Does the Pericope Adulterae Belong in the Bible?

A Very Brief Overview

Much ink has been spilled in arguing whether the verses of John 7:53 to 8:11 are authentic and inspired and therefore should be included in the Bible. Almost from the beginning Papias, a disciple of the Apostle John, was noted as the originator of this story. Such illustrious men as Eusebius and Jerome discussed the passage while others, such as Augustine, were convinced it was authentic and some believed they had been removed by 'wicked' men who thought it would give license to their wives to sin. In modern times the verse has been included in the Textus Receptus editions while the Alexandrian family has generally either removed the verses or marked them as likely spurious using various markers.

Tregelles was convinced the verses were spurious and relegated them to a lengthy footnote that had the versions of Codex Bezae Cantabrigiensis, Stephanus, and Codex Amiatus' Latin Vulgate in parallel. He also discussed the authenticity of the verses in his 1854 book An Account of the Printed Text of the Greek New Testament where he listed places both where it had been found and omitted in manuscripts known in his day. Since his time others have been found where it is omitted, sometimes without any apparent knowledge of its existence by the scribe.

Manuscript Evidence

For example on page ΝΒ of Papyrus 66 which is an almost complete copy of the gospel of John dated to about 200AD we see a transition between the end of verse 7:52 and 8:12 without any indication that the scribe was aware of the verses as we see in the following image:

 

 

The scribe of P66 marked points where he knew variants existed in the text. Here he used // to mark a word order difference in John 7:52. However, when he reached the end of the verse he transitioned directly to what we now call verse 12 of chapter 8. This is seen in the second line where it reads:

ΟΠΡΟΦΗΤΗΣΟΥΚΕΓΙΡΕΤΑΙ·ΠΑΛΙΝ

Likewise Papyrus 75 (c.175 to 225 AD) omits the verses:

The scribe left a space of just a single letter between the end of verse 7:52 and 8:12 (near the arrow) indicating that the verses were not considered to be part of the text. The earliest manuscript known to contain the verses is Codex Bezae Cantabrigiensis (c.400AD)

Evidence from early sources as well as questions as to its authenticity certainly tell us that while the story may have actually happened it was not originally included in John's Gospel.

Personally, after having struggled through these verses for my apparatus I would say it's pretty clear that it is not authentic and that John did not write these words and most importantly God did not inspire them, but rather they were added for whatever reason at a later date.

In its own right, the evidence is strong that it was not originally written by John, so what convinces me that it's not authentic? While there is other compelling evidence, simply the sheer variety of versions of the verses. There's little consensus on what they say or even where they belong. Those two things alone should shout 'insertion!'. There are many different variants in Scripture, but most of these are simple spelling or word order changes. Occasionally words or even whole verses are added or omitted but generally all versions are in harmony. Here we find multiple wildly different versions in multiple locations in manuscripts that date to later than the fourth century and nothing definitive prior to that time.

We also find in early Christian writings that its source may have been outside of Scripture. Didymus the Blind (c.313-398) spoke of the story but stated it was contained in the now lost The Gospel According to the Hebrews (c.150AD) rather than John's Gospel. Eusebius said, 'and [Papias] has expounded another story about a woman who was accused before the Lord of many sins, which the Gospel according to the Hebrews contains' (Kirsopp Lake Ecclesiastical History Book III.39.16). Neither is conclusive proof that the story was not in the Gospel of John at this time but it is interesting neither mention the Gospel and there are significant differences between the two accounts.

Evidence For the Pericope

Obviously, there is some evidence in favour of including the Pericope, or there would be no discussion. So what evidence is there? For starters Jerome worked on his new Latin Translation around 400 AD and he included the verses on the basis of manuscripts he had access to. Likewise, Augustine was convinced that it existed in earlier copies of John's Gospel but was removed by wicked enemies of Christ who wrongly thought it would give license to their wives to sin.

Unfortunately, we have none of the manuscripts Jerome consulted and we have no writings to back up Augustine's assertion. Even if we did it still does not settle the argument of whether it was original or not. It could be that an early scribe decided to insert the verses into the text of John's Gospel and equally it could be that a scribe disagreed with the verses and removed them leaving a stream of transmission that did not contain the Pericope Adulterae.

I personally do not any idea how we could prove it is truly Scripture and not a later insertion of an oral source that had apparently been circulating for centuries before it found its way into the Gospel of John. Perhaps the finding of a second or early third century Christian writer discussing its removal or addition would give us a strong case for including it. But without something like that all we have is arguments from silence. There are no early manuscripts, most of the early Christian writers are silent and apart from mentions of it that do not quote Scripture but rather cite non-Scriptural sources. We would perhaps need some definitive early discussion of the Pericope Adulterae to also sort out the issue of the wide number of variants.

Confusion of Evidence

When it comes to the Pericope Adulterae there is little agreement in either text or its placement. There are multiple versions and several manuscripts place them after John 21:25 (Family 1 and most Armenian translations), Family 13 places it after Luke 21:38, Minuscule 225 places it after John 7:36, a corrector of Minuscule 1333 places it after Luke 24:53, while others place the verses after 8:12 and so on.

The following table compares three of the versions. Stephanus representing the most common version including several Alexandrian Editions, F35 which varies significantly from the TR and other Byzantine Editions, and the Westcott-Hort text which varies significantly from other Alexandrian texts. I have marked the variants with red text.

Stephanus	F35	WH
7:53 και επορευθη εκαστος εις τον οικον αυτου 8:1 Ιησους δε επορευθη εις το ορος των ελαιων 2 ορθρου δε παλιν παρεγενετο εις το ιερον και πας ο λαος ηρχετο προς αυτον και καθισας εδιδασκεν αυτους 3 αγουσιν δε οι γραμματεις και οι φαρισαιοι προς αυτον γυναικα εν μοιχεια κατειλημμενην και στησαντες αυτην εν μεσω 4 λεγουσιν αυτω διδασκαλε αυτη η γυνη κατειληφθη επαυτοφωρω μοιχευομενη 5 εν δε τω νομω μωσης ημιν ενετειλατο τας τοιαυτας λιθοβολεισθαι συ ουν τι λεγεις 6 τουτο δε ελεγον πειραζοντες αυτον ινα εχωσιν κατηγορειν αυτου ο δε ιησους κατω κυψας τω δακτυλω εγραφεν εις την γην 7 ως δε επεμενον ερωτωντες αυτον ανακυψας ειπεν προς αυτους ο αναμαρτητος υμων πρωτος τον λιθον επ αυτη βαλετω 8 και παλιν κατω κυψας εγραφεν εις την γην 9 οι δε ακουσαντες και υπο της συνειδησεως ελεγχομενοι εξηρχοντο εις καθ εις αρξαμενοι απο των πρεσβυτερων εως των εσχατων και κατελειφθη μονος ο Ιησους και η γυνη εν μεσω εστωσα 10 ανακυψας δε ο Ιησους και μηδενα θεασαμενος πλην της γυναικος ειπεν αυτη η γυνη που εισιν εκεινοι οι κατηγοροι σου ουδεις σε κατεκρινεν 11 η δε ειπεν ουδεις κυριε ειπεν δε αυτη ο Ιησους ουδε εγω σε κατακρινω πορευου και μηκετι αμαρτανε	7:53 Καὶ ἀπῆλθε ἕκαστος εἰς τὸν οἶκον αὐτοῦ. 8:1 ¶ Ἰησοῦς δὲ ἐπορεύθη εἰς τὸ ὄρος τῶν ἐλαιῶν. 2 ὄρθρου δὲ πάλιν παρεγένετο εἰς τὸ ἱερόν, καὶ πᾶς ὁ λαὸς ἤρχετο πρὸς αὐτόν· καὶ καθίσας ἐδίδασκεν αὐτούς. 3 ἄγουσι δὲ οἱ γραμματεῖς καὶ οἱ Φαρισαῖοι πρὸς αὐτὸν γυναῖκα ἐπὶ μοιχείᾳ κατειλημμένην, καὶ στήσαντες αὐτὴν ἐν μέσῳ 4 λέγουσιν αὐτῷ· διδάσκαλε, ταύτην εὕρομεν αὐτοφώρῳ μοιχευομένην· 5 ἐν δὲ τῷ νόμῳ ἡμῶν Μωσῆς ἐνετείλατο τὰς τοιαύτας λιθοβολεῖσθαι. σὺ οὖν τί λέγεις; 6 τοῦτο δὲ ἔλεγον πειράζοντες αὐτόν, ἵνα ἔχωσι κατηγορίαν κατ’ αὐτοῦ. ὁ δὲ Ἰησοῦς κάτω κύψας τῷ δακτύλῳ ἔγραφεν εἰς τὴν γῆν μὴ προσποιούμενος. 7 ὡς δὲ ἐπέμενον ἐρωτῶντες αὐτόν, ἀνακύψας εἶπε πρὸς αὐτούς· ὁ ἀναμάρτητος ὑμῶν πρῶτος τὸν λίθον ἐπ’ αὐτῆ βαλέτω. 8 καὶ πάλιν κάτω κύψας ἔγραφεν εἰς τὴν γῆν. 9 οἱ δὲ ἀκούσαντες καὶ ὑπὸ τῆς συνειδήσεως ἐλεγχόμενοι ἐξήρχοντο εἷς καθ’ εἷς, ἀρξάμενοι ἀπὸ τῶν πρεσβυτέρων ἕως τῶν ἐσχάτων. καὶ κατελείφθη μόνος ὁ Ἰησοῦς καὶ ἡ γυνὴ ἐν μέσῳ οὖσα. 10 ἀνακύψας δὲ ὁ Ἰησοῦς καὶ μηδένα θεασάμενος πλὴν τῆς γυναικὸς εἶπεν αὐτῇ ποῦ εἰσιν ἐκεῖνοι οἱ κατήγοροί σου; οὐδείς σε κατέκρινεν; 11 ἡ δὲ εἶπεν· οὐδείς, Κύριε. εἶπε δὲ αὐτῇ ὁ Ἰησοῦς· οὐδὲ ἐγώ σε κατακρίνω· πορεύου καὶ ἀπὸ τοῦ νῦν μηκέτι ἁμάρτανε.	7:53 [[ΚΑΙ ΕΠΟΡΕΥΘΗΣΑΝ ἕκαστος εἰς τὸν οἶκον αὐτοῦ, 8:1 Ἰησοῦς δὲ ἐπορεύθη εἰς τὸ Ὄρος τῶν Ἐλαιῶν. 2 Ὄρθρου δὲ πάλιν παρεγένετο εἰς τὸ ἱερόν[, καὶ πᾶς ὁ λαὸς ἤρχετο πρὸς αὐτόν, καὶ καθίσας ἐδίδασκεν αὐτούς]. 3 Ἄγουσιν δὲ οἱ γραμματεῖς καὶ οἱ Φαρισαῖοι γυναῖκα ἐπὶ μοιχείᾳ κατειλημμένην, καὶ στήσαντες αὐτὴν ἐν μέσῳ 4 λέγουσιν αὐτῷ Διδάσκαλε, αὕτη ἡ γυνὴ κατείληπται ἐπʼ αὐτοφώρῳ μοιχευομένη· 5 ἐν δὲ τῷ νόμῳ [ἡμῖν] Μωυσῆς ἐνετείλατο τὰς τοιαύτας λιθάζειν· σὺ οὖν τί λέγεις; 6 [τοῦτο δὲ ἔλεγον πειράζοντες αὐτόν, ἵνα ἔχωσιν κατηγορεῖν αὐτοῦ.] ὁ δὲ Ἰησοῦς κάτω κύψας τῷ δακτύλῳ κατέγραφεν εἰς τὴν γῆν. 7 ὡς δὲ ἐπέμενον ἐρωτῶντες [αὐτόν], ἀνέκυψεν καὶ εἶπεν [αὐτοῖς] Ὁ ἀναμάρτητος ὑμῶν πρῶτος ἐπʼ αὐτὴν βαλέτω λίθον· 8 καὶ πάλιν κατακύψας ἔγραφεν εἰς τὴν γῆν. 9 οἱ δὲ ἀκούσαντες ἐξήρχοντο εἷς καθʼ εἷς ἀρξάμενοι ἀπὸ τῶν πρεσβυτέρων, καὶ κατελείφθη μόνος, καὶ ἡ γυνὴ ἐν μέσῳ οὖσα. 10 ἀνακύψας δὲ ὁ Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν αὐτῇ Γύναι, ποῦ εἰσίν; οὐδείς σε κατέκρινεν; 11 ἡ δὲ εἶπεν Οὐδείς, κύριε. εἶπεν δὲ ὁ Ἰησοῦς Οὐδὲ ἐγώ σε κατακρίνω· πορεύου, ἀπὸ τοῦ νῦν μηκέτι ἁμάρτανε.]]

I've created a spreadsheet that helped me straighten out the tangled variants in these verses. The variants are from the standpoint of the Logos version of Tregelles' GNT which for some reason is the Codex Bezae Cantabrigiensis version. I've coloured the variants and colour coded the Editions where they agree and disagree. It's fairly messy but hopefully it can give viewers an idea of just how many variations of John 7:53 to 8:11 there are. Keep in mind this is just 14 Editions of the Greek New Testament and there are roughly seven different versions (verse 8:4 has the greatest number of variants). While it's likely that any of the TR Editions I include will contain the 'standard' version others may have their own variants. That I've yet to check. Perhaps one day I'll post a comprehensive verse-by-verse comparison of the Editions with those that match grouped together.

Closing Remarks

As you can see just from the three examples above there are significant differences in the Pericope versions. The most common version is longer than the other two, the WH version being the shortest of the three. Other versions such as that in Codex Bezae, Robinson-Pierpont, and Hodges-Farstad are different again. Put this together with the other evidence and I believe that this confused mess is evidence that it was never originally part of John's Gospel but is likely to have come from an oral tradition transmitted over centuries that at some point (or points) in history it was decided belonged in the Scriptures and was inserted in various locations that Scribes felt it belonged until eventually an unspoken consensus set its location at John 7:53 to 8:11.

I am quite convinced that while it is something that did actually happen and is a good example of Christ's compassion and his fair approach to the Law, but based on the current evidence and lack of any compelling sources in favour, the Pericope Adulterae does not belong in the Bible.

I will revisit this subject in the future because I do need to examine all evidence in more depth, but based on the research I have done and the sheer number of variants, at this stage I cannot take a side with those who believe it should be exactly where it is in the modern editions.

Sources I Examined

Pro

Mind Renewers - a discussion on whether the oldest manuscripts are the best.

Purely Presbyterian - a lengthy quote from the book The King James Defended.

Con

Bible-Researcher - a collection of quotes about the Pericope Adulterae from various sources.

Archive.org - Tregelles' An Account of the Printed Text of the Greek New Testament (pp 236-243)

Darren M. Slade - download the PDF from Academia.edu using a Google account.

Not Sure of Stance

Andrews University (PDF) - the author seems happy with its inclusion