The Woman Taken in Adultery was a forgery. WOW!

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
R

RachelBibleStudent

Guest
#1
it is true that this account was not originally written by john in his gospel...

-but- it is probably an authentic story...maybe one john told to his followers...who wrote it down in their own copies...
 
A

AnandaHya

Guest
#2
seriously?

it doesn't matter when it was written just rather or not it was God inspired and a truthful account of what Jesus did.

John writes this:

John 21
24 This is the disciple who testifies of these things, and wrote these things; and we know that his testimony is true.
25 And there are also many other things that Jesus did, which if they were written one by one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that would be written. Amen.
 
L

Lifelike

Guest
#3
According to the majority of Bible scholars, the story of the woman taken in adultery was a later addition by another anonymous author centuries later, who made the story up and added it to propagate a theological position regarding the judging of others by likewise imperfect beings. The message is certainly a very useful and positive one, however it is more than likely not the message of the original author of John. Within all of the earliest manuscripts relating to the Gospel in question, such a story makes no appearance. In fact, the earliest manuscript to contain this story dates from around the late 4th to early 5th centuries within the Latin Codex ‘Bezae’, 200-300 years after the Gospel’s original production. Prior to this there was no mention of the story within the earliest and most reliable eastern manuscripts; the ‘Codex Sinaiticus’, the ‘Codex Vaticanus’ or the ‘Codex Alexandrinus’, nor in the earliest papyrus’ which were witnesses to the Gospel of John, known as ‘P 66’ and ‘P 75’. As mentioned, the story first makes an appearance within the Western, or Latin Codices which Bible scholars agree, are later and generally speaking less reliable than their Eastern counterparts.



The Biblical scholar, James M. Robinson, in his work, ‘The Gospel of Jesus: A Historical Search for the Original Good News’, says:



But the basic problem with this story is that it was not part of the original New Testament. It is not in the oldest and best manuscripts, but was added, at various places, by later scribes.


However, since it ended up in the medieval manuscripts used by the King James translators, we are familiar with it, in a way that we are not familiar with most late additions to and alterations of the original text (namely, those absent from the manuscripts used by King James's translators). Most modern translations either leave it out or indicate in some way that it is not part of the original text. (The New Revised Standard Version uses double square brackets and a footnote saying, "The most ancient authorities lack 7:53-8:11.")[1]



Once again referring to the works of Professor Bart D. Ehrman, we read:



It is a brilliant story, filled with pathos and a clever twist in which Jesus uses his wits to get himself—not to mention the poor woman— off the hook. Of course, to a careful reader, the story raises numerous questions. If this woman was caught in the act of adultery, for example, where is the man she was caught with? Both of them are to be stoned, according to the Law of Moses (see Lev. 20:10). Moreover, when Jesus wrote on the ground, what exactly was he writing? (According to one ancient tradition, he was writing the sins of the accusers, who seeing that their own transgressions were known, left in embarrassment!) And even if Jesus did teach a message of love, did he really think that the Law of God given by Moses was no longer in force and should not be obeyed? Did he think sins should not be punished at all?


Despite the brilliance of the story, its captivating quality, and its inherent intrigue, there is one other enormous problem that it poses.


As it turns out, it was not originally in the Gospel of John. In fact, it was not originally part of any of the Gospels. It was added by later scribes.[2]



[1] James M. Robinson. The Gospel of Jesus: A Historical Search for the Original Good News. Harper Collins, (2005) Pg., 65.

[2]Bart D Ehrman. Misquoting Jesus. HarperSanFrancisco. (2005). Pg. 64.
No text that comes out of Alexandria, Egypt is reliable.
 
A

AnandaHya

Guest
#4
Hah??? What are you taling about brother?
that most of the Eastern manuscripts have gnostic influences that removed certain text and words like "in Heaven" and "Jesus" and "Christ" from certain parts of scripture to allow their heresy to flourish and make sense to people. they believe that those "earlier" texts are corruption that Paul warned about in his letters that mix Eastern religion and mysticism into Christianity to corrupt the sound doctrine and truth that Jesus taught.

there is a whole series on it that another poster is doing about text conparisions.

here is a link to one of them:

http://christianchat.com/bible-disc...ne-more-different-wordings-westcott-hort.html
 
Last edited:
A

AnandaHya

Guest
#5
if their point of view does not line up with GOD's then it is NOT valid.

you are starting to get offensive with your words Michael sherlock.

until you apologize and explain your false statements about Yahweh commissioning rape I do not think we have much to discuss. I will not accept any sources except the Bible as proof text. Therefore if you can not cite Bible verses then don't bother to justify your statement an apology will suffice. direct it towards GOD for your offensive words.
 
Feb 16, 2011
2,957
24
0
#6
Many people doubt the text the OP is mentioning as the best text. In fact alot of people find problems with that text. Some people already mentioned it, but it is most likely that the story was left out of the text.
 
Y

yaright

Guest
#7
seriously?

it doesn't matter when it was written just rather or not it was God inspired and a truthful account of what Jesus did.

John writes this:

John 21
24 This is the disciple who testifies of these things, and wrote these things; and we know that his testimony is true.
25 And there are also many other things that Jesus did, which if they were written one by one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that would be written. Amen.
these are the verses that first came to mind when I considered the complaint. That's all it is after all, just a simple complaint by someone who pretends, because she isn't allowed to think on her own. What was written wasn't a forgery, it is a witness (present tense) concerning who we are and why we are that way in God's sight.
 
A

AnandaHya

Guest
#8
WOw. Im sorry! I did not address this issue because I was focussed on another but I just read your comment and I am truly sorry for offending you.

Ok one of the verses to support my claim that Yahweh condoned rape is as follows;

"If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay the girl's father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the girl, for he has violated (anah) her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives." Deuteronomy 22:28-29

Imagine the poor girl having to live with her rappist as his wife and be repeatedly raped over and over, because god said that her torment should continue for the rest of her life.

The next is:

"When thou goest forth to war against thine enemies, and the LORD thy God hath delivered them into thine hands, and thou hast taken them captive, And seest among the captives a beautiful woman, and hast a desire unto her, that thou wouldest have her to thy wife; Then thou shalt bring her home to thine house; and she shall shave her head, and pare her nails; And she shall put the raiment of her captivity from off her, and shall remain in thine house, and bewail her father and her mother a full month: and after that thou shalt go in unto her, and be her husband, and she shall be thy wife."
Deuteronomy 21:10-13

The next is:

Judges 19:16-30 describes an event similar to Genesis 19. Some men in the city wanted to "know" a visiting Levite. The owner of the house offered his virgin daughter and the Levite's concubine so that the men could rape them. Verse 24 states: "Behold, here is my daughter a maiden, and his concubine; them I will bring out now, and humble ye them, and do with them what seemeth good unto you: but unto this man do not so vile a thing." The man sent his own concubine outside to the gang, who proceeded to serially rape her. She died of the attacks. The man only learned of her death when he was leaving the house in the morning and stumbled across her body. The woman was clearly considered expendable and of little value.

AND there are other passages.

Sorry to offend but it is the truth and the truth is not my fault, I promise!
alright context is VERY important when reading the OT.

my initial response would be that God had His prophets record the sinfulness of Israel to reveal the world's need for a Savior. how the nature of men when left to their own devices become deplorable and wax worst and worst through each generation without the direct revelation of God through His prophets.

you see the pattern when you read the book of Judges. how when God sends a prophet the people obey the commandments of God but when the prophet dies they sin and chase after idols and other people they are not suppose to intermarry with.

You do know when Jesus came He overturned some of the rules and told them the Spirit of the Law not just the form of it, right?

you can look at the commandment of the eye for an eye thing. it was to prevent someone from demanding the death of another for a trivial offense and limit the punishment of a person who stole to replacement of the property instead of death like the surrounding nations demanded but Jesus expanded upon that principal of mercy and grace to include forgiveness and willing sacrifice out of love and compassion instead of retribution and what the world sees as justice.

I can not answer for the OT, I have not studied but will reread the passages and pray about them.

However God does not condone rape for He reveals by these words that if anyone mistreats their wife their prayers will be hindered and God will not listen to them. Rape would fall under dishonoring your wife.

1 Peter 3:7
Husbands, likewise, dwell with them with understanding, giving honor to the wife, as to the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life, that your prayers may not be hindered.


also the passages you quote break this commandment:

2 Corinthians 6:14
Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers. For what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness? And what communion has light with darkness?
 
A

AnandaHya

Guest
#9
Ruth was from another people that were considered Gentiles and Jesus bloodline is traced to her. the law of intermarriage is not about ethnic groups but beliefs and religion, of who the person worshiped not what bloodlines they had.

the law debate is still raging on the forums, don't really want to get into it right now.

I have studied the OT, the Tanakh, just not as often as I have read the NT. I tend to read through the NT all the way through about once a month. the OT not as much. perhaps once a year. though I read passages from both every day. However, I never claimed to fully understand the Christian religion.

my only claim is that the Holy Spirit lives in my heart and allows me to cry out Abba Father for Jesus Christ came and died on the cross for the remission of my sins and was resurrected on the third day and will come again.

the moral laws are eternal, just men don't really understand them. they apply and are found in all religions because God sent His angels to each nation to teach them those laws but He chose Israel to teach personally, yet they still disobeyed and sinned and transgressed just like the rest of the world but a remnant was always keep through each generation until the time of Jesus Christ and the gift of the Holy Spirit.

i can find the scriptures but I was heading to bed lol.
 
A

AnandaHya

Guest
#10
DId you know that Jesus shared many common features with older Pagan gods?
did you know that Satan listens in to God's plans and God has been sending Prophets to proclaim the coming of Jesus for a very long time and therefore Satan can set up imitations to try and discredit Jesus?

the fakes fall short on the love department and the Holy Spirit promise.

that is why Jesus spoke these words:

John 10

1 “Most assuredly, I say to you, he who does not enter the sheepfold by the door, but climbs up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber. 2 But he who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. 3 To him the doorkeeper opens, and the sheep hear his voice; and he calls his own sheep by name and leads them out. 4 And when he brings out his own sheep, he goes before them; and the sheep follow him, for they know his voice. 5 Yet they will by no means follow a stranger, but will flee from him, for they do not know the voice of strangers.” 6 Jesus used this illustration, but they did not understand the things which He spoke to them.

7 Then Jesus said to them again, “Most assuredly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep. 8 All who ever came before Me[a] are thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not hear them. 9 I am the door. If anyone enters by Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture. 10 The thief does not come except to steal, and to kill, and to destroy. I have come that they may have life, and that they may have it more abundantly.
11 “I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd gives His life for the sheep. 12 But a hireling, he who is not the shepherd, one who does not own the sheep, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees; and the wolf catches the sheep and scatters them. 13 The hireling flees because he is a hireling and does not care about the sheep. 14 I am the good shepherd; and I know My sheep, and am known by My own. 15 As the Father knows Me, even so I know the Father; and I lay down My life for the sheep. 16 And other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they will hear My voice; and there will be one flock and one shepherd.
17 “Therefore My Father loves Me, because I lay down My life that I may take it again. 18 No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This command I have received from My Father.”