The Woman Caught in Adultery (John 8:1–12) — A Sermon by R.C. Sproul

SPROUL: Our Scripture this morning  is from the gospel according to St.   John. I’ll be reading from chapter  eight, verses one through twelve,   and some of you may have difficulty reading  along with me because the text that I am   reading may not appear in your version of the  gospel of John, or it may appear as a footnote,   or it may appear somewhere else in your Bible. And  I’ll explain that, God-willing, in a few moments. Chapter eight, verse one, “And Jesus went to the  Mount of Olives. Now early in the morning He came   again to the Temple, and all the people came  to Him, and He sat down and taught them. And   then the Scribes and the Pharisees brought to Him  a woman caught in adultery, and when they had set   her in the midst they said to Him, ‘Teacher, this  woman was caught in adultery, in the very act. Now   Moses, in the law, commanded us that such should  be stoned. What do you say?’ And this they said   testing Him, that they might have something of  which to accuse Him. But Jesus stooped down and  

wrote on the ground with His finger as though He  did not hear. So when they continued asking Him,   He raised Himself up and said to them, ‘He who is  without sin among you, let him throw a stone at   her first.’ And again He stooped down and wrote  on the ground. And those who heard it, being   convicted by their conscience went out one by  one, beginning with the oldest even to the last. And Jesus was left alone and the woman standing  in the midst. When Jesus had raised Himself   up and saw no one but the woman, He said  to her, ‘Woman, where are those accusers   of yours? Has no one condemned you?’ And she  said, ‘No one, Lord.’ And Jesus said to her,   ‘Neither do I condemn you. Go and sin no more.’  And then Jesus spoke to them again saying, ‘I   am the light of the world. He who follows me shall  not walk in darkness but have the light of life.’” He who has ears to hear the Word of God,  let them hear it. You may be seated.  

Let us pray. And now, our Father, as we give  attention to this passage so well-known from the   New Testament, so beloved in thy church for the  way it bears witness to your mercy and grace, we   ask that you would grant understanding to us and  to our lives. For we ask it in Jesus’ name, amen. Before we look at the content of this  text, let me just take a moment or two   to explain what I meant when I said some of  you may not find this particular passage at   the beginning of the gospel according to  eight – of John, in the eighth chapter.   I have with me my New Testament  copy of the Nestle’s text in Greek,   and I’ve pointed this out to you before, but  for those of you who have super vision, you   ought to be able to see the difference between the  size of the text on this page – on this page – and   the size on this page. This is much smaller over  here, and the reason is this: that at the bottom   of the page in the Greek text is contained what  is called the Apparatus, and the purpose of the  

Apparatus is to help us, as we’re reading the  text, discern what was in the original text. In biblical scholarship, we distinguish between  two types of criticism that is directed towards   the Bible. The first is called “higher criticism”  that really criticizes the content of the Bible   itself. It is a task with which I am not very  enamored; but in addition to higher criticism   there’s also what’s called “lower criticism” or  “textual criticism,” which is a very exact science   by which efforts are made to reconstruct as  best as possible the original text of Scripture.   The oldest parchment that we have of any portion  of the New Testament is a fragment believed to   be from the first century and the closest thing  we have to what may be an original portion of   Scripture. The so-called Rylands fragment is  of a very small portion of the gospel of John.   But when John wrote this gospel, people  didn’t take it and put it in a museum to   preserve it for future generations. When  Paul wrote his letter to the Galatians  

and to the Ephesians and to the Romans,  those letters would then be read in the   church and then circulated throughout  the Christian community. And it became   the task of people within the church to  make copies of those original documents. In terms of the Old Testament, they had  a very – a professionally trained group   of scholars called the Masorites whose task  every day was to copy the manuscripts of the   Old Testament for future generations. Now the  church has confessed her faith historically   in the inspiration of the Bible, that the  original writers of the text of Scripture   were so superintended by God the Holy  Spirit, who inspired the original writings,   that these documents were received as nothing  less than the veritable Word of God. But the   church has not taken the position that each  and every copyist, who copied the original   to the next generation and so on down the ages  received the same divine superintendence – that   is we restrict inspiration to what is called the  Autographa, the original autographs of the Bible.

Now I’ve said all that to say this: The science of  textual criticism weighs and evaluates thousands   of extant copies of the New Testament. There  are different families, different schools   of those copies, in which some of those families  are, obviously, more accurate and older than   others. And the copies don’t always agree at every  detail. Now with respect to the main substance of   Scripture, 99-44 one hundredths percent of it – is  in agreement in all of the families of the copies,   but there are less than one percent of  the texts in the Bible that have variant   readings. No major doctrine of the Christian  church is affected by those variant readings. But the one that is perhaps the most interesting  is this whole story that I just read this morning.   Frankly, the best manuscripts from  antiquity do not include this story   in the gospel according to St. John. The  overwhelming consensus of textual critics   is that it was not part of the original gospel  of John, at least not in this portion of John.   At the same time, the overwhelming consensus is  that this account is authentic, it’s apostolic,  

and it should be contained in any edition of  the New Testament. I believe it’s nothing less   than the Word of God. Whether it belongs here  in John’s gospel or at the end of twenty-one   chapter of Luke or somewhere else in John’s  gospel I leave for the ages. But I’m treating   it as nothing less than the very Word of God.  That’s a little excursus on textual criticism. Now I hope that doesn’t disturb anybody that  there are copy errors. You know, because of that   some people say, “We don’t have the originals,  so how can we say that the Bible’s the Word of   God?” That’s like saying that if somebody put a  bomb in the department of weights and measures in   Washington – or the Bureau of Standards – and blew  up our yard stick that there wouldn’t be enough   extant yard sticks and copies good enough that we  couldn’t reconstruct what a yard is without the   original. Of course we can reconstruct it, and we  can reconstruct it with infinitesimal variation. All right, let’s look then at this text that has  created so much difficulty. This is an appropriate   place to put it, by the way, because it follows  the same kind of thing that’s been going on here   in these disputes that Jesus is having with  the Scribes and the Pharisees. And so we read,   “Early in the morning Jesus came to  the Temple. All the people came to Him,   and He sat down and taught them.” And while  He’s in the midst of this teaching experience,   we are told the Scribes and the Pharisees  – let me just comment on that briefly.  

Sometimes we have a tendency to think that  the Scribes and the Pharisees were one in   the same group. They weren’t. The Scribes were  the theologians. The Scribes were the purists,   and they were called lawyers because they were the  experts in interpreting the Old Testament law. Not   all of the Scribes, which was a particular work  or career, were members of the party of Pharisees.   Pharisees were a party. They were a group. Now  many of the Scribes were members of the Pharisee   party and vice versa – many of the Pharisees were  Scribes; but not all Scribes were Pharisees, and   not all Pharisees were Scribes. And so John makes  a distinction – or whoever wrote this pericope. They – here we have the Scribes and the Pharisees  together, the theologians and the rulers of   the Jews dragging a woman who’s been caught in  adultery, and they set her in the midst – right   there where Jesus is engaged in teaching  His lecture. Here He’s interrupted by this   kangaroo court of leaders of the Pharisees and  Scribes, dragging this woman in her embarrassment.   And they make the announcement, “Teacher,  Rabbi, this woman was caught in adultery,   in the very act; and Moses, in the law, commands  that such should be stoned. What do you say?”

Now what’s wrong with this picture already?  If this woman was caught in the act, where’s   her partner? Did he flee for his life? Did he  escape? Or was this woman a victim of unbelievable   chauvinism by the Pharisees and the Scribes who  singled out the feminine member in this as the   guilty party and dragged her for public exposure.  Maybe the man was someone of such importance that   they didn’t want to get him in trouble. We  don’t know, but you have to ask the question:   Where is he? But instead they take the one most  defenseless, the woman, and they bring her in her   shame for public humiliation, and they’re doing  this obviously not for their zeal for the law.

In one sense this episode reflects the depths  towards which the Pharisees had deteriorated.   The term “Pharisee” means “separated one.” During  the inter-testamental period, in the post-exilic   time of Israel, many of the people had moved  away from zealous obedience to the law of God.   They were cavalier about obeying the terms of  God’s covenant with His people. And so a group of   people who were committed to spiritual, moral, and  theological reform banded together in an effort to   purify the Jewish community, and they committed  themselves to zealous and passionate pursuit   of obedience to the law, and so they were called  “the separated ones, the Pharisees.” They were the   Puritans of ancient Israel. They were the people  of the reformed faith of ancient Israel. They   were us in ancient Israel. But they began with a  godly passion and zeal to obey the law of Moses.

But on this occasion were are told why they bring  this woman – not because they were zealous for   the law. They didn’t bring her because they  were scandalized by her behavior and wanted   Jesus to clean up Jerusalem. No, they’re  – we’re told why they brought her here:   to put Jesus to the test. This woman was being  used by the Scribes and the Pharisees in order   to trap Jesus. Can you imagine someone who’s  really zealous for the things of God using a   person in this kind of a situation to destroy  the Son of God? But that’s what was going on. Now what’s the test? “They say to Him, ‘Moses,  in the law, commanded that such a person should   be stoned. What do you say?’ And this they said  testing Him that they might have something of   which to accuse Him.” Accuse Him to whom? What’s  the deal here? What’s the subject of the test?   Well during Roman occupation, the Romans gave much  self-rule to those nations that they conquered.   They let them practice their religion. They  let them have a strong measure of freedom,  

but they did not allow vassal nations  to exercise the death penalty in capital   cases. If someone was to be put to death for a  crime in a Roman province, it had to be through   the Roman judicial system. That’s why Jesus  was sentenced by Pilate and not by Caiaphas.   But you know that the people hate Roman  occupation, and they’re following after Jesus;   and the sly Pharisees are setting up Jesus,  putting Him in this test because if Jesus says,   “Stone the woman,” then they’re going to run right  to the Roman headquarters and say, “This preacher   out here is advocating that we exercise capital  punishment against somebody here and to do it   without going through the Roman system.” And so  they’d get Jesus in trouble with the Romans. But   if He says, “Don’t stone her,” then they can run  back to the Sanhedrin and say, “This Jesus really   is a heretic because He denies the law of Moses,  and Moses’ law requires that such be executed.” By the way, they say in here that such be  executed by stoning. Another little excursion  

here. You have to distinguish among three sins.  Fornication is unjustifiable sexual relationships   between unmarried people. Adultery, to the Jew,  was an involvement sexually between two people,   at least one of whom was married. Also,  under Jewish law, if a woman was engaged,   or if a man was engaged but not yet married,  and if either of them was unfaithful sexually   with another partner, that was also considered  adultery, even though they weren’t yet married,   and the specific mode of execution for the  despoiling of an engaged woman was stoning.   Regular adultery was death by execution, but it  didn’t necessarily prescribe stoning. They could   do it other ways. But stoning was particularly  required for a woman who was not yet married.

So anyway, this is the test, and they have  Jesus on the horns of a dilemma. If He says,   “Stone her,” He’s in trouble with the Romans.  If He says, “Don’t stone her,” He’s in trouble   with the Jewish headquarters. So no  matter how He answers the question,   He’s in serious trouble. And that’s exactly what  they were trying to do. So what does Jesus do?   Give a lecture on capital punishment? No,  listen to what He does. It’s incredible. “But Jesus stooped down and wrote on the  ground with His finger as though He didn’t   hear them.” Wow! If there’s any verse in all  of the Bible that has sparked speculation,   it’s this one; and the question – the  $64,000 question – is what did He write?   This is the only occasion that we ever have in  Scripture that Jesus ever wrote anything. Now   we know that He was literate, but He didn’t  write an autobiography – at least that we   know of – and He didn’t write any epistles or  any treatises in theology or religion. This   is the only occasion where you hear of Jesus  writing anything, and He’s writing like the   quarterback in the sandlot football game,  when the huddle is on everybody’s knees,   and the play’s drawn in the dirt. He’s kneeling  over, on the ground, these Pharisees and Scribes   are waiting for Him to answer this question, and  He kneels over and starts writing in the dirt.

Now again, we have to be careful  about speculation. Calvin said,   “When God closes His holy mouth, let us desist  from inquiry.” But sometimes the temptation is   just too great to not speculate, and scholars have  speculated through the ages on what was going on   here with this particular action by Jesus. One of  them goes back to an Old Testament text where God   says that for those who are disobedient to Him,  the handwriting of the law will be written in the   sand. And some say Jesus is symbolically reminding  these Pharisees that the finger of God is going   to be written in the sand against them one of  these days. And maybe that’s what was going on. Another view is that Jesus was simply doodling,   just to gather some time. He’s being  impaled on the horns of this dilemma,   they’re waiting for an answer, and he says,  “Wait a minute. I have to think about this,”   so He scribbles in the sand while He’s thinking  about His reply. That’s another speculation.

My favorite speculation is the one I’m  next-to-positive really happened because   it is linked with when Jesus says, “Let Him who  is without sin pick up the first stone,” and   then He goes back to write some more. Now in the  Roman law, before a judge would give His verdict,   He would write it down and then announce it.  But I don’t think Jesus is doing that either,   because this isn’t a Roman court. My guess is that  He gets down in the dirt, He looks at one of them,   and He writes, “embezzler,” let’s the guy see  what He’s writing. That guy clears throat and   slinks away. Or the next one He writes,  “murderer,” and the murderer leaves. Or,   perhaps, even more precise – notice He said,  “He who is without sin, cast the first stone,”   and the specific content of that phrase refers  to the Old Testament practice that if you accuse   somebody of a capital offense, you yourself  must be on hand to throw the stones. You have   to participate in the execution, and so  the sin that Jesus has in mind, perhaps,  

is the same sin for which they’re ready to  convict this woman. And it just could be that   He’s surrounded by a bunch of adulterers. And so  He looks at Sam, and He writes, “Judy.” He drops   his stone and walks away. He looks at Frank and  writes, “Sarah.” Woops! There goes his reputation. And I kind of think that this is the way it’s  going to be on the day of judgment, folks –   that none of us is going to be going out of our  way to go to the rock pile. And when Jesus says,   “Let him who is without sin cast  the first stone,” He is not by   that completely destroying the whole  Judicial system of the law of God.   What He is speaking to are people who  hypocritically are bloodthirsty in their   desire to shame and punish people who have fallen,  who have no concept of the grace of God. It is not   wrong to punish criminals for their crimes. The  Bible does not teach that it’s wrong to punish   criminals, but it is wrong to have a kangaroo  court, and it is wrong to drag this person  

and to add insult to her injury; and so Jesus  deals with the manifest hypocrisy of these who   are judging this woman. And one by one they walk  away, and the woman is left alone with the only   person present who meets the qualification that  Jesus had given for carrying out the execution.   Notice that Jesus doesn’t hedge between the  Jewish law and the Roman law. He sides with   Moses. He gives His verdict. She’s guilty. Stone  her. Then He appointed the executioners and found   the lacking. But again, the only one qualified to  do it, the only one who was without sin is Jesus.

And so after all the rest of the accusers  leave, and He’s left alone with the woman,   He said, “Woman, where are your  accusers? Has no one condemned you?”   Now the only words that are recorded for  us in this entire passage that come from   the lips of the woman is the simple reply  to Jesus’ question, when she says, “No one,   Lord.” Now the word there is “lord.” It’s curios.  It could mean that she’s simply saying, “No one,   sir,” because the lowest form of the use  of that word curios is the polite form of   address to a man. She may be just simply saying,  “No one’s here, sir.” Or, by the grace of God,   her eyes may have been opened to understand that  she was in the presence of her redeeming Lord,   and there’s more in that word that might  seem – might meet the eye at first.

But she says, “There’s no  one here to accuse me, Lord.”   You might expect Jesus to say, “Well  I’m still here.” He doesn’t do that.   Jesus said to her the sweetest words that any  human being could ever hear from His lips.   “Neither do I condemn you.” My friend Barney once  said, when we were speaking together in a prison,   he said, “If that doesn’t turn you on, you don’t  have any switches.” If you can’t relate to that,   then your heart has been hardened, because  beloved, that is how each one of us stands   in the presence of God, because we’re  naked and ashamed before Him. But Christ   has stood in our midst and has clothed  us with the cloak of His righteousness,   covered our nakedness, covered our shame,  and said to us, “Neither do I condemn you.”

And then what? Now that grace has  abounded let sin abound? No, no,   no. But He says to her, “Don’t do this  anymore. Be done with this kind of life.   Go now in peace. Go now in newness  of life. Go now in your forgiveness,   and sin no more.” He follows this with one  of His I AMs. “I am the light of the world,   and he who follows me shall not walk in  darkness but have the light of life.” The light has come into the world,  the light that comes not to expose   our sin but to deliver us from the  darkness that would destroy our lives,   the light that says, “Neither do I  condemn you. Go and sin no more.” Let’s pray. Father, how we thank  you for this story by which we see   so graphically and vividly  the tender mercy of Jesus,   without which none of us would stand.  We thank you for it in His name, amen.