WM 302: The Failure of James White's Apologetic in the "Real World": RCC, PA, and Sola Scriptura

 

JTR

WM 301: Sermon Review: Gurry on the PA as a Spurious but "True" Illustration

 

Here is a link to my TBS booklet, Why John 7:53-8:11 is in the Bible.

JTR

Booklet: Why John 7.53-8.11 is in the Bible: A Defence of the Authenticity of 'The Woman Taken in Adultery' Account in the Text of Holy Scripture

 

I have posted a pdf of the new booklet, Why John 7.53-8.11 is in the Bible: A Defence of the Authenticity of 'The Woman Taken in Adultery' Account in the Text of Holy Scripture (Trinitarian Bible Society, 2023) to my academia.edu page.

It is an expanded version of my notes from the 2021 lecture I did at Met Tab in London. View here.

You can read the booklet here.

The pdf is also now available at the articles page at the TBS website. Hard copies can also be ordered from TBS.

JTR

Sermon by Ryan Davidson: Accusers, a Sinner, and Jesus (John 7:53--8:11)

 

I enjoyed listening to this recent sermon by Ryan Davidson of Grace Baptist Chapel in  Hampton, Virginia. Good model for acknowledging textual challenges in the PA, affirming its authenticity, and drawing solid pastoral applications.

JTR 

WM 262: Schäfer’s Jesus in the Talmud & An Internal Argument for the PA

 

My notes:

Peter Schäfer, Jesus in the Talmud (Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press, 2007): 210 pp.

This book is about references to Jesus of Nazareth in the Talmud (both Palestinian and Babylonian), the “the foundation document of rabbinic Judaism in Late Antiquity” (1).

The author sees the scattered references to Jesus, Mary, and his followers as evidence of the early conflict between Jews and Christians (or, we might say, Christianity as a sect emerging out of Judaism).

Chapter One: Jesus’ Family

This traces rabbinic traditions that deny the virgin birth by saying that Jesus instead was conceived through an adulterous relationship between Miriam (who grew her hair long as a sign of promiscuity) and a Roman soldier named Pandera/Panthera.

This Jewish slur on Jesus was picked up on by the pagan writer Celsus.

Chapter Two: The Son/Disciple Who Turned Out Badly

Vague references are made to Jesus as a failed son/disciple who succumbed to sexual immorality.

The author notes here the Gnostic connection of Jesus with Mary Magdalene as his wife.

Chapter Three: The Frivolous Disciple

Jesus is presented as a heretical and idolatrous disciple of the rabbis who practiced magic and even worshipped a brick (!).

Chapter Four: The Torah Teacher

The focus here is on Jews who had become followers of Jesus. One is a disciple named Jacob (James?). Another is called Rabbi Eliezer who was accused of sexual immorality with a prostitute and use of magic.

Chapter Five: Healing in the Name of Jesus

Discussion is given here to depictions of the followers of Jesus as “tricksters and imposters” (62) who use of the name of Jesus as a magical formula to perform exorcisms and healings.

Chapter Six: Jesus’ Execution

This chapter traces vague references to Jesus as one who was put to death by stoning and hanging for idolatry. The “Bavli narrative” even reveals “the precise day of his execution: he was hanged on the even of the Passover, that is, the day before the Passover” (72).

Schäfer notes that the rabbinic authors even stress that “the Jews took upon themselves the responsibility for Jesus’ execution” (74). He summarizes the message the rabbinic authors wanted to convey:

… yes, the Roman governor wanted to set him free, but we did not give in. He was a blasphemer and idolater, and although the Romans probably could not care less, we insisted that he get what he deserved. We even convinced the Roman governor (or more precisely forced him to accept) that this heretic and imposter needed to be executed—and we are proud of it (74).

He concludes, “What we have in the Bavli is a powerful confirmation of the New Testament Passion narrative, a creative rereading, however, that not only knows some of its distinct details but proudly proclaims Jewish responsibility for Jesus’ execution” (74).

The Talmud thus sees the death of Jesus as “the rightful execution of a blasphemer and idolater” (74).

Chapter Seven: Jesus’ Disciples

This chapter discusses a tradition in the Bavli following the execution of Jesus which says he had five disciples (one of whom was named Mattai—Matthew?) who were also put on trial and executed.

The author suggests that “this forms the climax of the Bavli’s discussion of Jesus and Christianity…. Jesus was rightly killed, and there is nothing that remains of him and his teaching after his death” (81).

Chapter Eight: Jesus’ Punishment in Hell

This final section relays a Talmudic tradition about three notorious heretical figures in hell: Titus (the destroyer of Jerusalem); Balaam (the pagan prophet); and Jesus the Nazarene.

Titus must repeatedly be burned and have his ashes scattered over the seven seas.

Balaam is forever placed in boiling semen.

And Jesus is forever placed in boiling excrement.

Final Summary: Jesus in the Talmud

In the closing chapter Schäfer gives a summary of the Talmudic attack on Jesus and early Christianity.

First, he says “the most prominent characteristic” that dominates is the charge of “sexual promiscuity” and immorality (97). Jesus is a bastard. Christianity is an “orgiastic cult” (99). They even engage in ritualistic cannibalism of babies (a parody of the eucharist).

These charges were also picked up by pagan critics.

Second, they charge Jesus with being a magician and deceiver.

Third, they charge him and his followers with idolatry and blasphemy.

Rather than being raised from the dead, his fate will be to sit in excrement in hell.

The author notes that the stronger attacks on Christianity are found not in the Palestinian Talmud but in the Bavli (Babylonian Talmud).

He surmises this is due to the fact that “Palestinian Judaism was under the direct and continuously growing impact of Christianity in the Holy Land” (115), so it is no surprise that the “most graphic polemic against Jesus” was found in the Babylonian Talmud composed outside of Palestine (122).

He suggests that the Rabbis likely had access to the NT (perhaps through Tatian’s Diatessaron or through the Syriac Peshitta) (123).

He takes special interest in John since it seems it seems to be “the most strongly anti-Jewish Gospel of the four Gospels” (124). He sees it as having been written in Asia Minor sometime after AD 100.

He adds:

Having been written in the Jewish Diaspora of Asia Minor, it bears all the characteristics of a bitter struggle between the established Jewish and emerging Christian communities, a struggle that was waged by both sides with the gloves off (128).

He ends: “Taken together, the texts in the Bablyonian Talmud, although fragmentary and scattered, become a daring and powerful counter-Gospel to the New Testament in general and to John in particular” (129).

Observation: In the current context the NT is often accused of being antisemitic (Matthew and John, in particular). This study is refreshing in that it acknowledges that this was a conflict in which both Jews and Christians were mutually engaged and that the rabbis, at the least, gave as much as they received.

On the PA:

Toward the end, the author makes reference to the way in which the PA fits within the overall themes of this conflict between Jesus and his disciples and the Jews or Pharisees. The discussion begins, “Some of the confrontations are portrayed as direct discussions between Jesus and ‘the Jews’ or the Pharisees. When Jesus prevents the stoning of the adulterous woman…” (127-128). He sees the content of John 8:17ff, in particular, as related to the earlier challenge of the forgiveness of the adulterous woman.

Schäfer assumes that the PA is part of the authentic text of John that it fits with the overall theme of conflict or confrontation. Thus, he presents a cogent internal argument for the authenticity of this passage and how it fits within the overall narrative and literary goals of John.

This shows that is it no way irrational to posit that the PA is consistent with the rest of John, but instead exposes the folly of those who reject it or scorn it as their “favorite story that’s not really in the Bible.”

JTR

Jots & Tittles 15: PA affirmed in Yale Divinity Chapel Sermon!!!

 

You can find the entire chapel service here.

JTR

Wm 256: Review: An Ordination Sermon that Omits John 7:53--8:11

 

JTR

WM 238: Review: Lanier Panel Discussion on Manuscripts

 

Find the video for the entire panel discussion here.

Find Mounce's lecture at the Lanier Theological Library "Statistics Don't Lie, Or Do They?" here.

JTR

Broad Oak Piety: Why the Woman Taken in Adultery is Scripture

 

I enjoyed having this conversation with Ryan and Joey on the Broad Oak Piety podcast this week.

JTR

WM 225: Wasserman on the PA: Not Scripture but should be read in the church?

 

Resources:

Read the original article by Wasserman here.

Read my review of Knust & Wasserman's To Cast the First Stone here.

Watch my lecture defending the authenticity of the PA here.

JTR

Book Review: Jennifer Knust and Tommy Wasserman, To Cast the First Stone

 

I have posted the audio version of my review of Jennifer Knust and Tommy Wasserman, To Cast the First Stone: The Transmission of a Gospel Story, in Puritan Reformed Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1 (January 2021): 195-198. I have also posted the written review to academia.edu (read it here).

JTR

CCP "Updates" the Woman Taken in Adultery Passage

A friend sent me a link to this news article on a Chinese textbook that "updates" John's controversial account of the Pericope Adulterae (PA) or woman taken in adultery (John 7:53-8:11).

In the new CCP version of the story, Jesus oversees the stoning of the woman and announces, "I too am a sinner."

This story has never been popular with unbelievers, legalists, and oppressive rulers. Though modern scholars (like Knust and Wasserman) continue to tell us that there was no attempt to suppress the narrative in early Christianity, Augustine tells a different story, and this recent attempt to mangle the PA's content is yet more anecdotal evidence of the perennial scandal represented by the sacred record of Christ's deeds and words [both "He that is without sin among you, let him cast the first stone at her" (v. 7) and "go and sin no more" (v. 11)].

JTR

WM 168: Q & A (NKJV, Ward, PIA), then review of Boyce on PA

Earlier this week, I posted WM 168: Q & A (NKJV, Ward, PIA), then review of Boyce on PA. Listen above.

Here are a few links to resources noted in this episode:

Part One: Following up with Correspondence:

On the NKJV:

You can order Alan J. Macgregor, Three Modern Versions:  A Critical Assessmentof the NIV, ESV, and NKJV (The Bible League, 2004) here.

Check out the articles page on the TBS website. If you scroll down to the section on "English Versions" you will find five articles on the NKJV.

Dane Johannsson also has this podcast on the NKJV.

On Mark Ward's Which TR? article:

See Ward's lecture, An Evaluation of Confessional Bibliology (September, 2019).

Read Ward's Which TR? article from DBTSJ (2020) here.

Read my blog post on WM 140: Responding to the "Which TR?" Objection here.

Listen to WM 140 here:

On the PIA and debates on text:

Look here for the PIA's list of public debates (none of which, according to the titles, give singular, sustained focus to defending his rejection of any specific TR text).

Part Two: Review of Introduction to Stephen Boyce on the PA:

Read Boyce's full article here.

Listen to my full debate with Boyce on the PA here:

Blessings, JTR

WM 166: Wasserman & To Cast the First Stone

I have posted WM 166: Wasserman & To Cast the First Stone.

This is the first WM on text criticism I have posted since April.

In the first part of this episode, I offer a "historical" review of some previous conversations had on this blog, which began in WM 163: Gurry, Parker, Text, & Postmodernism.

In the comments of the WM 163 article, Swedish Baptist scholar Tommy Wasserman offered this rejoinder:

You cited me (and Jennifer Knust) again in your last comment, so perhaps I should emphasize again that it is not an either-or for me. I think that polarization is so unfortunate.

1) I do not believe the pericope adulterae belongs in the initial text of the Gospel of John, it entered in the early third century.

2) Our focus in this book was not on the initial text ... we did not find the pericope there. The focus was on the available textual objects, etc.

3) I am very interested in the reconstruction of the initial text and wrote another book with Peter Gurry whom you debate here. I think the easiest hypothesis is the assumption that the initial text is the authorial text.

4) I think the position that the Textus Receptus is God's word exclusively is completely untenable from both a logical–scientific and a theological viewpoint. I have no desire to debate with proponents of the Textus Receptus (I have done my share of that, and urge those who want more knowledge to first study the manuscripts and read an introduction to New Testament textual criticism).

Wasserman then offered a post on The Goal(s) of New Testament Textual Criticism on the Evangelical Textual Criticism blog, in which he again lamented the insistence of an "either-or" approach to text criticism.

The conversation continued in WM 164: Has there been a "major shift" in the goal(s) of text criticism?

Here also is a link to the audio of my debate with Stephen Boyce on the authenticity of the PA.

In the second part of this episode I offer a draft of my review of Jennifer Knust & Tommy Wasserman, To Cast the First Stone: The Transmission of a Gospel Story (Princeton University Press, 2019).

Enjoy!

JTR

New WM Video resources on the PA added to Word Magazine channel

Last Tuesday (5.19.20) I was in a debate with Stephen Boyce on the PA. This brought to mind the two WM podcasts I did in 2014 (hard to believe it was that long ago!) reviewing a sermon by evangelical pastor John Piper in which he makes some of the same arguments as Boyce on the PA, especially in suggesting that the PA is a  "true" story that is not in the Bible.

In these podcasts I point out some of the problems I see with this rejection of the authenticity of the the Pericope Adulterae (PA), John 7:53-8:11.

I have added video versions of WM 31 and WM 32 to the Word Magazine channel:

JTR

New Resources: New Audio on CJ Roundtable and PA Debate & New Video Version of WM 54 on CJ

I have posted some new audio material to sermonaudio.com from the two presentations I did yesterday on the text of the NT: (1) The audio of the CB Roundtable # 2: The Comma Johanneum (1 John 5:7-8); (2) The audio of my debate with Stephen Boyce on the PA (John 7:53-8:11):

I have also posted a video version of WM 54 The Comma Johanneum and the Papyri (from 7.13.16):

JTR

Debate on PA Coming (5.19.20)

God willing, I'm planning to take part this evening in an online debate with Stephen Boyce a staff "apologist" at City Light Church in Seattle on the "Talking Christianity" podcast at 9 pm EST (8 pm CST).

The topic: “Is the PA an authentic part of John's Gospel? The PA should be rejected on external, internal, and historical grounds."

The PA refers to the Pericope Adulterae or woman taken in adultery passage in John 7:53--8:11, one of two major textual issues in the NT (the other being the ending of Mark).

My opponent will be arguing that the PA is spurious and should be removed from our Bibles. I will be defending the PA as Scripture.

JTR

The Woman Taken in Adultery Passage: Loved, Controverted, Misinterpreted

Image: Ivory pyxis from Egypt (c. 5-6 century), depicting the woman taken in adultery. National Museum, Paris.

Note: Devotion taken from last Sunday's sermon on John 8:1-11.

And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more (John 8:11b).

The woman taken in adultery passage (John 7:53—8:11) is perhaps the best loved, and the most controversial, and the most misinterpreted account in the Gospel of John.

It is perhaps the best loved, because it is in miniature the story of every believer. Perhaps we have committed outright adultery or we have committed mental or emotional adultery. We have broken God’s laws. We have committed spiritual adultery by having other gods above God. We have been caught in the act, and we have no excuse and can make no plausible defense for ourselves. We deserve everything we ought to get. We are exposed. And there is only one who can judge us, and it is a holy God himself. But then he sends forth his own dear Son to stand in our place and to take upon himself the wrath we deserve. So that, for us, there is now no condemnation. The “hanging” judge then takes us from the criminal court to family court, and he grants us spiritual adoption so that we become co-heirs with his own dear Son.

It is perhaps the most controversial, because some have tried to remove it from the text of Scripture. Witness the many modern Bibles that now place this text within brackets or even relegate it to the footnotes. Still, it has tenaciously held its place in God’s Word. Why has it been attacked? Because some have been offended by such an outlandish display of God’s grace in Christ toward this woman. Augustine of Hippo knew of attempts to suppress this account in his day (c. early fifth century), writing:

Certain persons of little faith, or rather enemies of the 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 given permission to sin.

Christ couldn’t have done this, some think. But he did. And the saints of God will never let this precious account slip from God’s Word.

It is perhaps the most misinterpreted. How many have mis-used, “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone” to cover, ignore, justify, or obfuscate their own sin? They do the same with Matthew 7:1. Somehow, they conveniently miss consideration of Christ’s final words to this woman: “Go, and sin no more.” Christ not only saves men, but he also changes them. He calls them to live in ways above and beyond which, humanly speaking, they are capable. And this casts them again and again at the feet of Christ, confessing their sin, seeking his forgiveness, and being helped up again to walk in newness of life.

Calvin observes: Here we see “the design of the grace of Christ”: that a sinner reconciled to God “may honor the Author of his salvation by a good and holy life.”

Let us treasure this Word. Let us defend this Word. Let us rightly divide this Word.

Grace and peace, Pastor Jeff Riddle

Word Magazine # 53: Interview with James Snapp on New E-Book on the PA (John 7:53--8:11)

Image:  A fifth century pyxsis with scenes from John's Gospel, including the woman caught in adultery. 

Update (7.7.16):  A transcript of WM 53 is now posted in pdf form to sermonaudio.com (look here).

I posted to sermon audio today WM # 53 Interview: James Snapp's Book on the PA (John 7:53--8:11).  This episode features my phone interview with James Snapp on the PA.  Sound quality is choppy at times.  Thanks for your patience in listening.

Snapp's book recently got  a shout out on the Evangelical Text Criticism blog (see here), where he makes regular comments.

Snapp is pastor of Curtisville Christian Church in Elwood, Indiana. Though we have some obviously significant theological and ecclesiological differences, we do share some common interests in defending traditional NT texts like the ending of Mark and the PA. As Snapp describes it, text criticism is a work-related hobby that has turned into an obsession for him. He regularly posts articles on text criticism on his blog, "The Text of the Gospels," and elsewhere.

In this episode we discuss Snapp's new e-book:  A Fresh Analysis of John 7:53-8:11:  With a Tour of the External Evidence.

We discuss, in particular, sections of his book related to the external evidence for the PA, the internal evidence for the PA, and the notion of the PA as a "floating tradition."

Though Snapp holds to what he calls "Equitable Eclecticism," which leads him essentially to a Byzantine Text position as the best "reconstructed" text, he has common ground with confessional text advocates in defending the authenticity of passages like the PA.  As Snapp put it at the end of the episode, he's rather set sail on a ship with a few barnacles (the TR, in his view) than one filled with holes (the modern critical text).

JTR

New Book: The Pericope of the Adulteress in Contemporary Research

The book produced from the 2014 conference at SEBTS on the Pericope Adulterae (see my report here) is available for pre-order from Bloomsbury/ T & T Clark.  Unfortunately the price is high (Amazon lists the kindle price at $67.19 and the hardback at $104.46)!  The 2008 book edition of the SEBTS conference on the ending of Mark was printed by B & H Academic in paperback at a much more reasonable price.  I guess there’s always inter-library loan.

Larry Hurtado, the only contributor to the book who was not part of the SEBTS symposium, describes this book as now being the “go-to” resource for text-critical study of the PA (see his blog post on the book here).  Hurtado, of course, sides with Knust/Wasserman/Keith in rejecting the originality of the PA, but I find his “heretical” statements against text-critical orthodoxy in this post to be interesting.  He sees the PA as an inexplicable late addition.  What about the possibility it was early [original, in fact, to John], went through a period of suppression from some corners, but tenaciously persisted and prevailed?

JTR