Festschrift for Maurice A. Robinson On-line

In 2014, Mark Billington and Peter Streitenberger edited a volume of essays, Digging for the Truth: Collected Essays Regarding the Byzantine Text of the Greek New Testament, to honor Maurice A. Robinson, Professor Emeritus of New Testament at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary (SEBTS).

One of the contributors to the volume, Abidan Paul Shah, former PhD student of Robinson, introduced the Festschrift at SEBTS and made available this videoclip of the presentation. At 4.20 you can see the honoree enter the stage to receive his book.

Since the book is now out of print, one of the editors, Peter Streitenberger, has now made it freely available here.

As readers will notice, the volume is written mainly from a pro-Byzantine text perspective, which is understandable since Robinson, in my opinion, is the most respected proponent of this school, which represent a very small minority of scholars in the discipline today. Read more about this perspective in Robinson’s own article, “The Case for Byzantine Priority,” in TC: A Journal of Biblical Textual Criticism.

Neverthelesss, it is a pity that there has not been another Festschrift for our co-blogger Maurice reflecting a wider perspective. I would have liked to contribute to that. On the other hand, I did participate in a symposium at SEBTS in 2014, invited by Maurice, to discuss the pericope adulterae, the text to which he has devoted much of his career (read my reports here and here with more links to summaries). The result of this consultation was published in The Pericope of the Adulteress in Contemporary Research, LNTS 551, ed. by D. A. Black and J. N. Cerone (London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2016). See my announcement here.

Let me conclude this blogpost by citing from the preface of my recent book To Cast the First Stone (co-authored with Jennifer Knust) where I express my gratitude to Maurice as he reached out to a Swedish new-comer to the field:

Tommy would first like to thank Maurice Robinson, who was willing to suggest a topic for his bachelor’s thesis at Örebro School of Theology on a particularly interesting variant in the pericope adulterae, which led to his first research visit to the INTF in Münster and eventually resulted in his first academic publication [here]. In spite of different views regarding the history of the New Testament text, Maurice has always been gracious and helpful to both of us.

Giveaway: Three Copies of To Cast the First Stone

Princeton University Press has just released Tommy Wasserman and Jennifer Knust’s major new book on the Pericope Adulterae: To Cast the First Stone: The Transmission of a Gospel Story. I currently have three copies sitting in my house ready to be given away. You know the drill: you have until Friday morning (Arizona time) to enter to win in any of the ways listed. We’ll pick the winners next week.

a Rafflecopter giveaway

Publisher details

The story of the woman taken in adultery features a dramatic confrontation between Jesus and the Pharisees over whether the adulteress should be stoned as the law commands. In response, Jesus famously states, “Let him who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” To Cast the First Stone traces the history of this provocative story from its first appearance to its enduring presence today.

Likely added to the Gospel of John in the third century, the passage is often held up by modern critics as an example of textual corruption by early Christian scribes and editors, yet a judgment of corruption obscures the warm embrace the story actually received. Jennifer Knust and Tommy Wasserman trace the story’s incorporation into Gospel books, liturgical practices, storytelling, and art, overturning the mistaken perception that it was either peripheral or suppressed, even in the Greek East. The authors also explore the story’s many different meanings. Taken as an illustration of the expansiveness of Christ’s mercy, the purported superiority of Christians over Jews, the necessity of penance, and more, this vivid episode has invited any number of creative receptions. This history reveals as much about the changing priorities of audiences, scribes, editors, and scholars as it does about an “original” text of John.

To Cast the First Stone calls attention to significant shifts in Christian book cultures and the enduring impact of oral tradition on the preservation—and destabilization—of scripture.

Jennifer Knust is associate professor of New Testament and Christian origins at Boston University. Her books include Unprotected Texts: The Bible’s Surprising Contradictions about Sex and Desire. Tommy Wasserman is professor of Biblical studies at Ansgar Teologiske Høgskole in Norway. His books include The Epistle of Jude: Its Text and Transmission.

You can read the introduction here.

Endorsements

“This valuable and delightful book leaves no stone unturned in tracing the fascinating reception history of the biblical story of Jesus’s encounter with the adulterous woman. Deeply scholarly and wonderfully accessible, To Cast the First Stone will prove relevant for many discussions on the early church.” —AnneMarie Luijendijk, Princeton University

“Brilliantly conceived, massively researched, and convincingly argued, Knust and Wasserman’s wide-ranging analysis of the pericope adulterae is a milestone in the field of textual studies, destined to be the definitive account for a generation.” —Bart D. Ehrman, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

“Knust and Wasserman use the story of the adulteress to illustrate the fascinating transmission history of gospel literature and the various personalities and forces that contributed to the process. To Cast the First Stone will undoubtedly become the standard book on this story.” —Chris Keith, author of The Pericope Adulterae, the Gospel of John, and the Literacy of Jesus

Maurice Robinson: The source of the Pericope Adulterae insertion in GA 1333

PA in GA 1333. View in NT.VMR

Maurice Robinson sends the following email which he has asked me to post here.

James Snapp happened to ask me about MS 1333, where a later scribe inserted the PA on a blank page between Luke and John (the only MS known to do so).

Since obviously the insertion was lectionary-based (the PA begins at 8.3 with the heading εκ του κατα ιω (below the designation for Pelagia, 8 Oct), this provoked a search between my continuous-text database and my lectionary PA database to see whether a source lectionary MS for the 1333 insertion might be determined.

As it turns out, the mystery of the source lectionary for the insertion into continuous-text MS 1333 appears to be solved! Although MS 1333 (11th century) is now at Saba in Jerusalem, the later PA insertion apparently was copied directly from the 12th century lectionary L-1755, now at St Catherine’s in Sinai.

This identification is established not only by their otherwise common text (which generally follows a typical lectionary line of transmission, with only minor orthographic issues), but primarily from one glaring (and problematic) reading in 8:9 — και υπο της οικειας συνειδησεως— which otherwise appears in only one other continuous-text MS (GA 1082), and that one with an extremely different text from what otherwise is shared by MS 1333 and L-1755.

Closely related to L-1755, however, is L-1804 (now at Athens, Natl. Lib., 14th century). I suspect that L-1804 either may have been copied from L-1755 or from some common lectionary archetype.

I like solving mysteries, especially when the solution was far simpler than might have been imagined!

Given that 1333 is dated 11th century and lectionary 1755 is from the 12th, Tommy Wasserman asked how this can be. Maurice’s response:

The PA insertion in 1333 was added on a totally blank page, so this was ex post facto from the original copying.

In other words, the insertion must be later than the 11th century.

For more on 1333 and the PA, see Snapp’s recent post.

Maurice Robinson and Chris Keith on 284 and the PA

Over at the Jesus Blog, Chris Keith has posted comments from Maurice Robinson on 284 and the PA. More importantly, Chris Keith has christened him the the “Silver-Haired Assassin,” a perfectly fitting title in my view. Henceforth, I require all blog commentators to address Dr. Robinson by this title! Now, go read the Assassin’s blog post.

Here is the link to the page in 284 under discussion.

Why Westcott and Hort gave special treatment to the woman caught in adultery

Not long ago, we discussed on the blog whether or not the story of the woman caught in adultery (John 7.53–8.11) should be read and taught as Scripture. I remain somewhat torn myself though I lean toward a negative answer. Regardless of that larger question, one of the issues that came up in the discussion was whether Mark 16.9–20 and John 7.53–8.11 raise distinct canonical questions that are not warranted for other widely-attested variant texts like John 5.4.

The Pericope Adulterae
in Westcott and Hort’s GNT

Regarding this question, I was intrigued by how Hort explained his and Westcott’s unique handling of the Pericope in their edition. As you may know, they printed it in double brackets just like Mark 16.9–20 but then went a step further by placing it after John’s Gospel with its own separate heading. (Note, however, that it is not listed in the table of contents.)

In a letter to his good friend A. A. Vansittart dated May 4, 1865, Hort explained this decision as follows:

I firmly adhere to the Pericope so treated, though conscious that it may cause scandal. Let me repeat more clearly than before. This is one of many passages which belong in a sense to the New Testament, and which we feel we cannot expel from it, and yet which do not belong to the originals of its component books. The other such passages or clauses we leave (in at least one case, Mt 27.49b we insert) in their proper places for two reasons: those passages could not stand independently from their very nature, and the contexts are little or not at all injured by the interpolation, which of course is plainly marked. Here both conditions are reversed: the Pericope can very well stand by itself, and St John’s narrative is miserably interrupted by its insertion. To put it in the appendix would be to expel it from the New Testament: we can therefore only place it as an omitted chapter of the ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ. It will, I trust, like the other passages stand within ⟦ ⟧.

Thus, Hort explains why the Pericope could neither be expelled from the NT altogether but could and should be left out of the Gospel according to John proper, even with its double brackets. Hort, of course, was well aware that this might cause scandal which itself is interesting given that on theological matters, the two editors typically eschewed public controversy.

Should we preach and teach the story of the woman caught in adultery?

If the story of the woman caught in adultery in John 7.53–8.11 is not original to the fourth Gospel, as I think, does it follow that it should not be used as Scripture? The same question confronts us with the Longer Ending of Mark, a text which, as I have said before, I think is not original but should be preached as Scripture.

‘Christ and the Woman taken in Adultery’ by Sebastiano Conca

Although I feel that way about Mark 16.9–20, I am not as sure about this passage. It is not as early or widely attested as the Longer Ending is. But many think it preserves authentic tradition about Jesus. So, when the question came up in class a few weeks ago, I let Tommy answer for me. Here’s what he says:

Is the PA [Pericope Adulterae] original to John’s Gospel or is it a later interpolation? Should it be proscribed or proclaimed? My short answer to the first question is: Yes, I think it is an interpolation as I have argued in this essay. This, however, does not automatically lead to a negative answer to the second question, namely that this passage should be proscribed rather than proclaimed. I regard the story as an authentic Jesus tradition, which has been highly treasured by the Church from a very early stage. I hope it continues to be told and proclaimed, but at the same time, I think it is proper to signal to modern readers of John that the passage (at its present location) is a suspect interpolation.

This is from Tommy Wasserman, “The Strange Case of the Missing Adulteress,” in The Pericope of the Adulteress in Contemporary Research, ed. David A. Black and Jacob Cerone, LNTS 551 (London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark), 63, which is a very helpful volume on the subject. It includes articles that defend the pericope’s originality and articles, like Tommy’s, that don’t.

What say you, O blog readers? If the pericope is not original, should we still preach and teach it? Should we derive theology from it? Or should it be rejected as a wonderful, extra-Biblical story without authority for us?

On the Origin of the Pericope Adulterae in the Syriac NT

Here is an interesting detail about the origin of John 7.53-8.11 in the Syriac tradition. Apparently, in the excellent Mingana collection at the University of Birmingham, there is a “handsome and sumptuous” manuscript containing the New Testament and a number of other treatises. So says A. Mingana in his Catalogue (vol. 1, col. 863). One important feature of this manuscript that Mingana reports is this:

The Syriac can be translated as follows:

This story (ܣܘܢܬܟܣܝܣ = σύνταξις) is not found in all manuscripts. But Abba Mar Paule found it in one of the Alexandrian manuscripts and translated it into Syriac as written here from the Gospel of John.

From this, J. de Zwaan, writing in 1958, draws this conclusion:

Paul of Tella, who was the leading spirit in the translation of the Hexaplaric O.T. by order of Athanasius I, and under whose auspices Thomas of Harkel laboured on the N.T. at the same time and the same place, viz. the Enaton-monastery near Alexandria (615-617), is, therefore, responsible for the introduction of John vii.53-viii.11 in MSS. of the Syriac N.T.

This is interesting as it confirms the hypothesis that on Paul’s initiative the Harklean enterprise (whatever it has been: translation, revision, collation or mere annotating) was completed.

And this is important as it adds probability to the surmise that Thomas’ work should be considered as analogous to the O.T. enterprise. For textual criticism e.g. the question, whether ‘Western’ copies could be present in the viith century in Alexandria and be still valued there by experts as authoritative, this point is very important.

We know that in most of the NT, Thomas actually used a nearly Byzantine text and in the Catholic Epistles he used something more distinctive, a possible precursor to the Byzantine text (so K. Wachtel). Where Thomas gave “Western” readings, so far as I understand it, is primarily in the margin in Acts.

So I’m not convinced with Zwaan that this remark in Mingana Syr 480 shows that the “Western” text was valued in the 7th century in Alexandria. But it is still significant if Zwaan is right that this confirms Paul of Tella’s involvement in both the Syro-hexapla and the Harklean NT and that he is somehow responsible for the inclusion of the Pericope Adulterae in the latter.

You can find this and more discussed in Chris Keith’s excellent book on the Pericope Adulterae. For more on the manuscript sources, see Gwynn.

* * *

For more on the PA in Syriac and Arabic, see Adam McCollum’s blog post on a 17th cent. Garshuni lectionary which has the following note pictured below:

Know, dear reader, that this pericope [pāsoqā] is lacking in our Syriac copy [lit. the copy of us Syriac people], but we have seen it among the Latins [r(h)omāyē], and we have translated it into our Syriac language and into Arabic. Pray for the poor scribe!

Marginal note in CCM 64, f. 79r, (17th cent.) explaining the origin of the Pericope Adulterae.

New Book: The Pericope of the Adulteress in Contemporary Research

Finally, the book from the Pericope of the Adulteress Symposium is out (see here), and I am happy to have contributed with a chapter, “The Strange Case of the Missing Adulteress.” This is an expensive book, but a more affordable paperbook will be published in due course.

Publisher’s description: 

The contributors to this volume (J.D. Punch, Jennifer Knust, Tommy Wasserman, Chris Keith, Maurice Robinson, and Larry Hurtado) re-examine the Pericope Adulterae (John 7.53-8.11) asking afresh the question of the paragraph’s authenticity. Each contributor not only presents the reader with arguments for or against the pericope’s authenticity but also with viable theories on how and why the earliest extant manuscripts omit the passage.

Readers are encouraged to evaluate manuscript witnesses, scribal tendencies, patristic witnesses, and internal evidence to assess the plausibility of each contributor’s proposal. Readers are presented with cutting-edge research on the pericope from both scholarly camps: those who argue for its originality, and those who regard it as a later scribal interpolation. In so doing, the volume brings readers face-to-face with the most recent evidence and arguments (several of which are made here for the first time, with new evidence is brought to the table), allowing readers to engage in the controversy and weigh the evidence for themselves.

Read more about the book on Larry Hurtado’s blog. On behalf of the editors, I asked Larry to write a response chapter and I am glad that he accepted to do it.

Forthcoming Book on the Pericope of Jesus and the Adulteress

From Dave Black:

I am pleased to announce that The Pericope of the Adulteress in Modern Research has been accepted for publication in T & T Clark’s Library of New Testament Studies series. You may recall that SEBTS hosted a major conference on this topic in April of 2014.

Well, the papers have now been assembled in book form. Yours truly and my former assistant and current Th.M. student Jacob Cerone are serving as editors. Here are the contents:

Foreword:  Gail O’Day
Preface: David Alan Black
Introduction: Jacob N. Cerone
Chapter 1: John David Punch: “The Piously Offensive Pericope Adulterae”
Chapter 2: Jennifer Knust: “‘Taking Away From’: Patristic Evidence and the Omission of the Pericope Adulterae from John’s Gospel”
Chapter 3: Tommy Wasserman: “The Strange Case of the Missing Adulteress”
Chapter 4:  Chris Keith: “The Pericope Adulterae: A Theory of Attentive Insertion”
Chapter 5: Maurice Robinson: “The Pericope Adulterae: A Johannine Tapestry with Double Interlock”
Chapter 6: Larry Hurtado: “The Pericope Adulterae: Where from Here?

I’ll just say that I’m delighted that Gail O’Day agreed to write the foreword and Larry Hurtado the response. And, of course, I am grateful beyond words to T & T Clark. If this book in an way contributes to even one person coming to a better understanding of this key New Testament passage, then the conference was worth the effort a billion times over.

Bible Odyssey Featuring "Alexandrian Text" and "Early Versions"

A year ago or so I was invited to contribute to SBL's project Bible Odyssey which was launched about two months ago. I was told that this week my article on the "Alexandrian Text" is highlighted on the Bible Oddysey home page, together with an article on  "The Earliest Versions and Translations of the Bible" by Brennan Breed and a timeline of "The History of the English Bible" and a newly added videoclip on Early Christian Martyrdom featuring Candida Moss.

Just a week ago, John Kutsko of the SBL sent out a report about the two first months of the website, and it turns out that "People are very interested in ... 'life in first century Galilee' and 'how the Hebrew Bible relates to the ancient Near East,' as well as 'the binding of Isaac' and 'the woman caught in adultery.'” The last entry is written by my friend Jennifer Knust and we have worked a lot together on this topic for some years now. There is a related video clip in which Amy Jill Levine discusses the pericope adulterae, and another entry on the manuscript history of the passage (John 8:1-11) by another friend of mine, Chris Keith. Earlier this year, Chris, Jennifer and I contributed to a conference at SEBTS, the Pericope Adulterae symposium.

Kutsko continues his report on the Bible Odyssey webpage saying that many visitors come from North America and Europe, but that there is also strong traffic from Australia, Malaysia, New Zealand, and Israel. Personally, Kutsko thinks the "Ask the Scholar" button (see the magnifying glass on the image above, or go here) is the coolest of all. Here they have received questions such as:

• Why does God speak in the plural in Genesis?
• Was John the Baptist an Essene?
• How many scholars believe that Q existed as a source for Matthew and Luke?
• Has the biblical figure of Satan evolved?
• Why is ‘almah in Proverbs 30:19 translated differently?
• How does domestic architecture vary in the Second Temple period?

Live Update from the Pericope of the Adulteress Conference

This is a quick live update from Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminar hosting the Pericpoe Adulterae symposium.

Image HT: Jacob Cerone

Right now Jennifer Knust is presenting her paper, "Neither Add Nor Take Away..."(photo by Chris Keith)

You can follow a live twitterstream at @ceronej  hashtag: paconf#

Update: There is liveblogging at www.jacobcerone.com and www.thomashudgins.com (with videoblog).

Second update: David A. Black summarizes the conference.

Pericope Adulterae Conference at Southeastern Baptist Seminary

Don't forget this awesome TC conference at Southeastern Baptist seminary coming up in April:

https://www.sebts.edu/news-resources/conferences/pericope_adulterae.aspx

See the prior announcement on ETC here: http://evangelicaltextualcriticism.blogspot.com/2013/11/pericope-adulterae-symposium-at-sebts.html

Pericope Adulterae Symposium at SEBTS

Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary (SEBTS) will host a Pericope Adulterae Symposium in honor of Maurice Robinson in April 25-26 2014 and I am one of the invited speakers. Here is the announcement from the conference webpage:

 

Scholars have long disagreed about the originality of the text of John 7:53-8:11, which contains the story of the woman caught in adultery. Traditionally known as the Pericope Adulterae, this text has concerned various textual critics as to whether it should be included in the canon of Scripture. Furthermore, Bible translators have debated how to include it in their translations, and pastors have debated whether they should preach it as inspired Scripture. Please join us as we explore these issues with some of the leading scholars in this area. 

Is the woman caught in adultery passage:

• Original to John's Gospel? Or is it a later interpolation?
• Should it be proclaimed or proscribed?

These questions will be discussed at Pericope Adulterae.
Join us on April 25 - 26, 2014

The cost will be $30 per person & $20 for students.

Speakers include:

Dr. David Alan Black; Dr. M.O. Owens Jr. Chair of New Testament Studies Professor of New Testament & Greek at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary
Dr. Chris Keith; Professor of New Testament & Early Christianity Director of the Centre for the Social-Scientific Study of the Bible at St. Mary’s University College in Twickenham, London
Dr. Jennifer Knust; Assistant Professor of New Testament & Christian Origins School of Theology & the Graduate School of Arts & Sciences, Boston University
Dr. John David Punch; Senior Pastor of City Church Denver
Dr. Maurice Robinson; Senior Professor of New Testament & Greek at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary
Dr. Tommy Wasserman; Academic Dean & Lecturer in New Testament at the Örebro School of Theology in Sweden