F*** Reviews: ASUS ASUS RT-AC66U Dual-Band Wireless-AC1750 Gigabit Router
by Asus 240 days in the top 100 (379) Buy new: $199.99 $193.49 82 used & new from $170.73. Saving Price & Special Offers Todays Discount ASUS ASUS RT-AC66U Dual-Band Wireless-AC1750 Gigabit Router On Sale of the Day Limit Time... Compare This One
Consult courtesy of Greek, Coptic, & Bible Forensic: How many know that “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.” isn’t found in the oldest NT manuscripts?
John 7:53-8:11 was added to the Bible later. Probably during the fifth century AD. None of the early manuscripts have the passage, and neary all modern Bibles mark the passage as spurious.
Google “pericope of the adulteress” for details.
That is things to know about How many know that “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.” isn’t found in the oldest NT manuscripts? that you may possibly be compelled to fix difficulties their selves. Hopefully this will assist in several ways: making everything much better. In hopes things to know about How many know that “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.” isn’t found in the oldest NT manuscripts? would be an answer in the coming years.
Most practical answer:
Answer by margie k
It’s still darned good advice though huh !
Answer by guyster
I’ll be darned.
Thanks.
Sorta like the end of Mark 16.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_16
Answer by The Reverend Soliel
. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . ,.-‘”. . . . . . . . . .“~.,
. . . . . . . .. . . . . .,.-”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .“-.,
. . . . .. . . . . . ..,/. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ”:,
. . . . . . . .. .,?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\,
. . . . . . . . . /. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,}
. . . . . . . . ./. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:`^`.}
. . . . . . . ./. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:”. . . ./
. . . . . . .?. . . __. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :`. . . ./
. . . . . . . /__.(. . .“~-,_. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:`. . . .. ./
. . . . . . /(_. . ”~,_. . . ..“~,_. . . . . . . . . .,:`. . . . _/
. . . .. .{.._$ ;_. . .”=,_. . . .“-,_. . . ,.-~-,}, .~”; /. .. .}
. . .. . .((. . .*~_. . . .”=-._. . .“;,,./`. . /” . . . ./. .. ../
. . . .. . .\`~,. . ..“~.,. . . . . . . . . ..`. . .}. . . . . . ../
. . . . . .(. ..`=-,,. . . .`. . . . . . . . . . . ..(. . . ;_,,-”
. . . . . ../.`~,. . ..`-.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..\. . /\
. . . . . . \`~.*-,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..|,./…..\,__
,,_. . . . . }.>-._\. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .|. . . . . . ..`=~-,
. .. `=~-,_\_. . . `\,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\
. . . . . . . . . .`=~-,,.\,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . `:,, . . . . . . . . . . . . . `\. . . . . . ..__
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .`=-,. . . . . . . . . .,%`>–==“
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _\. . . . . ._,-%. . . ..`
░█▀▀ ░█▀█ ░█ ░█▀▀ ░░█▀▀ ░█▀█ ░█ ░█
░█▀▀ ░█▀▀ ░█ ░█ ░░░░█▀▀ ░█▀█ ░█ ░█
░▀▀▀ ░▀ ░░░▀ ░▀▀▀ ░░▀ ░░░▀░▀ ░▀ ░▀▀▀
……..|¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨…
……..|……….2 points ……….|||”|”"\__
……..|__________________|||_|___|)
........!(@)"(@)""""**!(@)(@)****!(@)
Here comes the truck delivering me 2 points
Answer by Shinigami (FAC) weeaboo
same with that part where angels minister to him in the garden of Gethsemane. I think that was an add in too.
…do I Really have to google pericope of the adulteress?
but what is the point of bringing this forward? Is not the dispensation of faith already at work in the world? Or are the trials and tribulations of a pack of primates not really that important in the grand scheme of things? Personally, I want love. I want to be important…at least to one someone.
*glances at thumbs downs*
wow. I feel so loved now.
Answer by God LOVES pork!!!
Look buddy – just cuz your avatar has glasses don’t mean you’re as smart as you think you are. I call BS!!! You is full of it and bacon if you are lucky. (((())))) Love ya!
Answer by Don H
Why nitpick details?
The man Jesus was well aware of the meaning and power of this verse.
What is attributed to him has done much good in the world.
Let it be. What are you trying to prove?
Love and blessings Don
Answer by Aaron
are you actually studying the scripture and the oldest manuscript families, or did you google it. Google can give you some false stuff if you did not already know. Also someone used wiki as their source. I edit wiki all of the time to be funny. Imagine what other people will do. What oldest manuscripts do you speak of. The dead sea scrolls? What about codex A. Is it not mentioned their? Are you merely showing us a “presumed” fallacy in the Bible, or are you trying to throw the Bible out as false all together? What is your agenda. Even if these verses where added, which they were not, this does not change the message of salvation.
Edit: I did my research and it is not found in most manuscripts, but it is founds in some. I wanted to answer before looking it up. What is your agenda though? Do you study the word for benefit?
Answer by thundercatt9
You probably are right. There’s a good probability that it wasn’t in John, but there is also evidence within the passage that it was legitimate tradition. For example, Jesus writes in the dirt, but the narration doesn’t specify what he writes, which suggests an authentic account. Also, the way in which they try and trap him into an act that might hurt his reputation no matter what decision he makes is very clever and seems authentic. Some have even suggested that it was in Luke instead. I also buy the reason some give why it may have been excluded, being that it would give some the implication that adultery was okay. In other words, it makes much more sense to me why they would have taken it out, than someone putting it in. Knowing how such leaders act in institutional churches, I don’t find this a stretch to believe at all.
Although it is probably not original, it doesn’t teach anything different than the rest of the text, so I don’t get excited about it either way. Inerrancy is a doctrine which applies to the original, no-unavailable manuscripts, not to the zillion non-identical copies made since then, and certainly not to modern translations.
Answer by Rancher Roy
John 20:30 Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; John 20:31 but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.
There were many other things which Jesus did which were not written in this book (John) and this pericope may be one of them. It may still be true, Jesus may still have said and done what 7:53-8:11 says yet not inspired by the Holy Spirit through the Apostle John.
The 7:53-8:11 passage is still included in most editions of the book of John, although with a note that it may be true but not written by John himself.
NET Bible note on John 7:53
NOTE:Interestingly one important family of mss (Ë13) places the pericope after Luke 21:38. Conclusion: In the final analysis, the weight of evidence in this case must go with the external evidence. The earliest and best mss do not contain the pericope. It is true with regard to internal evidence that an attractive case can be made for inclusion, but this is by nature subjective (as evidenced by the fact that strong arguments can be given against such as well). In terms of internal factors like vocabulary and style, the pericope does not stand up very well. The question may be asked whether this incident, although not an original part of the Gospel of John, should be regarded as an authentic tradition about Jesus. It could well be that it is ancient and may indeed represent an unusual instance where such a tradition survived outside of the bounds of the canonical literature. However, even that needs to be nuanced.
Answer by Martin S
The NIV and other Bibles based upon the Westcott & Hort text or the principles on which it was compiled have footnotes saying what you have posted.
Personally, I don’t think that God allowed anything that He didn’t want to be in His book to be there. Consider this argument about 1 John 5:7
NKJV Textus Receptus 1 John 5:7 For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one.
NIV Westcott Hort 1 John 5:7 For there are three that testify:
http://www.libertyparkusafd.org/lp/Burgon/reports%5CDefence%20of%20the%20Johannine%20Comma.htm
Even more to the point is the testimony of Jerome on this matter. Jerome was
commissioned by Damasus, the bishop of Rome, to prepare a standard Latin
translation of the Holy Scriptures to replace the former Latin translation which
had grown in multiplicity by the late 4th century. Jerome did this, utilising
the Greek as his source for revision of the Latin New Testament for his Vulgate.
At one point in his work, Jerome noted that the trinitarian reading of I John
5:7 was being removed from Greek manuscripts which he had come across, a point
which he specifically mentions. Speaking of the testimony of these verses he
writes,
“Irresponsible translators left out this testimony in the Greek codices.”15
Thus, we see that Jerome specifically mentioned that this verse was being
removed from Greek manuscripts in his day. Logically, we can suppose that for
him to recognise the absence of this verse as an omission from the Greek texts,
he must have been aware of Greek manuscripts which contained the Comma in the
time of his preparation of the Vulgate (395-400 AD), a time much earlier than is
suggested by the dating of currently known Comma-containing Greek mss.
When we really sit down and think about it, it becomes logically apparent that
as far as antiquity is concerned, WITHIN the body of Greek manuscriptual
evidence, age is not really that important of a factor. The oldest witness
(Sinaiticus) is still almost 300 years after the fact. Further, the oldest
witnesses (Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, Bezae, Alexandrinus, Codex “D05″, Ephraemi
Rescriptus) are all widely variant from each other and not as trustworthy as
they are put forth. When we consider that these texts are in the small minority,
and are also grossly variant from the dominant majority of the Greek
manuscripts, the Byzantine tradition. The Alexandrian texts are accorded a
special status by most textual critics which they do not deserve. Their
readings, though often variant and out of step with each other, as well as the
older papyri, are looked upon subjectively as the “best” manuscripts without any
qualification being given other than that they are “older”. This is in spite of
their localised nature (Egypt) and evidence of Gnostic and Docetic corruptions.
However, The very antiquity of the Alexandrian texts combined with their
excellent condition suggest that they were not used by early Christians, likely
because of their errors, and thus did not suffer the effects of constant use and
reuse, followed by the destruction of ragged manuscripts which was routinely
carried out by early Christians as a way of honouring the texts. Further,
despite the Alexandrians’ antiquity, the texts available which are often older
(though in far worse shape), in the form of the various papyri, often show as
much if not more affinity for the Byzantine textual type as they do the
Alexandrian type exemplified by Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. This again suggests
that the Alexandrian textual type, represented by a small minority of the total
Greek witness, cannot claim precedence over the Byzantine type, as is generally
held.
Answer by Maranatha
I agree these verses are not in the Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest extant Mss. we have, but they are in over 900 other mss. The Sinaiticus has been shown to have verses left out that other mss. have in them which are verified by much older fragments than the Sinaiticus. Was the verses added later or was the Sinaiticus wrong, that is the question. Personally I don’t know, but it in no way takes away from the message of the Gospels.
Answer by Renata
I was aware of it.
Answer by Rick G
First of all the things I have found wrong about the account.
1. Jesus being alone, with no disciples present. The only time that happened, especially this late in his ministry was when he went off into the hills to pray by himself.
2. The ones bringing the woman “to the temple” to test Jesus, are scribes and Pharisees. When he said, “let the one of YOU that is sinless be the first to throw a stone”, these guys would have been reaching for stones, since they KNEW they were sinless.
Answer by Abernathy the Dull
Not only is it not in the original New Testament, but it has also been misused by many. Some have used it to justify permissiveness when it comes to gross sin.
For example, is someone rightly points out the sinful conduct of another, someone hearing those comments may refer to that verse, implying self-righteousness.
Answer by Fed up with the crap here
This is like watching a bunch of kids arguing over the endings of 2 printings of a superman comic book.
>And believe me, I’ve actually seen this. I don’t think it was a superman story, I just used that for my remark. But it WAS a comic book that had the same story with 2 different endings printed at different times or places or something like that, and kids were arguing over which one was the TRUE ending.
Have any idea far better?
Add all your answer on the comments!