Teacher fired for conceiving child out of wedlock

Its a story, that while in the NT that you read today...was not in the New Testament at all when it was written ...that is what I am saying...when the first New Testament was written, all copies where copied by hand...and people ( screwed up, changed on accident, changed on purpose, mistranslated...)...this story shows up in the new testament quite a while after it was first written...

So you do live in a 2D black and white world....explains sooo much

Please do share your source for this information. Took 2 different NT classes in college and never once have heard what your claiming. Not to mention the years of attendance at a private christian school.

Actually, he is right. The oldest "known" text does not have that story, it started appearing much later.

Some people like Pocket think it was never there to start with since it is not in our oldest copy but it could be that it was in older copies that were destroyed, warn out exc. and it was looked over by mistake or some other reason during the oldest known copies we have. Oral tradition would have remembered the story and brought it back. I honestly can not remember where I learned this from but a few years back I was big into studying the history of scripture and I did learn this also. Its always brought up by atheists who want to disprove the bible.

I hate it when I agree with Pocket

whats funny is that if you really look at the changes made to the bible, and how it was altered over time, you actually can fix some of the errors that someone may use to disprove it..like why Luke says one thing..and the same story told by Mark....is completely different...One way to look at is it say, its proof its all worthless drivel...the other is to see that man changed the meaning and words of one story, to meet there own viewpoints....and thus why the stories them self do not match up. But it also shows why those who try to take very literal takes of the bible...should know that the words they take litterly...are often now what was written 2000 years ago...but maybe what they where changed to 1700 years ago 1500 years ago...or at some other point. its why if you have different versions of the bible...and scholars can actually trace back the changes to different branches of translations...

Then again I am not a christian...so why should I have to point out these things Christians...I mean they devote there live to it, and use it to condemn others...I am sure they must know these things..

you think they want to teach you that everything your reading...could and often is not what was written originally?

you ever played telephone? now picture that game, for hundreds of years,...being written and translated....by countless people who have there own views , viewpoints, and flaws in reading and translating...Even simple things like punctuation that we use, not really in place in the written languages...Someone makes a error...someone finds error, fixes error...someone fixes error wrong....someone fixes what they think must be a error...but is now...someone does not agree with something they are asked to translate and write...they change it, make it agreeable to them....the times change and politically something written is not convenient ...it gets changed. There is not printing press, its all by hand...often times with very few around who can read and write , so no one to question its correctness...

when a story is not in copy's for hundreds of years, and then show up one day...its more likely if was just added then forgotten for 300 years and someone was just like hey wait we forgot this....is it possible sure, but likely? no...also its just one of many errors and changes to the book

http://www.carm.org/manuscript-evidence

Also this is referred to in the Latin as Pericope Adulterae:

The pericope is not found in its canonical place in any of the earliest surviving Greek Gospel manuscripts; neither in the two 3rd century papyrus witnesses to John - P66 and P75; nor in the 4th century Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, although all four of these manuscripts may acknowledge the existence of the passage via diacritical marks at the spot. The first surviving Greek manuscript to contain the pericope is the Latin/Greek diglot Codex Bezae of the late 4th or early 5th century. Papias (circa AD 125) refers to a story of Jesus and a woman "accused of many sins" as being found in the Gospel of the Hebrews, which may well refer to this passage; there is a very certain quotation of the pericope adulterae in the 3rd Century Syriac Didascalia Apostolorum; though without indicating John's Gospel. The Constitutions of the Holy Apostles Book II.24 refers to the passage “And when the elders had set another woman who had sinned before Him, and had left the sentence to Him, and were gone out, our Lord, the Searcher of the hearts, inquiring of her whether the elders had condemned her, and being answered No, He said unto her: “Go thy way therefore, for neither do I condemn thee.” Book II is generally dated to the late third century (Von Drey, Krabbe, Bunsen, Funk). Codex Fuldensis, which is positively dated to AD 546 contains the adulterae pericope. The Second Epistle of Pope Callistus section 6 contains a quote that may be from John 8:11 - "Let him see to it that he sin no more, that the sentence of the Gospel may abide in him: “Go, and sin no more.”" However the epistle quotes from eighth century writings and is not thought to be genuine.

Until recently, it was not thought that any Greek Church Father had taken note of the passage before the 12th Century; but in 1941 a large collection of the writings of Didymus the Blind (ca. 313- 398) was discovered in Egypt, including a reference to the pericope adulterae as being found in "several copies"; and it is now considered established that this passage was present in its canonical place in many Greek manuscripts known in Alexandria and elsewhere from the 4th Century onwards. In support of this it is noted that the 4th century Codex Vaticanus, which was written in Egypt, marks the end of John chapter 7 with an "umlaut", indicating that an alternative reading was known at this point. Jerome reports that the pericope adulterae was to be found in its canonical place in "many Greek and Latin manuscripts" in Rome and the Latin West in the late 4th Century. This is confirmed by the consensus of Latin Fathers of the 4th and 5th Centuries CE; including Ambrose, and Augustine. The latter claimed that the passage may have been improperly excluded from some manuscripts in order to avoid the impression that Christ had sanctioned adultery: "Certain persons of little faith, or rather enemies of the true faith, fearing, I suppose, lest their wives should be given impunity in sinning, removed from their manuscripts the Lord's act of forgiveness toward the adulteress, as if he who had said, Sin no more, had granted permission to sin."

As for the different accounts in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John it's not that they are different in facts, but rather in details that one noticed over the other. This is 4 different vantage points, even in the the earliest canonical writings they do not differ in validity but just in the 4 different ways of noticing details. You will find that John (the beloved) and Luke (doctor) were far more detailed than Matthew or Mark.

Thank you Coach. That is very good.

Christian haters love to point out minor discrepancies in the historical record to denigrate the faith, Jesus, and all Christians. They are most intolerant of anyone who believes other than of course, Muslims. They are afraid of them so they never criticize them.

That was very interesting, thank you for posting it.

Hundreds of years? I do not think we are talking about hundreds of years. As for scripture in general, the dead sea scrolls are almost exact with the exception of some spelling differences and the oldest known Isa scroll is dead on accurate to the modern Isa scroll (in Hebrew) so I must disagree that it is all garbage or incorrect. But I do not expect you to agree with me otherwise your faith would be different

Yeap...Christianity is just a BS cult made up by a Roman emperor.

Wow!!!

The Bible was written for a Roman emperor to win power.

Wow!!!

Amazing what some people believe.

says the person who believes...o come on...do we even need to start?

A chick gives birth a a kid...but is a virgin ...( 2000 years ago, no invtro) ...and its the son of God....God is of course some ransom unseen super power that wipes out whole cities for being Immoral...also flooded the world ....but was saved my a guy who built a boat that held pairs of all life on it till flood was over....of course these animals after that all then where imbreads...but lets ignore this....I could go on...but I think its important we not forget....Katrina was because of Gays and God was angry...

also the world is 2000 years ago...and man lived with dinosaurs....


But beliving that a political leader used a Religion to gain power...and thus spread the Religion...thats just silly....I know...a burning Bush told me...also it was written on stone...by a invisible man in the sky...

I would just like to interject that not all Christianity falls under the history of Roman Catholicism.

well the rest are all heathens who will burn in hell...

Yeah speaking of stories.....Wasn't it Darwin himself that said if we didn't see the evolution of a new species in the next 200 years then he was wrong. He was even doubting himself towards the end of his life. I mean as a Christian I believe in the emacculate conception of Christ and that is considered silly. Yet evolutionist believe that this whole world came from a spec, an ash........really? So your free to believe how you like, but don't belittle my faith because you don't believe in it.