Tuesday, December 17, 2013

Conference on "Pericope Adulterae" coming in April 2014

 
 
I just finished reading Rethinking the Synoptic Problem (Baker Academic, 2001), edited by David Alan Black and David R. Beck.  This book came from presentations given at a 2000 symposium at Southeastern Baptist Seminary on the synoptic problem.  I've also previously reviewed the Black edited Perspectives on the Ending of Mark (Broadman & Holman, 2008) which came from a 2007 seminar at Southeastern on Mark 16:9-20.  I was glad, therefore, to hear that Southeastern will be hosting another symposium (no doubt organized by David Alan Black) in 2014, this time addressing another key text critical issue:  the pericope adulterae (John 7:53--8:11).  Here's a description from the conference webpage:
 
Scholars have long disagreed about the originality of the text of John 7:53-8:11, which contains the story of the woman caught in adultery. Traditionally known as the Pericope Adulterae, this text has concerned various textual critics as to whether it should be included in the canon of Scripture. Furthermore, Bible translators have debated how to include it in their translations, and pastors have debated whether they should preach it as inspired Scripture. Please join us as we explore these issues with some of the leading scholars in this area.
 
Is the woman caught in adultery passage:
  • Original to John's Gospel? Or is it a later interpolation?
  • Should it be proclaimed or proscribed?
These questions will be discussed at Pericope Adulterae.
 
Join us on April 25 - 26, 2014
 
The cost will be $30 per person & $20 for students.
 
Speakers include:
 
Dr. David Alan Black; Dr. M.O. Owens Jr. Chair of New Testament Studies Professor of New Testament & Greek at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary
 
Dr. Chris Keith; Professor of New Testament & Early Christianity Director of the Centre for the Social-Scientific Study of the Bible at St. Mary’s University College in Twickenham, London
 
Dr. Jennifer Knust; Associate Professor of New Testament & Christian Origins School of Theology & the Graduate School of Arts & Sciences, Boston University
 
Dr. John David Punch; Senior Pastor of City Church Denver
 
Dr. Maurice Robinson; Senior Professor of New Testament & Greek at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary
 
Dr. Tommy Wasserman; Academic Dean & Lecturer in New Testament at the Örebro School of Theology in Sweden

4 comments:

Kipp said...

Brother,

This conference looks wonderful, and exceedingly needful. May the Lord open eyes as a result of it.

As I pray about preaching either John or Mark in the New Year, and being a proponent of the Traditional Text, what would be your top 2-3 resources on Mark's ending and the Pericope Adulterae? Regardless of which Gospel I preach, I am looking forward to the natural opportunities to teach on textual issues.

I am thankful for your blog, as I am always edified by reading it.

Pastor Jeff said...

Kipp,

Thanks for your comment.

As for resources, I'd encourage you to search the blog for "The Traditional Text of Scripture: A Select Annotated Bibliography" for a list of general references.

As for a couple specifics: (1) On the ending of Mark, I'd recommend the book edited by Black, "Perspectives on the Ending of Mark" (especially the chapter by Maurice Robinson). There is also Dean Burgon's monograph, "The Last Twelve Verses of Mark." (2) On the pericope adulterae, I'd commend EF Hills in "The KJV Defended" (pp. 150-159).

I feel sure a book will come out of this symposium that will be a valuable resource on this topic.

Again, thanks for this encouragement.

JTR

Phil Brown said...

I just finished E.F. Hills book, and it is worth your time. His perspective on the Scriptures and the handling of them is rare and needed.

Kipp said...

Thank you for the recommendations. Something tells me I have that Burgon work somewhere in my (unruly) library. The book edited by Black is one that I have not interacted with, but will make it a point to in the near future.

I second the Hills' commendation. I still firmly believe that neither he nor Burgon's Revision Revised have been adequately answered by CT proponents. I think that is due to the fact that their textual (preservation) presuppositions do not allow for it.