August 23, 2015   John 7:50 – 8:18

Download discussion questions: John 7_50 – 8_18 judging
Download essay: John 7_53 – 8_11 woman caught in adultery
Download essay:  John 1_34 – Textual Variants

Our discussion this week included a significant digression from the content of John’s Gospel.  What makes Scripture to be Scripture?  Does authorship matter?  Does textual evidence matter?  How do we decide (or do we)?

The question arises when we look at the familiar story of the woman caught in adultery and (in most modern translations) are met with a puzzling footnote, such as the New American Standard Version:  “Later mss add the story of the adulterous woman, numbering it as John 7:53-8:11.”  What difference does it make that the story is not found in early manuscripts (“mss”) of John’s writing.  If it was added several hundred years after John wrote, does that matter in our study of Scripture?  Is it Scripture?  Is it inspired and normative and authoritative?  (For additional background see the essay, “The Woman Caught in Adultery.”)

The questions led to considerable discussion among our group.

• Someone pointed out that this is a very familiar passage to non-Christians as well, and the phrase, “Let him who is without sin cast the first stone” is often used, even by people who may not know another word of the Bible.
• Everyone agreed that all Scripture is God-breathed and is important, but that begs the question: is a document added centuries later truly Scripture?
• Multiple people commented that the passage in question does not contain any controversial doctrinal matters, and that it shows a picture of Jesus consistent with our other understanding of Him and how He engaged people.
• One person noted that it “shows who my Jesus is, whether it was written by the Apostle John or by Joe Blow.”
• The subject of God’s sovereignty came up several times: God must have wanted it in the Bible because someone (perhaps a well-meaning scribe) added the passage to his copy of John, probably around the fifth century.

The consensus was clear – most of the group felt that the passage is inspired Scripture and really doesn’t require any special treatment.

The above-referenced two-page essay (“John 7_53 – 8_11 woman caught in adultery.”) summarizes opinions from several respected scholars.  The range of opinions varies from a text which is “divinely inspired and fully authoritative for life,” to a caution that the passage should be omitted from preaching and translations.  (See the essay for the citations of these and other viewpoints, as well as additional comments related to the group discussion.  The essay also includes my dissenting minority opinion that I did not want to debate in our limited time together as a group.  The second essay, “John 1_34 – Textual Variants,” may also be helpful in understanding the process of evaluating ancient manuscripts.)

As I expressed to the group, my heart would break if I said anything to undermine anyone’s confidence in Scripture.  At the same time, understanding the criteria that ensure the reliability of our Bibles is important.  I highly recommend a brief book by F.F. Bruce where he says, “The variant readings about which any doubt remains among textual critics of the New Testament affect no material question of historic fact or of Christian faith or practice.”[1]  We certainly can trust our Bibles.

We eventually did get around to discussing the content of the passage in question.  John’s narrative records the continuing debate over Jesus birthplace among the chief priests and Pharisees (John 7:52) and even the crowd in general (John 7:41).  One member of our discussion asked a simple question, “Why didn’t Jesus correct their misunderstanding?”  He had been raised and lived in Galilee, but He was indeed born in Bethlehem in fulfilment of the very prophesies they were looking for (John 7:42).  Why did He allow their confusion to continue?  There were several responses in our group.

Jesus was not trying to answer their hypothetical questions, to give them information apart from faith.  He was building relationships for faith that would lead to an eternal relationship with Him and with the Trinity, the “Eternal Community.”  Another participant reminded us of His words elsewhere in the Gospels when the disciples asked why He taught in parables.  His focus on “ears to hear” probably referred to those who came to Him with questions (and even with doubts) in search of a relationship with Him.  Some were just impressed by His wondrous signs (John 6:2; 7:31) or even free food (John 6:26).  Others came with questions and challenges to trick Him into an apparent violation of the Law (John 8:6, Matthew 19:3).  Jesus knew that no answer would satisfy these groups.  Any answer He gave to the “hypocrites” (as He called them in Matthew 22:18) would only lead to expectations for more signs, or demands for more food, or new accusations.  In those cases answers would not lead to relationship.  John had just recorded a powerful example where Jesus’ clear, direct teaching had the result that “many of His disciples withdrew and were not walking with Him anymore” (John 6:66).  The Twelve, desiring the relationship with Him regardless of the difficulty of the teaching.  Jesus knew that no amount of detailed explanation about His birthplace would satisfy the superficial seekers.  Perhaps their confusion was a better condition, since it kept at least some of them thinking and wondering about Him.  Jesus may have even encouraged their continuing questioning when He brought up the subject, “I know where I came from and where I am going, but you do not know where I come from or where I am going” (John 8:14).  Maybe statements like that prompted some to reconsider their premature conclusions about His Galilean roots.  Even when confronted by harsh accusations and insincere questions, Jesus continues to offer hints or suggestions to help them move toward the truth He offers and the relationship growing from that truth.

In our discussion specifically about the woman caught in adultery, the main focus was on Jesus’ response to a volatile situation.  The scribes and Pharisees brought the woman (not both participants in the alleged adultery, as required by the Law they claimed to be enforcing, Deuteronomy 22:22-30).  Their clear intention was to trap Jesus, to have “grounds for accusing Him” (John 8:6).  Note the irony – they were so scrupulous about having a valid case against Jesus that they ignored the Law about both parties in adultery.  Apparently the Law was important to them when it was convenient or expedient for their own agenda.

And their opinion of the Law itself is reflected in their own description:  “Moses commanded us…” (John 6:5).  Moses indeed wrote the Law, but not on his own.  Moses was communicating God’s standards.  Had the scribes and Pharisees become so wrapped up in keeping the Law, of following the rules (and enforcing them on others) that they had forgotten the true origin of the Law, that it was God’s Word and God’s authority.  Perhaps that distorted understanding of the source and intent of the Law twisted their application of the Law, just as it had done in the case of the man Jesus had healed earlier (John 5:9-10; cf. 7:23).  Manmade rules often leave no room for the mercy of God.

Picture yourself confronted by an angry mob carrying various sized rocks.  They are clearly trying to trap you.  One wrong word and the stones could start flying.  Or you could be misunderstood as contradicting the Law and the crowds turn on you.  What do you do? What do you say?  Jesus said nothing.  He did something very curious (to us today and perhaps equally curious to the restless mob).  He stooped down and used His finger to write in the dust.  He didn’t confront the mob about their hypocrisy.  He didn’t defend the woman or ask where the man was.  He didn’t try to rescue her from their grasp.  He didn’t try to respond to them with shouts of His own.  He wrote in the dust.

What?  What did He write?  That question has probably fueled speculation (with no real evidence) since the passage was added to John’s Gospel.  Maybe He was writing the Law about adultery from Deuteronomy.  Maybe He was writing the names (and sins?) of those in the accusing mob.  Maybe He was writing the name(s) of the men in the mob who had also had an inappropriate relationship with the woman.  One member of our group suggested He was just doodling to relieve the tension of the situation.  Whatever was written in the dust, after some period of time He stood and essentially gave them permission, with one famous prerequisite, “He who is without sin among you, let him be the first to throw a stone at her” (John 8:7).  Then once again He stooped down and wrote.  Both descriptions of His writing indicate that He probably spent some time in that activity – the Greek “imperfect” verb tense.  He was allowing the weight of His words to sink in.  He wasn’t continuing to stand in a confrontational posture, glaring at them, defying them.  He almost certainly wasn’t even making eye contact with them.  He was allowing their consciences (and we would assume, the Holy Spirit) to be working on their hearts while He continued to disturb the dust.

Can we learn to do that?  Can we learn to face opposition and threats (to ourselves or to others) without defensive and even aggressive responses?  Can we learn to risk dispelling anger and confrontation with quiet humility instead of feeling we have to match the other person’s adrenaline level with our own?  And there certainly is a risk involved for us.  What if our gentle and rational response is met with increased hostility?  What if as soon as Jesus stooped down the first time, before He spoke His famous challenge, just one person had hurled a stone at the woman, or at Jesus Himself?  Jesus was God Incarnate, so in some sense perhaps He knew the outcome, but He was equally human, “tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin” (Hebrews 4:15).  Would He have felt the human anxiety, even fear that any of us would certainly experience in that situation?  Would He have had a sense of taking a risk in the way He responded?  I believe the truth of the Incarnation would imply that He did.  And because He did, we can take risks as well.  We, too, can “draw near with confidence to the throne of grace, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need” (Hebrews 4:16 – the next verse).  We can take risks in unfamiliar or even threatening situations, not by angry confrontation but in quiet and gentle confidence, as when Jesus stooped down and wrote in the dust.

The discussion in our group turned to perhaps the most controversial and confrontational aspect in our current culture, the issue of same-sex relationships, and from the recent Supreme Court decision, “marriage.”  How do we respond to others when this issue comes up?  How do we reply to those who use the issue intentionally to challenge and provoke Christians, much like the scribes and Pharisees intentionally provoked the confrontation with Jesus?  How do we answer when the questioner (or challenger) is clearly not looking for truth or even a rational response, but only to “have grounds to accuse” as they did with Jesus?

One member of the group shared a clear work of the Holy Spirit in just such a conversation.  A friend living the homosexual lifestyle asked, “If I become a Christian, will I have to give this up?”  The person sharing in our group said that she responded with words that had to have been from God’s Spirit.  They were not a catch-phrase or canned response she had planned (or ever even thought of before):  “Anything that you love more than God is sin.”  Another person in our group noted that, like the passage in John 8, “That was such a Jesus answer.”  Neither Jesus nor our group member was confrontational.  Neither she nor Jesus compromised on the nature of sin.  But both answers turn the challenge back to questioner.  Both are thought-provoking and powerful responses.  Both answers avoid escalating conflict or hostility.  Both answers communicate grace and truth, each in full measure.

The homework assignment from this passage:  Think of ways to respond to questions or challenges about same-sex issues in ways that communicate grace and truth as Jesus modeled.  The danger in this assignment is to create a checklist of responses or a formula to fit every situation.  Don’t do that.  Only in moment-by-moment dependence on the Holy Spirit as we are in a conversation can we know what He wants us to say (or not to say).  But thinking about what a “Jesus answer” might look like (from John 8) or from the experience of our group member will help us give room for the Spirit to work.  As He softens our hearts we will be more attentive to listen when a difficult, even risky conversation happens.

[1] F. F. Bruce, The New Testament Documents:  Are they reliable? (Chicago:  Inter-Varsity Press, 1968), 19-20.