tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7225373.post1647226647314424669..comments2024-02-29T03:34:23.190-05:00Comments on Who Were the Sea Peoples?: What work is biblical inerrancy supposed to be doing?gcallahhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10065877215969589482noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7225373.post-26507000353260165452013-09-05T10:37:33.510-04:002013-09-05T10:37:33.510-04:00Wikipedia has a rather interesting and informative...Wikipedia has a rather interesting and informative entry:<br /><br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_and_the_woman_taken_in_adulteryAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7225373.post-41652872340145094502013-08-24T22:59:46.413-04:002013-08-24T22:59:46.413-04:00Yes, I think you may be right that he said the lat...Yes, I think you may be right that he said the latter. But why did they only become aware of it then?gcallahhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10065877215969589482noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7225373.post-31024763498315046352013-08-24T02:04:34.663-04:002013-08-24T02:04:34.663-04:00No one, or no Greek church father?No one, or no Greek church father?PHhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12011728672116977010noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7225373.post-49740298082275907222013-08-22T20:32:37.951-04:002013-08-22T20:32:37.951-04:00My source is Ehrman and what he claims is that no ...My source is Ehrman and what he claims is that no one talks of it being in John before the 12th century. gcallahhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10065877215969589482noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7225373.post-14692038080818188422013-08-21T16:55:17.780-04:002013-08-21T16:55:17.780-04:00"[I]t is nearly certain that the story of the..."[I]t is nearly certain that the story of the adulteress did not make it into John until after 1000 A.D."<br /><br />I think you may be misinterpreting (or misremembering) your source on this point. The Codex Bezae, which is dated to the fifth century, is standardly cited as the first Greek manuscript to contain the Pericope Adulterae.<br /><br />According to William Lawrence Petersen, the story is also found in one eighth century manuscript (E), ten ninth century manuscripts (F G H K M U Π Ω 565 892), and three tenth century manuscripts (Γ 1076 1582). See <i>Patristic and Text-Critical Studies: The Collected Essays of William L. Petersen</i>, 304.<br /><br />Where the story is placed in each of those manuscripts, I am not sure. I know that some manuscripts place it in the Gospel of Luke, but to my knowledge all of them come later. (Are there any outside <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_13" rel="nofollow">f13</a>?) They would not, then, affect the count above. (Incidentally, <a href="http://archive.org/stream/fathersofthechur009508mbp#page/n118/mode/1up" rel="nofollow">St. Augustine</a> is clearly familiar with the story, though he does not explicitly attribute it to the Gospel of John.)<br /><br />I agree that the Pericope Adulterae is a scribal insertion. I would just want to date the insertion much earlier.PHhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12011728672116977010noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7225373.post-17004558886032432702013-08-20T20:23:03.593-04:002013-08-20T20:23:03.593-04:00Gene, I love it! This is something I want to tackl...Gene, I love it! This is something I want to tackle, maybe on Sunday, at my blog. <br /><br />In the meantime, how do you deal with something like <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20corinthians%2015:12-19&version=NKJV" rel="nofollow">this</a>? Plenty of Christians would say, "If the Bible is just a bunch of nice stories teaching us a lesson, then my faith is a sham."Bob Murphyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04001108408649311528noreply@blogger.com