Introduction

This exegetical paper will focus on the passage commonly known as Pericope Adulterae, or John 7:53 – 8:11.[1] Aspects of the complex authentication debate which mysteriously surround this “floating” passage will be detailed in order to establish a foundation for the remaining exegetical discussion. The historical-cultural and literary contexts of the passage will be addressed. Content will be analyzed through word and commentary study in order to extract the originally intended meaning of the passage. Finally, this paper will offer suggestions for modern-day application of the selected passage. The goal of this paper is to set forth an exegetical summary of the pericope which provides a historical-cultural and literary contextual basis from which to launch into a more detailed expository teaching of the passage.

The Mount of Olives is included in the introductory sentence for a significant purpose. The specific mention of this locale indicates the remainder of the passage’s intent in that Jesus is soon to be betrayed by Judas Iscariot at the same place and for the very reason the Pericope Adulterae exemplifies (John 18:2).[2] In this brief yet profound passage, Jesus establishes Himself with the authority of a true teacher and scribe when He bends down to use His finger to touch the earth and write something new upon it (John 8:6). This first act is done in order to symbolize Himself as the fulfillment of the Old Testament, or Mosaic, law. He centrally stands in as the sacrificial substitution for the adulterous woman. He then writes on the ground a second time to signify the New Testament of grace to come after His crucifixion and resurrection. What Jesus does in the Pericope Adulterae for one woman, He is soon to do for all who will believe in Him. The adulterous woman is a representation of all mankind. John 7:53 – 8:11 is a condensed, parable-type account of Jesus’ own trial, crucifixion and resurrection event to come after, as well as an exemplification of the reason for it.

Context of John 7:53 – 8:11

Authoritative Debate

Before the context of the passage can be interpreted, it is imperative to note the unusual circumstances regarding the authenticity and placement of the passage itself. Modern translations note some variant of the following regarding John 7:53 – 8:11: (1) it is not in the earliest manuscripts; (2) the placement varies within the Gospel of John (after 7:36; 21:25); and (3) authorship is occasionally attributed to Luke (placing after 21:38; 24:53).[3] It is difficult to undertake careful analysis of the passage, much less apply the principles offered in it, when its very inclusion seems to be advertised as questionable within the footnotes which earmark it. Henry Cadbury expounds:

With regard to the text of the pericope adulterae it must at once be confessed that it is one of the most uncertain passages in the whole [New Testament]…Textual evidence, however, does not encourage the hypotheses [of Luke as author]…Nearly all the authorities that contain or refer to it put it in chapter eight or at the end of the Gospel of John. The only exception is the Ferrar group which places it after Luke 21:38.[4]

The footnotes in the modern translations, which call attention to these authoritative discrepancies and exclusions from the early manuscripts, typically do not elaborate on the extensiveness of the arguments. However, it is fairly safe to determine the placement of the passage in the Gospel of Luke—indicating Lukan authorship—is minimal, at best. Further, the vast majority of translations have the placement of the passage after John 7:52, rather than elsewhere in John’s gospel. Zane Hodges, in his analysis of the work of H. F. Von Soden[5], concurs:

Von Soden…has made it clear that the real location of the pericope de adultera in the manuscript tradition is exactly where it is found today in the English Authorized version. …The number of texts which place the pericope in some other location in the biblical text than after John 7:52 is miniscule in the extreme, hardly reaching much beyond a couple dozen or so.[6]

Some accounts place the number of Greek manuscripts which include the pericope, or part of it, at 1,495, and those that exclude it at 267—these being the oldest manuscripts.[7] However, in some instances the evidence of omission is merely presumed as some manuscripts are missing pages altogether. Hodges states omission is a guestimate by some upon a mere measurement of “the missing leaves.”[8]

The question as to why the pericope is not in the earliest manuscripts, which many scholars consider the most authentic, is intriguing. The Gospels produced by Jerome in 383 A.D. include the passage.[9] St. Augustine (ca. 430) used the passage extensively and stated in its defense:

[C]ertain 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 the manuscripts the Lord’s act of forgiveness toward the adulterous, as if He who had said, "sin no more" had granted permission to sin.[10]

The Council of Trent (1545-1563 A.D.) declared the Latin Vulgate, which contains the passage, authentic.[11] Gavin McGrath supports the authenticity and inclusion of the passage and its primary placement after John 7:52 due to internal context:

Furthermore, we must ask, why does John 8:20 specify the treasury, “These words spake Jesus in the treasury, as he taught in the temple,” and how did Jesus and the Pharisees (John 8:13) get into “the temple” (John 8:20), when the narrative of John 7:52 leaves the Pharisees separate from Jesus who was somewhere at “the feast” (John 7:37). [sic] How could we say, “Then spake Jesus again unto them” (John 8:12) as a natural sequence from these events, unless in fact we are first told, “Jesus” “came again into the temple,” as did “the scribes and Pharisees” whom he spoke to (John 8:1-3,7)? Thus context strongly supports the inclusion of John 7:53-8:11 as part of the natural flow of John 7 & 8; whereas its omission creates an awkward and puzzling interruption in the flow of John 7 & 8.[12]

Johann Bengel’s Gnomen of the New Testament sheds light upon the actions of transcribers, stating partial omissions and marginal notations are common, and that a ban from public reading does not equate the opinion of inauthenticity:

The wisdom and effectual power which Jesus evinced in the history of the adulteress are so great, that it is strange this remarkable portion of the Gospel history should be accounted by many in the present day as uncertain. It is also omitted in the Codex Ebnerianus, but only from verse 3; and at the end of the Gospel according to John it is so supplied, and attached to verse 2, that it is readily apparent, that the transcribers removed only from public reading this portion, which they acknowledged as genuine. In the book, Joh. Lami de Eruditione Apostolorum, describing the Florentine Greek manuscript of the four Evangelists, he says, “In the Gospel of John, lambic verses were written in the end. There comes first an index of the nineteen chapters. The tenth chapter had been omitted, and, out of the regular order, in the front, there was recounted περὶ μοιχαλίδος, concerning the Adulteress, whose history is extant in the Gospel itself. The writing is of the twelfth century.[13]

The transcriber’s floatation of the passage may have more to do with the content, and its possible societal implications, than with the authenticity of the passage itself.

John is attributed to have written his gospel, in which the pericope is nestled, in the years 70-100 A.D. J. Scott Duvall and J. Daniel Hays describe the times:

During the second century and into the third…several heretical individuals and groups…began to produce written literature…that attempted to revise significantly the traditional Christian theology of the first century (defined in the four Gospels and letters of Paul)…[14]

During the second and third century, the aspect of the canonization of the New Testament began to emerge at the same time the pericope became accepted as authentic and part of the canonized Gospel of John.[15] Hodges limits the conflict as prior to 200 A.D., therefore, placing the origin of the authentication problem during the period of common heretical revisions.[16] In Revelation 22:18, John warns against changing the prophesy contained in that book. This may have been a strict caution added completely through divine revelation, or it may have been due to the apostle having already experienced the frustration of his work being erroneously changed. Hodges continues:

It is not observed often enough that this kind of warning [found in Revelation 22:18] might well have been evoked by John’s own awareness that the New Testament writings – indeed, even his own! – had been willfully tampered with already in his own lifetime. Consequently, the possibility cannot be excluded that by the time the book of Revelation was penned (perhaps in the reign of Domitian, A.D. 81-96), the textual disruption caused by the addition or subtraction of the pericope de adultera had already occurred![17]

The argument regarding authenticity, authorship and placement has continued throughout the history of the Christian church. Upon the exploration of this debate, there seems to be much heated focus revolving around the pericope even though its inclusion was decided through the same channels as was the New Testament canon. Perhaps it is the subject matter of the passage that stokes the fire of this debate the most. It is this author’s stance, since the passage does exist and has survived for over 1500 years, to treat it as a genuine part of the New Testament canon and to give its content equal weight and reverence. If one is guarded in study, one cannot extract all that is intended from the passage. However controversial it may be, the pericope is very unique in its illustrative power and withstanding presence. Its very homelessness seems to echo the opening of the passage where the Pharisees each went to their own homes, but Jesus went to the Mount of Olives with, much like the passage, “no place to lay His head” (John 7:53, 8:1; Matt 8:20; Luke 9:58).

Historical-Cultural Context

In consideration of the information from these aforementioned scholars and commentaries, this author believes it highly likely that the Pericope Adulterae was penned by John and that the passage in question should be considered apostolic, orthodox, and catholicized due to its inclusion through similar avenues, councils and authorities as the entire New Testament was canonized.[18] John was one of the twelve disciples of Jesus, and the “disciple whom Jesus loved” (John 13:23, 19:26, 20:2, 21:7, 21:20). His audience was Jewish and Gentile, to whom he desired to show Jesus as the Word of God made flesh (John 1:1). John’s overarching theme was to portray Jesus as the Son of God. John 3:16 encourages people to believe in Jesus as Savior—a topic consistent throughout John’s Gospel, as is love.

The scene of the pericope takes place the day following the Feast of Tabernacles—a Jewish celebration to mark the harvest and to recount Israel’s Exodus with a pilgrimage to Jerusalem during October (John 7:37; 8:2). Prior to this festival, Jesus had traveled about Galilee, but avoided Judea due to the increasing threat of Jews seeking to kill Him (John 7:1). Jesus traveled alone to the festival once it was half-over and He began to teach at the temple regarding His authority and matters of the Law (John 7:14-24). On the last and most important day, Jesus cried out in a loud voice, “If any man is thirsty, let him come to Me and drink,” establishing Himself as eternal, living water for those who would believe in Him as the Messiah (John 7:37-42). Many people believed Him (John 7:31). The Pharisees learned of this and sent attendants to arrest Jesus (John 7:32).

Literary Context

The Pharisees erroneously conclude Jesus is not a prophet, and each person “went to his own house” (John 7:52-53). In contrast, Jesus went to the Mount of Olives for the night. The pericope opens with the specific place name where Jesus would soon be betrayed by Judas Iscariot with a kiss, tried in court, and crucified as the sacrificial Lamb, thus commencing the literal actions the pericope foreshadows. The woman is also betrayed, tried in the midst of the court, and threatened to be stoned, but she is not the one who dies. Jesus takes her place and, therefore, she is pardoned sin while He pays for it. The specific mention of the Mount of Olives in the Pericope Adulterae marries these two events and portrays a love than cannot be matched.

The challenge comes against Jesus at the Temple court regarding the law of Moses (Deut 22:22-24) in which the Pharisees and scribes wished to test Him (John 8:6). Jesus is the Word made flesh and the true scribe and Author, sent with the legal authority of God (John 1:14, 5:30; Matt 7:29; Heb 12:2). On two counts, Jesus writes on the ground to establish this authority (John 8:6, 8:8). In the midst of these, the passage states clearly that Jesus raised Himself up (John 8:7) while giving the perfect answer and substitution that saved the adulterous woman from judgment and death.

In the remainder of John 8, Jesus continues His discourse with the crowd which included both the Pharisees who did not believe Him and the Jews who did (John 8:12, 8:13-14, 8:31). Within the text there are allusions to division—the festival was half through when Jesus began to teach at the temple; they brought the woman accused to the center of the temple court; the Pharisees were calling for stoning of the woman only, which was only half of the Mosaic Law (Deut 22:22-24); and Jesus wrote on the ground twice. Where there is division, there is a choice to believe one side or the other (Deut 30:19). Jesus intervened in the case and became the Lamb between the Old Covenant judgment and the New Covenant mercy (Luke 12:51-52; Matt12:22-28).

Content of John 7:53 – 8:11

Meaning

Jesus had no “house” in which to lay His head at the opening of the Pericope Adulterae, no oikos, which is the Greek word for either “house or family”.[19] The immediate mood of the passage is one of aloneness. Jesus went to the festival alone because He was hunted by those who sought His life. Jesus entered the temple court at dawn (John 8:2). He is Light breaking into the darkness of the world (John 8:12). A particular sect of opposition, the Pharisees mock Jesus with a motive to try Him (John 8:6). They call Him, “Teacher” or didaskaios (John 8:4), which means, “an instructor acknowledged for mastery in their field.” [20] However, if they sincerely beheld Him as such, they would not have interrupted His teaching already in progress (John 8:2-3). They disrespect the title of didaskaios and the temple, or hieron or hieros, which means a “sacred” place, by defiling holiness with false motives. [21] Temple, or court, is a word mentioned prominently as the specific location of this scene where Jesus offers mercy rather than judgment for those who break the law.

“Woman,” or gune, is used in indignation by the Pharisees and in admiration, or respect, by Jesus. Gune can mean, “woman, wife, or my lady.” [22] The term “caught”, or katalambano, means, “to aggressively take, with decisive initiative or eager self-interest; to grasp something in a forceful manner, making it one’s own.”[23] The Greek language suggests a more abrupt trespass than the English translates. To be caught “in the very act” of adultery, or epautophoro, means that the man escaped, they freed him, or he was present yet not openly accused.[24] The Mosaic Law they charge against her expressed equal punishment for the male (Deut 22:22-24), so the Pharisees were only holding to part of the law. The woman and the sin of adultery seemed to be secondary in their aim to find fault with Jesus Christ.

Anakupto, meaning to raise myself, look up, or elation, is the Greek word for “stood up”.[25] Jesus raised Himself up to speak on her behalf between His writings on the ground. Three times in the passage, Jesus bends down to the earth and rises again, which parallels His crucifixion and resurrection and has possible prophetic ties to Daniel 5:29 (third ruler—Adam, Satan, Jesus). Jesus specifically writes on the ground with His finger twice and the verb tense changes from, “He wrote”, the first time to, “He…went on writing” the second time.[26] This signifies a definite closure to the Old Covenant and an eternal outcome for the New.

By the end of the exchange, the woman goes from being forcefully seized (katalambano) by men, to calling Jesus, Lord, or Kurios—a person who exercises absolute ownership rights. Kurios denotes “owner, or master.”[27] Men leave her but “Jesus was left alone with the woman standing before Him.” Figuratively, this woman represents the forgiven and purchased church as His bride (Rev 22:17). He tells her to, “go…and from now on sin no more.” Sin, or hamartano, means to “miss the mark of one’s true aim, such as an archer missing the target.”[28] The target, or the aim of the remainder of this woman’s life, is Jesus Christ Himself.

Commentary

The Pericope Adulterae opens like the scene of a play with Jesus alone at the Mount of Olives, the very place in which He was about to be betrayed (John 18:2). Jesus knows He will be crucified as the sacrificial Lamb. Jesus, bending down in the center of the court considering this woman’s case is essentially stating with His actions, “It is written” (Matt 4:4, 7, 10). This is reminiscent of the temptations due to Scripture being misquoted by the legalistic accuser in that it is only partially observed (Matt 4:3, 6, 8). Jesus trades the law the Pharisees present for the woman before Him. He trades a legal case for her loyalty and soul. He does this by stooping down (to the earth/ground); raising himself up to remove their accusations (her enemies) from her; bending down again (suggestive of descension; Apostles’ Creed[29]; 1 Pet 3:18-20; Rev 1:18); and then raising Himself up to face her privately (John 8:11, 3:16; 1 Cor 13:12; Rev 20:10-12). He writes with His finger on the ground, similar to Daniel 5:5-29[30], and raises Himself up, choosing to become the very sacrifice for the woman caught in both literal and spiritual adultery against God. All the “accusers of the brethren” leave, as she is becoming a believer (Rev 12:10). Also connected prophetically are the words, “go on your way” spoken to both the adulterous woman and to Daniel (Dan 12:9, 13).

Application of John 7:53 – 8:11

Let him who is without sin cast the first stone (John 8:7). According to the Pericope Adulterae, Christians are not to pass judgment upon sinners, for all have sinned, but are to realize that all will stand before God alone as judge. Jesus became the sacrifice for everyone’s sin. This episode begins with Jesus at the Mount of Olives, the place where He would soon be betrayed by Judas Iscariot and become the living sacrifice to atone for sin. All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God (Rom 2:23). For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become guilty of all of it (Jas 2:10). As the Pharisees were finding fault with the woman, with the motive to try Jesus, they were only partly following the Mosaic Law, as Deuteronomy 22:22-24 expressly states both caught in adultery were to be stoned. This exemplifies that humans are inept at passing judgment upon others for breaking the law as they are simultaneously in error and in violation against the law as well.

Metaphorically, the writing on the ground by Jesus before He rose and spoke on her behalf, then again after, may refer to the Old Testament and the New Testament being written around Him (Luke 24:44; Isa 42:9, 43:19; Rev 21:5), with His substitution (crucifixion and resurrection) central to the entire Bible. If one takes into account the dialogue of John 8, Jesus clearly establishes He is God’s Son, with the authoritative status to fulfill both the Law and Prophets. All sinners may be represented by the adulterous woman with Jesus as salvation from sin and death. Jesus ends the passage with, “Go and sin no more.” Each sinner, after an encounter with the saving Christ, can take these words to heart personally and apply them to their own life.

Conclusion

The historical and literary context of John 7:53 – 8:11 points to Jesus’ central infiltration into a hostile world that is seeking His life. His loud plea for souls to accept Him as their personal Savior, with the claim He is God’s Son, is the theme common to the Gospel of John (John 7:37). It is this claim that is the most controversial to the scribes, Pharisees and Jews seeking to kill Him. This leads the reader to view the pericope as a condensed scene conveying the same invitational message of John 3:16. The pericope illustrates a scene rich with symbolism of Jesus’ own trial, crucifixion and resurrection event to follow. The adulterous woman is anyone who will believe upon Him as Savior in their own legal case.

The Pericope Adulterae is a sobering passage for all who can perceive the magnificence of it. In a dramatic scene, and with very few words, the reader sees both the Law and the Prophets beautifully fulfilled (Matt 5:17, 7:12, 11:13, 22:40, 23:34; Luke 16:16, 24:44; John 1:45; Acts 24:14, 28:23; Rom 3:21). In the case of authenticity and placement, perhaps the very nature of the criticism, doubt and unrest surrounding the pericope is also metaphorical in that it rests solely upon what the reader believes. There are other mysterious dualities in Scripture that invite the exploration of personal belief via a presented perplexity, such as Saul’s cause of death (1 Sam 31:4; 2 Sam 1:10). Does the interpreter of the pericope believe Jesus is that merciful? If they do, the passage fits perfectly. If they do not, it cannot find a place to “lay its head”. Jesus labored and suffered so that those who would believe could find merciful rest (Matt 9:29, 8:13, 11:28; John 3:16-19). The Gospel of John uses the word believe eighty-five times to Matthew’s eight, Mark’s thirteen, and Luke’s eleven.[31] Therefore, this author believes the Periocope Adulterae to be perfectly placed within the Gospel of John.

Bibliography

Bengel, Johann. “Gnomon of the New Testament.” Biblehub.com. Accessed November 16, 2017. http://biblehub.com/commentaries/bengel/john/8.htm.

Cadbury, Henry J. “A Possible Case of Lukan Authorship (John 7:53-8:11).” The Harvard Theological Review, vol. 10, no. 3 (1917): 237-244. Accessed November 16, 2017. www.jstor.org/stable/1507078.

Duvall, J. Scott and J. Daniel Hays. Grasping God’s Word: A Hands-On Approach to Reading, Interpreting and Applying the Bible. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2012.

ESV Study Bible. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2008.

Hanover College Department of History: Trans. Waterworth, J. “The Council of Trent; The Fourth Session: The Canons and Decrees of the Sacred and Oecumenical Council of Trent” (London: Dolman, 1848), 17-21. Accessed November 25, 2017. https://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct04.html.

Helps Word-Studies. “264, 2962, 352, 3034, 1135, 3431, 1320, 2638, 1888, 3624, 2411, 3430.” Copyright 1987, 2011 by Helps Ministries, Inc. Biblehub.com. Accessed November 16, 2017. http://biblehub.com/greek/264.htm.

Henry, Matthew. Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2008.

Hills, Edward F. The King James Version Defended, 4th Ed. Des Moines: Christian Research Press, 1984.

Hodges, Zane. “Problem Passages in the Gospel of John Part 8: The Woman Taken in Adultery (John 7:53 – 8:11).” The Text, BSac 136 (1979): 318-332. Accessed November 25, 2017. http://textualcriticism.scienceontheweb.net/ TEXT/Hodges1979.html#s02.

Klein, William W., Craig L. Blomberg, and Robert L. Hubbard, Jr. Introduction to Biblical Interpretation. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2017.

McGrath, Gavin Basil. A Textual Commentary on the Greek Received Text of the New Testament, Volume 1 (Matthew 1-14), Revised Volume 1 (Matthew 1-14). Sydney, New South Wales, Australia: Officeworks, 2008, 2010.

NAS Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible with Hebrew-Aramaic and Greek Dictionaries. “264, 2962, 352, 3034, 1135, 3431, 1320, 2638, 1888, 3624, 2411, 3430.” Copyright © 1981, 1998 by The Lockman Foundation. Biblehub.com. Accessed November 16, 2017. http://biblehub.com/greek/264.htm.

Punch, John David. “An Analysis of ‘Non-Johannine’ Vocabulary in John 7:53-8:11, Part 2.” In die Skriflig/In Luce Verbi 47(1), no. 98 (2013): 1-6. Accessed November 16, 2017. http://indieskriflig.org.za/index.php/skriflig/article/viewFile/98/2080.

Reardon, JoHannah. “The Nicene and Apostles’ Creeds.” Christianitytoday.com. Accessed November 26, 2017. http://www.christianitytoday.com/biblestudies/ articles/churchhomeleadership/nicene-apostles-creeds.html.

Renner, Rick. Sparkling Gems from the Greek: 365 Greek Word Studies for Every Day of the Year to Sharpen Your Understanding of God’s Word. Tulsa, OK: Teach All Nations/Rick Renner Ministries, 2003.

Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance. “264, 2962, 352, 3034, 1135, 3431, 1320, 2638, 1888, 3624, 2411, 3430.”Biblehub.com. Accessed November 16, 2017. http://biblehub.com/greek/264.htm.

Thayer’s Greek Lexicon. “264, 2962, 352, 3034, 1135, 3431, 1320, 2638, 1888, 3624, 2411, 3430.” Electronic Database. Copyright 2002, 2003, 2006, 2011 by Biblesoft, Inc. Biblehub.com. Accessed November 16, 2017. http://biblehub.com/greek/264.htm.

Vine, W. E. Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, Inc., 1984, 1996.

Wikipedia Contributors. “Jesus and the Woman Taken in Adultery.” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Accessed November 25, 2017. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Jesus_and_the_woman_taken_in_adultery.

[1] Unless otherwise noted, all biblical passages referenced are in the Amplified Bible, Classic Edition (La Habra, CA: The Zondervan Corporation and the Lockman Foundation, 1987). Scripture quotations taken from the Amplified Bible (AMPC), Copyright © 1954, 1958, 1962, 1964, 1965, 1987 by the Lockman Foundation. Used by permission. www.Lockman.org. (Author’s Note: Various authors quoted in this paper refer to the Pericope Adulterae as the pericope de adultera or simply the pericope. All refer to John 7:53 – 8:11.)

[2] Johann Bengel, “Gnomon of the New Testament,” Biblehub.com, accessed November 16, 2017, http://biblehub.com/commentaries/bengel/john/8.htm.

[3] The Holy Bible, New International Version®, NIV® Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984, 2011 by Biblica, Inc.® Used by permission. All rights reserved worldwide.

[4] Henry J. Cadbury, “A Possible Case of Lukan Authorship (John 7:53-8:11),” The Harvard Theological Review, vol. 10, no. 3 (1917): 237-244, accessed November 16, 2017, www.jstor.org/stable/1507078.

[5] Zane Hodges, “Problem Passages in the Gospel of John Part 8: The Woman Taken in Adultery (John 7:53 – 8:11),” The Text, BSac 136 (1979): 318-332, accessed November 25, 2017, http://textualcriticism.

scienceontheweb.net/ TEXT/Hodges1979.html#s02. (Author’s Note: The following are the cited sources within the Zane Hodges article: H.F. von Soden, Die Schriften des Neuen Testaments... Teil 1. Abteilung 2: A. Die Evangelien pp 735-36. H.F. von Soden, Die Schriften, Teil 1, Abteilung 1, p. 486.)

[6] Ibid., 318-332.

[7] Wikipedia Contributors, “Jesus and the Woman Taken in Adultery,” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, accessed November 25, 2017, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_and_the_woman_taken_in_adultery.

[8] Hodges, “Problem Passages (John 7:53 – 8:11),” 318-332.

[9] Ibid., 318-332.

[10] Hodges, “Problem Passages (John 7:53 – 8:11),” 318-332.

[11] Ibid., 318-332. (Author’s Note: Further reference from Hanover College Department of History: Trans. J. Waterworth, “The Council of Trent; The Fourth Session: The Canons and Decrees of the Sacred and Oecumenical Council of Trent” (London: Dolman, 1848), 17-21, accessed November 25, 2017, https://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct04.html.)

[12] Gavin Basil McGrath, A Textual Commentary on the Greek Received Text of the New Testament, Volume 1 (Matthew 1-14), Revised Volume 1 (Matthew 1-14) (Sydney, New South Wales, Australia: Officeworks, 2008, 2010), 116.

[13] Johann Bengel, “Gnomon of the New Testament,” Biblehub.com, accessed November 16, 2017, http://biblehub.com/commentaries/bengel/john/8.htm.

[14] J. Scott Duvall and J. Daniel Hays, Grasping God’s Word: A Hands-On Approach to Reading, Interpreting and Applying the Bible (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2012), 449.

[15] Ibid., 449.

[16] Hodges, “Problem Passages (John 7:53 – 8:11),” 318-332.

[17] Hodges, “Problem Passages (John 7:53 – 8:11),” 318-332.

[18] William W. Klein, Craig L. Blomberg and Robert L. Hubbard, Jr., Introduction to Biblical Interpretation (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2017), 179.

[19] Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance. “264, 2962, 352, 3034, 1135, 3431, 1320, 2638, 1888, 3624, 2411, 3430.”Biblehub.com. Accessed November 16, 2017. http://biblehub.com/greek/3624.htm.

[20] Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance. “264, 2962, 352, 3034, 1135, 3431, 1320, 2638, 1888, 3624, 2411, 3430.”Biblehub.com. Accessed November 16, 2017. http://biblehub.com/greek/1320.htm.

[21] Ibid., http://biblehub.com/greek/2411.htm.

[22] Ibid., http://biblehub.com/greek/1135.htm.

[23] Ibid., http://biblehub.com/greek/2638.htm.

[24] Ibid., http://biblehub.com/greek/1888.htm.

[25] Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance. “264, 2962, 352, 3034, 1135, 3431, 1320, 2638, 1888, 3624, 2411, 3430.”Biblehub.com. Accessed November 16, 2017. http://biblehub.com/greek/352.htm.

[26] AMPC version.

[27] Ibid., http://biblehub.com/greek/2962.htm.

[28] Ibid., http://biblehub.com/greek/264.htm.

[29] JoHannah Reardon, “The Nicene and Apostles’ Creeds,” Christianitytoday.com, accessed November 26, 2017, http://www.christianitytoday.com/biblestudies/articles/churchhomeleadership/nicene-apostles-creeds.html.

[30] Bengel, “Gnomon of the New Testament,” http://biblehub.com/commentaries/bengel/john/8.htm.

[31] AMPC Version; other translations are similar in count.