Amaleq13

That link goes to a post by mens sana responding to Magdlyn. Which of them made your point?

No Robots

This is what I was referring to:

I mean, can Magdlyn cite any authorities on his holy cornholery, or whatever you want to call it?

mens_sana

I would be surprised to hear anyone argue that the pericope is not ancient. That was never on my horizon. The question about the pericope is whether it is an authentic part of the Johannine Gospel. That it is missing from the most ancient and best mss. tells against that authenticity, especially when it is seen to move around within John and is even found once in Luke. As I said before, this is not how an authentic passage "acts," but it is how scribes act when they are looking for a place where it will "fit."

May I suggest that No Robots' position that the pericope is authentically Johannine and belongs in the Gospel, brings up more problems than it resolves. His resolution is that it was suppressed and he calls upon Ambrose and Augustine for support. However, Ambrose and Augustine are speculating about why the passage is missing in some early manuscripts. Calling upon the authority of ancient speculation is not much of an argument. And neither ancient speculation nor suppression explain why the passage was so restless.

Metzger's suggestion that the passage was seen as Johannine, but independent of the gospel, and that ancient scribes did not want to lose such an appealing story is a much more economical resolution — although it does leave a stain upon some theological preconceptions.

mens_sana

[QUOTE=No Robots;4919322]No Robots: This is what I was referring to:

mens_sana: And the original context is relevant? How so?

No Robots

Lord, does everything have to be spelled out for you people? You were challenging him for making an absurd claim about how "Jesus was just a composite figurehead for a certain Jewish syncretistic movement." I was challenging him on what I felt to be a similarly absurd claim about Christ "as the copulating and dying corn god."

Magdlyn

It's not absurd and I'm not a man.

Ben C Smith

No Robots stated in post 13 of this thread that he did not think the pericope was authentically Johannine:

Ben.

mens_sana

Thanks Ben. But then, in that case, I'm not sure what he is arguing about.

No Robots

I said quite the opposite:

Yeah, not authentically Johannine, but authentically ancient.

I don't mind Metzger's solution, but I wouldn't want to commit myself to it without being more of a scholar myself, especially when I like so much the censorship explanation.

No Robots

Never said you were. When I said "him" it was in the neutral sense.