But someone will object:
"Oh sure, it is closely connected to John NOW, after all a clever forger would do just this: He would borrow vocabulary, phraseology, themes, even structural patterns from John, to make it look authentic."
Perhaps a forger would do those things. But then the explanation about it being an 'accidental insertion' by some copyist is completely farcical and bogus now, isn't it? It must have been composed expressly for its insertion right here.
Yet this is only HALF the question isn't it?
Does the passage know anything about John? It SURE DOES.
But isn't the real question,
Does JOHN know anything about the passage?
It SURE IS THE REAL QUESTION.
Lets take a look:
http://cadesign.webworkercanada.com/CHARTS/John-Interlock1.jpg
Wow! It looks like this parallel correspondence every two chapters or so is built right into JOHN, and can't be the dumb luck of a forger!
A forger would have to have written in this very same correspondence elsewhere, such as is found between chapter 5 and chapter 7, which remains in place even when John 8:1-11 is removed!
Notice that removing John 7:53-8:11 doesn't even remove all the correspondence between 6 and 8!
Lets have a look at those parallels:
To start,
Culpepper helpfully diagrams the connections between chapter 5 of John and chapter 7. On page 166 he provides a chart, showing a remarkable and deep linkage between two sections of John, 5:1-47, and 7:15-24:
John 5____________________________________Jn 7:15-24
5:47.........."letters" /what is written' (grammata).....................7:15
5:31..........speaking on His own behalf..................................7:17
5:44..........seeking the glory from God...................................7:18
5:45-47......Moses gave the Law.......................................7:19-25
5:18...........seeking to kill Jesus........................................7:19-20
5:1-18 .......healing of man at pool/'one work'.........................7:21
5:1-18........"I healed a man's whole body on Sabbath............7:23
5:9.............the sabbath.......................................................7:23
____________________________________________________
Obviously the connections between the two passages run deep. And neither of these two passages are suspected of being additions on any textual grounds. The MSS tradition is unwavering here. Also, no one has ever produced any internal evidence suggesting either or both of these two passages was some kind of addition or insertion.
From:
The Gospel and Letters of John,
by R. A. Culpepper ( 1998 Abingdon Press pp.170-171 )
But now let us add our own second chart, showing the remarkably similar connection between two other passages in John:
Now we extend this list with the parallels between chapter 6 and 8:
John 6__________________________________John 8:1-11
6:14............ the Prophet to come.......................................7:52
6:15.............Jesus retires to mountain alone.......................8:1
6:17............it was now night................................................8:1
6:22..........the following day, the crowd/people stood.........8:2
6:37,44...........the people came to Him...............................8:2
6:21................they willingly received Him...........................8:2
6:45................they were taught of God..............................8:2
6:25................they said to Him Rabbi/Teacher..................8:4
6:32................Moses gave them bread/law........................8:5
6:30..............."What do you work/say?"..............................8:5
6:36.................they believed Him not................................. 8:6
6:21................on the ground...............................................8:6
6:41-2.............they murmered at/pressed Him....................8:7
6:34...............then they said, "give us this bread"
.......................and they that heard were convicted.............8:9
6:39-40........."I will raise them up"
......................Jesus raised Himself up..............................8:10
6:47.........."whosever believes in Me has eternal life"
....................."Neither do I judge thee"...............................8:11
_________________________________________________
Note that the parallel includes the 'joining section' (John 7:53-8:1). The whole purpose of this transitional portion is to intentionally connect to the previous part of John (the end of chapter 7).
The parallel also involves the previous verse, 7:52, which is not even in dispute as a part of John's Gospel. There is no textual evidence of a gloss here in 7:52 either.
In case this weren't enough, there are the incredible direct parallels in language between chapter 6 and the passage:
The word-for-word parallels between John 8:1-11 and John 6:1-21:
John 6:3 : anhlqen de eiV to oroV IhsouV (But Jesus went to the mountain...)
John 8:1 : IhsouV de anhlqen eiV to oroV (But Jesus went to the mountain..)
John 6:5 : poluV ocloV ercetai proV auton (a great crowd came unto Him)
John 8:2 : paV o laoV hrceto proV auton (all the people came unto Him)
John 6:6 : touto de elegen peirazwn auton (this He said testing him)
John 8:6 : touto de elegon peirazonteV auton (this they said testing Him)
John 6:10 anapesein ...anepesan...oi andreV (sit down, the men sat down)
John 8:6 : o de InsouV katw kujaV (but Jesus bent down...)
John 6:21 ...kai euqewV egeneto to ploion epi thV ghV (... upon the ground )
John 8:6b ...kategrafen eiV thn ghn ([Jesus was] writing in the ground )
______________________________________________________
It becomes obvious that whoever composed John 8:1-11 was intimately familiar with and extensively used John chapt. 6 as a template (or vise versa). But this is exactly the habit and pattern of the composer of 5:1-47, and 7:15-24, namely John the evangelist himself.
Once again it becomes clear that this cannot be any kind of naive 'insertion' of a story previously unrelated to John, by some scribe or editor trying to preserve an 'ancient tradition' or 'authentic oral story'. Either the gospel was extensively and carefully rewritten to include the pericope, or it was always an integral part of John's gospel.
...or maybe its original....
(Edited to remove oversized image.)
