7/30/06 The Woman Caught in Adultery: Redemption
John 8:2-11
[2] And early in the morning He came again into the temple, and all the people were coming to Him;
and He sat down and began to teach them. [3] And the scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman
caught in adultery, and having set her in the midst, [4] they said to Him, "Teacher, this woman has
been caught in adultery, in the very act. [5] "Now in the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women;
what then do You say?" [6] And they were saying this, testing Him, in order that they might have grounds
for accusing Him. But Jesus stooped down, and with His finger wrote on the ground. [7] But when they
persisted in asking Him, He straightened up, and said to them, "He who is without sin among you, let him
be the first to throw a stone at her." [8] And again He stooped down, and wrote on the ground. [9] And
when they heard it, they began to go out one by one, beginning with the older ones, and He was left alone,
and the woman, where she was, in the midst. [10] And straightening up, Jesus said to her, "Woman, where
are they? Did no one condemn you?" [11] And she said, "No one, Lord." And Jesus said, "Neither do I
condemn you; go your way. From now on sin no more."
Today’s study is the third in succession where John records Jesus’ usage of the term “condemn” in three
different ways. When Jesus encountered Nicodemus, in 3:17, His emphasis was on the fact that God’s purpose
in sending His “only begotten Son” was not to place a judgment of eternal punishment on the world. The world
had yet to be redeemed…there had never, nor would there ever be enough animal sacrifices (in either quantity or
quality) to remove the wrath of God against mankind’s sins. So, Jesus could have come to smite the world and
destroy it in the same way God smote Sodom and Gomorrah. (However, we must never forget that God did, in
fact, judge the sins of the world in the Lord Jesus Christ on the cross…2 Corinthians 5:21).
In Christ’s encounter with the blind man, John 9:36, Jesus said that “for this judgment I have into the world.”
We saw that this judgment was a kind of evaluation-judgment…where people come to judge between what is
light and what is darkness…it is a judgment that determines the differences of two things.
The term “caught in the very act” smacks of a conspiracy. How is it that they “caught her in the very act?” Was
this a set up? Did they set up a situation where a man seduced this woman to bed? Or maybe this relationship
had been going on for a while. Why hadn’t the Pharisees done something about this before? This picture does
not look right to me. This “caught” thing is just too easy. If it had been going on, why wasn’t there an attempt
to bring reconciliation, forgiveness and righting it?
There are several things working against that. First, the law did not stipulate exceptions. If you were caught,
you died. Now I don’t know how frequently the observance of the Law actually happened. I suspect, in Jesus
day, not very often. In fact, we don’t have a single reference of this law being applied in an actual case in
scripture. Does that mean that the Law was never applied to situations like this? I am sure that it did. We
just don’t have scriptural references to it. There are other references like when the Pharisees picked up stones
to stone Jesus when He said that He and the Father were One; when they stoned Stephen; and when the Apostle
Paul was stoned.
Second, the Pharisees would not have had any reason to reconcile these “kinds of people” because the Pharisees
looked down on them as “sinners.” They did not see their own arrogance, their pride in not being aware that they,
too, were sinners. Jesus called attention to their sin, which is why they hated Him all the more.
The scripture reveals that this was just a test to catch Jesus in violation of the Law. They were people who used
people to establish their advantage against Jesus. Actually, it was to establish their position before Jesus. The
issue was their position. They were determined that they would out-duel Jesus. They were determined to show
Him up. They wanted to prove to those around Jesus that they were the righteous ones. They were pitting Jesus
against themselves and the Law. The only problem with that (and they did not clearly see this) is that Jesus wrote
the Law. John’s first Divinely inspired words in his gospel were, “In the beginning was the Word and the Word was
with God, and the Word was God.” Though they did not realize it, they were picking on the wrong Person. This
whole episode was about control. They could not stand to not be in control. The Pharisees were sensing that this
man, Jesus, was teaching things that would totally destroy their world. He declared that the Pharisees were in
error in their interpretations of the Scripture. He was emphasizing the very things that Samuel and King David and
Isaiah all declared: God is not impressed with the externals of our lives (what we do)…He wants to rule the
motivations, longings, desires, words of our hearts. Prov. 4:23 reminds us that “all the issues of life” flow from the
heart. Jesus said in Luke 6:45, “it is out of the overflow of a man’s heart that he speaks.” You could say that the
Pharisees were more concerned about making sure that everyone else lived according to the Law than they were in
living it themselves.
I don’t know of any situation in scripture where there is such a deviant plot set against the Lord. Though it is
detestable, it really isn’t surprising that they took the extreme measure that they did just for the purpose of
deposing the Lord from His exalted position of respect and authority with the people.
Something always sticks in my craw when I read this account: where was the man? The Law says in
Leviticus 20:10, “If there is a man who commits adultery with another man's wife, one who commits adultery
with his friend's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.” So why didn’t they bring him?
This had to have been a set-up of major proportions. And an underlying current in the society was that this
command was seldom, if ever taken seriously. The society had degraded that far. There was a maxim used among
the people, “No penalty without a warning.” The Pharisees probably thought they were being very magnanimous
with the woman that they did not take her out immediately and stone her. I wouldn’t be surprised if one of the
Pharisees had not had relations with her and this was an easy way for him to get rid of the proof, per se. So, here
she was being dragged into the presence of this Rabbi and all the people by the Pharisees saying that she had
been “caught in the very act.” What about her reputation? Maybe she was a harlot. Even so, all people, no matter
how down and out have some measure of shame. This was not a desirable place to be in. Caught in the act, she
probably was naked or at best was able to throw some meager clothing on.
The religionists of the day did not like the way Jesus ate with sinners. He was a violator of the Sabbath many,
many times. He did not hold the Pharisees in a place of venerable trust. Everything that Jesus said and did
resulted in a feeling of denigration. He actually called them the ones who needed salvation. So when they brought
this woman to Jesus, it was not that they were confused about what to do with her, they were testing Jesus.
The awesome nature of Jesus being both God and man gave Him a leg up on everyone and everything. He was
never caught off guard. He was never left in the dark. There was never a fog about any situation. Jesus was
always prepared, not just because He had superior wisdom, but He knew things would happen before they ever
happened. So, when they thrust this woman before Him, He was already prepared. He knew what was in their
hearts.
If in fact they did this, putting her in this situation, it made them as guilty as her. Even if they did not “set her
up” in some way, the glee that was in their hearts to put to the Master a situation whereby they could test Him
and prove Him not to be who He was saying that He was.
There has been great discussion and debate by commentators as to what Jesus wrote on the ground. And, of
course, I have my own opinion, as well. Ha! What do you think He wrote? No one can know for certain, but I
think it had to do in some way with their lack of concern for the destructive process of sin. They obviously cared
nothing for the woman…they were not grieved over her sin…the sin itself was not bemoaned. Using the sinfulness
of another person to attack the righteousness of Jesus is as hypocritical as you can get. This judgment was more
of the pedigree of Matthew 7 (where Jesus said, “Judge not, lest you be judged.”) Remember, this judgment is of
the final decree kind of sentence…one where there is no possibility of correction, i.e., “you are rotten to the core
and can never hope to be anything else.”
Though we will never know what He wrote, we do know that it was probing, pointed, and poignant. It probed their
hearts, it pointed to them and their hearts’ attitudes and moved them to silence and ultimately to leave the place
with their “tails between there legs.” EXODUS 23:1 b, “do not put you hand with the wicked to be an unrighteous
witness.”
Today’s study reveals another judgment in the encounter that Jesus has with the woman caught in adultery. This
third usage is the kind that has the “lasting judgment” kind of intent in its meaning. Jesus did not condone her sin.
He did not dismiss her sin. He just did not condemn her to the life in which she had been living. His words to
her were “from now on, sin no more.” The form of the Greek word implies a ceasing to commit an action already
started, “stop your sinful habit.” And the “no more” points to the thought of no returning to it. Jesus calls her to
a clean break with the sin. He calls the woman to a clear amendment to her lifestyle and to her thinking about the
meaning and purpose of life. Though He does not say, “you are forgiven” He did show her His grace and mercy that
she would have never been able to forget. Could it be that this woman caught in adulterer is the same woman of
Luke 7? Though the John passage’s setting was Jerusalem and the Luke passage’s setting appears to be in the
area of Nain, it is not totally impossible for the two to be the same. The Luke 7 woman’s response to Jesus would
certainly be in line with someone who had been rescued (redeemed) from the clutches of a stoning.
Now one of the Pharisees was requesting Him to dine with him. And He entered the Pharisee's house, and
reclined at the table. [37] And behold, there was a woman in the city who was a sinner; and when she
learned that He was reclining at the table in the Pharisee's house, she brought an alabaster vial of perfume,
[38] and standing behind Him at His feet, weeping, she began to wet His feet with her tears, and kept
wiping them with the hair of her head, and kissing His feet, and anointing them with the perfume.
[39] Now when the Pharisee who had invited Him saw this, he said to himself, "If this man were a prophet
He would know who and what sort of person this woman is who is touching Him, that she is a sinner."
[40] And Jesus answered and said to him, "Simon, I have something to say to you." And he replied, "Say it,
Teacher." [41] "A certain moneylender had two debtors: one owed five hundred denarii, and the other fifty.
[42] "When they were unable to repay, he graciously forgave them both. Which of them therefore will love
him more?" [43] Simon answered and said, "I suppose the one whom he forgave more." And He said to him,
"You have judged correctly." [44] And turning toward the woman, He said to Simon, "Do you see this woman?
I entered your house; you gave Me no water for My feet, but she has wet My feet with her tears, and wiped
them with her hair. [45] "You gave Me no kiss; but she, since the time I came in, has not ceased to kiss My
feet. [46] "You did not anoint My head with oil, but she anointed My feet with perfume.
[47] "For this reason I say to you, her sins, which are many, have been forgiven, for she loved much; but he
who is forgiven little, loves little." [48] And He said to her, "Your sins have been forgiven." [49] And those
who were reclining at the table with Him began to say to themselves, "Who is this man who even forgives
sins?" [50] And He said to the woman, "Your faith has saved you; go in peace." Luke 7:36-50
Isn’t this account a great picture of what Jesus did for you and me? No, maybe we were not “caught in the act of
adultery,” but we were “caught in the grip of sin”…whatever it might have been, even self-righteousness! And Jesus
said, I do not condemn you, but I do tell you to stop what you are doing and quit going that way. I think we are
significantly positioned in this picture of Christ’s redemptive act. We must never quit giving God thanks and praising
His name for the place of death He has brought us out of. Lord, help us to never forget where we were (in the
bondage of sin) and what You have brought us (literally positioned in Christ with His imputed righteousness).
What is in this for us?