The account of the woman taken in adultery John 8:1 - 11 RSV

This they said to test him, that they might have some charge to bring against him

What struck me this time was this ...

in the law Moses commanded us to stone such.

She had broken the seventh commandment, and had been caught in the very act of so doing. There was no compassion being shown to her by the religious clergy of the day, only the enforcement of the laws grim penalty, and a chance for them to sort Jesus out.

(Please NOTE .... Nothing was said about the mans part in this affair !

He was not accused or charged, he doesn't even get a mention !

but more about this fact later)

The LAW demanded that she pay the penalty and the offence was punishable by death !

The Pharisees had Jesus 'on taast'. They would teach Jesus to meddle with them.

It was an 'open and shut case' He must agree with them they thought.

He could not possibly save her or he would open himself up for public ridicule and accusation and a charge also .... that they might have some charge to bring against him There was a lot at stake !

Jesus bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground.

And as they continued he stood up and said to them, “Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her"

And once more he bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground

Many times over the past 50 years when I have read this account, I have thought

“I wonder what he wrote with his finger in the dust of the ground in front of them all?”

Earlier, I thought he must have written a list of sins, like PRIDE, LUST, FORNICATION, HYROCRISY, COVETOUSNESS etc to convict them.

Perhaps a list of what used to be called 'the 7 deadly sins'

But these are a general list of sins, and would not be specific enough to cause such a reaction in their individual consciences in my view

I have 2 theories about what he wrote ....

Both theories venture into the touchy subject of the morals of the professional religious clergy, or rather their hypocrisy and concealed immorality !

They were and still are, so quick to judge others when someones wrong actions or weaknesses are discovered or exposed, but are careful to cover their own similar deeds, until found out.

The Pharisees didn't realise just who they were dealing with.

But Jesus was the Son of God who became for a while the 'Son of Man'

The scribes and Pharisees after all were men and human as all men are, with common weaknesses, even as David the Shepherd King with Bathsheba long before them.

Like many other LEGALISTIC religious professionals involved with temple worship, there were 'temple women', which the professional priests used for sexual activity.

Temple prostitutes, either by choice or arrangement !

So, my first theory is that Jesus wrote Leviticus 20:10 in the dust .......

But they were only dealing with the second part of the verse .... what about the first part ? What about the man ? Where was he while all this was happening ?

Probably they excused his part in it ..... along with themselves of course !

Reading this passage of Leviticus 20 : 10- 21 .......

10 verses start with AND IF A MAN, only verse 16 starts with and if a woman

Doesn't that indicate that the primary motivator of such encounters is usually THE MAN ? Again, where was the man on this occasion ?

And then ..... recently .... GOT IT .... I reckon that I know what he wrote !

Something so specific, so personally convicting that they were 'nailed' themselves, perhaps something that their colleagues knew about them and would be able to confirm as true. Something so personal, yet such public knowledge that the tables were turned, and they were the ones accused, and which they could not deny !

So, my second theory is this .... ( have to wait till Heaven to check it out ! )

That Jesus wrote down the NAMES of the PRIESTS / PHARISEES, alongside the names of the TEMPLE PROSTITUTES that they had been with .... and that their colleagues in all probability knew about !

BENJAMIN and BATHSHEBA

DANIEL and DIANA

DAVID and DEBORRA

LEVI and LARA

REUBEN and RACHEL

RONALD and RAHAB

SIMEON and SARAH

THOMAS and TAMAR

etc etc

Close to the mark do you think ?

It would surely take something of this magnitude to get such a reaction in my view !

How on earth did this man Jesus know that about them ?

Something so personal and private !

Something that so stung their consciences, to cause them to sling away !

That so exposed their personal and individual HYPOCRISY

That they were all actually guilty of the same sexual weakness as the guilty woman.

So they slunk away ! CONVICTED from their own consciences, exposed !

And perhaps ..... additionally, Jesus would have listed them from the oldest to the youngest as he wrote in the dust, for that is how they were convicted and slunk away

How did he know that about them also ?

Like Joseph made Prime Minister in Egypt, who was Jesus earlier 'type'

Remember when just before Joseph revealed himself to his brethren, he gave them a feast, and sat them down at he table in age order - from the oldest to the youngest, and so amazed them ! Genesis 43:33 How did he know that about them ?

And so this touchy underlying subject is revealed in this account, which is really all about the hypocrisy and immorality of the professional religious clergy !

And Gods amazing GRACE to a woman in such a situation.

What about contemporary America and the very public exposure of tele-evangelists in recent years, some serving jail terms for promiscuity ?

And here in New Zealand, one Pentecostal minister told me that he personally knew and could name over 30 religious clergy in the Auckland / Hamilton region who had 'fallen' into immorality over recent years.

It's a subject recorded down through the centuries, and in more recent times testified of among Priests and Nuns, in their cloistered Orders, and the burial of babies born there !

There's 'nothing new under the sun' .... the heart of men, even the religious clergy are no exception to 'weaknesses' and what are referred to as 'sins of the flesh'

A frequent visitor to modern Israel also has said that Jewish men generally think nothing of frequenting brothels and prostitutes.

The New Testament has many other references about abstaining from fornication

Galatians 5:19, Ephesians 5:3, 1 Thessalonians 4:3-5, 1 Corinthians 5:9-11, 6:13,18, Hebrews 12:16 and which I would venture to suggest, that professional clergy would be very well aware of ! Hebrews 13:4 probably summarises it all

But there's yet another observed aspect ... that LEGALISM breeds IMMORALITY

Religious 'control' and the enforcement of 'behaviour standards' merely drives weaknesses underground, and HYPOCRISY is therefore a common fruit of LEGALISM to cover immorality.

Jesus looked up and said to her, "Woman, where are they? Has no man condemned you?" She said, “No one Lord." And Jesus said, "Neither do I condemn you; go, and do not sin again”

So for the woman in this account ..... it was .....

NOT THE LAW, or the penalty demanded by it ..... DEATH

but G R A C E ...... unmerited, undeserved MERCY and FAVOUR

She would never forget the Man who saved her from an early death

for which she would be eternally grateful,

and you can imagine, she would never forget Jesus, nor repeat the offence

henceforth to serve God, NOT by COMPULSION, but by LOVE and DEVOTION

for where sin abounded GRACE did much more abound Romans 5:20

What a most vivid demonstration that ....

GRACE has REPLACED the LAW and its consequences

and that HIS LOVE reaches from the UTTERMOST to the GUTTERMOST

H A L L E L U J A H !

but concerning the professional religious clergy of that day, and ours ...

Luke 12:1,2 advises us all to .......

and also, as the Pharisees in this account found to be very true indeed, that

sobering thoughts indeed !

PRAISE GOD for His awesome G R A C E

PS

Bernie Ogilvy writes and adds ....

To be convicted of a death sentence there was another test (law of God) that had to be applied. That was the law of witnesses. There had to be 2 or more such, otherwise you could get a snitcher on someone and have him/her removed!

And it was those witnesses who had the awesome responsibility, privilege and honour to throw the first stones!

Where were the witnesses? Or the accuser(s) for that matter?

To see this type of ‘event’ there would be a probable financial charge for that option - ‘pay per view’ concept. Otherwise, you may hear the event but the lady would wisely screen herself and her client while at least in the act.

Remember it was early morning - in the Hebrew world this new day began at 6.00 pm each evening our time. So I can imagine it was still dark. So the witnesses had to be more likely part of the ‘event’ with her. Because how come no one was the accuser? He would be implicated/marked as the other part of the event and hence death was coming his way as well.

No accuser was one important part of the law for the death penalty.

No witnesses was the other.

Their absence meant Jesus was bound by the law of God.

She was a ‘free’ woman under the law.

God’s law reflected His grace at the same time!

The religious leaders knew this too when pressed on the subject.

So my mind can suggest that Jesus was asking by his writings ....

“who/where are the witnesses” as well as “who/where is the accuser”?

Thanks Bernie

to which I add yet another reflection concerning this account .....

quite possibly, even probably, the man involved was actually a Pharisee also ?

which would add credence to why he wasn't introduced and mentioned by them

they could very well have been using, but protecting, one of their own 'mates'

and possibly the witnesses (likewise not introduced nor mentioned) were also Pharisees ??

which could well account for their conspicuous absence and non-mention

the mind boggles with these other possibilities !

which all add to the scary underlying aspect of religious hypocrisy