the Pericope Adulterae (John 7:53-8:11)

[MrMacSon]

The pericope is not found in most of the early Greek Gospel manuscripts. It is not in P66, and it is not in P75, both of which have been assigned to the late 100s or early 200s. Nor is it in two important manuscripts produced in the early/mid 300s, Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. The first surviving Greek manuscript to contain the pericope is the Latin/Greek diglot Codex Bezae, produced in the 400s or 500s (but displaying a form of text which has affinities with "Western" readings used in the 100s and 200s). Codex Bezae is also the earliest surviving Latin manuscript to contain it. Out of 23 Old Latin manuscripts of John 7-8, seventeen contain at least part of the pericope, and represent at least three transmission-streams in which it was included ..(cont'd)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_and ... al_history

A recent paper, The Historicity of the Pericope Adulterae (John 7:53-8:11), by Darren M Slade, elaborates -

Conclusion

... the internal and external evidence strongly demonstrates that the pericope adulterae was not part of the Evangelist’s original Fourth Gospel ... There is simply no evidence that the story was ever written down prior to the fifth century.

[Adam]

That's unexpected, I would say,
Because the Pericope Adulterae is alternately found in copies of the Gospel of Luke. Is the conclusion here limited to its inclusion in any Gospel of John or does it include study of whether the copies of the Gospel of Luke may have had it before the fifth century?
Myself, I would put the accent on the "...simply no evidence....".

[MrMacSon]

That's unexpected, I would say,
Because the Pericope Adulterae is alternately found in copies of the Gospel of Luke. Is the conclusion here limited to its inclusion in any Gospel of John, or does it include study of whether the copies of the Gospel of Luke may have had it before the fifth century?
Myself, I would put the accent on the "...simply no evidence....".

Slade does not mention Luke. What passages in what copies of the Gospel of Luke do you have in mind?

[Ben C. Smith]

That's unexpected, I would say,
Because the Pericope Adulterae is alternately found in copies of the Gospel of Luke. Is the conclusion here limited to its inclusion in any Gospel of John, or does it include study of whether the copies of the Gospel of Luke may have had it before the fifth century?
Myself, I would put the accent on the "...simply no evidence....".

Slade does not mention Luke. What passages in what copies of the Gospel of Luke do you have in mind?

Family 13 locates the pericope de adultera after Luke 21.28. Minuscule 1333c locates it after Luke 24.53 (the last verse of the gospel).

Minuscule 225 locates it after John 7.36. Certain Georgian manuscripts locate it after John 7.44. Minuscules 1, 565, 1076, 1570, and 1582, as well as certain Armenian manuscripts, locate it after John 21.25 (the last verse of the gospel).

This pericope, um, gets around.

[Ben C. Smith]

Andrew Criddle has a very good post on this pericope: http://hypotyposeis.org/weblog/2007/06/ ... terae.html.

My own summary is as follows:

Pericope de Adultera	Textual Parallels
John 7.53-8.2: And each one journeyed to his house, but Jesus journeyed to the Mount of Olives. And early in the morning he arrived again into the temple, and all the people came toward him, and he sat down and taught them.	Luke 21.37-38: And he was teaching in the temple during the days, but during the nights he was going out and spending the night upon the mount that was called of Olives; and all the people would come toward him early in the morning to listen to him in the temple.
John 8.3-9: And the scribes and the Pharisees bring a woman who had been caught in adultery, and they stood her in the middle and say to him: Teacher, this woman was caught in the very act of committing adultery. And in the law Moses commanded us to stone such women. So what do you say? But they were saying this to test him, so that they might have something to accuse him for. But Jesus bent down and was writing upon the ground with his finger. And when they remained, making their request of him, he bent back up and said to them: Let the one without sin among you be the first to cast a stone at her. And again he bent down and was writing upon the ground. But those who had heard him went out one by one, beginning from the elder ones, and he was left alone, and the woman being in the middle.	Didymus, Commentary on Ecclesiastes: We find therefore in certain gospels: A woman, it says, was condemned by the Jews for a sin and was being sent to be stoned in the place where that was customary to happen. The savior, it says, when he saw her and observed that they were ready to stone her said to those that were about to cast stones: He who has not sinned let him take a stone and cast it. If anyone is conscious in himself not to have sinned let him take up a stone and smite her. And no one dared; since they knew in themselves and perceived that they themselves were guilty in some things they did not dare to strike her. Eusebius, History of the Church 3.39.17: And [Papias] himself used testimonies from the first epistle of John and similarly from that of Peter, and set out also another record about a woman who was charged for many sins before the Lord, which the gospel according to the Hebrews has.
John 8.10-11: And Jesus bent back up and said to her: Woman, where are they? Did no one condemn you? And she said: No one, Lord. And Jesus said: Nor do I condemn you. Journey on, and sin no more from now on.	Infancy gospel of James 16.3: And the priest said: If the Lord God has not made your sin manifest, neither do I condemn you. And he released them.

Refer also to Didascalia 7:

Beware therefore, *you that are without faith,* lest any man of you establish in his heart the thought of Amon, and perish suddenly and swiftly. Wherefore, O bishop, so far as you can, keep those that have not sinned, so that they may continue without sinning; and those that repent of their sins heal and receive. But if you receive not him who repents, because you are without mercy, you shall sin against the Lord God; for you do not obey our savior and our God, to do as he also did with her that had sinned, whom the elders set before him, and, leaving the judgment in his hands, departed. But he, the searcher of hearts, asked her and said to her: Have the elders condemned you, my daughter? She says to him: No, Lord. And he said unto her: Go your way; nor do I condemn you. In him, therefore, our savior and king and God, be your pattern, O bishops, and imitate him, so that you may be quiet and meek, and merciful and compassionate, and peacemakers, and without anger, and teachers and correctors and receivers and exhorters; and so that you be not wrathful or tyrannical; and so that you be not insolent or haughty or boastful.

Ben.

[Secret Alias]

I think we would serve the future of Biblical studies well if we refrained from using the term 'pericope' from here on in.

[MrMacSon]

That's unexpected, I would say,
Because the Pericope Adulterae is alternately found in copies of the Gospel of Luke. Is the conclusion here limited to its inclusion in any Gospel of John, or does it include study of whether the copies of the Gospel of Luke may have had it before the fifth century?
Myself, I would put the accent on the "...simply no evidence....".

Slade does not mention Luke. What passages in what copies of the Gospel of Luke do you have in mind?

Family 13 locates the pericope de adultera after Luke 21.28. Minuscule 1333c locates it after Luke 24.53 (the last verse of the gospel).

Cheers Ben. these seem to be late developments -

Family 13, also known Ferrar Group (f13, von Soden calls the group Ii), is a group of Greek Gospel manuscripts, varying in date from the 11th to the 15th century, which display a distinctive pattern of variant readings — especially in placing the story of Jesus and the woman taken in adultery (John 7:53-8:11) in the Gospel of Luke, rather than in the Gospel of John. Text of Luke 22:43-44 is placed after Matt 26:39. The text of Matthew 16:2b–3 is absent. They are all thought to derive from a lost majuscule Gospel manuscript, probably dating from the 7th century. The group takes its name from minuscule 13, now in Paris.
. . . <snip> . . .
The common characteristics of Family 13 were initially identified in a group of four witnesses (minuscules 13, 69, 124, and 346); but the category has subsequently been extended, and some authorities list thirteen family members. The most obvious characteristic of the group is that these manuscripts place John 7:53-8:11 after Luke 21:38, or elsewhere in Luke's Gospel. On the basis of palaeographical analysis, most of the manuscripts in the family (with the exception of Minuscule 69) appear to have been written by scribes trained in Southern Italy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_13

• Minuscule 225 locates it after John 7.36.
  
  Certain Georgian manuscripts locate it after John 7.44.
  
  Minuscules 1, 565, 1076, 1570, and 1582, as well as certain Armenian manuscripts, locate it after John 21.25 (the last verse of the gospel).

This pericope, um, gets around.

Family 1 is a group of Greek Gospel manuscripts, varying in date from the 12th to the 15th century. The group takes its name from the minuscule codex 1, now in the Basel University Library. "Family 1" is also known as "the Lake Group", symbolized as f1.
. . . <snip> . . .
The most obvious characteristic of the Lake Group is that these manuscripts placed Pericope adulterae (John 7:53-8:11) after John 21:25.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_1

Interestingly, someone has written this in wikipedia

The transplantation of the passage, in a few manuscripts, to precede John 7:37, or to follow 8:12, is a scribal adaptation intended to simplify things for the lector by presenting the lection for Pentecost as one uninterrupted segment of text. Likwise, in the f-13 group of manuscripts, the pericope adulterae has been transplanted out of the Gospel of John, and has been placed at the end of Luke 21, so as to conveniently arrange the reading for Saint Pelagia's feast-day (October 8) near Luke 21:12-19, the lection for Saints Sergius and Bacchus (October 7). Inasmuch as all these movements of the passage are different effects of the lection-cycle, the complete absence of the passage, it is proposed, is just one more example of this phenomenon—albeit attested in manuscripts earlier than the earliest clear evidence of a lection-cycle in which this passage was read at Pentecost.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_and ... _7:53-8:11