E*****m
发帖数: 25615 | 1 excerpt from
Misquoting Jesus --The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why
Bart D. Ehrman
The Woman Taken in Adultery
The story of Jesus and the woman taken in adultery is arguably the best-
known story about Jesus in the Bible; it certainly has always been a
favorite in Hollywood versions of his life. It even makes it into Mel Gibson
's The Passion of the Christ, although that movie focuses only on Jesus's
last hours (the story is treated in one of the rare flashbacks). Despite its
popularity, the account is found in only one passage of the New Testament,
in John 7:53-8:12, and it appears not to have been original even there.
The story line is familiar. Jesus is teaching in the temple, and a
group of scribes and Pharisees, his sworn enemies, approach him, bringing
with them a woman "who had been caught in the very act of adultery." They
bring her before Jesus because they want to put him to the test. The Law of
Moses, as they tell him, demands that such a one be stoned to death; but
they want to know what he has to say about the matter. Should they stone her
or show her mercy? It is a trap, of course. If Jesus tells them to let the
woman go, he will be accused of violating the Law of God; if he tells them
to stone her, he will be accused of dismissing his own teachings of love,
mercy, and forgiveness.
Jesus does not immediately reply; instead he stoops to write on the
ground. When they continue to question him, he says to them, "Let the one
who is without sin among you be the first to cast a stone at her." He then
returns to his writing on the ground, while those who have brought the woman
start to leave the scene—evidently feeling convicted of their own
wrongdoing—until no one is left but the woman. Looking up, Jesus says, "
Woman, where are they? Is there no one who condemns you?" To which she
replies, "No one, Lord." He then responds, "Neither do I condemn you. Go and
sin no more."
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.
How do we know this? In fact, scholars who work on the manuscript
tradition have no doubts about this particular case. Later in this book we
will be examining in greater depth the kinds of evidence that scholars
adduce for making judgments of this sort. Here I can simply point out a few
basic facts that have proved convincing to nearly all scholars of every
persuasion: the story is not found in our oldest and best manuscripts of the
Gospel of John;18 its writing style is very different from what we find in
the rest of John (including the stories immediately before and after); and
it includes a large number of words and phrases that are otherwise alien to
the Gospel. The conclusion is unavoidable: this passage was not originally
part of the Gospel.
How then did it come to be added? There are numerous theories about
that. Most scholars think that it was probably a well-known story
circulating in the oral tradition about Jesus, which at some point was added
in the margin of a manuscript. From there some scribe or other thought that
the marginal note was meant to be part of the text and so inserted it
immediately after the account that ends in John 7:52. It is noteworthy that
other scribes inserted the account in different locations in the New
Testament—some of them after John 21:25, for example, and others,
interestingly enough, after Luke 21:38. In any event, whoever wrote the
account, it was not John.
That naturally leaves readers with a dilemma: if this story was not
originally part of John, should it be considered part of the Bible? Not
everyone will respond to this question in the same way, but for most textual
critics, the answer is no. | E*****m
发帖数: 25615 | 2 The Last Twelve Verses of Mark
The second example that we will consider may not be as familiar to the
casual reader of the Bible, but it has been highly influential in the
history of biblical interpretation and poses comparable problems for the
scholar of the textual tradition of the New Testament. This example comes
from the Gospel of Mark and concerns its ending.
In Mark's account, we are told that Jesus is crucified and then buried
by Joseph of Arimathea on the day before the Sabbath (15:42-47). On the day
after Sabbath, Mary Magdalene and two other women come back to the tomb in
order properly to anoint the body (16:1-2). When they arrive, they find that
the stone has been rolled away. Entering the tomb, they see a young man in
a white robe, who tells them, "Do not be startled! You are seeking Jesus the
Nazarene, who has been crucified. He has been raised and is not here—see
the place where they laid him?" He then instructs the women to tell the
disciples that Jesus is preceding them into Galilee and that they will see
him there, "just as he told you." But the women flee the tomb and say
nothing to anyone, "for they were afraid" (16:4-8).
Then come the last twelve verses of Mark in many modern English
translations, verses that continue the story. Jesus himself is said to
appear to Mary Magdalene, who goes and tells the disciples; but they do not
believe her (vv. 9-11). He then appears to two others (vv. 12-14), and
finally to the eleven disciples (the Twelve, not including Judas Iscariot)
who are gathered together at table. Jesus upbraids them for failing to
believe, and then commissions them to go forth and proclaim his gospel "to
the whole creation." Those who believe and are baptized "will be saved," but
those who do not "will be condemned." And then come two of the most
intriguing verses of the passage:
And these are the signs that will accompany those who believe: they
will cast out demons in
my name; they will speak in new tongues; and they will take up snakes
in their hands; and if
they drink any poison, it will not harm them; they will place their
hands upon the sick and
heal them. (vv. 17-18)
Jesus is then taken up into heaven, and seated at the right hand of
God. And the disciples go forth into the world proclaiming the gospel, their
words being confirmed by the signs that accompany them (vv. 19-20).
It is a terrific passage, mysterious, moving, and powerful. It is one
of the passages used by Pentecostal Christians to show that Jesus's
followers will be able to speak in unknown "tongues," as happens in their
own services of worship; and it is the principal passage used by groups of "
Appalachian snake-handlers," who till this day take poisonous snakes in
their hands in order to demonstrate their faith in the words of Jesus, that
when doing so they will come to no harm.
But there's one problem. Once again, this passage was not originally
in the Gospel of Mark. It was added by a later scribe.
In some ways this textual problem is more disputed than the passage
about the woman taken in adultery, because without these final verses Mark
has a very different, and hard to understand, ending. That doesn't mean that
scholars are inclined to accept the verses, as we'll see momentarily. The
reasons for taking them to be an addition are solid, almost indisputable.
But scholars debate what the genuine ending of Mark actually was, given the
circumstance that this ending found in many English translations (though
usually marked as inauthentic) and in later Greek manuscripts is not the
original.
The evidence that these verses were not original to Mark is similar in
kind to that for the passage about the woman taken in adultery, and again I
don't need to go into all the details here. The verses are absent from our
two oldest and best manuscripts of Mark's Gospel, along with other important
witnesses; the writing style varies from what we find elsewhere in Mark;
the transition between this passage and the one preceding it is hard to
understand (e.g., Mary Magdalene is introduced in verse 9 as if she hadn't
been mentioned yet, even though she is discussed in the preceding verses;
there is another problem with the Greek that makes the transition even more
awkward); and there are a large number of words and phrases in the passage
that are not found elsewhere in Mark. In short, the evidence is sufficient
to convince nearly all textual scholars that these verses are an addition to
Mark.
Without them, though, the story ends rather abruptly. Notice what
happens when these verses are taken away. The women are told to inform the
disciples that Jesus will precede them to Galilee and meet them there; but
they, the women, flee the tomb and say nothing to anyone, "for they were
afraid." And that's where the Gospel ends.
Obviously, scribes thought the ending was too abrupt. The women told
no one? Then, did the disciples never learn of the resurrection? And didn't
Jesus himself ever appear to them? How could that be the ending! To resolve
the problem, scribes added an ending.19
Some scholars agree with the scribes in thinking that 16:8 is too
abrupt an ending for a Gospel. As I have indicated, it is not that these
scholars believe the final twelve verses in our later manuscripts were the
original ending—they know that's not the case—but they think that,
possibly, the last page of Mark's Gospel, one in which Jesus actually did
meet the disciples in Galilee, was somehow lost, and that all our copies of
the Gospel go back to this one truncated manuscript, without the last page.
That explanation is entirely possible. It is also possible, in the
opinion of yet other scholars, that Mark did indeed mean to end his Gospel
with 16:8.20 It certainly is a shocker of an ending.
The disciples never learn the truth of Jesus's resurrection because
the women never tell them. One reason for thinking that this could be how
Mark ended his Gospel is that some such ending coincides so well with other
motifs throughout his Gospel. As students of Mark have long noticed, the
disciples never do seem to "get it" in this Gospel (unlike in some of the
other Gospels). They are repeatedly said not to understand Jesus (6:51-52; 8
die, they manifestly fail to comprehend his words (8:31-33; 9:30-32; 10:33-
40). Maybe, in fact, they never did come to understand (unlike Mark's
readers, who can understand who Jesus really is from the very beginning).
Also, it is interesting to note that throughout Mark, when someone comes to
understand something about Jesus, Jesus orders that person to silence—and
yet often the person ignores the order and spreads the news (e.g., 1:43-45).
How ironic that when the women at the tomb are told not to be silent but to
speak, they also ignore the order—and are silent!
In short, Mark may well have intended to bring his reader up short
with this abrupt ending—a clever way to make the reader stop, take a
faltering breath, and ask: What? | G******e
发帖数: 9567 | | x****g
发帖数: 4008 | 4 Thanks for sharing
Gibson
its
,
【在 E*****m 的大作中提到】
: excerpt from
: Misquoting Jesus --The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why
: Bart D. Ehrman
: The Woman Taken in Adultery
: The story of Jesus and the woman taken in adultery is arguably the best-
: known story about Jesus in the Bible; it certainly has always been a
: favorite in Hollywood versions of his life. It even makes it into Mel Gibson
: 's The Passion of the Christ, although that movie focuses only on Jesus's
: last hours (the story is treated in one of the rare flashbacks). Despite its
: popularity, the account is found in only one passage of the New Testament,
| G*****9
发帖数: 3225 | 5 谢谢分享。学习《圣经》，当有critical thinking。还记得我之前问的那些个基本的
问题吗？呵呵，没有人关心。其实，我觉得很重要。如果神的话被人为地、随己所欲的
删减了。我觉得这些教导在学习的时候就要很小心了。 | m****u
发帖数: 1689 | 6 Thanks for sharing
Gibson
its
,
【在 E*****m 的大作中提到】
: excerpt from
: Misquoting Jesus --The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why
: Bart D. Ehrman
: The Woman Taken in Adultery
: The story of Jesus and the woman taken in adultery is arguably the best-
: known story about Jesus in the Bible; it certainly has always been a
: favorite in Hollywood versions of his life. It even makes it into Mel Gibson
: 's The Passion of the Christ, although that movie focuses only on Jesus's
: last hours (the story is treated in one of the rare flashbacks). Despite its
: popularity, the account is found in only one passage of the New Testament,
|
|
