3 The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery, and placing her in the midst 4 they said to Him, "Teacher, this woman has been caught in the act of adultery. 5 Now in the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. So what do you say?" 6 This they said to test Him, that they might have some charge to bring against Him. Jesus bent down and wrote with His finger on the ground. 7 And as they continued to ask Him, He stood up and said to them, "Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her." 8 And once more He bent down and wrote on the ground. 9 But when they heard it, they went away one by one, beginning with the older ones, and Jesus was left alone with the woman standing before Him. 10 Jesus stood up and said to her, "Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?" 11 She said, "No one, Lord." And Jesus said, "Neither do I condemn you; go, and from now on sin no more." (John 8:3-11).There are key elements here. The woman is accused of being "caught in the act". The call is to the letter of the Law. And, undeniably, it is a test. But Jesus doesn't fall for the trick. No, no. When they all slink away, Jesus tells her, "It's okay. What you did was fine. Don't worry about it."
If you didn't protest that last comment, you weren't paying attention. People today love that Jesus said, "Neither do I condemn you," but very few take the time to examine what really went on in this "tolerance" passage. Let's dig into it a little, because there are layers of things here.
At the surface, please note that this passage (John 7:53-8:11) doesn't exist in the earliest versions of John's Gospel. On that basis alone I would be wary of taking a position statement from the text.
Assuming, however, its accuracy, there are other considerations. Note that, according to the Pharisees, "This woman has been caught in the act of adultery." Now, the Law was explicit. "If a man commits adultery with the wife of his neighbor, both the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death" (Lev 20:10). If she was caught in the act, the adulterer would have been present and, as such, should have been here as well. Thus, while seeming to call for the letter of the Law, the Pharisees are, in fact, violating it. To me it brings into question that their accusation was genuine. At best, they were disingenuous.
Assuming, however, that she actually was caught in adultery, I would like to point out that there was no Law of Moses that called for stoning. Did you know that? Adultery was punishable by death, but it wasn't by stoning. According to John Gill, the standard method of death was -- get this -- by handkerchief. They were strangled. There was a stoning law for fornication, but not for adultery. So the Pharisees were standing on a lie.
Assuming, however, that it was a mere slip of the tongue, note that there are other problems. The Law did not allow Jesus to stone (or kill) the woman. It was traditionally required that the accusers do it (thus the "cast the first stone" comment). And it was to be done at the gates of the city, not some back street where they found Jesus to test Him.
Okay, so there are lots of problems here with the situation and the test in progress. So, what was Jesus's response? Was His response, "It's okay. What you did was fine. Don't worry about it."? No, indeed! Jesus didn't condone her sin (else He wouldn't have said, "Go and sin no more."). Because of the fact that He was not the accuser, He did not catch her in the act, and He had no authority to condemn her, He told her, "Since they don't condemn you, I don't either." That is not tacit approval. Nor is it "judge not".
Lots of people like that passage. We shouldn't be so "tuned to sin." "We shouldn't be so judgmental, so intolerant. Jesus didn't condemn the adulteress. He didn't cast the first stone." This all sounds well and good, but it's not in line with the text. We need to be careful not to approve of what God disapproves. We need to be careful not to malign what is approved in Scripture. Calling sin "sin", exhorting, rebuking, calling to repentance, these are all biblical recommendations, even commands. To strip Scripture of its meaning to encourage "tolerance" is not a wise approach.
2 comments:
Have you been skulking in the background at other blogs? This topic also came up recently in another conversation in which I participated. Or are you channeling?
In any case, this is something that does indeed come up often when discussing behaviors, as if I am actually condemning the sinner rather than the sin; as if I consider myself to have the authority to condemn anyone.
And here's the real problem: If we, or the church, no longer spends any time discussing sin and the ramifications of engaging in it, there no longer is a societal or cultural atmosphere of rejecting sinful behavior. It's peer pressure of the noblest kind that we encourage holy behavior and speak out against the bad. I lived under that in my childhood, where not only my parents, but the neighbors, teachers and community in general would speak out without fear upon witnessing bad behavior in a kid. All bad boy stuff was done out of view of parents if it was done at all. When found out, shame was heaped upon us and we felt it greatly, hanging our heads unable to look adults in the eye. It had an impact and we came to have a real grasp on right vs wrong.
Now, with no one willing to condemn (who are you to tell me what's right or wrong?----what's right for you isn't necessarily right for me---blah, blah, blah), there is no guidance. There is only mixed signals and moral relativity. And boy, that's worked out just fine.
Loving the wolves is the same thing as hating the sheep. The finest biblical record (including all Old Testament prophets, Jesus, and Paul) includes much finger pointing and public recognition of sin. Unless we're willing to say that Jesus was judgmental and mean spirited, then I'd guess that genuine love would be obligated, for the benefit of the loved one, to point out that which will cause much harm (read "sin"). Remember, don't fear those who can hurt the body; fear Him who is able to kill both body and soul.
Post a Comment