New to Radix Fidem?

Visit the Introduction and User Guide thread to get acquainted with us.

Automatic registration is currently closed. Please email admin@radixfidem.org if you'd like to register for the forum.


Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
NT Doctrine -- John 8:1-11
#1
In the balance of chapter 7 before this passage, and in the verses following in chapter 8, Jesus asserts in several different ways that He is the Son of God. The Temple guards could not arrest Jesus. He offered the water of the Spirit. He was the light of the world. He was not of this world.

John also records in passing how the Pharisees despised the common people as accursed because they weren't Talmud scholars. They also proved they didn't know Jesus, because they insisted He was born in Galilee. They also falsely asserted the no prophet ever came from Galilee, but of course, Jonah, Nahum, Hosea, probably Elijah, and Elisha were all from Galilee. They knew the Talmudic traditions, but didn't know the Scriptures. Their lack of clear knowledge of God's Word plays a large part in this episode when Jesus confronts them in the Temple.

What was really at play was their arrogance about Galilee being a land of ignorant bumpkins, and their complete lack of effort to find out where Jesus was born. They knew the Messiah was supposed to have been born in Bethlehem, but the issue is their contempt for anyone that wasn't among their number. Everyone knew the Messiah was going to be a Pharisee, right?

The emphasis here is that they didn't know the Word God, and thus did not know the God of the Word. The only way to know the Father is through the heart of faith. If they knew God that way, then they would have recognized that everything Jesus said was consistent with divine revelation. But because they had no real knowledge of God, they could not accept anything Jesus said, much less the truth that Jesus was the Son of God.

They had slipped away so far, for such a long time, that they were no longer under the Covenant of Moses. This is what matters most in the case of the woman caught in adultery. Overnight Jesus had gone to stay with friends and supporters over on the Mount of Olives. The next day He came back and taught again in the Temple. So some Scribes and Pharisees interrupted this teaching session by bringing a woman they claimed was caught in the act of adultery. By protocol, she would have been forced to kneel before Him.

It was common for rabbis to test each other by bringing law cases. Most were imaginary, but this time the big shots brought a very real case to Jesus, asking Him to rule as a civil judge. They cited the Law of Moses prohibiting adultery and the capital punishment.

It was proper protocol for rabbis to sit down when teaching, so from this position Jesus bent over close to the ground and began scratching in the loose dust on the plaza pavement with His finger. You would have thought He didn't hear them. But they pestered Him until He straightened up and said that if any of her accusers were without sin, they could cast the first stone. Supposedly that was the signal for everyone else to join in the stoning. Then He went back to scratching in the dust on the ground.

It requires monumental arrogance to imagine that one is sinless, particularly in Jewish culture. The Scribes and Pharisees might go so far as to imagine they alone were blessed by God and that their path was the right one, but they weren't insane. All of their posturing was suddenly exposed here, and it struck their consciences. The eldest knew it best, so they left first. The younger ones in their zeal took longer, but finally realized their support was gone, and eventually walked away.

As usual, John doesn't state what should have been obvious: None of the woman's accusers had standing to take action. They had no shalom to defend here. Sinless perfection is what the Pharisees thought Jesus was talking about, but He was pointing back to the Covenant. All that was necessary under Moses was that the accusers themselves be clean of adultery, and had witnessed the crime first hand. With humble obedience comes the confidence to act, but the Pharisees knew nothing of that; their hearts were silenced. All they had was intellectual legalism.

Further, why were they protecting the man with whom she committed adultery? They broke the Law by not bringing both guilty parties. They were notoriously contemptuous of women, a primary element of their legalism. The whole party was guilty and knew it. Once they were all gone, the woman was still there by herself. Where was the required witness against her? There was no one to bring the case. She gets away with her crime because everyone who sought to condemn her were themselves condemned. In order to condemn her would require vast changes the leadership weren't willing to embrace.

Jesus stated that He was in no position to condemn her. It's not that He didn't know whether she was a sinner, in contrast to His own sinless perfection. But the national covenant had been vacated, and so there was no jurisdiction, no community purity to protect. The nation was defunct; there was no leverage for executing capital punishment. There was also the practical matter that Rome would not permit an execution on those grounds. God had allowed Rome to steal away their national sovereignty because the leadership had abandoned the Covenant of Moses. The whole nation stood condemned.

So Jesus did what He could do in that position, dismissing her with the admonition to "sin no more." Jesus had not come to bring civil judgment for crimes, but to bring moral conviction about sin itself. The only way anyone could possibly be walking in righteousness was from within their own convictions. The threat of capital punishment had not stopped this woman; only her own conscience could do that.

Jesus had come to awaken a righteous conscience.

(Edited for clarity.)
Senior elder at radixfidem.org
Blog: radixfidem.blog
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)