So far, His4ever, any discussion where it’s even remotely possible that you could actually learn something about yourself, someone else, or even the Bible is completely fruitless because possibility does not equal reality.
A prime example is your hanging onto the idea that John 3:18 says it was a Samaritan woman taken in adultery. There’s no mention of her nationality; however, given that the Jews did not consider Samaritans to be Jewish, there’s exactly zero reason to even entertain the idea that the woman taken was Samaritan.
His4Ever, the story of the woman at the well is told in John 4:8-42. She is completely different from the woman the Pharisees brought in who was caught committing adultery. The position which this story is given in the gospels vary. Here’s the exact commentary from my copy of The New English Bible (emphasis mine):
In other words, not only is the woman caught in adultery completely different from the woman at the well, her story does not appear in all versions of the Gospels.
You frequently cite scriptural authority for your beliefs. If you choose to continue to do so, please make sure that authority is accurate and stop combining two very seperate women into one story.
I just went out to Bible Gateway and ran a search for John 7:53-8:11 on all versions of the Bible they have listed. Several translations of the Bible listed agree with my New English Bible. Here are notes from two more versions:
The note to the Catholic New American Bible regarding John 7:53 to *:11 states:
“The story of the woman caught in adultery is a later insertion here, missing from all early Greek manuscripts. A Western text-type insertion, attested mainly in Old Latin translations, it is found in different places in different manuscripts… There are many non-Johannine features in teh language, and there are also many doubtful readings within the passage. The style and motifs are similar to those of Luke, and it fits better with the general situation at the end of Luke 21, but it was probabbly inserted her because of the allusion to Jeremiah 17:13 and the statement “I do not judge anyone,” in 8:15. The Catholic Church accepts this passage as canonical scripture.”
Please note that the typos in the above quote stem from my clumsy use of this small iBook keyboard, and do not reflect the spelling ability of the Roman Catholic Church.
I got interupted by a neighbor in need earlier (her phone’s been out for 3 days; mine was out for 2). I want to make it clear that I do consider the woman caught in adultery to be a valid part of the Gospel, but it does appear to be the least reliable. This all came out of my citing the specific chapter and verses to distinguish between the woman at the well and the woman caught in adultery.
Sdrawkcab, you mean infallibility doesn’t extned to spelling?
BTW, H4E: Do you recall who posted this in this thread?
Didn’t someone call you out for your own complete disregard for something the Bible says? Looks to me like your actions do give out a one-sided/lopsided view of God’s character.
Please do. I have a natural distrust of Christians in general (sorry, can’t help it. I hear “Christian” and alarm bells go off instinctively) and you just reinforce that. I honestly don’t know how you think that you are doing any “good” here. You are driving people away from your beliefs by showing how ugly and hateful they are. Nobody is going to say “Hey, I have never heard of this Jesus guy… but that hell sure sounds scary so I’m in!” ok? Ain’t gonna happen. What IS going to happen, and what has happened already, is that those who already believe will shake their heads, and those who don’t will say “see? This is why I will never believe”
I think what Libertarian means is someone who follows the letter of the law, convinced of his own self-righteousness, like the Pharisees did in Christ’s days, as opposed to one who follows the spirit of the law. I regret to say that it’s an assessment I agree with.
Do you think she knows she’s coming across like that?
I think (I could be wrong) her point here is to convert someone, poster or lurker.
Everyone seems to be saying she’s failing that.
Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much a son of hell as you are. — Jesus (Matthew 23:15)
Well, this is typical. H4E makes an absolutist assertion about the bible, is demonstrated clearly to be in error about the assertion, and then she disappears completely. I expect she will appear elsewhere later, and never address the matter of her biblical errancy. This sort of behavior makes efforts to enlighten her about the facts to be completely fruitless, and IMHO a waste of time.
The deal, though, is that H4E isn’t following the letter of the law she tells everyone else they must follow. Many posters have pointed that out already and there’s even a rather interesting pit thread about it. And Opal’s description fits aptly.
The Samaritan woman’s encounter with Jesus is told in the fourth chapter of the Gospel According to John:
The woman whom His4Ever apparently conflated with her was in Jerusalem, and her account happens two chapters later, in the eighth chapter:
I think it is an apposite quote to be brought to His4Ever’s attention, because of what Jesus knows about her:
And yet…Jesus does not condemn her for her “serial polygamy” – the nice-nasty phrase moralists break out to judge those who divorce and remarry, but rather reveals Himself as Messiah to her, something he had been loath to do to anyone up until this point according to the Gospel accounts. It also has to be kept in mind that Jesus in associating with Samaritans generally and a Samaritan woman in particular is violating the Jewish moral code – these folks are heretics and “not part of us” – cultural outcasts living in a small area beween the Jewish territories of Judea and Galilee. No rabbi worth his salt would have deigned to speak to a people who rejected the books of the prophets and operated from an erroneous rescension of the Torah as the Samaritans did. It was unthinkable!
And, of course, the sole comment that those who practice moralistic judgmentalism pick up from the story of the woman taken in adultery, who is not the Samaritan woman, is Jesus’s comment, “Go, and sin no more.”
Cannot anyone perceive the mercy implicit in Jesus’s dialogue with these two women? They were judged by the “righteous” Jews of the time as unworthy of the promises of God – but God Incarnate knew them as they were, loved them, and judged otherwise.
And I’m very confident, though saddened, that the point behind this little Biblical exegesis will whoosh completely by those to whom it is directed.
