon mentions another most relevant reason why these early Fathers did not
comment on this section. Their comments were connected to the subject matter
they preached and the "pericope de adultera" was omitted from the ancient
Pentecostal lesson of the Church. Burgon concludes that this is why
Chrysostom (345-407) and Cyril (376-444), two early church Fathers, "in
publicly commenting on John's Gospel, pass straight from ch. 7:52 to ch.
8:12. Of course they do. Why should they - indeed, how could they - comment
on what was not publicly read before the congregation?"
Hills continues: "At a very early date it had become customary throughout
the Greek Church to read John 7:37-8:12 on the day of Pentecost. This lesson
began with 7:37-39, verses that are very appropriate to the Pentecostal
feast day in which the outpouring of the Holy Spirit is commemorated: 'In
the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If
any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink ... But this spake he of the
Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive.' Then the lesson
continued through John 7:52, omitting 7:53-8:11, and concluded with John
8:12 - 'Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the
world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the
light of life.'"
GREEKS BEARING ANSWERS Why then was the story of the Adulteress omitted from
the Pentecostal lesson? Obviously because it was inappropriate to the
central idea of Pentecost. However, the critics insist that it was not read
because it was not part of the Gospel of John at the time the Pentecostal
lesson was selected - that it was added to the original reading hundreds of
years later. Yet by so insisting they shoot themselves in the foot. As Hills
has asked: "Why would a scribe introduce this story about an adulteress into
the midst of the ancient lesson for Pentecost? How would it ever occur to
anyone to do this?" Besides, such a well known section could not be altered
without the Church's awareness of the change and, tradition bound as people
are, an outcry of major proportion would have been forthcoming from clergy
and laity alike. Also, such a momentous change would have aroused much
written protest and debate. Where is the historical evidence of such - but
forgive us - we now argue from silence!
|
|
| | From: | admin | | Subject: | Re: The Appendix A- Which Version #1 | | Date: | Tue, 30 Nov 2004 06:11:17 GMT |
|
|
| #1THIS IS POST #1 OF 4 POSTS ON APPENDIX
This a continuing post from the Book "Which Version is the
Bible" by Floyd Nolen Jones. Appendix A, pages 121-141
Which Version is the Bible?
Copyright 1995 · Floyd Jones Ministries, Inc.
All Rights Reserved. This book may be freely reproduced in any form as long
as it is not distributed for any material gain or profit.
APPENDIX A - The Pericope de Adultera JOHN 8:1-11
The story of the woman taken in the act of adultery.
Most New Versions: The story is omitted or footnoted.
Comment: If the woman were caught in the very act, where was the man? God
required that both should be stoned (Lev.20:10; Deu.22:22-24). Jesus knew
the entire matter was a set up for the purpose of placing Him on the horns
of a dilemma. If He said stone her according to the Law of the O.T., He
would be in trouble with the Roman authorities. If He said to release her
from the demand of the Law, the people would reject His claims as Messiah
for Messiah would never go against the Word of God.
One reason that so many religious leaders and laymen oppose the inclusion of
these verses, called the pericope de adultera in theological-scholastic
circles ("pericope" is a short selection from a book), is due to their lack
of understanding it and thus an inability to properly exegete the story. The
forgiveness which Christ bestowed upon the adulteress is contrary to the
conviction of many that the punishment for adultery should be very severe.
For most, the solution is to merely conclude that Jesus' coming to earth has
somehow nullified the Laws of God; that God no longer punishes sin but has
now "become" a God of mercy, love and compassion. The story seems to offer
too many inexplicable contradictory problems for most, and since they cannot
understand the verses - they raise their vote to exclude them from the
Scriptures. It requires great humility to admit lack of insight. Such men
rarely will humble their intellect before God, constantly labeling paradoxes
contained within the covers of the Bible as "unfortunate scribal errors"
simply because their wisdom has failed to unravel the paradox.
Far better to confess lack of scholarship, understanding or lack of
revelation than to insist, as most do, that the short-coming must be with
the Scriptures themselves (Man's pride and ego must be served at all cost!).
Many of us are self deceived, imagining that we "believe" the Word of God.
The Lord has deliberately written as He has to bring us to the point of
honesty. When we are confronted with seemingly contradictory places in
Scripture, what is our response? The response reveals the actual condition
of the heart and ego. Do we now still believe or do we place our intellects
above the Word, deciding that because we could not solve the apparent
discrepancy - the Scripture must contain error.
Although not claiming inerrant insight into all such matters, we do not
allow any errors within the Holy Writ - scribal or otherwise. We confess
ignorance, even hardness of heart, in areas that result in our lack of
revelation from above. We cannot explain all paradoxical parts of Scripture,
but in calm assurance we rest in faith that the solutions are present within
the pages of Scripture itself. No outside information need be brought to
bear on the problem to "add light" to the Word. How does one add light to
blinding revelation?
THE "PERICOPE" EXPLAINED As to the story before us, we find Jesus conducting
a "Bible study" at the Temple area. Suddenly the lesson is interrupted by a
commotion as the scribes and Pharisees cast before Jesus and the "Church" a
terrified believer, possibly clutching ashamedly at a bed sheet in an
attempt to clotheherself and hide her humiliation. These religious leaders
care nothing for her life or her shame. For them she is but the means, the
bait for the trap with which they seek to hopelessly ensnare our Lord. These
men are not "seekers of truth" as they pretend. Their motive is to secure
the death of their antagonist, and if this woman must die also in securing
that end, so be it.
When Jesus saw that the equally guilty man was not present, He knew their
motive. Further, He knew the man must be of some importance, influential in
the community or else the man would also now be before Him. Moreover it is
quite possible that the man was himself one of the leaders - having
deliberately seduced the woman thereby "sacrificing himself" to commit the
act as part of a conspiracy for the very purpose of entrapping Jesus. "But
what sayest thou?" that they might have something with which to accuse Him,
they inquired. Thus, the real issue before us is actually that of
"authority" (cp. verse 36!).
|
|
| | From: | admin | | Subject: | Re: The Appendix A- Which Version #1A | | Date: | Tue, 30 Nov 2004 06:11:22 GMT |
|
|
| #1A
This a continuing post from the Book "Which Version is the
Bible" by Floyd Nolen Jones. Appendix A, pages 121-141
Which Version is the Bible?
Copyright 1995 · Floyd Jones Ministries, Inc.
All Rights Reserved. This book may be freely reproduced in any form as long
as it is not distributed for any material gain or profit.
It is most important that the reader realize that Jesus did not set aside
the Laws of God or make an exception with this woman as though God had
changed His mind or had "softened" from the Old Testament to the New
Testament - that God was a God of wrath in the Old but had somehow "evolved"
into a God of love, grace, and compassion in the New. God loved and had
compassion on the exposed adulterers all throughout the Old Testament. He
certainly did not love or feel more compassion for her than any before her.
It was always the sin itself that He hated, but His holy nature and justice
then as now, called for righteous judgment and punishment. God never changes
(Mal.3:6).
First, this was still the time of the Old Covenant. The New Covenant could
not come into effect until the required blood of the Covenant was shed. But
the reader must come to see that Jesus perfectly upheld the demand of the
Law - Jesus actually told these religious unbelievers to stone her (verse
7)! He told them to obey the Law - but dealt with their consciences, bathed
in murder as they were, by the prefacing remark "He that is without sin
among you" let him cast the first stone. The idea behind this stipulation
was twofold. First, Jesus caught them unawares in that rather than having
the "Bible study group" carry out the stoning, Jesus called on the
unregenerate scribes and Pharisees to perform the deed. Thus if they so did,
it would be they whom the Roman authorities would come against and not
Jesus. They would have fallen into the pit that they themselves had dug
(Pro.26:27). The Romans had taken the power of life and death away from the
conquered Jews (Joh.18:31), and Roman law did not condemn an adulteress to
be put to death.
In the second place, Jesus is challenging them to merely obey the law to
which they so devotedly cleave. Jesus is calling on the required two or
three eye witnesses (Deu.17:6-7) to now step forward. If they are credible
witnesses, they must now identify themselves and also make known the
identity of the man. If they will not identify the man they will be
disobeying the law and thus will incur guilt. The man having been summoned,
the stoning could continue but the first stones must be cast by these same
men.
The qualifying "without sin" in Scriptural context with regard to witnesses,
does not mean "moral perfection" as many suppose, thereby creating a problem
here that does not exist. The context refers to the witnesses not being
guilty of sin with respect to their being false or unrighteous witnesses in
the matter at hand (cp. Lev.20:10; Deu.17:6-7; Exo.23:1-2 & 7; Deu.19:15-19
and Pro.6:16-19). This is especially made clear in Exodus 23:1-2, 7. The
Deuteronomy 19 passages continue the theme of dealing with false witnesses
by God's charging the judges with the responsibility of having the sentence
that would have been applied to the accused meted out to the false witness.
The implication from Jesus' stipulation is that if they obey God, being
innocent and without sin regarding this matter, God would doubtless protect
them from the Roman authorities. If, however, they are not - well then, they
could not expect to be so delivered could they? They would thus incur the
same penalty.
What the Lord wrote upon the ground is not recorded, but whatever it was, it
had the effect of convicting each of the accusers in his conscience. As one
of the main functions of the Law was to convict of sin (Rom.3:20, 7:7 & 8b;
7:13), we are certain that which He wrote was Scripture and from the Law.
Besides, it was the Law upon which they hoped to trap Jesus (vs.5), yet now
through a word of wisdom (I Cor.12:8; Heb.2:4) the Lord Jesus had used the
very same to ensnare them in their own pit. We do not wish to be dogmatic or
presumptuous; nevertheless, we strongly maintain that the narrative's
context makes plain that Jesus included Leviticus 20:10 in what He wrote the
first time
|
|
|
