27. Casting the First Stone (John 8:1-11)
Many critics do not regard these verses as
authentic, but despite all the official doubts there are voices to be heard in
their favor. Strong arguments have been advanced on both internal and external
grounds, which are summarized elsewhere (John Carter, The Gospel of John,
pp. 100,101; C.C. Walker, “The Woman Taken in Adultery”, The
Christadelphian, Vol. 70, No. 831 — Sept. 1933 — pp. 405,406).
The words of Jesus reported therein ring true and consistent both with the
immediate context and the more general teachings of his
ministry.
Jesus was teaching in the temple precincts one
morning when a band of scribes and Pharisees thrust themselves through the
crowd, dragging with them a terrified woman, whom they flung at the
Master’s feet. They reminded him of the law of Moses, requiring stoning
for the offence of adultery, and also that this woman was apprehended in the
very act. What does this new Rabbi have to say? Will he agree with Moses or, as
rumored by those who have heard his teaching, will he throw over the revered
traditions and laws of the fathers? It is Jesus, not the woman, who is on trial
this day; how will he respond?
The first reaction of Jesus was to stoop down and
write on the ground, apparently indifferent to their demands. But his crafty
enemies were not to be ignored or put off; they pressed him again and again for
an answer. But the answer they finally received came as a bombshell or, more
precisely, as a searchlight from the “Light of the World” (v. 12) to
reveal their innermost thoughts, their consciences stained indelibly with
sin.
“He that is without sin among you, let
him cast the first stone” (v. 7).
The burden of decision, with its consequent
dangers, which these men had sought to thrust upon Jesus, was now placed
squarely on their own shoulders. The law specified that the witnesses be the
first to lift up the hand in punishment of a convicted sinner. Not only was this
so but, by implication from the Law at least, such hands must be innocent of the
same offence. It is reported that the first-century Jews, even those most devout
for the Law, were notorious in their disregard for the sanctity of marriage, and
divorces were granted for the most trivial of reasons. The Mosaic law in this
regard had long fallen into disuse, and such punishments as they argued for here
were no longer meted out. In fact, they would have been prohibited by the Romans
at any rate.
Jesus put a sword with two edges in the hands of
the woman’s accusers; should they lift it up against the adulteress they
would also cut down themselves. That “first stone” is not in the
world yet, if Christ’s condition be required. Only one man could have cast
that stone, but he chose not to do so. The Light of the World had come,
and his light shone in the darkness. Assuredly that penetrating light would
reveal many works of darkness, no less the Pharisee’s subtlety and hatred
than the woman’s immorality. But Jesus had come to offer life; the
pronouncement of death for those who reject his offer was yet in the
future.
He stood up and searched the faces of these
rulers of Israel who had stooped so low. His eyes burned into them and they felt
the disapproval of this man’s perfect holiness. Then he bowed again to
write upon the ground. He had not accused them, but had left them to decide.
They watched him as he wrote, conscious that at any moment he could stand up
again to challenge any one of them, and they would have no defense. Silently,
each man in turn confessed his own guilt by departing, “beginning at the
eldest, even unto the last” (v. 9).
“That last phrase is an interesting
one....The older we get the more experienced we become, and the more conscious
we are of the scope and content of sin. Often when we read and hear of the sins
of others we are conscious that our guilt is as great as theirs. For us,
circumstance has not provided the occasion for the ‘very act’, or in
the case of some has even provided a cloak for sin. So, with the scribes and
Pharisees, it was the older and more experienced, the Gamaliels, who first
turned away, and it was the young Zealots, the Sauls amongst them, who finally
bowed their heads and left” (A. Ashton, “Neither Do I Condemn
Thee”, The Christadelphian, Vol. 105, No. 1248 — June 1968
— p. 247).
Now, finally, Jesus stood again. The crowd,
transfixed by the spectacle, remained awaiting an outcome. The poor bedraggled
woman, her shame revealed to all, was still there where her accusers had cast
her. But they were gone. Jesus now fixes his stare upon her. “Is there no
man here to condemn thee?” They had all faded away as mists at the rising
of the sun. “No man, Lord.” No witnesses remained to the crime, none
willing to cast “the first stone”. “Neither do I condemn thee;
go and sin no more” (v. 11).
The word for “condemn” here is
katakrino, which signifies a formal passing of judgment. It was at
this time the sole province of the Sanhedrin, supported and often restricted by
the Roman rulers, to pass such judgment. Jesus had recently spoken of the Father
committing all judgment to the Son (John 5:22), and it was so. The power was
there, both moral and physical, to punish sinners; but the authority had not yet
been assumed. For God sent not His Son into the world to condemn the world (easy
though it would have been!), but that the world through him might be
saved (John 3:17). This was the great message of light and comfort and hope; it
is the message we must share with one another and take to the world today.
Christ does not condone sin — that lesson is plain from the
incident too — but today, this age, is the “day of salvation”,
not the “day of condemnation”. Those who persist in sin, with
disregard to the holiness of Christ, will meet their fates soon enough without
the intervention of their own imperfect brethren.
“This incident has proved invaluable in
Christian history. It is a graphic exposition of the Master’s words on the
mount, ‘Judge not, that ye be not judged’ (Matt. 7:1-5). However
damning the evidence may be against our brother, if we pause and look into our
own hearts, we shall go quietly away and leave him with his Lord. There are
times when it becomes necessary to take action, but that action must not be
taken because we have condemned our brother. It will be taken in the painful
consciousness of our own unworthiness, and with a love which will plead
intercession before the Throne of Grace. We shall wait with eagerness for the
first signs of penitence so that we can joyfully restore the erring one to the
fellowship of the saints” (M. Purkis, A Life of Jesus, p.
235).
“The greatest abhorrence of sin is not
necessarily found in the one who is most severe on the sinner. Sinful men wanted
to stone the sinful woman. It was the perfect man who saved her. In these days
many of the brethren seem to think that if it is admitted that any members have
sinned, the only logical course is to withdraw from them, while anyone who has
reservations as to the correctness of such severity must be regarded as a
partaker of the evil deeds and should be treated in like manner. There is no
justification for such ideas in the Bible” (I. Collyer, An Appeal to
Christadelphians, p. 5).
An appealing final thought arises in relation to
this incident. The adversaries of Christ were insidious, and it is almost
certain that secret inquiries had been made into his early life and that the
peculiar circumstances of his begettal had been uncovered. This would naturally
suggest to the minds of his foes the possibility of illegitimacy. This
“secret”, as they saw it, might be exploited to discredit the
dangerous teachings of the man. It is possible, then, to see this whole incident
as contrived by the Lord’s enemies. The woman was caught in the very act,
but where was the man? Perhaps he was even one of the conspirators, who enticed
and compromised a betrothed woman (Deut. 22:23,24) only as a pretense for his
friends to confront Jesus.
So if Jesus had said, “Yes, let her be
stoned”, the retort would have immediately come back: “Then what
should be done with your mother?” — for Mary had been a
betrothed virgin at the time of his conception (Matt. 1:18,19).
Other such base insinuations, in this very
chapter, may be seen in the same light: “Where is thy father?” (John
8:19), and “WE be not born of fornication” [as some are!] (v.
41).
Let us leave this account then with this final
point for meditation. When we are hasty in seeking out “stones” to
cast at our brethren, let us remember that many men have been unjustly accused,
and that appearances are often deceiving! (Christ himself died as a
“criminal”!) How childishly wrong we can be in our blusterings
against the “sins” of others, when we cannot possibly know all the
attendant facts. Better to leave such matters to the One who is without sin, the
One who can and will judge perfectly when the time comes, and from whose eyes no
sin whether open or secret can be hid.