POPULARITY
3 episodes with new testament text
6 episodes with new testament text
2 episodes with new testament text
29 episodes with new testament text
3 episodes with new testament text
7 episodes with new testament text
God in Christ is patient with us sinners. New Testament Text: 2 Peter 3:8-13 http://media.urclearning.org/audio/tm-Godspatience-04-13-2025.MP3
God in Christ is patient with us sinners. New Testament Text: 2 Peter 3:8-13 http://media.urclearning.org/audio/tm-Godspatience-04-13-2025.MP3
In this episode, Nelson Hsieh, Research Associate in New Testament Text and Language at Tyndale House, discusses chapter divisions in Bible manuscripts with Tony Watkins. Nelson has been working on chapter divisions for the second edition of the Tyndale House Greek New Testament, and he explains how the approach he is taking is different to the method used in the first edition. They also reflect on how chapter divisions in our Bibles today can affect how we read the text.TH ink articles mentioned in the podcast: Where did the Bible's chapters come from? https://tyndalehouse.com/explore/articles/where-did-the-bible-s-chapters-come-from/John 1 according to the paragraphing of Greek manuscripts https://tyndalehouse.com/explore/articles/john-1-according-to-the-paragraphing-of-greek-manuscripts/Find out more about the host and guests here: Tony Watkins: https://tyndalehouse.com/about/staff/tony-watkins/Nelson Hsieh: https://tyndalehouse.com/about/staff/nelson-hsieh/Support the showEdited by Tyndale House Music – Acoustic Happy Background used with a standard license from Adobe Stock.Follow us on: X | Instagram | Facebook | YouTube
In this episode, Tony Watkins (Fellow for Public Engagement at Tyndale House) hears from Dirk Jongkind (Academic Vice Principal at Tyndale House) and Nelson Hsieh (Research Associate in New Testament Text and Language) about the role of textual criticism in the reformation. Find out more about the host and guests here: Tony Watkins: https://tyndalehouse.com/about/staff/tony-watkins/Dirk Jongkind: https://tyndalehouse.com/about/staff/dirk-jongkind/Nelson Hsieh: https://tyndalehouse.com/about/staff/nelson-hsieh/Support the showEdited by Tyndale House Music – Acoustic Happy Background used with a standard license from Adobe Stock.Follow us on: X | Instagram | Facebook | YouTube
In looking into apologetics, one would encounter often enough topics such as evolution or historical matters. What is lesser known unfortunately and no less important is the topic of Textual Criticism. As John lays out for us this series, we hope that, despite a technical sounding name, you will come to see its significance when it comes to defending the faith. Why, it may shift how you approach all other Christian matters altogether! Find out more information at: https://truthinmydays.com/ Follow the Truth in My Days Apologetics Program on all social platforms: Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/truthinmydays/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TruthInMyDays MeWe: https://mewe.com/p/truthinmydays Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4QnkYOIO91RWIGR6KPKoYc Apple Podcast: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/truth-in-my-days-lets-defend-christianity/id1570747696 Google Podcast: https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9hbmNob3IuZm0vcy81NzIyNTM4OC9wb2RjYXN0L3Jzcw Anchor: https://anchor.fm/john-tors Breaker: https://www.breaker.audio/truth-in-my-days-lets-defend-christianity Pocket Cast: https://pca.st/licr8nad
In looking into apologetics, one would encounter often enough topics such as evolution or historical matters. What is lesser known unfortunately and no less important is the topic of Textual Criticism. As John lays out for us this series, we hope that, despite a technical sounding name, you will come to see its significance when it comes to defending the faith. Why, it may shift how you approach all other Christian matters altogether! Find out more information at: https://truthinmydays.com/ Follow the Truth in My Days Apologetics Program on all social platforms: Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/truthinmydays/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TruthInMyDays MeWe: https://mewe.com/p/truthinmydays Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4QnkYOIO91RWIGR6KPKoYc Apple Podcast: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/truth-in-my-days-lets-defend-christianity/id1570747696 Google Podcast: https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9hbmNob3IuZm0vcy81NzIyNTM4OC9wb2RjYXN0L3Jzcw Anchor: https://anchor.fm/john-tors Breaker: https://www.breaker.audio/truth-in-my-days-lets-defend-christianity Pocket Cast: https://pca.st/licr8nad
This is part 17 of the Read the Bible For Yourself. After reviewing the resources you can use to learn Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, we delve into the sources that translators use for their work. Next, we'll look at translation philosophies, including formal and dynamic equivalence. Lastly we'll cover the controversial issues of gender accuracy and translation bias. Over all, this episode should give you a nice introduction to a deep answer for what translations you should use and why. Listen to this episode on Spotify or Apple Podcasts https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OsxuNfkTt-U&list=PLN9jFDsS3QV2TrdUEDtAipF3jy4qYspM_&index=18 —— Links —— See other episodes in Read the Bible For Yourself Other classes are available here, including How We Got the Bible, which explores the manuscript transmission and translation of the Bible Get the transcript of this episode Support Restitutio by donating here Join our Restitutio Facebook Group and follow Sean Finnegan on Twitter @RestitutioSF Leave a voice message via SpeakPipe with questions or comments and we may play them out on the air Intro music: Good Vibes by MBB Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-SA 3.0) Free Download / Stream: Music promoted by Audio Library. Who is Sean Finnegan? Read his bio here —— Notes —— 17 How to Choose a Bible Translation Translation basics Fee & Stuart: “Your Bible, whatever translation you use, which is your beginning point, is in fact the end result of much scholarly work. Translators are regularly called upon to make choices regarding meanings, and their choices are going to affect how you”[1] “Every translation is a commentary” -Lee Brice The Bible is in three languages. Hebrew: Old Testament except the Aramaic part Nearly 99% of the OT (22,945 of 23,213 verses) Aramaic: half of Daniel and two passages in Ezra Daniel 2.4b-7.28; Ezra 4.8-6.18; 7.12-26 About 1% of the OT (268 of 23,213 verses) Greek: New Testament (all 7,968 verses) How to begin learning Hebrew or Greek Immersion program in Israel or Greece Whole Word Institute offers a 9-month program. In-person college class (usually 2 semesters) Local colleges, RTS offers an 8-week summer program. In-person classes at a Jewish synagogue or Greek church or community center Online program with live instructor Biblical Language Center, Liberty University, etc. Digital program with pre-recordings Aleph with Beth (YouTube), Bill Mounce's DVD course, etc. How to improve your existing knowledge of Hebrew or Greek Reading group in-person or online Read a portion each week together. Daily dose of Hebrew/Greek/Aramaic Daily YouTube videos of one verse each (email list) Read every day. Read the Bible; read devotionals; read comic books (Glossa House produces great resources) Watch modern Hebrew and Greek shows. Izzy is like Netflix for Israel/Hebrew Greece has lots of channels streaming online. Translation process (1 Timothy 2:5 example) Greek New Testament (NA28)Εἷς γὰρ θεός, εἷς καὶ μεσίτης θεοῦ καὶ ἀνθρώπων, ἄνθρωπος Χριστὸς Ἰησοῦς Literal translationOne for god, one and mediator of god and men,man Christ Jesus Finished translationFor (there is) one God, and (there is) one mediator between God and mankind, (the) man Christ Jesus. New Testament critical editions Nestle Aland 28th Edition (NA28) based on the Editio Critica Maior (ECM), which employs the coherence based genealogical method (CBGM) Tyndale House Greek New Testament (THGNT) prioritizes trusted physical manuscripts over the CBGM. Old Testament critical editions Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (BHS) and the partially completed Biblia Hebraica Quinta (BHQ) print the Leningrad Codex in the main text, but include alternative readings in the footnotes. Hebrew Bible Critical Edition (HBCE) by Ronald Mendel is a project of the Society of Biblical Literature (SBL) to develop a critical edition. Resources to see decisions about alternative readings NET Bible (accessible here) New Testament Text and Commentary by Philip Comfort A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament by Bruce Metzger Formal equivalence translation philosophy Fee & Strauss: “If the Greek or Hebrew text uses an infinitive, the English translation will use an infinitive. When the Greek or Hebrew has a prepositional phrase, so will the English…The goal of this translational theory is formal correspondence as much as possible.”[2] Ron Rhodes: “Formal equivalence translations can also be trusted not to mix too much commentary in with the text derived from the original Hebrew and Greek manuscripts. To clarify, while all translation entails some interpretation, formal equivalence translations keep to a minimum in intermingling interpretive additives into the text. As one scholar put it, ‘An essentially literal translation operates on the premise that a translator is a steward of what someone else has written, not an editor and exegete who needs to explain or correct what someone else has written.'”[3] Dynamic equivalence translation philosophy Ron Rhodes: “Dynamic equivalence translations generally use shorter words, shorter sentences, and shorter paragraphs. They use easy vocabulary and use simple substitutes for theological and cultural terminology. They often convert culturally dependent figures of speech into easy, direct statements. They seek to avoid ambiguity as well as biblical jargon in favor of a natural English style. Translators concentrate on transferring meaning rather than mere words from one language to another.”[4] Formal vs. dynamic comparison Formal Equivalence Dynamic Equivalence Formal Correspondence Functional Equivalence Word for Word Thought for Thought Literal Readable Transparent to Originals Replicates Experience Transfer Interpretation Interpretation Built In Accurate Easy to Understand Formal equivalence Bibles ESV: English Standard Version NASB: New American Standard Bible LSB: Legacy Standard Bible NRSV: New Revised Standard Version HCSB: Holman Christian Standard Bible Gender Accuracy[5] “Man” used to mean “men and women” “Men” used to mean “men and women” “he” used to mean “he or she” Translations are changing with the changes in the English language so that female readers recognize the relevance of scripture to them See Eph 4:28; Mat 11:15; etc. Combatting bias To combat bias, look at translations from different thought camps. Evangelical: NIV, NLT, ESV, NASB, NET, CSB, HCSB, LEB MSG, Passion, Amplified, LSB, CEV, TEV/GNT, NCV, NIrV Jewish: JPS, KJB, Stone, Robert Altar, Shocken Catholic: NABRE, NAB, RNJB, NJB, JB, Douay-Rheims Mainline: NRSV, NEB, RSV, ASV, KJV Unitarian: REV, NWT, Diaglott, KGV, Buzzard, NEV Review If you can, learn the biblical languages so you can read the actual words of scripture rather than depending on a translation. Translations of the New Testament depend on the Greek critical text known as the Nestle Aland 28th edition (NA28). Translations of the Old Testament depend on the Leningrad Codex, which is printed in the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (BHS) and the partially complete Biblia Hebraica Quinta (BHQ). In addition, translators of the Old Testament are expected to look through the footnotes and commentary in these resources to judge readings from other sources. Over generations, textual critics have developed strategies and computer tools to more closely approximate the original text. As a result, newer critical texts contain reconstructions of an older stage of the text. Translation is the art of rendering a source text into a receptor language accurately. Formal equivalence translations focus on transparency to the source text and a minimum of added interpretation. Dynamic equivalence translations focus on readability in the receptor language. They seek clarity over ambiguity. Formal equivalence translations are safer, because they leave it up to the reader to figure out what a text means. However, they can contain awkward English and be difficult to read. Gender accuracy refers to the translation practice of including the feminine when a hypothetical singular masculine pronoun can refer to either sex or when masculine plurals include both genders. Bias is intrinsic to translation, especially with reference to doctrines that are widely held by committee members. The best way to expose and combat bias is to check translations from different thought camps. Although evangelical translations are better known, checking Jewish, mainline, Catholic, and unitarian translations provides a helpful corrective. [1] Gordon D. Fee and Douglas Stuart, How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2014), 23. [2] Gordon Fee and Mark Strauss, How to Choose a Translation for All Its Worth (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2007), p. 26. [3] Ron Rhodes, The Complete Guide to Bible Translations (Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers, 2009), p. 30. Quotation from Leland Ryken, Choosing a Bible (Wheaton: Crossway, 2005), p. 27. [4] Ron Rhodes, The Complete Guide to Bible Translations (Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers, 2009), pp. 32-33. [5] For a much deeper dive into this interesting topic, see session 15 from How We Got the Bible: Gender in Bible Translation, available on lhim.org or on YouTube.
17 How to Choose a Bible Translation – Notes Download Translation basics Fee & Stuart: “Your Bible, whatever translation you use, which is your beginning point, is in fact the end result of much scholarly work. Translators are regularly called upon to make choices regarding meanings, and their choices are going to affect how you”[[Gordon D. Fee and Douglas Stuart, How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2014), 23.]] “Every translation is a commentary” -Lee Brice The Bible is in three languages. Hebrew: Old Testament except the Aramaic part Nearly 99% of the OT (22,945 of 23,213 verses) Aramaic: half of Daniel and two passages in Ezra Daniel 2.4b-7.28; Ezra 4.8-6.18; 7.12-26 About 1% of the OT (268 of 23,213 verses) Greek: New Testament (all 7,968 verses) How to begin learning Hebrew or Greek Immersion program in Israel or Greece Whole Word Institute offers a 9-month program. In-person college class (usually 2 semesters) Local colleges, RTS offers an 8-week summer program. In-person classes at a Jewish synagogue or Greek church or community center Online program with live instructor Biblical Language Center, Liberty University, etc. Digital program with pre-recordings Aleph with Beth (YouTube), Bill Mounce's DVD course, etc. How to improve your existing knowledge of Hebrew or Greek Reading group in-person or online Read a portion each week together. Daily dose of Hebrew/Greek/Aramaic Daily YouTube videos of one verse each (email list) Read every day. Read the Bible; read devotionals; read comic books (Glossa House produces great resources) Watch modern Hebrew and Greek shows. Izzy is like Netflix for Israel/Hebrew Greece has lots of channels streaming online. Translation process (1 Timothy 2:5 example) Greek New Testament (NA28) Εἷς γὰρ θεός, εἷς καὶ μεσίτης θεοῦ καὶ ἀνθρώπων, ἄνθρωπος Χριστὸς Ἰησοῦς Literal translation One for god, one and mediator of god and men, man Christ Jesus Finished translation For (there is) one God, and (there is) one mediator between God and mankind, (the) man Christ Jesus. New Testament critical editions Nestle Aland 28th Edition (NA28) based on the Editio Critica Maior (ECM), which employs the coherence based genealogical method (CBGM) Tyndale House Greek New Testament (THGNT) prioritizes trusted physical manuscripts over the CBGM. Old Testament critical editions Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (BHS) and the partially completed Biblia Hebraica Quinta (BHQ) print the Leningrad Codex in the main text, but include alternative readings in the footnotes. Hebrew Bible Critical Edition (HBCE) by Ronald Mendel is a project of the Society of Biblical Literature (SBL) to develop a critical edition. Resources to see decisions about alternative readings NET Bible (accessible at org) New Testament Text and Commentary by Philip Comfort A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament by Bruce Metzger Formal equivalence translation philosophy Fee & Strauss: “If the Greek or Hebrew text uses an infinitive, the English translation will use an infinitive. When the Greek or Hebrew has a prepositional phrase, so will the English…The goal of this translational theory is formal correspondence as much as possible.”[[Gordon Fee and Mark Strauss, How to Choose a Translation for All Its Worth (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2007), p. 26.]] Ron Rhodes: “Formal equivalence translations can also be trusted not to mix too much commentary in with the text derived from the original Hebrew and Greek manuscripts. To clarify, while all translation entails some interpretation, formal equivalence translations keep to a minimum in intermingling interpretive additives into the text. As one scholar put it, ‘An essentially literal translation operates on the premise that a translator is a steward of what someone else has written, not an editor and exegete who needs to explain or correct what someone else has written.'”[[Ron Rhodes, The Complete Guide to Bible Translations (Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers, 2009), p. 30. Quotation from Leland Ryken, Choosing a Bible (Wheaton: Crossway, 2005), p. 27.]] Dynamic equivalence translation philosophy Ron Rhodes: “Dynamic equivalence translations generally use shorter words, shorter sentences, and shorter paragraphs. They use easy vocabulary and use simple substitutes for theological and cultural terminology. They often convert culturally dependent figures of speech into easy, direct statements. They seek to avoid ambiguity as well as biblical jargon in favor of a natural English style. Translators concentrate on transferring meaning rather than mere words from one language to another.”[[Ron Rhodes, The Complete Guide to Bible Translations (Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers, 2009), pp. 32-33.]] Formal vs. dynamic comparison Formal Equivalence Dynamic Equivalence Formal Correspondence Functional Equivalence Word for Word Thought for Thought Literal Readable Transparent to Originals Replicates Experience Transfer Interpretation Interpretation Built In Accurate Easy to Understand Formal equivalence Bibles ESV: English Standard Version NASB: New American Standard Bible LSB: Legacy Standard Bible NRSV: New Revised Standard Version HCSB: Holman Christian Standard Bible Gender Accuracy[[For a much deeper dive into this interesting topic, see session 15 from How We Got the Bible: Gender in Bible Translation, available on lhim.org or on YouTube.]] “Man” used to mean “men and women” “Men” used to mean “men and women” “he” used to mean “he or she” Translations are changing with the changes in the English language so that female readers recognize the relevance of scripture to them See Eph 4:28; Mat 11:15; etc. Combatting bias To combat bias, look at translations from different thought camps. Evangelical: NIV, NLT, ESV, NASB, NET, CSB, HCSB, LEB MSG, Passion, Amplified, LSB, CEV, TEV/GNT, NCV, NIrV Jewish: JPS, KJB, Stone, Robert Altar, Shocken Catholic: NABRE, NAB, RNJB, NJB, JB, Douay-Rheims Mainline: NRSV, NEB, NKJ, RSV, ASV, KJV Unitarian: REV, NWT, Diaglott, KGV, Buzzard, NEV Review If you can, learn the biblical languages so you can read the actual words of scripture rather than depending on a translation. Translations of the New Testament depend on the Greek critical text known as the Nestle Aland 28th edition (NA28). Translations of the Old Testament depend on the Leningrad Codex, which is printed in the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (BHS) and the partially complete Biblia Hebraica Quinta (BHQ). In addition, translators of the Old Testament are expected to look through the footnotes and commentary in these resources to judge readings from other sources. Over generations, textual critics have developed strategies and computer tools to more closely approximate the original text. As a result, newer critical texts contain reconstructions of an older stage of the text. Translation is the art of rendering a source text into a receptor language accurately. Formal equivalence translations focus on transparency to the source text and a minimum of added interpretation. Dynamic equivalence translations focus on readability in the receptor language. They seek clarity over ambiguity. Formal equivalence translations are safer, because they leave it up to the reader to figure out what a text means. However, they can contain awkward English and be difficult to read. Gender accuracy refers to the translation practice of including the feminine when a hypothetical singular masculine pronoun can refer to either sex or when masculine plurals include both genders. Bias is intrinsic to translation, especially with reference to doctrines that are widely held by committee members. The best way to expose and combat bias is to check translations from different thought camps. Although evangelical translations are better known, checking Jewish, mainline, Catholic, and unitarian translations provides a helpful corrective. The post 17: How to Choose a Bible Translation first appeared on Living Hope.
Received or Critical Text? Thank you for listening! Please leave a 5 star review,,share and subscribe!
Or forever settled? Thank you for listening! Please leave a 5 star review, share and subscribe!
Join Us today in Chapel as Dr. Wallace shares about the reliability of New Testament Text…
Interested in further study of the Bible? Join us at Logos Bible Software. Sign up to attend Westminster Seminary California's Seminary for a Day here! Get a copy of the Family Worship Bible Study, The Works of William Perkins, & the RHB Store! Please help support the show on our Patreon Page! Join Nick & Peter of the Guilt Grace Gratitude Podcast as they continue Season 5, Reformed Apologetics, as they discuss the sources of our New Testament! Peter Gurry (University of Cambridge, PhD) is Associate Professor of New Testament and Director at the Text & Canon Institute at Phoenix Seminary. His research interests range across the history and formation of the Bible, Greek grammar, and the history of New Testament scholarship. He has presented his work at the Society of Biblical Literature, the Evangelical Theological Society, and the British New Testament Conference. Elijah Hixson (PhD, University of Edinburgh) is junior research associate in New Testament Text and Language at Tyndale House, Cambridge, and author of Scribal Habits in Sixth-Century Greek Purple Codices. He has served as a tutor in biblical studies at the University of Edinburgh and as a research assistant in Greek manuscripts at Tyndale House, Cambridge, and has written articles for Journal of Theological Studies, Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, and Lexham Bible Dictionary. We want to thank IVP Academic for their help in setting up this interview! Book(s) used for this conversation: Myths and Mistakes in New Testament Textual Criticism Have Feedback or Questions? Email us at: guiltgracepod@gmail.com Find us on Instagram: @guiltgracepod Follow us on Twitter: @guiltgracepod Find us on YouTube: Guilt Grace Gratitude Podcast Please rate and subscribe to the podcast on whatever platform you use! Looking for a Reformed Church? North American Presbyterian & Reformed Churches --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/gggpodcast/support
Our hope and comfort are not found in this world, which is passing away, but in the next world. New Testament Text: 2 Peter 3:1-13 http://media.urclearning.org/audio/tm-hopeandcomfort-05-15-2022.MP3
Our hope and comfort are not found in this world, which is passing away, but in the next world. New Testament Text: 2 Peter 3:1-13 http://media.urclearning.org/audio/tm-hopeandcomfort-05-15-2022.MP3
God will always forgive our sins because the blood of Christ is sufficient to forgive them. New Testament Text: 1 Peter 1:1-5 http://media.urclearning.org/audio/tm-forgiven-05-08-2022.MP3
God will always forgive our sins because the blood of Christ is sufficient to forgive them. New Testament Text: 1 Peter 1:1-5 http://media.urclearning.org/audio/tm-forgiven-05-08-2022.MP3
In looking into apologetics, one would encounter often enough topics such as evolution or historical matters. What is lesser known unfortunately and no less important is the topic of Textual Criticism. As John lays out for us this series, we hope that, despite a technical sounding name, you will come to see its significance when it comes to defending the faith. Why, it may shift how you approach all other Christian matters altogether! Follow the Truth In My Days Apologetics Program on all social platforms: MeWe: https://mewe.com/p/truthinmydays Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/_truthinmydays/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TruthInMyDays YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqAhZo9ktzvnWGYDZfixcdQ Find out more information at: https://truthinmydays.com/
In looking into apologetics, one would encounter often enough topics such as evolution or historical matters. What is lesser known unfortunately and no less important is the topic of Textual Criticism. As John lays out for us this series, we hope that, despite a technical sounding name, you will come to see its significance when it comes to defending the faith. Why, it may shift how you approach all other Christian matters altogether! Follow the Truth In My Days Apologetics Program on all social platforms: MeWe: https://mewe.com/p/truthinmydays Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/_truthinmydays/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TruthInMyDays YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqAhZo9ktzvnWGYDZfixcdQ Find out more information at: https://truthinmydays.com/
In looking into apologetics, one would encounter often enough topics such as evolution or historical matters. What is lesser known unfortunately and no less important is the topic of Textual Criticism. As John lays out for us this series, we hope that, despite a technical sounding name, you will come to see its significance when it comes to defending the faith. Why, it may shift how you approach all other Christian matters altogether! Follow the Truth In My Days Apologetics Program on all social platforms: MeWe: https://mewe.com/p/truthinmydays Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/_truthinmydays/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TruthInMyDays YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqAhZo9ktzvnWGYDZfixcdQ Find out more information at: https://truthinmydays.com/
In looking into apologetics, one would encounter often enough topics such as evolution or historical matters. What is lesser known unfortunately and no less important is the topic of Textual Criticism. As John lays out for us this series, we hope that, despite a technical sounding name, you will come to see its significance when it comes to defending the faith. Why, it may shift how you approach all other Christian matters altogether! Follow the Truth In My Days Apologetics Program on all social platforms: MeWe: https://mewe.com/p/truthinmydays Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/_truthinmydays/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TruthInMyDays YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqAhZo9ktzvnWGYDZfixcdQ Find out more information at: https://truthinmydays.com/
In looking into apologetics, one would encounter often enough topics such as evolution or historical matters. What is lesser known unfortunately and no less important is the topic of Textual Criticism. As John lays out for us this series, we hope that, despite a technical sounding name, you will come to see its significance when it comes to defending the faith. Why, it may shift how you approach all other Christian matters altogether! Follow the Truth In My Days Apologetics Program on all social platforms: MeWe: https://mewe.com/p/truthinmydays Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/_truthinmydays/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TruthInMyDays YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqAhZo9ktzvnWGYDZfixcdQ Find out more information at: https://truthinmydays.com/
In looking into apologetics, one would encounter often enough topics such as evolution or historical matters. What is lesser known unfortunately and no less important is the topic of Textual Criticism. As John lays out for us this series, we hope that, despite a technical sounding name, you will come to see its significance when it comes to defending the faith. Why, it may shift how you approach all other Christian matters altogether! Follow the Truth In My Days Apologetics Program on all social platforms: MeWe: https://mewe.com/p/truthinmydays Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/_truthinmydays/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TruthInMyDays YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqAhZo9ktzvnWGYDZfixcdQ Find out more information at: https://truthinmydays.com/
In looking into apologetics, one would encounter often enough topics such as evolution or historical matters. What is lesser known unfortunately and no less important is the topic of Textual Criticism. As John lays out for us this series, we hope that, despite a technical sounding name, you will come to see its significance when it comes to defending the faith. Why, it may shift how you approach all other Christian matters altogether! Follow the Truth In My Days Apologetics Program on all social platforms: MeWe: https://mewe.com/p/truthinmydays Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/_truthinmydays/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TruthInMyDays YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqAhZo9ktzvnWGYDZfixcdQ Find out more information at: https://truthinmydays.com/
In looking into apologetics, one would encounter often enough topics such as evolution or historical matters. What is lesser known unfortunately and no less important is the topic of Textual Criticism. As John lays out for us this series, we hope that, despite a technical sounding name, you will come to see its significance when it comes to defending the faith. Why, it may shift how you approach all other Christian matters altogether! Follow the Truth In My Days Apologetics Program on all social platforms: MeWe: https://mewe.com/p/truthinmydays Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/_truthinmydays/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TruthInMyDays YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqAhZo9ktzvnWGYDZfixcdQ Find out more information at: https://truthinmydays.com/
In looking into apologetics, one would encounter often enough topics such as evolution or historical matters. What is lesser known unfortunately and no less important is the topic of Textual Criticism. As John lays out for us this series, we hope that, despite a technical sounding name, you will come to see its significance when it comes to defending the faith. Why, it may shift how you approach all other Christian matters altogether! Follow the Truth In My Days Apologetics Program on all social platforms: MeWe: https://mewe.com/p/truthinmydays Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/_truthinmydays/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TruthInMyDays YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqAhZo9ktzvnWGYDZfixcdQ Find out more information at: https://truthinmydays.com/
In looking into apologetics, one would encounter often enough topics such as evolution or historical matters. What is lesser known unfortunately and no less important is the topic of Textual Criticism. As John lays out for us this series, we hope that, despite a technical sounding name, you will come to see its significance when it comes to defending the faith. Why, it may shift how you approach all other Christian matters altogether! Follow the Truth In My Days Apologetics Program on all social platforms: MeWe: https://mewe.com/p/truthinmydays Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/_truthinmydays/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TruthInMyDays YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqAhZo9ktzvnWGYDZfixcdQ Find out more information at: https://truthinmydays.com/
In looking into apologetics, one would encounter often enough topics such as evolution or historical matters. What is lesser known unfortunately and no less important is the topic of Textual Criticism. As John lays out for us this series, we hope that, despite a technical sounding name, you will come to see its significance when it comes to defending the faith. Why, it may shift how you approach all other Christian matters altogether! Follow the Truth In My Days Apologetics Program on all social platforms: MeWe: https://mewe.com/p/truthinmydays Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/_truthinmydays/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TruthInMyDays YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqAhZo9ktzvnWGYDZfixcdQ Find out more information at: https://truthinmydays.com/
In looking into apologetics, one would encounter often enough topics such as evolution or historical matters. What is lesser known unfortunately and no less important is the topic of Textual Criticism. As John lays out for us this series, we hope that, despite a technical sounding name, you will come to see its significance when it comes to defending the faith. Why, it may shift how you approach all other Christian matters altogether! Follow the Truth In My Days Apologetics Program on all social platforms: MeWe: https://mewe.com/p/truthinmydays Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/_truthinmydays/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TruthInMyDays YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqAhZo9ktzvnWGYDZfixcdQ Find out more information at: https://truthinmydays.com/
In looking into apologetics, one would encounter often enough topics such as evolution or historical matters. What is lesser known unfortunately and no less important is the topic of Textual Criticism. As John lays out for us this series, we hope that, despite a technical sounding name, you will come to see its significance when it comes to defending the faith. Why, it may shift how you approach all other Christian matters altogether! Follow the Truth In My Days Apologetics Program on all social platforms: MeWe: https://mewe.com/p/truthinmydays Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/_truthinmydays/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TruthInMyDays YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqAhZo9ktzvnWGYDZfixcdQ Find out more information at: https://truthinmydays.com/
In looking into apologetics, one would encounter often enough topics such as evolution or historical matters. What is lesser known unfortunately and no less important is the topic of Textual Criticism. As John lays out for us this series, we hope that, despite a technical sounding name, you will come to see its significance when it comes to defending the faith. Why, it may shift how you approach all other Christian matters altogether! Follow the Truth In My Days Apologetics Program on all social platforms: MeWe: https://mewe.com/p/truthinmydays Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/_truthinmydays/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TruthInMyDays YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqAhZo9ktzvnWGYDZfixcdQ Find out more information at: https://truthinmydays.com/
In looking into apologetics, one would encounter often enough topics such as evolution or historical matters. What is lesser known unfortunately and no less important is the topic of Textual Criticism. As John lays out for us this series, we hope that, despite a technical sounding name, you will come to see its significance when it comes to defending the faith. Why, it may shift how you approach all other Christian matters altogether! Follow the Truth In My Days Apologetics Program on all social platforms: MeWe: https://mewe.com/p/truthinmydays Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/_truthinmydays/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TruthInMyDays YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqAhZo9ktzvnWGYDZfixcdQ Find out more information at: https://truthinmydays.com/
In looking into apologetics, one would encounter often enough topics such as evolution or historical matters. What is lesser known unfortunately and no less important is the topic of Textual Criticism. As John lays out for us this series, we hope that, despite a technical sounding name, you will come to see its significance when it comes to defending the faith. Why, it may shift how you approach all other Christian matters altogether! Follow the Truth In My Days Apologetics Program on all social platforms: MeWe: https://mewe.com/p/truthinmydays Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/_truthinmydays/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TruthInMyDays YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqAhZo9ktzvnWGYDZfixcdQ Find out more information at: https://truthinmydays.com/
In looking into apologetics, one would encounter often enough topics such as evolution or historical matters. What is lesser known unfortunately and no less important is the topic of Textual Criticism. As John lays out for us this series, we hope that, despite a technical sounding name, you will come to see its significance when it comes to defending the faith. Why, it may shift how you approach all other Christian matters altogether! Follow the Truth In My Days Apologetics Program on all social platforms: MeWe: https://mewe.com/p/truthinmydays Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/_truthinmydays/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TruthInMyDays YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqAhZo9ktzvnWGYDZfixcdQ Find out more information at: https://truthinmydays.com/
In looking into apologetics, one would encounter often enough topics such as evolution or historical matters. What is lesser known unfortunately and no less important is the topic of Textual Criticism. As John lays out for us this series, we hope that, despite a technical sounding name, you will come to see its significance when it comes to defending the faith. Why, it may shift how you approach all other Christian matters altogether! Follow the Truth In My Days Apologetics Program on all social platforms: MeWe: https://mewe.com/p/truthinmydays Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/_truthinmydays/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TruthInMyDays YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqAhZo9ktzvnWGYDZfixcdQ Find out more information at: https://truthinmydays.com/
In looking into apologetics, one would encounter often enough topics such as evolution or historical matters. What is lesser known unfortunately and no less important is the topic of Textual Criticism. As John lays out for us this series, we hope that, despite a technical sounding name, you will come to see its significance when it comes to defending the faith. Why, it may shift how you approach all other Christian matters altogether! Follow the Truth In My Days Apologetics Program on all social platforms: MeWe: https://mewe.com/p/truthinmydays Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/_truthinmydays/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TruthInMyDays YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqAhZo9ktzvnWGYDZfixcdQ Find out more information at: https://truthinmydays.com/
In looking into apologetics, one would encounter often enough topics such as evolution or historical matters. What is lesser known unfortunately and no less important is the topic of Textual Criticism. As John lays out for us this series, we hope that, despite a technical sounding name, you will come to see its significance when it comes to defending the faith. Why, it may shift how you approach all other Christian matters altogether! Follow the Truth In My Days Apologetics Program on all social platforms: MeWe: https://mewe.com/p/truthinmydays Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/_truthinmydays/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TruthInMyDays YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqAhZo9ktzvnWGYDZfixcdQ Find out more information at: https://truthinmydays.com/
In looking into apologetics, one would encounter often enough topics such as evolution or historical matters. What is lesser known unfortunately and no less important is the topic of Textual Criticism. As John lays out for us this series, we hope that, despite a technical sounding name, you will come to see its significance when it comes to defending the faith. Why, it may shift how you approach all other Christian matters altogether! Follow the Truth In My Days Apologetics Program on all social platforms: MeWe: https://mewe.com/p/truthinmydays Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/_truthinmydays/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TruthInMyDays YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqAhZo9ktzvnWGYDZfixcdQ Find out more information at: https://truthinmydays.com/
In looking into apologetics, one would encounter often enough topics such as evolution or historical matters. What is lesser known unfortunately and no less important is the topic of Textual Criticism. As John lays out for us this series, we hope that, despite a technical sounding name, you will come to see its significance when it comes to defending the faith. Why, it may shift how you approach all other Christian matters altogether! Follow the Truth In My Days Apologetics Program on all social platforms: MeWe: https://mewe.com/p/truthinmydays Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/_truthinmydays/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TruthInMyDays YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqAhZo9ktzvnWGYDZfixcdQ Find out more information at: https://truthinmydays.com/
In looking into apologetics, one would encounter often enough topics such as evolution or historical matters. What is lesser known unfortunately and no less important is the topic of Textual Criticism. As John lays out for us this series, we hope that, despite a technical sounding name, you will come to see its significance when it comes to defending the faith. Why, it may shift how you approach all other Christian matters altogether! Follow the Truth In My Days Apologetics Program on all social platforms: MeWe: https://mewe.com/p/truthinmydays Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/_truthinmydays/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TruthInMyDays YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqAhZo9ktzvnWGYDZfixcdQ Find out more information at: https://truthinmydays.com/
In looking into apologetics, one would encounter often enough topics such as evolution or historical matters. What is lesser known unfortunately and no less important is the topic of Textual Criticism. As John lays out for us this series, we hope that, despite a technical sounding name, you will come to see its significance when it comes to defending the faith. Why, it may shift how you approach all other Christian matters altogether! Follow the Truth In My Days Apologetics Program on all social platforms: MeWe: https://mewe.com/p/truthinmydays Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/_truthinmydays/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TruthInMyDays YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqAhZo9ktzvnWGYDZfixcdQ Find out more information at: https://truthinmydays.com/
In looking into apologetics, one would encounter often enough topics such as evolution or historical matters. What is lesser known unfortunately and no less important is the topic of Textual Criticism. As John lays out for us this series, we hope that, despite a technical sounding name, you will come to see its significance when it comes to defending the faith. Why, it may shift how you approach all other Christian matters altogether! Follow the Truth In My Days Apologetics Program on all social platforms: MeWe: https://mewe.com/p/truthinmydays Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/_truthinmydays/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TruthInMyDays YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqAhZo9ktzvnWGYDZfixcdQ Find out more information at: https://truthinmydays.com/
In looking into apologetics, one would encounter often enough topics such as evolution or historical matters. What is lesser known unfortunately and no less important is the topic of Textual Criticism. As John lays out for us this series, we hope that, despite a technical sounding name, you will come to see its significance when it comes to defending the faith. Why, it may shift how you approach all other Christian matters altogether! Follow the Truth In My Days Apologetics Program on all social platforms: MeWe: https://mewe.com/p/truthinmydays Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/_truthinmydays/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TruthInMyDays YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqAhZo9ktzvnWGYDZfixcdQ Find out more information at: https://truthinmydays.com/
In looking into apologetics, one would encounter often enough topics such as evolution or historical matters. What is lesser known unfortunately and no less important is the topic of Textual Criticism. As John lays out for us this series, we hope that, despite a technical sounding name, you will come to see its significance when it comes to defending the faith. Why, it may shift how you approach all other Christian matters altogether! Follow the Truth In My Days Apologetics Program on all social platforms: MeWe: https://mewe.com/p/truthinmydays Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/_truthinmydays/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TruthInMyDays YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqAhZo9ktzvnWGYDZfixcdQ Find out more information at: https://truthinmydays.com/
Fatigue, poor lighting, haste from persecution, skipping letters or lines, mishearing the Lector are among reasons for unintentional errors in some Bible texts. God bless you and thank you for listening! Please subscribe, share, and leave a 5 star review!
Because we become what we worship, we must make it our purpose to reject idols and worship the one true God though Jesus Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit. New Testament Text: 1 Corinthians 8:4-6 http://media.urclearning.org/audio/tm-arewhatweworship-02-20-2022.MP3
Because we become what we worship, we must make it our purpose to reject idols and worship the one true God though Jesus Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit. New Testament Text: 1 Corinthians 8:4-6 http://media.urclearning.org/audio/tm-arewhatweworship-02-20-2022.MP3
In this sermon we will define basic and ultimate wisdom and how to get these, which leads to the good life. New Testament Text: 1 Corinthians 1:18-31 http://media.urclearning.org/audio/tm-fearofthelord-01-02-2022.MP3
In this sermon we will define basic and ultimate wisdom and how to get these, which leads to the good life. New Testament Text: 1 Corinthians 1:18-31 http://media.urclearning.org/audio/tm-fearofthelord-01-02-2022.MP3
Because vengeance belongs to God, we can live by faith loving our neighbors, even our wicked ones. New Testament Text: 2 Thessalonians 1 http://media.urclearning.org/audio/tm-finaljudge-11-07-2021.MP3
Because vengeance belongs to God, we can live by faith loving our neighbors, even our wicked ones. New Testament Text: 2 Thessalonians 1 http://media.urclearning.org/audio/tm-finaljudge-11-07-2021.MP3
The first reading (post published Mar 18, 2021) is a guest post from Brice Jones regarding Amulets and how they help with New Testament Reconstruction. In the second reading (post published Apr 15, 2015) Dr. Ehrmam writes about false memories and Jesus' death. Join the blog at https://ehrmanblog.org/ and read up to 6 new posts each week and every post in the archives. Your entire minimal cost of membership goes to charity. https://ehrmanblog.org/the-value-of-amulets-for-reconstructing-the-new-testament-text-guest-post-by-brice-jones/ https://ehrmanblog.org/my-memory-book-chapter-4-again-the-death-of-jesus/
Is the New Testament trustworthy? Dr. Charles Quarles joins us today for a conversation on textual criticism and the reliability of Scripture. Dr. Quarles is the co-author of 40 Questions on the New Testament Text and Canon. We'll discuss his book as well as important considerations regarding the text of Scripture.
God is just to judge humanity for sin but God is also merciful through Jesus Christ, which means salvation for those who trust in Christ. New Testament Text: 1 Corinthians 15:20-26 http://media.urclearning.org/audio/tm-judgsalv-2020-08-23.MP3
God is just to judge humanity for sin but God is also merciful through Jesus Christ, which means salvation for those who trust in Christ. New Testament Text: 1 Corinthians 15:20-26 http://media.urclearning.org/audio/tm-judgsalv-2020-08-23.MP3
Welcome to the FIFTH episode of the Every Word Podcast. This is a podcast series for those who enjoy studying details found in God’s Word. In every episode I will read from Dr. Wilbur Pickering’s fresh-sounding translation of the New Testament, which he named, “The Sovereign Creator Has Spoken.” In today’s episode, I will read and comment on Pickering’s translation of Mark chapter 16. Dr. Pickering’s translation is based on the Majority Text of the Greek New Testament, which is also called the Byzantine Text. Beginning in 1881 there was a shift in the Greek text used for English Bible translations, caused by the influence of the Wescott and Hort Greek New Testament, which was based on a very small sampling of manuscripts of the Alexandrian Text Type, that is from Egypt. [The main two manuscripts they relied on are Codex Sinaiticus (abbreviation א [Aleph] or 01) and Codex Vaticanus (abbreviation B or 03). Those are dated at 330-360 AD and 300-325 respectively.] At the time Wescott and Hort were working, it was anticipated that research into the most ancient manuscripts newly discovered in Egypt would reveal a coherent textual stream that would point to the authentic initial form of the Greek text. Now, over a century later, those ancient Egyptian manuscripts have been analyzed, but they do not reveal a coherent textual stream that can be followed. Instead they reveal that Egyptian scribes very freely edited the texts they copied. However the myth continues to be taught that Alexandrian manuscripts are better despite evidence to the contrary, and despite that only the first two picked by Wescott and Hort are still the only ones that are given priority. In contrast, the Majority Text of the New Testament was made by copyists who lived in the same places as the original recipients of the apostles’ writings. Individual scribal errors have been weeded out, since this text type is based on the majority reading of thousands of Greek manuscripts. The Majority Text has been stable over the centuries and is the best academically defendable text of the Greek New Testament that we have today. It is my hope that these podcasts will build awareness of the faulty Greek text that underlies almost all of the English Bible translations of the last century, starting with the ASV (1901), and including RSV, NASB, NIV, GNT, NLT, NET, and ESV. If you have questions you would like me to try to answer, please write. Aside from questions, please let me know where I have made mistakes. My favorite way for you to send your comments is via the Contact button at dailybiblereading.info. If you would like to send me a recording of your comments, it is very possible that I will play it. About 4-5 years ago, the pastor at our church in Siloam Springs preached an expository series of sermons on the Gospel of Mark. Our pastor does a great job of preaching through books of Scripture, even through some of the hardest material in the Bible. So I was shocked that on the Sunday when we were all expecting to hear the last message in Mark’s Gospel, the pastor started his message by telling us that he would not be preaching on chapter 16. Before he launched into the new topic he had chosen for that Sunday, he said something like this, “I decided that I would not preach on this passage, because, after all, we don’t know whether it is part of inspired Scripture or not.” I want you to know that my pastor believes in the inspiration of God’s Word. Was the pastor right to doubt if Mark 16:9-20 was written by Mark? Is he being inconsistent in his belief in the inspiration of the Bible if he doubts that the long ending of Mark is the correct text? What’s the evidence? This is an important point, and that’s what we will deal with today. After I read Pickering’s translation of Mark 16, I will read Pickering’s article, entitled Mark 16:9-20 and the Doctrine of Inspiration. This is the Appendix E in his book entitled The Identity of the New Testament Text. (See the Resources section of the episode notes for information on where you can download this book, or purchase it. The complete text of the article I will read parts from is in the PDF file attached to this podcast. To download the PDF, find the podcast entitled EveryWord005 at dailybiblereading.info.) I think some of you will be disappointed that Pickering doesn’t put the overwhelming textual evidence for the inclusion of the last 12 verses of Mark right at the front of his article. So if you don’t have time 45 minutes of interesting discussion that leads up to that info, you can skip to minute xxxx. I think it is good for us to start out considering the impact that the ending of Mark has upon our attitude toward the reliability of all of Scripture. I think Pickering’s article is a faith builder. -------------------------------------- My (PCF's) comment at minute 33:54 Let me discuss briefly one of the ‘poison passages’ that Pickering mentioned, the one found in Luke 3:33. LUKE 3:33Majority Text: The son of Aminadab, the son of Aram, the son of Hezron, the son of Perez, the son of Judah, Eclectic Text: The son of Aminadab, the son of Admin, the son of Arni, the son of Hezron, the son of Perez, the son of Judah Dr. Timothy Friberg says in his What is what article:The reading of the Traditional Text is consistent with the known Old Testament account of Jesus’ ancestors (1Chronicles 2) and also Matthew 1, while the text of the Bible Society Text has no known Old Testament support. For a link to Friberg’s article, see the Resources section, at the bottom of the episode notes. PCF's comment: Of new Bible translations, only NIV sort of follows the BT and harmonizes with 1Chronicles 2. All the others contain the fictitious Arni. I am surprised by this. It must be that most translators felt that most people would not notice a little change in Jesus’ genealogy. As I show in my Playing Follow the Leader article, in important places where readers will notice a difference, the translators for versions of the last century departed from the Eclectic Text about 30% of the time. Whenever translators do this, they show they are ashamed of the Eclectic Text. No one should deny that it contains the kind of ‘poison’ Pickering speaks of. ------------------------------------ Dr. Pickering named his NT, “The Sovereign Creator Has Spoken.” That title contains three concepts that were not believed by Wescott, Hort, and the succeeding managers of the Eclectic Text. They did not believe that our Creator created humans as described in Genesis. They did not believe in the sovereignty of God. Nor did they believe that God actively inspired and has preserved every word of Scripture for us. Moses and Jesus said, “Man shall not live on bread alone, but by every word of God.” (Deut. 8:3; Mat. 4:4; Luk. 4:4) May the Lord bless you ‘real good’! Resources: Fields, Philip: Playing Follow the Leader in Bible Translation, 2019, by Phil Fields. See the Resources list in that article for many more helpful articles on the superiority of the Majority Greek Text. Friberg, Timothy: On the text of the Greek New Testament that also happens to be the right one for cousin audiences Although the title of this four-page paper refers to translating for Muslims, the principles and summary is widely applicable. I suggest reading this paper before reading Friberg’s other articles listed below. Layman’s Guide — A modest explanation for the layman of ideas related to determining the text of the Greek New Testament, 2019. What is what? — Differences between the Traditional Text and the Bible Society Text of the Greek New Testament. Some data for the reader to weigh, 2019. Pickering, Wilbur: New Translation of the New Testament: The Sovereign Creator has Spoken Greek Text of the New Testament based on Family 35 The Identity of the NT Text IV This book is available as a free download for the Kindle reader app, and also can be purchased from Amazon. All of Pickering’s articles and books are freely available for download at PRUNCH.net. All are released under the Creative Commons license. Additionally, his second edition (2016) NT translation is available for a free download via the Kindle app. It is also freely available as a module in the MyBible program for Android and Apple devices. Robinson, Maurice: The New Testament in the Original Greek: Byzantine Textform, 1991, 2005, 2018. This is available in free digital form in the MyBible Bible app, and in other ways. Article: Full Text of the 105 verses lacking overall Greek Manuscript Support in the NA edition 27
Welcome to the FIFTH episode of the Every Word Podcast. This is a podcast series for those who enjoy studying details found in God’s Word. In every episode I will read from Dr. Wilbur Pickering’s fresh-sounding translation of the New Testament, which he named, “The Sovereign Creator Has Spoken.” In today’s episode, I will read and comment on Pickering’s translation of Mark chapter 16. Dr. Pickering’s translation is based on the Majority Text of the Greek New Testament, which is also called the Byzantine Text. Beginning in 1881 there was a shift in the Greek text used for English Bible translations, caused by the influence of the Wescott and Hort Greek New Testament, which was based on a very small sampling of manuscripts of the Alexandrian Text Type, that is from Egypt. [The main two manuscripts they relied on are Codex Sinaiticus (abbreviation א [Aleph] or 01) and Codex Vaticanus (abbreviation B or 03). Those are dated at 330-360 AD and 300-325 respectively.] At the time Wescott and Hort were working, it was anticipated that research into the most ancient manuscripts newly discovered in Egypt would reveal a coherent textual stream that would point to the authentic initial form of the Greek text. Now, over a century later, those ancient Egyptian manuscripts have been analyzed, but they do not reveal a coherent textual stream that can be followed. Instead they reveal that Egyptian scribes very freely edited the texts they copied. However the myth continues to be taught that Alexandrian manuscripts are better despite evidence to the contrary, and despite that only the first two picked by Wescott and Hort are still the only ones that are given priority. In contrast, the Majority Text of the New Testament was made by copyists who lived in the same places as the original recipients of the apostles’ writings. Individual scribal errors have been weeded out, since this text type is based on the majority reading of thousands of Greek manuscripts. The Majority Text has been stable over the centuries and is the best academically defendable text of the Greek New Testament that we have today. It is my hope that these podcasts will build awareness of the faulty Greek text that underlies almost all of the English Bible translations of the last century, starting with the ASV (1901), and including RSV, NASB, NIV, GNT, NLT, NET, and ESV. If you have questions you would like me to try to answer, please write. Aside from questions, please let me know where I have made mistakes. My favorite way for you to send your comments is via the Contact button at dailybiblereading.info. If you would like to send me a recording of your comments, it is very possible that I will play it. About 4-5 years ago, the pastor at our church in Siloam Springs preached an expository series of sermons on the Gospel of Mark. Our pastor does a great job of preaching through books of Scripture, even through some of the hardest material in the Bible. So I was shocked that on the Sunday when we were all expecting to hear the last message in Mark’s Gospel, the pastor started his message by telling us that he would not be preaching on chapter 16. Before he launched into the new topic he had chosen for that Sunday, he said something like this, “I decided that I would not preach on this passage, because, after all, we don’t know whether it is part of inspired Scripture or not.” I want you to know that my pastor believes in the inspiration of God’s Word. Was the pastor right to doubt if Mark 16:9-20 was written by Mark? Is he being inconsistent in his belief in the inspiration of the Bible if he doubts that the long ending of Mark is the correct text? What’s the evidence? This is an important point, and that’s what we will deal with today. After I read Pickering’s translation of Mark 16, I will read Pickering’s article, entitled Mark 16:9-20 and the Doctrine of Inspiration. This is the Appendix E in his book entitled The Identity of the New Testament Text. (See the Resources section of the episode notes for information on where you can download this book, or purchase it. The complete text of the article I will read parts from is in the PDF file attached to this podcast. To download the PDF, find the podcast entitled EveryWord005 at dailybiblereading.info.) I think some of you will be disappointed that Pickering doesn’t put the overwhelming textual evidence for the inclusion of the last 12 verses of Mark right at the front of his article. So if you don’t have time 45 minutes of interesting discussion that leads up to that info, you can skip to minute xxxx. I think it is good for us to start out considering the impact that the ending of Mark has upon our attitude toward the reliability of all of Scripture. I think Pickering’s article is a faith builder. ---------------------------------- My (PCF) comment at minute 33:54 Let me discuss briefly one of the ‘poison passages’ that Pickering mentioned, the one found in Luke 3:33. LUKE 3.33Majority Text: The son of Aminadab, the son of Aram, the son of Hezron, the son of Perez, the son of Judah, Eclectic Text: The son of Aminadab, the son of Admin, the son of Arni, the son of Hezron, the son of Perez, the son of Judah Dr. Timothy Friberg says in his What is what article:The reading of the Traditional Text is consistent with the known Old Testament account of Jesus’ ancestors (1Chronicles 2) and also Matthew 1, while the text of the Bible Society Text has no known Old Testament support. For a link to Friberg’s article, see the Resources section, at the bottom of the episode notes. PCF: Of new Bible translations, only NIV sort of follows the BT and harmonizes with 1Chronicles 2. All the others contain the fictitious Arni. I am surprised by this. It must be that most translators felt that most people would not notice a little change in Jesus’ genealogy. As I show in my Playing Follow the Leader article, in important places where readers will notice a difference, the translators for versions of the last century departed from the Eclectic Text about 30% of the time. Whenever translators do this, they show they are ashamed of the Eclectic Text. No one should deny that it contains the kind of ‘poison’ Pickering speaks of. ------------------------------- Dr. Pickering named his NT, “The Sovereign Creator Has Spoken.” That title contains three concepts that were not believed by Wescott, Hort, and the succeeding managers of the Eclectic Text. They did not believe that our Creator created humans as described in Genesis. They did not believe in the sovereignty of God. Nor did they believe that God actively inspired and has preserved every word of Scripture for us. Moses and Jesus said, “Man shall not live on bread alone, but by every word of God.” (Deut. 8:3; Mat. 4:4; Luk. 4:4) May the Lord bless you ‘real good’! Resources: Fields, Philip: Playing Follow the Leader in Bible Translation, 2019, by Phil Fields. See the Resources list in that article for many more helpful articles on the superiority of the Majority Greek Text. Friberg, Timothy: On the text of the Greek New Testament that also happens to be the right one for cousin audiences Although the title of this four-page paper refers to translating for Muslims, the principles and summary is widely applicable. I suggest reading this paper before reading Friberg’s other articles listed below. Layman’s Guide — A modest explanation for the layman of ideas related to determining the text of the Greek New Testament, 2019. What is what? — Differences between the Traditional Text and the Bible Society Text of the Greek New Testament. Some data for the reader to weigh, 2019. Pickering, Wilbur: New Translation of the New Testament: The Sovereign Creator has Spoken Greek Text of the New Testament based on Family 35 The Identity of the NT Text IV This book is available as a free download for the Kindle reader app, and also can be purchased from Amazon. All of Pickering’s articles and books are freely available for download at PRUNCH.net. All are released under the Creative Commons license. Additionally, his second edition (2016) NT translation is available for a free download via the Kindle app. It is also freely available as a module in the MyBible program for Android and Apple devices. Robinson, Maurice: The New Testament in the Original Greek: Byzantine Textform, 1991, 2005, 2018. This is available in free digital form in the MyBible Bible app, and in other ways. Article: Full Text of the 105 verses lacking overall Greek Manuscript Support in the NA edition 27
Happy Shelter in Place Day, Friends! I find myself living in the part of Central California right now that has been essentially shut down for the next 22 days, and our Shelter in Place order just went into effect about an hour ago. These are strange, strange times! So – sometimes people ask me how it’s going doing a daily podcast. I can tell you that each episode takes just a little under 3 hours from start to finish, which includes writing the episode, recording it, editing it in Audacity, and entering all of the pertinent information into a WordPress and Libsyn post. Longer episodes take longer, shorter episodes can be around 2 hours of time. Last night was one of the later nights for the show. One of my daughters wanted to watch a show with me, and I’ll take just about any excuse I can to spend time with them, so we watched a show together, which began after midnight. Then I wrote a fairly long pastoral email to the congregation of the church I pastor about the coronavirus pandemic. When I say fairly long, I mean over 1800 words, so about 6 pages worth. We’re in California, and on a virtual lock-down, so hopefully they had a little extra time to read. One of the problems being in a church that is pastored by somebody who fancies himself as a writer is that you can get very long emails from time to time. If you are a leader at the church I pastor, you got a 2100 word email from me AND an 1800 word email from me within the space of 4 days. I should repent in sackcloth and ashes for that, I suppose, but these are trying times we live in right now, filled with dangers like novel viruses, lack of toilet paper, and novel-length emails from pastors. ANYWAY, the point of what I was trying to say earlier before I rambled was that I didn’t start WRITING the podcast until around 3AM. Fortunately, I had some great material from pastor David Platt to use, so I didn’t have to write a ton of original material myself. It was, however, one of the few times since I began this daily podcast in January that I kind of just wanted to go to bed, and not spend 2 hours or so on a podcast. HOWEVER – when I got to the point of recording it, and I got to the part where I was just reading the Scriptures into the microphone, that’s when I noticed something that happens practically every time I do the podcast: THE WORD OF GOD ENCOURAGED ME. It gave me HOPE. It built me up. It elevated my mood. Almost every time I record this show, I come away encouraged. Not because I like recording and editing a podcast – that can get a little tedious…but because the WORD of God is powerful, and supernatural, and it just builds me up in faith, because faith comes by HEARING THE WORD OF GOD. I just wanted to share that with you as a benefit. You can get that same benefit – without the 2-3 hours of writing, recording and editing by simply READING (or listening!) to the WORD OF GOD! If you haven’t done so yet, allow me to encourage you to listen to the other half of today’s episode – episode #78 – I split today’s show into two parts so it wouldn’t be too long. In today’s reading, we encounter the story of the woman caught in adultery, known to scholars as the Pericope Adulterae. Many scholars, including many evangelical ones, consider this passage to be a later edition to the New Testament, and in most modern Bibles, this part of John is set apart to show doubt about the passage. So – what’s going on here, and was this story original to John’s Gospel, or was it a later edition? The Pericope Adulterae, found in John 7:53-8:11, is surrounded by more controversy and conjecture than any other New Testament Passage with the possible exception of the ending of Mark. The authorship and placement of this pericope has been hotly debated at least since the fifth century, and there are still scholars lined up on opposite sides of the issues surrounding this passage. Attempting to extract meaning and application from this passage is almost meaningless without first wrestling with the genuineness of the text and the mass of evidence for and against it. The issue is simple to grasp – if this pericope is a genuine and accurate happening in the life of Jesus, then it carries just as much weight as the rest of the New Testament. Conversely, if the passage is a later edition with no basis in fact (i.e. it never happened) then the passage is notable only for its historical value and the question of how it became inserted into many manuscripts of the New Testament. Though it will be argued that there is no way to be certain of the historicity of this passage, the preponderance of the evidence points to it being a genuine happening in the life of Jesus, and as such it does have application in the modern church and it can inform how we live and interact with each other. Summary of the Passage 7:53-8:2 The Pericope Adulterae begins with a somewhat awkward[1] transition from the previous narrative. The stage is set here; Jesus has spent the night at the Mount of Olives and dawn finds Him mingling with the crowd near the temple courts. His very presence attracts a crowd and notably (for the fourth Gospel)[2] Jesus sits down to teach them. 8:3-8:6a As Jesus is teaching the people, The scribes and Pharisees bring in a woman and stand her in front of the crowd. They explain to Jesus that the woman was caught in the act of committing adultery, and (on the surface) they present her to Jesus for judgment. The question is, should the woman be stoned in accordance with the law of Moses? The text informs us that this question is a trap for Jesus, a classic catch 22, there is no clear way that Jesus can give a verdict here without opening Himself up to some basis for accusation, either in the eyes of the Roman authorities, or the people. 8:6b-8:9 Perplexingly, Jesus doesn’t answer their questions immediately, indeed, He never gives them the verdict. Instead, He leans over and writes on the ground. The accusers persist in their questioning, and Jesus finally responds with His classic retort, challenging any one of the accusers without sin to be the one that casts the first stone. Though we don’t know how much time passed after Jesus’ challenge, one can almost be assured of an awkward silence, punctuated by occasional stones hitting the soft earth as they fall from the hands of the accusers. Beginning with the eldest among them, the scribes and Pharisees melt away into the crowd. 8:10-8:11 Jesus and the accused woman are left as the center of attention. He initiates dialogue her, asking the obvious questions – where is everybody? Is no one left to condemn? Upon her acknowledgment that they have all left, Jesus also refuses to condemn the woman, but warns her to leave behind her life of sin. Controversy and Canonicity: Contra Johannine This Pericope is a wonderful piece of literature; very moving and dramatic. Jesus cleverly meets the challenge of the scribes and Pharisees without compromising and without falling into a trap, and the woman caught in sin is given a second chance to repent. It’s a powerful story, but is it genuine? Did it really happen? If it did really happen, why is there so much evidence against it being an original part of the gospel of John? A survey of the evidence for and against genuineness is presented below. The majority of New Testament scholars are fairly adamant that the Pericope Adulterae is non-Johannine in origin. The ancient manuscript evidence is indeed stacked against this Pericope. Bruce Metzger points out that all major early Greek manuscripts omit the Pericope, including our oldest and most respected early manuscripts, Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Vaticanus, p66 and p75.[3] Though some Old Latin manuscripts include the Pericope, many omit it as well, and the early Syriac, and Coptic manuscripts do not contain the passage[4]. Codex Bezae is the only major Greek manuscript prior to the 8th century that this pericope appears in, and Bezae is known for its many interpolations. In fact, Metzger states, “No other manuscript has so many and such remarkable variations from what is usually taken to be the New Testament Text. Codex Bezae’s special characteristic is the free addition (and occasional omission) of words, sentences and even incidences.”[5] Further manuscript evidence against the Johannine nature of the Pericope is the variety of places it is attached in some of the manuscripts that do contain it. In some manuscripts, it appears after John 7:36, in some after John 7:44, some as an addition at the end of John’s gospel, some after Luke 21:28, and some even after Luke 24:53.[6] Though the number of manuscripts that displace this pericope is not overwhelming, the mere fact of its varied appearance in even a few manuscripts tends to cast doubt on the concreteness of its location after John 7:52. The final bit of manuscript evidence is the unusually high number of textual variants found in the manuscripts that do contain the pericope. Gary Burge points out that line per line, these twelve verses contain more textual variants across the manuscript tradition than almost any other passage of scripture. [7] There is also much patristic evidence, especially in the east, stacked against the passage. This pericope is not mentioned by any Greek Father until Euthymius Zigabenus in the 12th century and isn’t found in the writings of the early Fathers in the west either. Thus, it is omitted by Origen, Clement, Cyprian, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Cyril and Chrysostom,[8] even in writings where it would seem to be an appropriate resource for them to use. While Zane Hodges tries to make the case that the absence of the Pericope in these church fathers constitutes an argument from silence, and thus proves nothing[9], the fact of the matter is that this is more empirical evidence stacked against the pericope, and it adds weight to the non-Johannine argument. While the manuscript evidence would seem to be the greatest evidence against the Pericope, there are also suspicious grammatical and contextual features of the text. Statistical analysis of the text has claimed to show several features which “prove” its non Johannine nature. Vern Poythress has examined the grammatical use of the conjunctions “de”, “oun”, “kai”, and “asyndeton” in the Gospel of John, and developed some general rules that John appears to follow. Upon examination of the adulteress pericope, it would appear that there are enough variations in its use of conjunctions (compared with the rest of John) to allow Poythress to conclude that this Pericope is not written by John.[10] Further grammatical evidence focuses on the words that are used in the passage. Bryant and Krause point out that approximately nine percent, or 15 of the words used in this pericope do not occur elsewhere in the gospel, the highest percentage for a passage of this size in John[11]. The Mount of Olives, The scribes, and the phrase “early morning” are not found anywhere else in the gospel of John, but all are somewhat common in the synoptic gospels. In addition, only here in John is Jesus addressed as teacher. While some of these unique words can be explained by the nature of the story, as well as the semi-technical judicial language employed, there are still a high frequency of unique words and constructs here compared with the rest of John. Finally, there is contextual evidence that seems to indicate this pericope is out of place. Borchert[12] and many others believe that the text disrupts the flow of the Feast of Tabernacles narrative. Many point out its similarity in time and setting to Luke 21:37-38, and (as mentioned above) some manuscripts place the passage right after verse 38 because it seems to be a better fit. It is also true that the flow of the text from 7:52 to 8:12 is smooth and uninterrupted when this passage is removed, but of course, that could be said of many passages! Controversy and Canonicity: Pro Johannine Most scholars believe the evidence against the Pericope Adulterae is overwhelming, but there is much positive evidence for the ancientness of this event, and even some evidence that would seem to indicate the text is Johannine and not at all out of place. The strongest evidence for the veracity and Johannine nature of the Pericope comes from the manuscripts and church fathers of the west. Several Old Latin manuscripts do in fact contain the Pericope. Hodges argues valiantly that the absence of the passage in our earliest and most reliable manuscripts (Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, p66 and p75) is due to those manuscripts being of a proto-Alexandrian origin, and thus likely coming from the same (ancient) exemplar, one which had the passage intentionally excised.[13] He posits that the Pericope was removed from some texts very early (before 200), but that the passage was quite possibly in the original autograph. The Patristic evidence for the Pericope is surprisingly strong in the west. Several church fathers in the fourth and fifth century mention the text, beginning with Pacian of Barcelona, and including Ambrose, Ambrosiaster, Jerome and Augustine. Jerome and Augustine in particular add much to the pro Johannine side of the argument, providing significant ancient evidence and speculation on the passage. Jerome includes the Pericope Adulterae in his Latin Vulgate translation of the scriptures, thus cementing its future acceptance among the Catholic church. In his Dialogue against the Pelagians, Jerome makes a very intriguing reference to this passage, “In the Gospel according to John in many manuscripts, both Greek and Latin, is found the story of the adulterous woman who was accused before the Lord.”[14] This comment is very significant in considering the Pericope Adulterae, and would seem to stand as the strongest pro-Johannine evidence available. As Hodges points out[15], Jerome was well traveled, and would have had a wide exposure to both Greek and Latin texts, many of which were older than any that has survived to this day. Jerome’s statement should carry much more weight with modern New Testament textual scholars than it appears it does. Augustine goes even further than Jerome does in his commentary on the passage, acknowledging the already existing controversy over the passage and offering a reason for it’s removal from some manuscripts, “Certain persons of little faith, or rather enemies of true faith, fearing, I suppose, lest their wives should be given impunity in sinning, removed from their manuscripts the Lord’s act of forgiveness toward the adulteress, as if He who said ‘sin no more’ had granted permission to sin.” [16] While Augustine’s hermeneutical approach to the passage contains a common mistake (Jesus did not specifically forgive the adulterous woman), his observation is very relevant and offers an intriguing possible explanation for the manuscript problems (and textual variances) associated with this passage. Hodges further quotes Ambrose who makes a similar suggestion to Augustine’s – that the passage is a stumbling block. The contextual argument against this pericope is perhaps the easiest to answer. While many commentators have pointed out the “disruption” of the Feast of Tabernacles narrative that this pericope seems to effect, Allison Trites convincingly argues the opposite; the entire passage fits into the overall theme of controversy in John 1-12.[17] Other contextual clues could be seen to indicate the proper placement of this passage. For one, it would seem that the story is a great illustration of John 3:17, “For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.” (John 3:17, NIV) The Pericope can also be seen in a literary sense as a response to the question posed in John 7:26, “Here he is, speaking publicly, and they are not saying a word to him. Have the authorities really concluded that he is the Christ?” (John 7:26, NIV) While much has been made of the grammatical analysis of this pericope, specifically focusing on what is considered non Johannine grammar, there has been some grammatical work on the passage that offers different conclusions. Alan Johnson has used some of the existent grammatical statistical methods on other, non disputed passages of John, and concluded that some of those would be considered non Johannine based on the very same methodology used on the Pericope Adulterae. In addition, he also points out several grammatical features in this passage that are consistent with the rest of John, including the use of “de”, “touto” and “legein” [18] My own grammatical analysis of the passage has produced some interesting results, further casting doubt on the ability of statistical grammatical analysis to effectively determine canonicity and authorship questions. The phrase “meketi amartane” (no longer sin, or stop sinning) only occurs here in the pericope and in John 5:14, where Jesus likewise instructs the paralytic to stop sinning. “ina ecosin” (that they might) is a phrase found only in verse six, and John 17:13. “Kai palin” (and again) in verse 8 is found six other times in John but only once in Luke. Finally, the phrase “eis ten gen” (in the earth) from verse 6 is found 23 times in the New Testament, 5 are in John, and 12 are in Revelation – so of the 23 times that phrase is used, 17 times it is Johannine. That analysis might be used to impress upon some a level of certainty that John did write this passage, but in fact, in the final analysis it doesn’t add much to the argument one way or the other – except to possibly refute those who use statistical grammatical analysis to “prove” that this Pericope is non-Johannine. A thorough survey of the evidence reveals one thing quite clearly: the authorship and position of the Pericope Adulterae is not an easy issue to decide. It is perplexing and frustrating to see the certainty that is exhibited by many scholars on both sides of this issue. Bruce Metzger, Phillip Comfort, Kurt Aland, Raymond Brown, George Beasley-Murray, Leon Morris and many others all make absolute statements on the Pericope and point to overwhelming evidence that it is either non-canonical or non Johannine. Beasley-Murray goes so far as to write, “It is universally agreed by textual critics of the Greek NT that this passage was not part of the Fourth Gospel in its original form.”[19] What an outrageous and misleading statement! On the other hand, there are a few scholars (Elmer Towns, some scholars in the King James only camp, and several Dallas Theological Seminary professors) who are equally adamant that this passage is certainly genuine, and right where it belongs in the New Testament. The fact is that the best and most irrefutable evidence against the Johannine nature of the Pericope Adulterae is its lack of attestation in many of our earliest and best surviving manuscripts. When this manuscript evidence is considered in light of Jerome’s quote above on all of the Greek and Old Latin manuscripts he saw that contained the Pericope (and likely were older than most that we have now) we have a clear conundrum, one that cannot be fairly answered without new evidence coming to light. Thankfully, one thing is agreed upon by most N.T. scholars – this pericope is very old[20] and very likely to be an accurate event in the life of Jesus. Thus Metzger writes that John 7:53-8:11, “has all the earmarks of historical veracity”[21], and Raymond Brown writes, “There is nothing in the story itself, or its language that would forbid us to think of it as an early story concerning Jesus.”[22] If this Pericope is in fact a genuine event in the ministry of Jesus – how is it that it is absent in so many early Biblical texts? To put the issue another way, Phillip W. Comfort offers a list of suspect passages in the Textus Receptus, including the Pericope Adulterae. He challenges those who would argue for the inclusion of these questionable passages to, “come up with good arguments as to why scribes (in the early centuries) would have purposely excised these passages.”[23] Gary Burge proposes an interesting, though improvable suggestion that answers both questions: the Pericope Adulterae text was excised from some early manuscripts for theological reasons. Burge points to the unbiblical Doctrine of Penance, as articulated by early church fathers like Tertullian, Clement and Cyprian. Sexual sins in the eyes of many of the early church fathers were very grave, and in some cases unforgivable.[24] In light of that, it is conceivable that this passage was removed, under the impression that it was or too light on a sin, or in fear (As Augustine suggests above) that it would give others license to sin without fear of reprisal. It is also a possibility that the text is a real happening in the life of Jesus that never was put into the gospels because of the fear listed above (or for another reason – as John says, if everything Jesus did was written down, the world couldn’t contain the books!) A Deeper Look at the Text We now turn our attention back to the text itself, and from the perspective that it is a genuine happening, and is placed in the appropriate place in the text. Examining this passage in its literary context, we see that Jesus’ ministry, previously marked by amazing miracles and healings at the time of the adulterous pericope had become quite controversial. Jesus’ teachings were very challenging, and He even lost some disciples because of them. In the events leading up to the encounter, Jesus brothers urge Him to go the Feast of Tabernacles, and he temporarily declined, only to come later and begin to interact with the people. As He teaches, many people believe in Him, and many don’t – causing arguments and strife. The temple guards are sent to arrest Jesus, but they themselves become arrested by His words and fail to complete their job. The Pharisees and other religious leaders meet in anger, considering what to do and finding no solution. It is directly after this that the incident with the adulterous woman happens. The Old Testament, in Deuteronomy 22 states, “If a man is found sleeping with another man’s wife, both the man who slept with her and the woman must die.” (Deuteronomy 22:24, NIV) Leviticus 20 states similarly, “If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife—with the wife of his neighbor—both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death.” (Leviticus 20:10, NIV) These were the laws of Moses referred to in vs. 5 of this passage. Curiously, there is no mention of the man that was with the woman – this has led many to conclude that the situation was a set up from the beginning, (i.e. the woman was also “trapped”) The scribes and Pharisees, therefore, were wanting Jesus to rule on a case that was flawed from the beginning – they were asking Him to incompletely apply the law of Moses to this situation. This was merely another attempt by the religious leaders to put Jesus in a position where there is no good way out. A similar incident occurs in Matthew 22 (and the other Synoptics): Jesus is asked whether it is right to pay taxes to Caesar, if He answers yes, then the crowds would get angry with Him, if He answers no, then He risks making enemies of the Roman leaders. Also, Jesus uses the same technique against the religious leaders in Matthew 21 when asked who gave Him his authority, His return question, was John’s Baptism from heaven or not, could not be answered in such a way as to not cause the leaders problems. In this particular instance, if Jesus were to “rule” that the woman should be stoned, He would run afoul of Roman laws against mob violence[25] and if He let the woman off the hook, then He would be countermanding the Law of Moses. The response of Jesus to this dilemma, certainly knowing the religious leader’s hearts and motives, is very interesting: He merely stoops down and writes on the ground. Much ink has been wasted trying to determine what exactly it was that Jesus wrote in the ground. Beasley-Murray offers a good list of past suggestions: Was He writing out His decision in the case before verbally announcing it? Was he writing out a passage from Exodus that warns against supporting a wicked man as a malicious witness? Was He writing in the dust to remind the scribes of Jeremiah’s words, “Those who turn away from you will be written in the dust, because they have forsaken the Lord, the spring of living water.” (Jeremiah 17:13, NIV).[26] I prefer Raymond Brown’s proposal; that Jesus was merely doodling[27], possibly to consider how to handle the situation wisely, possibly in prayer. The fact is that what Jesus wrote has not been recorded, so it clearly was only an important issue for the exact time the incident took place, if even then. By suggesting that the one who is without sin cast the first stone, Jesus brilliantly defuses the situation. It’s very possible He could be referring to Deuteronomy 17, which prescribes that nobody should be put to death on the testimony of just one witness, and that the witnesses should be the first one to cast the stone. Is Jesus pointing to the possibility of the corruption of the witnesses here – understanding that the woman, though guilty, was caught in an elaborate set up, and thus invalidating the “prosecution’s” case against her, or is He articulating a more basic principle – if you are sinless you can participate in her stoning? This is a difficult question to answer; Stephen James argues somewhat convincingly that what Jesus means by “without sin” in this context is that their case must be presented without evil motives, and in accordance with the law of Moses (how many witnesses to the act were there, more than one? What of the man?) The religious leaders knew their motives weren’t correct, and therefore left the scene.[28] It is also important to point out here that in defusing the scene the way He did, Jesus did not abrogate the Law of Moses, nor did He completely uphold it – He chose a third, an option that leaves open the question of whether those laws were still applicable in His mind. The incident ends with Jesus challenging the woman to go and leave her life of sin. Modern and ancient preachers and commentators alike have written or preached that Jesus actually forgave the woman – this is not the case – Jesus did not explicitly forgive her as recorded in the text, He simply chose not to condemn her, and exhorted her to also stop sinning. Application If we accept the hypothesis that this Pericope is an accurate and genuine happening, then how does it apply today? Did it abolish the death penalty, as many have argued? Did it usher in an age of more leniency on sin? What sort of standard is Jesus setting for those who would be in a position to judge or pronounce punishment over another? While it is very important to not draw doctrine out of a narrative that doesn’t explicitly indicate doctrinal things, this text can still go beyond being a beautiful story of the mercy and wisdom of Jesus and find application in our modern setting. The first application to consider is what this story says about the death penalty, if anything. As Stephen James points out, many (including John Howard Yoder, Dwight Erricson, Lewis Smedes, G.H. Clark, Charles H. Milligan etc) have used this passage to argue for the abolishment of the death penalty.[29] A careful reading of the text will clearly show that Jesus does not abolish the death penalty, indeed, He doesn’t even address the issue. Thus, both opponents and proponents of capital punishment will need to look in other places to justify their beliefs. I believe the real modern application of this passage is found in Jesus’ challenge to the religious leaders, “If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her.” (John 8:7 NIV) There seems to be a profound connection to this principle and the plank-eye principle that Jesus articulates in Luke 6 – in order to help remove the speck from your brother’s eye, you must first remove the plank from your own. The principle is this, that we should judge and purify ourselves, worrying less about the bad things we see in other people – until our own issues are dealt with – then we will see clearly to help others out. The principle is not advocating merely minding your own business – it is advocating personal holiness that can lead to corporate holiness when we help and challenge each other in right heart and attitude. The Pharisees and scribes were not at all interested in the principle behind the Mosaic laws they were urging Jesus to rule on (i.e. purge the evil from among you), they were just interested in accomplishing their own agendas. The church today cries out for those who would walk in holiness and near the heart of God to the point where we can see clearly enough to help our brothers out with the specks in their eyes, and we can pass judgments rightly. Conclusion An objective look at the Pericope Adulterae, its context, its grammar and its manuscript history leads one to the conclusion that this passage has been rightly seen as controversial through the ages. There is not the kind of overwhelming evidence that is needed for dogmatic statements regarding the authorship and canonicity of John 7:53-8:11 either for or against. There is substantial evidence, however, to demonstrate that this text represents a genuine and accurate event in the life of Jesus, and as such it can inform the modern believer about the nature of Jesus and the importance of holiness in the realm of judgment. [1] Somewhat awkward, but not completely out of place – see below. [2] Some scholars point out that Jesus sitting and teaching is a common feature of the Synoptic Gospels, and cite it as further proof of the Non-Johannine authorship of the Pericope – see John 6:3, however for another instance of Jesus sitting down among the people. Borchert, Gerald The New American Commentary Volume 25A: John 1-11. (electronic edition) Logos LibrarySystem (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1996) [3] For a full list of the major Greek manuscripts that omit this pericope, see: Metzger, Bruce M. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, Second Ed. (New York: Oxford, 1992.), 219-220 [4] Brown, Raymond E. John 1-11. Anchor Bible 29. Garden City: Doubleday, 1982, 335 [5] Metzger, Bruce M. The Text of the New Testament – Its Transmission, Corruption and Restoration, Third Ed. (New York: Oxford, 1992.), 50 [6] The Text of the New Testament – Its Transmission, Corruption and Restoration p. xxix [7] Burge, Gary M. “A Specific Problem In The New Testament Text And Canon: The Woman Caught In Adultery (John 7:53-8:11)” (Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 27 no.2), 144 [8] “A Specific Problem In The New Testament Text And Canon: The Woman Caught In Adultery (John 7:53-8:11)” 142 [9] Hodges, Zane C. “Problem Passages in the Gospel of John Part 8: The Woman Taken in Adultery (John 7:53-8:11)” (Bibliotheca Sacra 136 no. 544 (October, 1979), 329 [10] Poythress, Vern S. “Testing for Johannine Authorship by Examining the Use of Conjunctions” (Westminster Theological Journal 46, no. 2 Fall 1984), 362 [11] Bryant, Beauford H. and Krause, Mark S. John. The College Press NIV Commentary. (Joplin: College Press, 1998) [12] Borchert, Gerald – John 1-11 The New American Commentary. (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1996) [13] “Problem Passages in the Gospel of John Part 8: The Woman Taken in Adultery (John 7:53-8:11)” 323 [14] As quoted in “Problem Passages in the Gospel of John Part 8: The Woman Taken in Adultery (John 7:53-8:11)” 330 [15] “Problem Passages in the Gospel of John Part 8: The Woman Taken in Adultery (John 7:53-8:11)” 330 [16] As quoted in “Problem Passages in the Gospel of John Part 8: The Woman Taken in Adultery (John 7:53-8:11)” 331 [17] Trites, Allison A. “The Woman Taken in Adultery” (Bibliotheca Sacra 131 no. 522 April, 1974) 138-144 [18] Johnson, Alan F. “A Stylistic Trait of the Fourth Gospel in the Pericope Adulterae” Bulletin of the Evangelical Theological Society (IX Spring, 1966) 91-96 [19] Beasley-Murray, George R. The Gospel according to John The Word Biblical Commentary. (Dallas: Word Incorporated, 1999.) [20] Raymond Brown quotes Eusebius, who in turn quotes Papias writing near the time of the Apostles about a woman who was brought before Jesus accused of many sins. Brown also mentions the 3rd century Syrian Didascalia Apostolorum, which gives clear reference to the events of the Pericope Adulterae which indicates that 2nd century Syria knew of the narrative. John 1-11, p. 335 [21] Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, p. 220 [22] John 1-11, p. 335 [23] Comfort, Phillip W. Encountering the Manuscripts (Nashville: Broadman and Holman, 2005) p.99 [24] “A Specific Problem In The New Testament Text And Canon: The Woman Caught In Adultery (John 7:53-8:11)” pages 146-148 [25] John 1-11 The New American Commentary [26] The Gospel according to John The Word Biblical Commentary [27] John 1-11. Anchor Bible 29 p. 334 [28] James, Stephen A. “The Adulteress And The Death Penalty.” (Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 22 no. 1 March, 1979) pages 49-50. [29] “The Adulteress And The Death Penalty.” Pages 45-46
Happy Shelter in Place Day, Friends! I find myself living in the part of Central California right now that has been essentially shut down for the next 22 days, and our Shelter in Place order just went into effect about an hour ago. These are strange, strange times! So – sometimes people ask me how it’s going doing a daily podcast. I can tell you that each episode takes just a little under 3 hours from start to finish, which includes writing the episode, recording it, editing it in Audacity, and entering all of the pertinent information into a WordPress and Libsyn post. Longer episodes take longer, shorter episodes can be around 2 hours of time. Last night was one of the later nights for the show. One of my daughters wanted to watch a show with me, and I’ll take just about any excuse I can to spend time with them, so we watched a show together, which began after midnight. Then I wrote a fairly long pastoral email to the congregation of the church I pastor about the coronavirus pandemic. When I say fairly long, I mean over 1800 words, so about 6 pages worth. We’re in California, and on a virtual lock-down, so hopefully they had a little extra time to read. One of the problems being in a church that is pastored by somebody who fancies himself as a writer is that you can get very long emails from time to time. If you are a leader at the church I pastor, you got a 2100 word email from me AND an 1800 word email from me within the space of 4 days. I should repent in sackcloth and ashes for that, I suppose, but these are trying times we live in right now, filled with dangers like novel viruses, lack of toilet paper, and novel-length emails from pastors. ANYWAY, the point of what I was trying to say earlier before I rambled was that I didn’t start WRITING the podcast until around 3AM. Fortunately, I had some great material from pastor David Platt to use, so I didn’t have to write a ton of original material myself. It was, however, one of the few times since I began this daily podcast in January that I kind of just wanted to go to bed, and not spend 2 hours or so on a podcast. HOWEVER – when I got to the point of recording it, and I got to the part where I was just reading the Scriptures into the microphone, that’s when I noticed something that happens practically every time I do the podcast: THE WORD OF GOD ENCOURAGED ME. It gave me HOPE. It built me up. It elevated my mood. Almost every time I record this show, I come away encouraged. Not because I like recording and editing a podcast – that can get a little tedious…but because the WORD of God is powerful, and supernatural, and it just builds me up in faith, because faith comes by HEARING THE WORD OF GOD. I just wanted to share that with you as a benefit. You can get that same benefit – without the 2-3 hours of writing, recording and editing by simply READING (or listening!) to the WORD OF GOD! If you haven’t done so yet, allow me to encourage you to listen to the other half of today’s episode – episode #78 – I split today’s show into two parts so it wouldn’t be too long. In today’s reading, we encounter the story of the woman caught in adultery, known to scholars as the Pericope Adulterae. Many scholars, including many evangelical ones, consider this passage to be a later edition to the New Testament, and in most modern Bibles, this part of John is set apart to show doubt about the passage. So – what’s going on here, and was this story original to John’s Gospel, or was it a later edition? The Pericope Adulterae, found in John 7:53-8:11, is surrounded by more controversy and conjecture than any other New Testament Passage with the possible exception of the ending of Mark. The authorship and placement of this pericope has been hotly debated at least since the fifth century, and there are still scholars lined up on opposite sides of the issues surrounding this passage. Attempting to extract meaning and application from this passage is almost meaningless without first wrestling with the genuineness of the text and the mass of evidence for and against it. The issue is simple to grasp – if this pericope is a genuine and accurate happening in the life of Jesus, then it carries just as much weight as the rest of the New Testament. Conversely, if the passage is a later edition with no basis in fact (i.e. it never happened) then the passage is notable only for its historical value and the question of how it became inserted into many manuscripts of the New Testament. Though it will be argued that there is no way to be certain of the historicity of this passage, the preponderance of the evidence points to it being a genuine happening in the life of Jesus, and as such it does have application in the modern church and it can inform how we live and interact with each other. Summary of the Passage 7:53-8:2 The Pericope Adulterae begins with a somewhat awkward[1] transition from the previous narrative. The stage is set here; Jesus has spent the night at the Mount of Olives and dawn finds Him mingling with the crowd near the temple courts. His very presence attracts a crowd and notably (for the fourth Gospel)[2] Jesus sits down to teach them. 8:3-8:6a As Jesus is teaching the people, The scribes and Pharisees bring in a woman and stand her in front of the crowd. They explain to Jesus that the woman was caught in the act of committing adultery, and (on the surface) they present her to Jesus for judgment. The question is, should the woman be stoned in accordance with the law of Moses? The text informs us that this question is a trap for Jesus, a classic catch 22, there is no clear way that Jesus can give a verdict here without opening Himself up to some basis for accusation, either in the eyes of the Roman authorities, or the people. 8:6b-8:9 Perplexingly, Jesus doesn’t answer their questions immediately, indeed, He never gives them the verdict. Instead, He leans over and writes on the ground. The accusers persist in their questioning, and Jesus finally responds with His classic retort, challenging any one of the accusers without sin to be the one that casts the first stone. Though we don’t know how much time passed after Jesus’ challenge, one can almost be assured of an awkward silence, punctuated by occasional stones hitting the soft earth as they fall from the hands of the accusers. Beginning with the eldest among them, the scribes and Pharisees melt away into the crowd. 8:10-8:11 Jesus and the accused woman are left as the center of attention. He initiates dialogue her, asking the obvious questions – where is everybody? Is no one left to condemn? Upon her acknowledgment that they have all left, Jesus also refuses to condemn the woman, but warns her to leave behind her life of sin. Controversy and Canonicity: Contra Johannine This Pericope is a wonderful piece of literature; very moving and dramatic. Jesus cleverly meets the challenge of the scribes and Pharisees without compromising and without falling into a trap, and the woman caught in sin is given a second chance to repent. It’s a powerful story, but is it genuine? Did it really happen? If it did really happen, why is there so much evidence against it being an original part of the gospel of John? A survey of the evidence for and against genuineness is presented below. The majority of New Testament scholars are fairly adamant that the Pericope Adulterae is non-Johannine in origin. The ancient manuscript evidence is indeed stacked against this Pericope. Bruce Metzger points out that all major early Greek manuscripts omit the Pericope, including our oldest and most respected early manuscripts, Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Vaticanus, p66 and p75.[3] Though some Old Latin manuscripts include the Pericope, many omit it as well, and the early Syriac, and Coptic manuscripts do not contain the passage[4]. Codex Bezae is the only major Greek manuscript prior to the 8th century that this pericope appears in, and Bezae is known for its many interpolations. In fact, Metzger states, “No other manuscript has so many and such remarkable variations from what is usually taken to be the New Testament Text. Codex Bezae’s special characteristic is the free addition (and occasional omission) of words, sentences and even incidences.”[5] Further manuscript evidence against the Johannine nature of the Pericope is the variety of places it is attached in some of the manuscripts that do contain it. In some manuscripts, it appears after John 7:36, in some after John 7:44, some as an addition at the end of John’s gospel, some after Luke 21:28, and some even after Luke 24:53.[6] Though the number of manuscripts that displace this pericope is not overwhelming, the mere fact of its varied appearance in even a few manuscripts tends to cast doubt on the concreteness of its location after John 7:52. The final bit of manuscript evidence is the unusually high number of textual variants found in the manuscripts that do contain the pericope. Gary Burge points out that line per line, these twelve verses contain more textual variants across the manuscript tradition than almost any other passage of scripture. [7] There is also much patristic evidence, especially in the east, stacked against the passage. This pericope is not mentioned by any Greek Father until Euthymius Zigabenus in the 12th century and isn’t found in the writings of the early Fathers in the west either. Thus, it is omitted by Origen, Clement, Cyprian, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Cyril and Chrysostom,[8] even in writings where it would seem to be an appropriate resource for them to use. While Zane Hodges tries to make the case that the absence of the Pericope in these church fathers constitutes an argument from silence, and thus proves nothing[9], the fact of the matter is that this is more empirical evidence stacked against the pericope, and it adds weight to the non-Johannine argument. While the manuscript evidence would seem to be the greatest evidence against the Pericope, there are also suspicious grammatical and contextual features of the text. Statistical analysis of the text has claimed to show several features which “prove” its non Johannine nature. Vern Poythress has examined the grammatical use of the conjunctions “de”, “oun”, “kai”, and “asyndeton” in the Gospel of John, and developed some general rules that John appears to follow. Upon examination of the adulteress pericope, it would appear that there are enough variations in its use of conjunctions (compared with the rest of John) to allow Poythress to conclude that this Pericope is not written by John.[10] Further grammatical evidence focuses on the words that are used in the passage. Bryant and Krause point out that approximately nine percent, or 15 of the words used in this pericope do not occur elsewhere in the gospel, the highest percentage for a passage of this size in John[11]. The Mount of Olives, The scribes, and the phrase “early morning” are not found anywhere else in the gospel of John, but all are somewhat common in the synoptic gospels. In addition, only here in John is Jesus addressed as teacher. While some of these unique words can be explained by the nature of the story, as well as the semi-technical judicial language employed, there are still a high frequency of unique words and constructs here compared with the rest of John. Finally, there is contextual evidence that seems to indicate this pericope is out of place. Borchert[12] and many others believe that the text disrupts the flow of the Feast of Tabernacles narrative. Many point out its similarity in time and setting to Luke 21:37-38, and (as mentioned above) some manuscripts place the passage right after verse 38 because it seems to be a better fit. It is also true that the flow of the text from 7:52 to 8:12 is smooth and uninterrupted when this passage is removed, but of course, that could be said of many passages! Controversy and Canonicity: Pro Johannine Most scholars believe the evidence against the Pericope Adulterae is overwhelming, but there is much positive evidence for the ancientness of this event, and even some evidence that would seem to indicate the text is Johannine and not at all out of place. The strongest evidence for the veracity and Johannine nature of the Pericope comes from the manuscripts and church fathers of the west. Several Old Latin manuscripts do in fact contain the Pericope. Hodges argues valiantly that the absence of the passage in our earliest and most reliable manuscripts (Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, p66 and p75) is due to those manuscripts being of a proto-Alexandrian origin, and thus likely coming from the same (ancient) exemplar, one which had the passage intentionally excised.[13] He posits that the Pericope was removed from some texts very early (before 200), but that the passage was quite possibly in the original autograph. The Patristic evidence for the Pericope is surprisingly strong in the west. Several church fathers in the fourth and fifth century mention the text, beginning with Pacian of Barcelona, and including Ambrose, Ambrosiaster, Jerome and Augustine. Jerome and Augustine in particular add much to the pro Johannine side of the argument, providing significant ancient evidence and speculation on the passage. Jerome includes the Pericope Adulterae in his Latin Vulgate translation of the scriptures, thus cementing its future acceptance among the Catholic church. In his Dialogue against the Pelagians, Jerome makes a very intriguing reference to this passage, “In the Gospel according to John in many manuscripts, both Greek and Latin, is found the story of the adulterous woman who was accused before the Lord.”[14] This comment is very significant in considering the Pericope Adulterae, and would seem to stand as the strongest pro-Johannine evidence available. As Hodges points out[15], Jerome was well traveled, and would have had a wide exposure to both Greek and Latin texts, many of which were older than any that has survived to this day. Jerome’s statement should carry much more weight with modern New Testament textual scholars than it appears it does. Augustine goes even further than Jerome does in his commentary on the passage, acknowledging the already existing controversy over the passage and offering a reason for it’s removal from some manuscripts, “Certain persons of little faith, or rather enemies of true faith, fearing, I suppose, lest their wives should be given impunity in sinning, removed from their manuscripts the Lord’s act of forgiveness toward the adulteress, as if He who said ‘sin no more’ had granted permission to sin.” [16] While Augustine’s hermeneutical approach to the passage contains a common mistake (Jesus did not specifically forgive the adulterous woman), his observation is very relevant and offers an intriguing possible explanation for the manuscript problems (and textual variances) associated with this passage. Hodges further quotes Ambrose who makes a similar suggestion to Augustine’s – that the passage is a stumbling block. The contextual argument against this pericope is perhaps the easiest to answer. While many commentators have pointed out the “disruption” of the Feast of Tabernacles narrative that this pericope seems to effect, Allison Trites convincingly argues the opposite; the entire passage fits into the overall theme of controversy in John 1-12.[17] Other contextual clues could be seen to indicate the proper placement of this passage. For one, it would seem that the story is a great illustration of John 3:17, “For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.” (John 3:17, NIV) The Pericope can also be seen in a literary sense as a response to the question posed in John 7:26, “Here he is, speaking publicly, and they are not saying a word to him. Have the authorities really concluded that he is the Christ?” (John 7:26, NIV) While much has been made of the grammatical analysis of this pericope, specifically focusing on what is considered non Johannine grammar, there has been some grammatical work on the passage that offers different conclusions. Alan Johnson has used some of the existent grammatical statistical methods on other, non disputed passages of John, and concluded that some of those would be considered non Johannine based on the very same methodology used on the Pericope Adulterae. In addition, he also points out several grammatical features in this passage that are consistent with the rest of John, including the use of “de”, “touto” and “legein” [18] My own grammatical analysis of the passage has produced some interesting results, further casting doubt on the ability of statistical grammatical analysis to effectively determine canonicity and authorship questions. The phrase “meketi amartane” (no longer sin, or stop sinning) only occurs here in the pericope and in John 5:14, where Jesus likewise instructs the paralytic to stop sinning. “ina ecosin” (that they might) is a phrase found only in verse six, and John 17:13. “Kai palin” (and again) in verse 8 is found six other times in John but only once in Luke. Finally, the phrase “eis ten gen” (in the earth) from verse 6 is found 23 times in the New Testament, 5 are in John, and 12 are in Revelation – so of the 23 times that phrase is used, 17 times it is Johannine. That analysis might be used to impress upon some a level of certainty that John did write this passage, but in fact, in the final analysis it doesn’t add much to the argument one way or the other – except to possibly refute those who use statistical grammatical analysis to “prove” that this Pericope is non-Johannine. A thorough survey of the evidence reveals one thing quite clearly: the authorship and position of the Pericope Adulterae is not an easy issue to decide. It is perplexing and frustrating to see the certainty that is exhibited by many scholars on both sides of this issue. Bruce Metzger, Phillip Comfort, Kurt Aland, Raymond Brown, George Beasley-Murray, Leon Morris and many others all make absolute statements on the Pericope and point to overwhelming evidence that it is either non-canonical or non Johannine. Beasley-Murray goes so far as to write, “It is universally agreed by textual critics of the Greek NT that this passage was not part of the Fourth Gospel in its original form.”[19] What an outrageous and misleading statement! On the other hand, there are a few scholars (Elmer Towns, some scholars in the King James only camp, and several Dallas Theological Seminary professors) who are equally adamant that this passage is certainly genuine, and right where it belongs in the New Testament. The fact is that the best and most irrefutable evidence against the Johannine nature of the Pericope Adulterae is its lack of attestation in many of our earliest and best surviving manuscripts. When this manuscript evidence is considered in light of Jerome’s quote above on all of the Greek and Old Latin manuscripts he saw that contained the Pericope (and likely were older than most that we have now) we have a clear conundrum, one that cannot be fairly answered without new evidence coming to light. Thankfully, one thing is agreed upon by most N.T. scholars – this pericope is very old[20] and very likely to be an accurate event in the life of Jesus. Thus Metzger writes that John 7:53-8:11, “has all the earmarks of historical veracity”[21], and Raymond Brown writes, “There is nothing in the story itself, or its language that would forbid us to think of it as an early story concerning Jesus.”[22] If this Pericope is in fact a genuine event in the ministry of Jesus – how is it that it is absent in so many early Biblical texts? To put the issue another way, Phillip W. Comfort offers a list of suspect passages in the Textus Receptus, including the Pericope Adulterae. He challenges those who would argue for the inclusion of these questionable passages to, “come up with good arguments as to why scribes (in the early centuries) would have purposely excised these passages.”[23] Gary Burge proposes an interesting, though improvable suggestion that answers both questions: the Pericope Adulterae text was excised from some early manuscripts for theological reasons. Burge points to the unbiblical Doctrine of Penance, as articulated by early church fathers like Tertullian, Clement and Cyprian. Sexual sins in the eyes of many of the early church fathers were very grave, and in some cases unforgivable.[24] In light of that, it is conceivable that this passage was removed, under the impression that it was or too light on a sin, or in fear (As Augustine suggests above) that it would give others license to sin without fear of reprisal. It is also a possibility that the text is a real happening in the life of Jesus that never was put into the gospels because of the fear listed above (or for another reason – as John says, if everything Jesus did was written down, the world couldn’t contain the books!) A Deeper Look at the Text We now turn our attention back to the text itself, and from the perspective that it is a genuine happening, and is placed in the appropriate place in the text. Examining this passage in its literary context, we see that Jesus’ ministry, previously marked by amazing miracles and healings at the time of the adulterous pericope had become quite controversial. Jesus’ teachings were very challenging, and He even lost some disciples because of them. In the events leading up to the encounter, Jesus brothers urge Him to go the Feast of Tabernacles, and he temporarily declined, only to come later and begin to interact with the people. As He teaches, many people believe in Him, and many don’t – causing arguments and strife. The temple guards are sent to arrest Jesus, but they themselves become arrested by His words and fail to complete their job. The Pharisees and other religious leaders meet in anger, considering what to do and finding no solution. It is directly after this that the incident with the adulterous woman happens. The Old Testament, in Deuteronomy 22 states, “If a man is found sleeping with another man’s wife, both the man who slept with her and the woman must die.” (Deuteronomy 22:24, NIV) Leviticus 20 states similarly, “If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife—with the wife of his neighbor—both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death.” (Leviticus 20:10, NIV) These were the laws of Moses referred to in vs. 5 of this passage. Curiously, there is no mention of the man that was with the woman – this has led many to conclude that the situation was a set up from the beginning, (i.e. the woman was also “trapped”) The scribes and Pharisees, therefore, were wanting Jesus to rule on a case that was flawed from the beginning – they were asking Him to incompletely apply the law of Moses to this situation. This was merely another attempt by the religious leaders to put Jesus in a position where there is no good way out. A similar incident occurs in Matthew 22 (and the other Synoptics): Jesus is asked whether it is right to pay taxes to Caesar, if He answers yes, then the crowds would get angry with Him, if He answers no, then He risks making enemies of the Roman leaders. Also, Jesus uses the same technique against the religious leaders in Matthew 21 when asked who gave Him his authority, His return question, was John’s Baptism from heaven or not, could not be answered in such a way as to not cause the leaders problems. In this particular instance, if Jesus were to “rule” that the woman should be stoned, He would run afoul of Roman laws against mob violence[25] and if He let the woman off the hook, then He would be countermanding the Law of Moses. The response of Jesus to this dilemma, certainly knowing the religious leader’s hearts and motives, is very interesting: He merely stoops down and writes on the ground. Much ink has been wasted trying to determine what exactly it was that Jesus wrote in the ground. Beasley-Murray offers a good list of past suggestions: Was He writing out His decision in the case before verbally announcing it? Was he writing out a passage from Exodus that warns against supporting a wicked man as a malicious witness? Was He writing in the dust to remind the scribes of Jeremiah’s words, “Those who turn away from you will be written in the dust, because they have forsaken the Lord, the spring of living water.” (Jeremiah 17:13, NIV).[26] I prefer Raymond Brown’s proposal; that Jesus was merely doodling[27], possibly to consider how to handle the situation wisely, possibly in prayer. The fact is that what Jesus wrote has not been recorded, so it clearly was only an important issue for the exact time the incident took place, if even then. By suggesting that the one who is without sin cast the first stone, Jesus brilliantly defuses the situation. It’s very possible He could be referring to Deuteronomy 17, which prescribes that nobody should be put to death on the testimony of just one witness, and that the witnesses should be the first one to cast the stone. Is Jesus pointing to the possibility of the corruption of the witnesses here – understanding that the woman, though guilty, was caught in an elaborate set up, and thus invalidating the “prosecution’s” case against her, or is He articulating a more basic principle – if you are sinless you can participate in her stoning? This is a difficult question to answer; Stephen James argues somewhat convincingly that what Jesus means by “without sin” in this context is that their case must be presented without evil motives, and in accordance with the law of Moses (how many witnesses to the act were there, more than one? What of the man?) The religious leaders knew their motives weren’t correct, and therefore left the scene.[28] It is also important to point out here that in defusing the scene the way He did, Jesus did not abrogate the Law of Moses, nor did He completely uphold it – He chose a third, an option that leaves open the question of whether those laws were still applicable in His mind. The incident ends with Jesus challenging the woman to go and leave her life of sin. Modern and ancient preachers and commentators alike have written or preached that Jesus actually forgave the woman – this is not the case – Jesus did not explicitly forgive her as recorded in the text, He simply chose not to condemn her, and exhorted her to also stop sinning. Application If we accept the hypothesis that this Pericope is an accurate and genuine happening, then how does it apply today? Did it abolish the death penalty, as many have argued? Did it usher in an age of more leniency on sin? What sort of standard is Jesus setting for those who would be in a position to judge or pronounce punishment over another? While it is very important to not draw doctrine out of a narrative that doesn’t explicitly indicate doctrinal things, this text can still go beyond being a beautiful story of the mercy and wisdom of Jesus and find application in our modern setting. The first application to consider is what this story says about the death penalty, if anything. As Stephen James points out, many (including John Howard Yoder, Dwight Erricson, Lewis Smedes, G.H. Clark, Charles H. Milligan etc) have used this passage to argue for the abolishment of the death penalty.[29] A careful reading of the text will clearly show that Jesus does not abolish the death penalty, indeed, He doesn’t even address the issue. Thus, both opponents and proponents of capital punishment will need to look in other places to justify their beliefs. I believe the real modern application of this passage is found in Jesus’ challenge to the religious leaders, “If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her.” (John 8:7 NIV) There seems to be a profound connection to this principle and the plank-eye principle that Jesus articulates in Luke 6 – in order to help remove the speck from your brother’s eye, you must first remove the plank from your own. The principle is this, that we should judge and purify ourselves, worrying less about the bad things we see in other people – until our own issues are dealt with – then we will see clearly to help others out. The principle is not advocating merely minding your own business – it is advocating personal holiness that can lead to corporate holiness when we help and challenge each other in right heart and attitude. The Pharisees and scribes were not at all interested in the principle behind the Mosaic laws they were urging Jesus to rule on (i.e. purge the evil from among you), they were just interested in accomplishing their own agendas. The church today cries out for those who would walk in holiness and near the heart of God to the point where we can see clearly enough to help our brothers out with the specks in their eyes, and we can pass judgments rightly. Conclusion An objective look at the Pericope Adulterae, its context, its grammar and its manuscript history leads one to the conclusion that this passage has been rightly seen as controversial through the ages. There is not the kind of overwhelming evidence that is needed for dogmatic statements regarding the authorship and canonicity of John 7:53-8:11 either for or against. There is substantial evidence, however, to demonstrate that this text represents a genuine and accurate event in the life of Jesus, and as such it can inform the modern believer about the nature of Jesus and the importance of holiness in the realm of judgment. [1] Somewhat awkward, but not completely out of place – see below. [2] Some scholars point out that Jesus sitting and teaching is a common feature of the Synoptic Gospels, and cite it as further proof of the Non-Johannine authorship of the Pericope – see John 6:3, however for another instance of Jesus sitting down among the people. Borchert, Gerald The New American Commentary Volume 25A: John 1-11. (electronic edition) Logos LibrarySystem (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1996) [3] For a full list of the major Greek manuscripts that omit this pericope, see: Metzger, Bruce M. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, Second Ed. (New York: Oxford, 1992.), 219-220 [4] Brown, Raymond E. John 1-11. Anchor Bible 29. Garden City: Doubleday, 1982, 335 [5] Metzger, Bruce M. The Text of the New Testament – Its Transmission, Corruption and Restoration, Third Ed. (New York: Oxford, 1992.), 50 [6] The Text of the New Testament – Its Transmission, Corruption and Restoration p. xxix [7] Burge, Gary M. “A Specific Problem In The New Testament Text And Canon: The Woman Caught In Adultery (John 7:53-8:11)” (Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 27 no.2), 144 [8] “A Specific Problem In The New Testament Text And Canon: The Woman Caught In Adultery (John 7:53-8:11)” 142 [9] Hodges, Zane C. “Problem Passages in the Gospel of John Part 8: The Woman Taken in Adultery (John 7:53-8:11)” (Bibliotheca Sacra 136 no. 544 (October, 1979), 329 [10] Poythress, Vern S. “Testing for Johannine Authorship by Examining the Use of Conjunctions” (Westminster Theological Journal 46, no. 2 Fall 1984), 362 [11] Bryant, Beauford H. and Krause, Mark S. John. The College Press NIV Commentary. (Joplin: College Press, 1998) [12] Borchert, Gerald – John 1-11 The New American Commentary. (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1996) [13] “Problem Passages in the Gospel of John Part 8: The Woman Taken in Adultery (John 7:53-8:11)” 323 [14] As quoted in “Problem Passages in the Gospel of John Part 8: The Woman Taken in Adultery (John 7:53-8:11)” 330 [15] “Problem Passages in the Gospel of John Part 8: The Woman Taken in Adultery (John 7:53-8:11)” 330 [16] As quoted in “Problem Passages in the Gospel of John Part 8: The Woman Taken in Adultery (John 7:53-8:11)” 331 [17] Trites, Allison A. “The Woman Taken in Adultery” (Bibliotheca Sacra 131 no. 522 April, 1974) 138-144 [18] Johnson, Alan F. “A Stylistic Trait of the Fourth Gospel in the Pericope Adulterae” Bulletin of the Evangelical Theological Society (IX Spring, 1966) 91-96 [19] Beasley-Murray, George R. The Gospel according to John The Word Biblical Commentary. (Dallas: Word Incorporated, 1999.) [20] Raymond Brown quotes Eusebius, who in turn quotes Papias writing near the time of the Apostles about a woman who was brought before Jesus accused of many sins. Brown also mentions the 3rd century Syrian Didascalia Apostolorum, which gives clear reference to the events of the Pericope Adulterae which indicates that 2nd century Syria knew of the narrative. John 1-11, p. 335 [21] Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, p. 220 [22] John 1-11, p. 335 [23] Comfort, Phillip W. Encountering the Manuscripts (Nashville: Broadman and Holman, 2005) p.99 [24] “A Specific Problem In The New Testament Text And Canon: The Woman Caught In Adultery (John 7:53-8:11)” pages 146-148 [25] John 1-11 The New American Commentary [26] The Gospel according to John The Word Biblical Commentary [27] John 1-11. Anchor Bible 29 p. 334 [28] James, Stephen A. “The Adulteress And The Death Penalty.” (Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 22 no. 1 March, 1979) pages 49-50. [29] “The Adulteress And The Death Penalty.” Pages 45-46
Finally, it’s the long-anticipated Van Halen episode, which manages to feature not only Eddie Van Halen and Alex Van Halen but also another important Dutch-born “Van”: Reformed theologian Cornelius Van Til! Plus, New Testament textual critics Elijah Hixson and Peter Gurry are back with us to discuss the mistakes that people defending the Christian faith tend to make when talking about the textual reliability of the Bible. Along the way, Timothy discusses a few of the errors he made in his book Misquoting Truth and reveals the sordid truth about why Garrick has been mysteriously absent for portions of the past two weeks. The Infinity Gauntlet births a question to which the answer is slightly more obvious than it ought to be this week, but things take a radical turn for the better during the Truth segment in the second half. The focus of this week’s music segment is on the only Van Halen song that includes the words “Gospel” and “Scripture.” (No, you guessed wrong; it's not "Hot for Teacher." Try again!) This segment is packed with some of the greatest music of the twentieth century from one of the greatest guitarists in human history who has been accompanied by one of the greatest rock vocalists ever. (Hint: David Lee Roth is none of the above, at least according to Timothy.) As Garrick and Timothy explore the backstories of Van Halen and Sammy Hagar, the dynamic duo is delighted to discover yet another link to Journey vocalist Steve Perry, and it becomes increasingly apparent to our intrepid cohosts that everything great in 1980s rock and roll (and perhaps everything great in the entire twentieth century) connects somehow to Steve Perry. Also, there should totally be a Reformed hard rock band called “Van Til We Meet Again.” In this Episode Peter Gurry, Ph.D., is assistant professor of New Testament at Phoenix Seminary where he teaches courses in Greek Language and New Testament literature. His research interests range across Greek grammar, the history and formation of the Bible, and the history of New Testament scholarship. Gurry is the author of A Critical Examination of the Coherence-Based Genealogical Method in New Testament Textual Criticism and A New Approach to Textual Criticism: An Introduction to the Coherence-Based Genealogical Method (co-authored with Tommy Wasserman). Follow Dr. Gurry on Twitter at @pjgurry. Elijah Hixson, Ph.D., is research associate in New Testament Text and Language at Tyndale House, Cambridge, where he is working with Dirk Jongkind to produce a textual commentary on the Greek New Testament. Hixson is the author of Scribal Habits in Sixth-Century Greek Purple Codices and editor of Myths and Mistakes in New Testament Textual Criticism (co-edited with Peter Gurry). He has served as a tutor in biblical studies at the University of Edinburgh and has written articles for Journal of Theological Studies, Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, and Lexham Bible Dictionary. Questions to Discuss 1. What’s the primary point of this new book, Myths and Mistakes in New Testament Textual Criticism? 2. Here’s a claim that appears in one popular apologetics books: “Two factors are most important in determining the reliability of a historical document: the number of manuscript copies in existence, and the time between when it was first written and the oldest existing copy. When it comes to the New Testament, there are more than five thousand seven hundred Ancient Greek manuscripts in existence from as early as the second century A.D.” What about this statement is right, and what is wrong? 3. Here’s another common claim: “A fragment of John’s Gospel survives from 125 A.D., only three decades from the time the Gospel was written.” What is right and wrong about this claim? 4. What would you say to the apologist who is excited by all of this and who thinks they might want to become a textual critic? Links to Click If you want to dig deeper into the historical integrity of the New Testament, one great place to start is In Defense of the Bible, edited by Terry Wilder and Steven Cowan. To download a sample chapter, visit http://www.bhacademic.com B and H Academic Reformed Dogmatics, volume 4: book by Herman Bavinck The Institutes of the Christian Religion: book by John Calvin Myths and Mistakes in New Testament Textual Criticism: book edited by Peter Gurry and Elijah Hixson Evidence That Demands a Verdict: book by Josh McDowell and Sean McDowell Reinventing Jesus: book by J. Ed Komoszewski, M. James Sawyer, and Daniel Wallace How We Got the Bible: book by Timothy Paul Jones Misquoting Truth: book by Timothy Paul Jones 5150: album by Van Halen The Best of Both Worlds: album by Van Halen Balance: album by Van Halen "Eruption": song by Van Halen "Running with the Devil": song by Van Halen "Love Walks In": song by Van Halen "I Can't Drive 55": song by Sammy Hagar "Give to Live": song by Sammy Hagar "When It's Love": song by Van Halen "Judgment Day": song by Van Halen "Learning to See": song by Van Halen "Affirmation": song by Sammy Hagar & The Circle ThreeChordsApologetics.com If you are interested in earning a master’s degree online or on campus that will equip you with the most comprehensive apologetics training available anywhere, click here. How to Make Three Chords and the Truth More Amazing than It Already Is Support the show and spread the word! Here are a few ways to do that: 1. Subscribe to Three Chords and the Truth: The Apologetics Podcast: Apple / Android / RSS. 2. Leave a rating and review on iTunes to encourage other people to listen to the show. 3. If you purchase any of the books mentioned in Three Chords and the Truth, consider using the Amazon links provided in the show notes. The show will receive a small percentage of each sale. 4. Visit our Patreon site where you can support the podcast, suggest future songs or topics, and order Three Chords and the Truth merchandise. 5. Make contact with us on Twitter: @DrTimothyPJones @GarrickBailey @ApologeticsPod The Closing Credits Three Chords and the Truth: The Apologetics Podcast thanks B&H Academic for their sponsorship. Music for the podcast has been licensed through Artlist.io and performed by the band Vegan Friendly—even though neither Garrick nor Timothy has ever been vegan friendly. Brief excerpts of music played in each program are included solely for the purposes of comment and critique as allowed under the fair-use provision of U.S. copyright law. "The fair use of a copyrighted work ... for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, ... scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright" (U.S. Code § 107, Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use).
Has the Bible been copied accurately? Skeptics such as biblical scholar Dr. Bart Ehrman have suggested that it wasn’t. According to Bart Ehrman's book Misquoting Jesus, it makes no sense for Christians to refer to the Bible as God's inspired Word "because we no longer possess the words that God supposedly inspired. ... All that we have are error-ridden copies" far removed from the original texts. In the first half of this episode, two scholars in the field of textual criticism join Garrick and Timothy to talk about the reliability of the text of the New Testament. Peter Gurry is assistant professor of New Testament and co-director of the Text and Canon Institute at Phoenix Seminary; Elijah Hixson is a research assistant at Tyndale House in Cambridge. During the interview, Elijah shares the amazing story of how he discovered a lost snippet of Greek text in the fifth-century manuscript Codex Bezae. A biblical theology of the city is the theme of the second half of this episode. While setting the stage for a theology of the city, your intrepid cohosts recognize that 1986 was the greatest year ever for rock and roll, and they explore the very first tune that Timothy heard when he went searching for rock and roll. That song was "You Belong to the City," written and recorded in 1985 for the soundtrack of Miami Vice. In the process of exploring the meaning and purpose of the city, Garrick and Timothy also define "fundamentalism" and discover that—despite Timothy's best efforts—rock and roll music is incapable of boiling an egg. More seriously and far more importantly, Garrick and Timothy discuss the impact of the crack epidemic and disproportionate incarceration on African-American communities in the inner city. This episode is also a wild and reckless celebration of the lost art of mispronunciation! Before the episode was recorded, Timothy said to Garrick, "When this song was on the radio in Kansas in the 1980s, I'm pretty sure that the disc jockey pronounced the artist's last name like 'fry.'" After the recording was over, it was discovered that Timothy was slightly right but mostly wrong. That is indeed the way the name was being pronounced in the corn and soybean kingdom of Kansas in 1986, but it's not the correct pronunciation of Glenn Frey's latter nomen, which is in fact pronounced "fray"---less like a fried strip of tuber that you dip in catsup and more like what happens to the hemline of Garrick's cargo slacks when he spends too much time practicing the moonwalk on the front porch of the chapel at Southern Seminary. This week's question from the Infinity Gauntlet erupts into a deadly duel between Luke Skywalker and Harry Potter, and we deal with a deep and difficult dilemma of vital importance for the daily life of every listener: Can a non-magical weapon block a magical curse? The results of our discussion leave Luke Skywalker lying on the floor of the Death Star with a lightning-shaped scar on his forehead, whining about how he never got to go to Tosche Station with Ron and Hermione even though he finished his chores and saved the galaxy. Also "Tosche Station" would be a great name for a band. Subscribe to Three Chords and the Truth: The Apologetics Podcast: Apple / Android / RSS. In this Episode Peter Gurry, Ph.D., is assistant professor of New Testament at Phoenix Seminary where he teaches courses in Greek Language and New Testament literature. His research interests range across Greek grammar, the history and formation of the Bible, and the history of New Testament scholarship. Gurry is the author of A Critical Examination of the Coherence-Based Genealogical Method in New Testament Textual Criticism and A New Approach to Textual Criticism: An Introduction to the Coherence-Based Genealogical Method (co-authored with Tommy Wasserman). Follow Dr. Gurry on Twitter at @pjgurry. Elijah Hixson, Ph.D., is research associate in New Testament Text and Language at Tyndale House, Cambridge, where he is working with Dirk Jongkind to produce a textual commentary on the Greek New Testament. Hixson is the author of Scribal Habits in Sixth-Century Greek Purple Codices and coeditor with Peter Gurry of Myths and Mistakes in New Testament Textual Criticism. He has served as a tutor in biblical studies at the University of Edinburgh and has written articles for Journal of Theological Studies, Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, and Lexham Bible Dictionary. Questions to Discuss 1. What is textual criticism? 2. One of the questions that Bart Ehrman asks in Misquoting Jesus is, “How does it help us to say that the Bible is the inerrant word of God if in fact we don’t have the words that God inerrantly inspired but only the words copied by the scribes—sometimes correctly but sometimes (many times!) incorrectly?” How would you respond to that question? 3. Bart Ehrman also makes the claim that “there are more variations among our manuscripts than there are words in the New Testament.” Is Ehrman’s claim true and, if it is, should it worry us? Links to Click If you want to dig deeper into the historical integrity of the New Testament, one great place to start is In Defense of the Bible, edited by Terry Wilder and Steven Cowan. To download a sample chapter, visit http://www.bhacademic.com B and H Academic Misquoting Jesus: book by Bart Ehrman "A Lost Page of Codex Bezae": article by Elijah Hixson "The Digital Recovery of a Lost Page of Codex Bezae": article by Elijah Hixson "A Theology of Cities": article by Tim Keller Shelby Park: neighborhood in Louisville Sojourn Church Midtown: church in Shelby Park The Color of Law: book by Richard Rothstein The New Jim Crow: book by Michelle Alexander The City of God: book by Augustine of Hippo "Miami Vice Theme": soundtrack by Jan Hammer "You Belong to the City": song by Glenn Frey "Livin' On A Prayer": song by Bon Jovi "Danger Zone": song by Kenny Loggins "Don't Stop Believin'": song by Journey "Hotel California": song by the Eagles "Take It Easy": song by the Eagles "Tequila Sunrise": song by the Eagles "Crooked Ways": song by Propaganda "It's Not Working": song by Propaganda ThreeChordsApologetics.com If you are interested in earning a master’s degree online or on campus that will equip you with the most comprehensive apologetics training available anywhere, click here. How to Make Three Chords and the Truth More Amazing than It Already Is Support the show and spread the word! Here are a few ways to do that: 1. Subscribe to Three Chords and the Truth: The Apologetics Podcast: Apple / Android / RSS. 2. Leave a rating and review on iTunes to encourage other people to listen to the show. 3. If you purchase any of the books mentioned in Three Chords and the Truth, consider using the Amazon links provided in the show notes. The show will receive a small percentage of each sale. 4. Visit our Patreon site where you can support the podcast, suggest future songs or topics, and order Three Chords and the Truth merchandise. 5. Make contact with us on Twitter: @DrTimothyPJones @GarrickBailey @ApologeticsPod The Closing Credits Three Chords and the Truth: The Apologetics Podcast thanks B&H Academic for their sponsorship. Music for the podcast has been licensed through Artlist.io and performed by the band Vegan Friendly—even though neither Garrick nor Timothy has ever been vegan friendly. Brief excerpts of music played in each program are included solely for the purposes of comment and critique as allowed under the fair-use provision of U.S. copyright law. "The fair use of a copyrighted work ... for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, ... scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright" (U.S. Code § 107, Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use).
Sexual sin, which is a corruption of what God created good, is forgiven and corrected by the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Old Testament Text: 2 Samuel 13 New Testament Text: 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 http://media.urclearning.org/audio/tm.forgivenessandhealing.MP3
This sermon was preached at the Pleasant Ridge Presbyterian Church in Cincinnati, Ohio on Sunday, 14 July 2019. The New Testament Text was: Matthew 2:1-12. Buen Camino!
This sermon was preached on Pentecost at the Pleasant Ridge Presbyterian Church in Cincinnati, Ohio. The New Testament Text was: John 14:15-24.
This was preached on Sunday, 2 June 2019 at the Pleasant Ridge Presbyterian Church in Cincinnati, Ohio. The New Testament Text was Luke 5:1-11.
Dirk Jongkind is Senior Research Fellow in New Testament Text and Language, Tyndale House, University of Cambridge, and the editor of one of the most exciting projects in modern New Testament criticism. The Greek New Testament (Crossway, 2017), which he edited, and which has been co-published by Cambridge University Press and Crossway, is an ambitious attempt to recover as closely as possible an early text of the New Testament. So closely does this edition follow early manuscript preferences that it reproduces both an alternative ordering of the New Testament canon and elements of the text that have almost always been edited out of the editions with which we are most familiar – including spelling variations. Jongkind, together with the larger editorial team based at Tyndale House, Cambridge, has made the text freely available online. Ground-breaking in approach, beautiful in design, this edition has the potential to revolutionize our experience of reading the Greek New Testament. Crawford Gribben is a professor of history at Queen's University Belfast. His research interests focus on the history of puritanism and evangelicalism, and he is the author most recently of John Owen and English Puritanism (Oxford University Press, 2016). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Dirk Jongkind is Senior Research Fellow in New Testament Text and Language, Tyndale House, University of Cambridge, and the editor of one of the most exciting projects in modern New Testament criticism. The Greek New Testament (Crossway, 2017), which he edited, and which has been co-published by Cambridge University Press and Crossway, is an ambitious attempt to recover as closely as possible an early text of the New Testament. So closely does this edition follow early manuscript preferences that it reproduces both an alternative ordering of the New Testament canon and elements of the text that have almost always been edited out of the editions with which we are most familiar – including spelling variations. Jongkind, together with the larger editorial team based at Tyndale House, Cambridge, has made the text freely available online. Ground-breaking in approach, beautiful in design, this edition has the potential to revolutionize our experience of reading the Greek New Testament. Crawford Gribben is a professor of history at Queen’s University Belfast. His research interests focus on the history of puritanism and evangelicalism, and he is the author most recently of John Owen and English Puritanism (Oxford University Press, 2016). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Dirk Jongkind is Senior Research Fellow in New Testament Text and Language, Tyndale House, University of Cambridge, and the editor of one of the most exciting projects in modern New Testament criticism. The Greek New Testament (Crossway, 2017), which he edited, and which has been co-published by Cambridge University Press and Crossway, is an ambitious attempt to recover as closely as possible an early text of the New Testament. So closely does this edition follow early manuscript preferences that it reproduces both an alternative ordering of the New Testament canon and elements of the text that have almost always been edited out of the editions with which we are most familiar – including spelling variations. Jongkind, together with the larger editorial team based at Tyndale House, Cambridge, has made the text freely available online. Ground-breaking in approach, beautiful in design, this edition has the potential to revolutionize our experience of reading the Greek New Testament. Crawford Gribben is a professor of history at Queen’s University Belfast. His research interests focus on the history of puritanism and evangelicalism, and he is the author most recently of John Owen and English Puritanism (Oxford University Press, 2016). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Dirk Jongkind is Senior Research Fellow in New Testament Text and Language, Tyndale House, University of Cambridge, and the editor of one of the most exciting projects in modern New Testament criticism. The Greek New Testament (Crossway, 2017), which he edited, and which has been co-published by Cambridge University Press and Crossway, is an ambitious attempt to recover as closely as possible an early text of the New Testament. So closely does this edition follow early manuscript preferences that it reproduces both an alternative ordering of the New Testament canon and elements of the text that have almost always been edited out of the editions with which we are most familiar – including spelling variations. Jongkind, together with the larger editorial team based at Tyndale House, Cambridge, has made the text freely available online. Ground-breaking in approach, beautiful in design, this edition has the potential to revolutionize our experience of reading the Greek New Testament. Crawford Gribben is a professor of history at Queen’s University Belfast. His research interests focus on the history of puritanism and evangelicalism, and he is the author most recently of John Owen and English Puritanism (Oxford University Press, 2016). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Dirk Jongkind is Senior Research Fellow in New Testament Text and Language, Tyndale House, University of Cambridge, and the editor of one of the most exciting projects in modern New Testament criticism. The Greek New Testament (Crossway, 2017), which he edited, and which has been co-published by Cambridge University Press and Crossway, is an ambitious attempt to recover as closely as possible an early text of the New Testament. So closely does this edition follow early manuscript preferences that it reproduces both an alternative ordering of the New Testament canon and elements of the text that have almost always been edited out of the editions with which we are most familiar – including spelling variations. Jongkind, together with the larger editorial team based at Tyndale House, Cambridge, has made the text freely available online. Ground-breaking in approach, beautiful in design, this edition has the potential to revolutionize our experience of reading the Greek New Testament. Crawford Gribben is a professor of history at Queen’s University Belfast. His research interests focus on the history of puritanism and evangelicalism, and he is the author most recently of John Owen and English Puritanism (Oxford University Press, 2016). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Our understanding of what God has done in Jesus of Nazareth derives from what is made known in the New Testament. Many would cast aspersions on the quality and accuracy of the New Testament we have in English translations today. What shall we say to these things? Can we have confidence in the New Testament as the full, complete revelation of what God has made known in Jesus, and that our New Testaments accurately reflect the texts as written so long ago? The New Testament Text | The Bible | Sermon Outline
Dr. Pete Williams, Warden of Tyndale House interacts with the students of RTS Charlotte in the first Faculty Forum on how evangelicals should think through textual criticism.
© 2020-2025 Ivy Podcast Discovery LLC
