AFTER THE WOMAN WAS GONE
A Dream about defending the text
In the dream, the box had a lamp of blue Glass but it broke when he touched it but the box with the ancient Hebrew writing on it remained. When he held the box, it electrified him. Now I TOO had a dream that same night in which I also held a lamp and when I touched it, I too was shocked. It also left a black soot on my hands. My lamp was not as beautiful though. It was just a simple brass lamp. I can't explain the soot or what the quality of my lamp meant or if it reflected my own study, or lack of! :) But in each dream, we both had a lamp.
Anyway, I believe that the Lord was saying that someone in real life, long ago really DID pray in 1800's for the Lord to raise up men to defend the biblical text (probably many texts, not necessarily just John 8:1-11) The lamp is the word but the light was going out. (It broke in the dream) The text still remains but needs defending due to omission, corrupted text etc (all this corruption of the text is explained on his site and it is all verifiable. I believe this reveals something in the spirit of what is happening now but of course there is always debate over it!
My understanding is that a real man, 150 yrs ago, prayed and the results are unfolding. The dream is attributed to many people. This does not make one person over the other "more important" because they had a dream. It just means Gods word is important. That is all it is. Gods will is to have his word preserved for others.
A friend described it this way: that my husband "disproved a very
dangerous heresy which holds otherwise superior Christian teachers captive to the belief that signs and wonders have ceased but it
is a blatantly obvious, if you read the last section of Mark and the
book of revelation that this is not so but they say this just because it is not in all the manuscripts- but my husband proved that the most reliable manuscripts are the ones which contain
it. He did all the language, literary criticism, cross referencing of
extra biblical historical sources, interrogation of the motives of
people involved in editing the manuscripts etc."
If you take out the ending of MARK, it leaves you hanging. It simply
ends without showing the resurrection as if it didn't exist so the
ending is essential.
But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong. 1 Corinthians 1:27
So, at the end of the day, God makes sure people do not get the glory God gets the glory and though it is typical that particular types of people are normally "honoured" in our society, this is not God necessarily honouring them. (sometimes it is) It is man. Yet authentic people are not "without" honour because God honours them. So the honour of man is often worthless to God and sometimes this includes "seminary degrees allegedly authenticating so - called accurate biblical scholarship. (Not saying people who go to Seminary or Bible College are wrong. I am just saying that it is not proof they are authentic or if an authentic Christian, being taught authentically)
He said to them, "You are the ones who justify yourselves in the eyes of others, but God knows your hearts. What people value highly is detestable in God's sight. Luke 16:15
The true mark of authenticity is discerned by God.
There is a book coming out in which authors ignore the authenticity of the ending of MARK and
James E. Snapp, Jr. left a comment on a post on the "New Book on the Pericope de Adultera":
"For the next week I am making it my purpose in life to compose a no-holds-barred response to some of the claims in this book."
He contacted me on April 26 2016 and attached a draft of his soon-to-be-published (Lord willing he said) e-book about John 7:53-8:11.
He said "I suspect that you and your husband will enjoy it."
Backgrounder on John 8:1-11 site, authorship of site and my thoughts
I appreciate old traditional Churches.
They represent the
saints of old. I can ignore the pitfalls of modernity and imagine what it was like 150 years prior. Was it better? Certainly the buildings
were more interesting.
Where the stations of the cross are present, there is story and where there is stained glass, it adds colour. You can walk silently down the isles and meditate on the story of Jesus from birth to resurrection and to the end of age but in some Modern Churches, there doesn't seem to be room for that, nor any opportunity for the public to walk through or pray. I worked in one of these churches in 1993-4. The sanctuary had very high ceilings. It was a beautiful church even though the paint was peeling. It was a bit dingy but an interesting dingy. I took my young daughter there several times. One day, she built a small sculpture with blocks. I was not sure what her sculpture was and when I asked , she said, "Church!" I was impressed with her observations and creativity in her sculpture.
I met my husband at this Church. The friend of mine who got me the job there and invited my husband to one of the dinners. They both worked in the recording Industry. I also knew my friend through a circle of Artists and Christians. After he introduced us and others, we all ate together and engaged in friendly conversation. My husband walked with
me to the transit when we all left to go home.
At Christmas we all got together again to eat at my friends house. At one time we did an Art show at a Gallery on Bloor street and my friend was the ONE male in the show (besides my husband who submitted a piece or two but did not attend the opening) He also memorized all 12 chapters of the book of Ecclesiastes and did a one man show reciting it. Quite an impressive feat I thought.
My husband was also very creative (still is) He loves reading and studying. When we first met, we talked about books a lot together. A guest at the Christmas dinner who knew him longer remarked on how he had an “Encyclopedia” in his brain! I discovered later that was true. His main interest was the Bible. He also loves Math and Physics.
NOTE (painting by my Husband above is called 'HEAVENS CHOIR" )
We got to know each other a lot over the phone. We talked about history and the Bible amongst other things. He was programming at that time and teaching music theory and he did a lot of electronic work as well as studio recording in a studio he built in his Apt. He worked periodically for years at a recording studio downtown which he helped build. Because he was and is still is very mechanical and mathematically minded, he spent a lot of time working on math and physics and this trained him to be a good researcher when it came to studying the scriptures in a scientific manner, examining the texts and making charts on the scripture as he dissected the manuscripts, the errors, the translations and their format.
I had been walking in the Christian faith over 15 years. He, a bit longer. Although he was a self-taught textural critic, he enjoyed teaching on topics he had studied. He had already started working on a small pamphlet on the story in John 8:1-11 several years before. John 8:1-11 is known as the pericope de Adultera where a woman is dragged to the temple and accused of Adultery. The Pharisees command she be stoned. Jesus takes it from there and saves the woman from her fate.
The Lord had inspired my husband to write about the passage and so for the first time, I looked at John 8:1-11 in a deeper light. Of course, I had already accepted it as authentic scripture. I never would have questioned that it should not be in the Bible so it never occurred to me that many critics of the text thought it did not even belong in the Gospel. That was stunning to me.
I had not really read the foot notes and if I did more thoroughly, it wouldn't have altered my belief in it's authenticity anyway. At the very least, I would learn more about the verse. So he explained to me that in fact this verse was in dispute and had been for many years but the thing that fascinated me was the fact that the woman in the story could have been a character that was in another part of the Bible.
I would have thought she was a nameless figure but it has been suggested that she was known to many in Herods court and in fact lived there and was a victim of circumstance surrounded by sinners. She was not altogether "innocent" though and we know this because after Jesus addressed the situation at the Temple in which she was dragged, he explicitly told her to “Sin no more. However, with wisdom beyond what we could ever imagine in such a dangerous situation, Jesus defends her, knowing she was a pawn used by the Pharisees to destroy him. The Pharisees were also not applying the scriptures with Gods wisdom and love.
NOTE You will see that in post under "The Sinister Intent behind the Game" it states that Gail O’Day describes the woman as "an object on display, given no name, no voice, no identity apart from that for which she stands accused’ (1992: 632)"
John 8:1-11 is not exclusively about the sin of Adultery nor exclusively about forgiveness though that is the big part of it, but also about the authenticity of the text. In tampering with this text, people have disputed it's authenticity and therefore question the forgiveness that Jesus offered. That is why it is so important to defend it's authenticity. So much is at stake. Challenging Jesus forgiveness goes against his entire mission.
The study my husband embarked on also includes 400 years of commentary on this passage by the best known and respected scholars. What started simply as a study of the text became a fight for scripture itself.
Textural critics use mathematical methods in figuring out the text. However, despite the fact that honest Textual Criticism ought to be a science, this has not been the case always and therefore some textural criticism has become more of, "the art of lying."
WHAT IS A TEXTURAL CRITIC?
Textural Critics examine and debate each variant in Biblical manuscripts and figure out what they believe to be the original text. They look for authenticity.
Although they claim to be quite certain of their conclusions and their analysis, at times they resolve a problem in the text by giving it their personal best guess.
I know. It sounds boring and hardly lucid to the spirit of real hands on Christianity but Textual Criticism, when honestly applied is extremely important, as well as essential to determining what is in the word of God.
I am not called to be a Textural
Critic though I have learned a lot about it from my husband. It has
also enhanced my faith and sharpened my methods of approaching
But, by the grace of God, I am who I am and I appreciate the gifts of God in others. After all, these gifts in other believers are a part of us.
It states in the King James Bible 1 Corinthians 12:21
And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you.The body is fascinating and it is a fact that all parts are essential to the other.
The body is used as analogy in scripture. Here are points on the body from online.
Our blood is circulated through 60,000 miles of tubing reaching to every part of the body. Our heart pumps up to 6,000 quarts of blood yet never seems to get tired . Our body has 200 separate bones. With an amazing blood manufacturing factory. Blood cells are made inside the bones. There are more than 600 muscles in a person’s body. The nervous system may be likened to a highly organized postal system or telephone system, carrying messages to and from the brain. The world’s most complex computer is the human brain. In fact, the entire human body is the world’s most incredible piece of machinery.
So as I quote this from an edited snipet online to illustrate the body. As we engage with what other believers have learned and how the Lord uses them, we are actually participating in a mystical like body of Christ. As each part works effectively with the other parts, we work harmoniously as a whole.
The field of Textural Criticism is an important study of the mechanics of scriptures but methods and translations have been corrupted. The body has been invaded with a cancer.
Before 1880 or so there were honest Textural Critics but since then, many modern Critics launched a secret attack on the bible to tear down what should be an honest scientific method of examining texts in manuscripts but instead, the critics engage in the warfare of propaganda against the Bible itself.
Since the text is thrown off, the Bible is thrown off, and in turn, believers are thrown off and can not understand the intended meaning of the scriptures because it has been invaded by this cancer. Omitting over 200 verses and questioning other verses based on weak evidence that they are not in the "oldest" of manuscripts and then moving them around or omitting them entirely is called tampering with the text, not research.
As I say this though, I know that God himself is a master of preserving the text. He can also raise and train people up to defend it. He has his own methods of using his Holy Spirit to give us understanding and discernment to teach us the meaning of his word.
Although Wordsworth did not say much on John 8:1-11. He comes to mind when I try to describe how wisdom alone can help interpret the text. Bishop Charles Wordsworth lived between 1853 to 1892.
He is a newly discovered favorite of mine. He was an
interest to me because he seemed to speak a lot about the spirit of God
While my husband was was looking at Greek and Hebrew languages and ancient history, I had been looking at Modern commentary by devoted Christians who focused more on the interpretation by the Holy Spirit and a closer walk with the Lord. However I did read about Augustine and St Francis and other various denominations, creeds and forms of Liturgical worship along with some commentaries such as the Matthew Henry commentary. I also took a course at the Bible College on the book of Esther.
We were both very interested in the spirit of scripture and it's proper interpretation. I leaned on the Spirit of God with some commentary. He also leaned on the spirit to guide him but as a researcher, he read so much more than I. His work is a great resource to learn about scripture.
We both had a strong faith but it seemed my husbands walk started at one end, and mine at another! Bishop Charles Wordsworth was an example of that middle ground, a blend of holding things I could understand intuitively but also holding the intellectual understanding of the kind of work my husband does. This brought my husband and I on a similar playing field. In the spirit of Christ he came to me one day and said,
gonna' like this!”
“What is it?” I said.
read some of Bishop Charles Wordsworth's work (paraphrased as in
those days, they were very long winded)
My husband was correct. I loved
what Wordsworth was all about: interpreting scripture by the guidance
of the Holy Spirit which is the best way to deeply understand scripture.
Without the Holy Spirit, we can not understand scripture on important levels. 2 Peter
1:21 states "For prophecy never had its origin in the human
will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried
along by the Holy Spirit."
So when asked about any interpretation our answer should be “How can I without the Holy Spirit?
So we know that the Holy Spirit is necessary in understanding of scripture.
So I just established that we can understand scriptures intuitively but when we argue with masters of corruption, brilliant but Godless men who know the Bible but want to destroy it, we need both expert knowledge and the power of the Holy Spirit to guide our work and arguments. We need the power of God through prayer to back the battles that arise as we face these enemies of the text. My husband is good at this work. (difficult and tedious work at times but enjoyable work!) I believe God needed a job done and people like my husband, and others became the Zoros of the textural critics war of words!
Wordsworth is like a strong comforting comrade to the warriors of Christian textural criticism. He was a pastor for many with his own Church. His battle was different than ours yet for the same Lord . All good Christians are given a battle. Jesus knows how to equip' his church with the right man or woman for each job as we fight spiritual and real enemies. We can be trained to brilliantly tear down arguments that exalt themselves above the Lord.
2 CORINTHIANS 10:5 says We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.
KJV states: Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;
ROMANS 12:2 And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.
Wordsworth As a scholar he is best known for his edition of the Greek New Testament (1856–1860), and the Old Testament (1864–1870), with commentaries; but his writings were many in number, and included a volume of devotional verse, The Holy Year (1862), Church History up to A.D. 451 (1881–1883), and Memoirs of his uncle, William Wordsworth (1851), to whom he was literary executor. His Inscriptiones Pompeianae (1837) was an important contribution to epigraphy. He also wrote several hymns (Hymns Ancient and Modern New Standard contains seven) of which perhaps the best known is the Easter hymn 'Alleluia, Alleluia, hearts to heaven and voices raise'.
Defending the Text: Dean Burgon
Dean Burgon was another man who defended the text. He defended the ending of MARK
DEAN BURGON : "He was the Dean of Chichester,born on August 21, 1813, in Smyrna, a province of Greece. He has been called "the champion of the impossible. His defenses against apostasy within his own church were remarkable and very brave. As far as the record is concerned, Westcott and Hort were silent in all the eleven church controversies in which Burgon found himself." Talk about being dragged into the center of his foes! It is interesting though because at the "age of seventy-three, two years before his death, Dean Burgon began writing his systematic defense of the Traditional Text of Scripture. It was to be a thorough going treatise on Biblical Textual Criticism in two volumes. He argued with himself before beginning:
"It will take a long time.
I know it.
The rest of your life.
I know it.
It will cost a great deal of money.
I know it
And you will never finish it.
I know it.
No one will ever appreciate it.
I know it.
I WILL DO IT!"
Dean Burgon was a determined man. He thought to himself, "Why don't I do for the whole New Testament what I have done for the Gospel of Mark?"
The Sinister Intent Behind the 'Game'
This is what happens in court all the time whether accusing a woman, a man or a group. And often a sinister witch hunt with no due process twisting law. The Sinister Intent Behind the 'Game' is also written up in John 8:1-11 (the woman caught in Adultery) and shows a Woman as Pawn and catalyst in a Deadly Game testing Jesus to also frame him. The target was Jesus essentially. They didn't care about justice or correction for the woman but cared only to frame Jesus.
The drama really begins to unfold with the announcement of purpose of Jesus’ opponents appearance: they bring a woman with them who they claim has been caught in adultery. The description is startling as she is thrust into the centre of the picture. As Gail O’Day describes it:
‘She is an object on display, given no name, no voice, no identity apart from that for which she stands accused’ (1992: 632).
This image also reminds us of the reality for the woman brought before Jesus: she is on trial for her life. Yet the reader becomes increasingly aware that the trial is not about any form of justice, but is a put-up job. First, if the woman was truly guilty of adultery, as the next verse tries to confirm, what need would there be to consult Jesus, for whose judgement his opponents to this point have shown only contempt (7.12, 15, 20, 47-49)?
Second, even the most obtuse of readers recognizes that it takes more than one person to commit adultery – yet only a woman is brought to Jesus.
Third, the following verses show that Jesus is being placed in an impossible situation with regard to making a judgement, having to contradict the letter of either the Jewish or the Roman law. http://textualcriticism.scienceontheweb.net/INT-EV/MScott2.html#r01