The Bible is fallible - Pericope Adulterae

w1z4rd

w1z4rd

Valued Senior Member
Im sure this may have being covered here, but I dont know to what level of detail.

Protestant generally believe that the Bible is the infallible word of God. I wish to challenge that false statement and point out that the Bible is fallible and has and will be effected and changed by the limitations of humans.

Having just read Misquoting Jesus and Gods Problem by Bart Ehram (pm if you want PDF copies). Two fantastic well referenced books that have being peer reviewed and undergone the scholarly method... so I may quote him a lot.

Should you be a Christian that resorts to argumentum ad hominem against Bart, you will be ignored. Keep the eye on the ball please. Debate the data not the personality of the author.

In this post I would like to discuss the story about Jesus and the woman taken in adultery. Its a pretty well known story that carries a lot of the themes of forgiveness and love thy neighbor message that Jesus is trying to get out.

Its basically the, "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her" verse.

The full story (John 7:53-8:11 KJV):
Code: 
7:53 And every man went unto his own house. 8:1 Jesus went unto the mount of Olives. 2 And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them. 3 And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst, 4 They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. 5 Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou? 6 This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not. 7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. 8 And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground. 9 And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst. 10 When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee? 11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.

Its a pretty cool story, it has all the hallmarks of a great story, theres a test between the new law and the old law, theres a message about forgiveness.. its so well known it made it into Mel Gibsons guilt movie, The Passion of Christ"...BUT.. none if it was originally said by Jesus.

Now I dont know about you, but if you are going to be going around the world quoting Yeshua Ben Yosef (Afaik thats JC`s real name).. and calling what Yeshua said, "The word of God"... dont you think perhaps its a good idea that you are actually quoting the Jesus God instead of something men added years later? When I say years... were talking about 500 years at least.

The evidence is pretty convincing... even to a denialist.. but to rip from wiki directy:
The pericope is not found in its canonical place in any of the earliest surviving Greek Gospel manuscripts; neither in the two 3rd century papyrus witnesses to John - P66 and P75; nor in the 4th century Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus. The first surviving Greek manuscript witness to the pericope is the Latin/Greek diglot Codex Bezae of the fifth century.
Click to expand...

Using both internal evidence (like do the words look like they are from the same author, does it fit in with the rest of the Gospel, are there other passages that support it, etc) and external evidence (do any reliable witness`s mention the verse, is it quoted in early Christian letters.. etc)... textual critics /scholars are pretty much certain and united in the knowledge that John did not write that story.

More information and evidence.

So this is a very clear fallibility in the Bible. To say the Bible infallible is extremely dishonest, and brings forward questions about ones reliability and sanity. If the person who is giving you the message can not be trusted to be honest how can you trust the message is honest?

Three things drove me strongly away from religion. The first would be when I learnt my dog was not going to heaven. The second was creationists and the third was people telling me the Bible is infallible when its darn clear to a kid with Crayons that the Bible is fallible.

While this type of stuff I understand can creep into textual tradition and become official lore its still not Gods word. Its the words of some scribe that included his thoughts into a margin that eventually got copies by another scribe as though John had written it. I also understand it doesnt effect the central tenets of Christianity... what is does do is call into question the Christian myth that the Bible is infallible.

What are your thoughts on this?
 
But ... why?

My only thought at the outset is to wonder why this would be added. It's a curious historical question that, in a broader context, could change perspectives on subtle but significant themes in the development of Western culture. More specifically, some of the greatest challenges to the legitimacy of Christian faith are the result of the actions of its institutions. Of all the things to add ... well, this one seems defiant of the general trend.

Answering the many questions about this will likely demand that we revisit and fine-tune our construction of just what that general trend was, and what it means in the context of Western cultural development.
 
Tiassa said:
My only thought at the outset is to wonder why this would be added. It's a curious historical question that, in a broader context, could change perspectives on subtle but significant themes in the development of Western culture. More specifically, some of the greatest challenges to the legitimacy of Christian faith are the result of the actions of its institutions. Of all the things to add ... well, this one seems defiant of the general trend.

Answering the many questions about this will likely demand that we revisit and fine-tune our construction of just what that general trend was, and what it means in the context of Western cultural development.
Click to expand...

Bart says it was most likely a story put into a margin by a scribe who thought the story represented one of the teachings of Jesus he was reading at the time.

Due to the photocopier not being invented yet another scribe comes along and makes a copy of the copy. He includes the margin bit in because he doesnt know any better. Another scribe comes along and copies the error and it then becomes a part of textual tradition.
 
"It will sometimes be necessary to use falsehood for the benefit of those who need such a mode of treatment."

"I have repeated whatever may rebound to the glory, and suppressed all that could tend to the disgrace of our religion." (Chp. 31, Book 12 of Prae Paratio Evangelica).

-- Eusebius Bishop, Church Father and Constantine's overseer of church doctrine
 
Lurker here, I can't send you a PM yet so I figured I'd just post.

Could I get the .pdf version of the books you mentioned?
 
Whats fallible about "let he who is without sin cast the first stone"?
 
w1z4rd said:
To say the Bible infallible is extremely dishonest, and brings forward questions about ones reliability and sanity. If the person who is giving you the message can not be trusted to be honest how can you trust the message is honest?
Click to expand...

now you know why kids rebel

it happened to me, too

i saw what was never to happen, per God........... that was it for me!
................... I also understand it doesnt effect the central tenets of Christianity... what is does do is call into question the Christian myth that the Bible is infallible.

What are your thoughts on this?
Click to expand...

that old stories teach us lessons

hopefully as you are 'being honest' perhaps a few others can too, but i am not holding my breath

thanks for the thread
 
Are there any clues about what it is Jesus is writing in the sand with his finger? He stoops down twice to do it.

Maybe Jesus is not writing words. Maybe he is drawing something symbolic.

What happens if you cast a stone into water? You get ripples. Could Jesus be drawing the ripple effect made by stones cast in water? Two circles affecting each other like the Vesica Piscis. It appears that from the from the Vesica Piscis, Christianity created the symbol Ichthys or "Jesus fish".

But hey, this is only guesswork.
 
w1z4rd said:
Nothing.. other than the fact Jesus didnt say it. It was included by scribes at a later date into the Gospel of John.
Click to expand...

Because of the lack of evidence indicating it existed before in some other variation of a gospel all of which were written by people other than Jesus?
 
munty13 said:
Are there any clues about what it is Jesus is writing in the sand with his finger? He stoops down twice to do it.

Maybe Jesus is not writing words. Maybe he is drawing something symbolic.

What happens if you cast a stone into water? You get ripples. Could Jesus be drawing the ripple effect made by stones cast in water? Two circles affecting each other like the Vesica Piscis. It appears that from the from the Vesica Piscis, Christianity created the symbol Ichthys or "Jesus fish".

But hey, this is only guesswork.
Click to expand...

what kind of writing utensils did they have back then?
 
John99 said:
what kind of writing utensils did they have back then?
Click to expand...

To make a Vesica Piscis, you need draw only two circles. That's it.

But I did hear of a tale that obelisks were once used as pencils. It took six thousand slaves a whole day to sign a bank cheque.
 
swarm said:
"It will sometimes be necessary to use falsehood for the benefit of those who need such a mode of treatment."

"I have repeated whatever may rebound to the glory, and suppressed all that could tend to the disgrace of our religion." (Chp. 31, Book 12 of Prae Paratio Evangelica).

-- Eusebius Bishop, Church Father and Constantine's overseer of church doctrine
Click to expand...

And we think that spin doctoring is something new......
 
S.A.M. said:
Because of the lack of evidence indicating it existed before in some other variation of a gospel all of which were written by people other than Jesus?
Click to expand...

Basically... for the first couple of hundred years that verse was not in John. Our oldest and best examples of John confirm that that verse was not in there.

Also, you need to take into account witness`s. IE, early christians who wrote about the Gospels and the verses and their take on each of the verses. None of these early witness`s mention that verse.

It only appears a couple of hundred years later. And even in those first instances where it does appear there are notes in the margin that warn readers that this was not part of the original verse.

The most likely scenario of what happened was a scribe was reading something in John that reminded him of that story. He most likely scribbled that story into the margin to remind him later and continued. The next scribe that copied that (most scribes in early christianity were more than likely illiterate) .. and thought it was part of the original text and included. Someone comes along and makes a copy of the copy with the error... takes it back to his town and it gets copied from someone next to his town and so on and so on until it becomes part of textual tradition.
 
Last edited:
munty13 said:
Are there any clues about what it is Jesus is writing in the sand with his finger? He stoops down twice to do it.

Maybe Jesus is not writing words. Maybe he is drawing something symbolic.
Click to expand...
i didn't see that movie

What happens if you cast a stone into water? You get ripples. Could Jesus be drawing the ripple effect made by stones cast in water?
Click to expand...

funny, 'the tapping the surface of a pond' is how i share an analogy of life.

Each action we impose to existence is like a tap on the pond; it lives and each action we cause is imposed to existence. We can do this by choice!

Two circles affecting each other ......
Click to expand...
and when the waves combine to increase the potential of the other, the wave lasts longer.

That is how to define 'good and bad'....... good combinations support life to continue, bad is like a wave trying to jump out of the pond (loss to the common).....


thanks for the scary addition to reality

But hey, this is only guesswork.
Click to expand...
 
When two stones are thrown simultaneously into a pool of still water, ripples move outward in concentric circles. These circles intersect in points which form a curve known as the hyperbola.

The field lines for a velocity field are hyperbolas. Each particle of fluid in a flow, travels on a field line. In fluid flow, those hyperbolas are called streamlines. Drop a leaf into a river, and it follows a streamline.

Something of a different tangent, but still relevant I feel, I borrowed the next bit from someone else:

"Mathematically, the hyperbola can be thought of as an anti-circle, or as a circle turned inside-out in the conceptual sense;for where the circle is closed, temporary though uninterrupted, and constant in form,the hyperbola is open, endless though interrupted, and variable.

These sister-shapes are so basic to math that one could, i imagine, fill whole books with their various properties and effects...".
http://www.tendingtodivinity-theshapeofmathematics.com/MathPages/CircleAndHyperbola.html
 
I found this pretty cool:

"The fundamental principles are that induction travels at right angles, 90°, to the direction of the current. For an illustration, if a person standing on a bridge should drop a pebble into the water below, after contact he would note circles radiating out over the surface of the water. These circles, being at right angles, 90°, to the direction of the force that caused the circles, are analogous to the flow of induction, and hence the aerial line, being vertical, transmits signals horizontally over the earth's surface."
http://chestofbooks.com/crafts/popular-mechanics/The-Boy-Mechanic-700-Things-for-Boys-to-Do/How-To-Make-An-Efficient-Wireless-Telegraph.html
 
munty13 said:
When two stones are thrown simultaneously into a pool of still water, ripples move outward in concentric circles. These circles intersect in points which form a curve known as the hyperbola.

The field lines for a velocity field are hyperbolas. Each particle of fluid in a flow, travels on a field line. In fluid flow, those hyperbolas are called streamlines. Drop a leaf into a river, and it follows a streamline.

Something of a different tangent, but still relevant I feel, I borrowed the next bit from someone else:

"Mathematically, the hyperbola can be thought of as an anti-circle, or as a circle turned inside-out in the conceptual sense;for where the circle is closed, temporary though uninterrupted, and constant in form,the hyperbola is open, endless though interrupted, and variable.

These sister-shapes are so basic to math that one could, i imagine, fill whole books with their various properties and effects...".
http://www.tendingtodivinity-theshapeofmathematics.com/MathPages/CircleAndHyperbola.html
Click to expand...


i love thinkers....

now associate that with the 'golden ratio' (combining of energy; the progression; the evolution)

enjoy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top