The Story of a Woman Caught in/Accused of Adultery in John 8:3-11 was a true narration that Christ Jesus had fulfilled the Law by defending SOMEONE of "Injustices and Abuses" of bearing FALSE WITNESSES to thy neighbor (9th Commandments of God)... Christ Jesus said, "I did not come to destroy but to fulfill the LAWS."... Amen.
The audacity of John to use words oly once is absolutely stunning! Imagine you handing in your thesis and your professor throws out large portions of it because you use words in there that you used nowhere else and he argues that therefor you did not write them. This is a silly and harmful argument.
Bull shit ! It’s not part of any manuscript! It was made up and added by an unknown source lol I can’t believe the lengths you Christian’s go to trying to cover up the disaster called Bible The creator of the universe and that Bible is the best the creator of the whole freaking universe could give us? Give me a break.
Great job on this one, Josh! Doug Wilson made a good statement re these bracketed passages, as well: "They may not be [Marking/Johannine], but they are scripture." That said, I think your reasoning here is excellent, especially related to the motivation to remove the passage and the "interrupted flow." Thanks much! God bless!
Hey, great video. This is unrelated to the video, but I have a question about apostasy. I know you have another video on Hebrews 6:4-6, but I would like to ask you here. If one were to fall away, would there be any chance to repent if the person returning wanted it? Or are they blocked out forever and God will not forgive them regardless? Thank you
Of Repentance they teach that for those who have fallen after Baptism there is remission of sins whenever they are converted 2 and that the Church ought to impart absolution to those thus returning to repentance. Now, repentance consists properly of these 3 two parts: One is contrition, that is, 4 terrors smiting the conscience through the knowledge of sin; the other is faith, which is born of 5 the Gospel, or of absolution, and believes that for Christ’s sake, sins are forgiven, comforts 6 the conscience, and delivers it from terrors. Then good works are bound to follow, which are the fruits of repentance.
About 80% or more of extant Greek mss have this passage in the traditional place but one or two very old mss have it in Luke. But the very old mss are leftovers from the deep past and are not really worth bothering with: their variations are shaky disagreeing among themselves as much as from the main text, and not being copied or worn out, they were clearly not deemed worthy at the time; hence the reason they survived.
I'm still trying to figure out why they persecuted women and not the men. She wasn't by herself in the act. No wonder why men cheat, they think it's ok for the man.
The pericopes Mark 16:9-20 and John 7:53-8:11 could be apocryphal works since s9ne codices abd therefore, bible translations do not have these pericopes. 8 find it rather unusual that the Vulgate would have the two passages abd that Lutger & Melanchthon would in particular, quote verses from the Mark pericope, in 16:16 in a baptism comment. This relates to tte earlier Antekegomena vs. Homolegoumen discussion.
I didn’t know much about this but I do recall reading somewhere that it was more likely it was removed for ‘social’ reasons than being added by a rogue scribe.
Very true, the vocabulary and syntax are really different. And I also agree that, internal evidence can not just be the final determiner of authenticity.
This video is such a blessing! Thank you for this video Pastor Joshua, as I’ve never heard a legitimate refutation to the common belief that the adulteress story does not belong in the Bible, all I’ve heard are characters like James White simply confirm that it’s not original and that’s that. The only refutation I had heard were from KJV only folks simply claiming it’s rightful inclusion while offering no legitimate reasoning other than the KJV is perfect. I love the KJV and NKJV, they are my favorite translations but I’m not king James only. But your explanation was entirely logical and sounded more plausible then the aforementioned beliefs regarding this topic. God bless you Brother, thank you for your insight
