| site search by freefind |
- Home
- Free Bible Study Lessons
- Free Bible Courses
- Life Line
- Master Life Lesson Eleven
[If you purchase anything on this site, I may make a commission. Disclosure Policy]
Master Life
Lesson Eleven
What Jesus And The Apostles Taught About The Law continued
Jesus And The Woman Taken In Adultery
This is an important incident in the life of Christ concerning the law. It would appear from a casual reading that Jesus subverted the Law when He released the woman from the just penalty of the Law. Let's take a deeper look at the story.
Please take a moment and read John 8:1-11. Go over it a few times to familiarize yourself with the story's context and details.
"This they said, testing Him, that they might have something of which to accuse Him." [John 8:6, NKJV]
To begin with, the Pharisees set this situation up to trick Jesus. They were not seriously looking for the Truth. It was deliberately designed to destroy the ministry of Jesus. As far as the Pharisees knew, there was no correct answer. If Jesus answered, "Yes, stone her," then He would have been unjust and unpopular for enforcing a law which had not been used for a long time. Also, it would not have been just to the woman to strictly enforce a Law in only one instance - the Law must apply to everyone. On the other hand, if He said, "No, don't stone her," He would be guilty of breaking God's Law and condoning people who break the Law. If that was the case, then He could no longer be God's Representative, for He would have joined the side of the lawbreakers.
Sitemap -
Newsletter -
Statement Of Faith -
Donate
Follow us on social media for daily Scripture comments and more at MeWe, Facebook or YouTube.
If Jesus ever broke the Law, subverted the Law, or in any way taught or condoned the breaking of the Law, then our salvation flies out the window. [How many people who try to do away with the Law in the New Testament realize that if they are right, there is no salvation either?] If Jesus did not perfectly keep and teach the keeping of the Law, then He was not perfect. If He were not perfect, He could not die for our sins. If He could not die for our sins, then we are hopelessly doomed to hell. This is not simply a minor technicality, but a foundational Truth. If the Law does not stand, then neither do we.
Let's look at the legal basis for the problem the Pharisees presented to Jesus. The Old Testament Law was blunt.
"The man who commits adultery with another man's wife, he who commits adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress, shall surely be put to death." [Lev. 20:10, NKJV]
Something is wrong here. John 8:3-4 says:
"...then the scribes and Pharisees brought to Him a woman caught in adultery...they said to Him, 'Teacher, this woman was caught in adultery, in the very act...'"
If logic serves me correctly, in order to be caught in the act of adultery, there must be two people present. The Law is not discriminatory. Both the guilty parties are to be put to death. Why did the Pharisees leave the man and only bring the woman? Again, this points to the fact that the Pharisees had no interest in justice or the Law, only in their attempt to destroy Jesus.
What was the response of Jesus?
"But Jesus stooped down and wrote on the ground with His finger, as though He did not hear." [John 8:6]
Jesus began by ignoring them. He was declining the role of judge and giving them an opportunity to withdraw before things came to a head. Jesus was not a legally appointed civil judge. As a teacher, He did not have the right to preside over a civil/criminal case. The Pharisees, by bringing Him a concrete case rather than a legal question, were trying to force Jesus into a position He was not in.
Now, it may be argued that, as God, Jesus is a Judge and has the right to judge. That is true, but the Pharisees did not recognize Him as God and at His First Coming, Jesus laid aside His divinity. He came to save the world, not to judge it.
"God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved." [John 3:17, NKJV]
We recognize that at the Second Coming, Jesus is returning as the Judge. However, in His earthly ministry, Jesus came to extend the loving forgiveness of God to those who would accept it.
The Pharisees were not going to accept this gracious offer to retreat. They thought they had Jesus in the ultimate no-win situation, and they fully intended to press it to a conclusion.
Jesus responded in vs. 7 with the famous sentence: "He that is without sin among you, let him throw the first stone." Instantly, all the anti-law Christians jump up and shout, "Hallelujah! We are not to judge each other. Jesus did away with the Law."
As I said above, if that is the case, then we are in deep trouble. If Jesus was saying that we have to be perfect before we can press charges against a law-breaker, then He was teaching total anarchy [this is where humanism's positive law will always lead, but not God's negative Law system]. We cannot judge or press charges against murderers, thieves, rapists, etc., if we must be totally perfect first. As you can see, this would lead to the total breakdown of society. No judgment and no Law can only lead to total wickedness in society.
Read the reply of Jesus once more. What Jesus was saying was just the opposite of what the anti-law people/humanists would have us believe. Look at the last phrase: "Let him throw the first stone." With that phrase, Jesus confirmed both the Law and the penalty. In effect, Jesus was saying, "Yes, the Law is correct, and this woman deserves death for its violation." According to Jesus, the Law and the penalty were just and to be enforced.
If what I have just said is true, why wasn't the penalty carried out? Jesus insisted that the whole Law be followed. Picking and choosing the Laws we want is not justice. We must apply the entire Law.
"The hands of the witnesses shall be the first against him to put him to death, and afterward the hands of all the people. So you shall put away the evil person from among you." [Deut. 17:7, NKJV]
The witnesses of a capital case, in this instance, the Pharisees, had to lead the people in the execution. Being a witness was a serious thing and carried grave responsibilities. If Jesus returned the obvious guilty verdict, then the Pharisees would be the first to throw the stones. I'm sure the Pharisees wouldn't have minded a bit.
With the first phrase [He that is without sin among you], Jesus, as the ultimate King and Law-giver, states a principle which is implied in the Old Testament but not explicitly taught. The sin Jesus referred to is NOT sin in general, but the SAME sin being judged. Jesus was saying that in order to be a witness [and therefore, in this case, an executioner] the person had to be innocent of the same sin as the accused. A murderer cannot press charges against a murderer. A thief cannot file a criminal case against another thief. An adulterer cannot demand that another adulterer be punished while escaping punishment himself. To condemn someone for a crime of which the accuser is himself guilty is the ultimate in hypocrisy.
Jesus demanded that the Pharisees, in order to condemn the woman, must themselves be innocent of adultery. Every single one of those Pharisees was guilty of the same sin as the woman - and now they knew Jesus knew it! They were not in a legal position to press charges unless they wanted the same charges pressed against them. With red faces [I'm sure;] they all left.
Now what was Jesus to do? He was still left with a guilty woman, but no one to press charges or lead in carrying out the sentence. Again, we find He returned to the Law.
"Whoever is worthy of death shall be put to death on the testimony of two or three witnesses, but he shall not be put to death on the testimony of one witness." [Deut. 17:6, NKJV]
In short, without the witnesses, there was no possible civil/criminal case. Case dismissed for lack of evidence. Without the presence of two or more innocent and reliable witnesses, no conviction [at least in a capital case] is possible.
Jesus ended His dealings with the woman with the famous words: "Go and sin no more." First, Jesus acknowledged her guilt [just because a civil/criminal conviction wasn't possible didn't mean she was innocent]. Then He extended the forgiveness of God to her, as He does to each of us who will accept it, and commanded her not to commit adultery anymore.
Far from this story being against the Law, it shows that Jesus kept, insisted on, and enforced the Law at every point. Jesus was a Champion of the Law, and all the Satanic tricks of the Pharisees could not move Him from that position.
Going The Extra Mile
"You have heard it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth'. But I tell you not to resist an evil person. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also. If anyone wants to sue you and take away your tunic, let him have your cloak also. And whoever compels you to go one mile, go with him two. Give to him who asks you, and from him who wants to borrow from you do not turn away." [Matt. 5:38-42, NKJV]
Did Jesus contradict the Law with this teaching in Matt. 5? After all, the Law did say:
"Your eyes shall not pity; but life shall be for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot." [Deut. 19:21, NKJV]
"Do not answer a fool according to folly, lest you also be like him. Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own eyes." [Pr. 26:4-5, NKJV]
What does Pr. 26 have to do with Matt. 5? Absolutely nothing except to illustrate an important point in Scripture interpretation. What are we supposed to do? Are we to answer the fool or not? How can the Scripture give contradictory instructions? Simple. Not every situation requires the same action. In some cases, we must answer the fool, or else he will deceive others and do much damage. In other cases, we only make ourselves appear foolish in answering him. We need the wisdom of God to know which principle applies in which situation.
Now, coming back to Matt. 5... We need to see the difference between when and to whom Jesus was speaking in the gospels and when and to whom He was speaking to and through Moses in the original Law. Moses was giving the principles of justice which must underscore Godly civil government. When people lose faith in the fairness of the earthly justice system [as is happening today], they begin to doubt whether God Himself is just.
Jesus did not set aside the Mosaic legal principle of "let the punishment fit the crime". His audience was not civil government leaders, nor were they people living under a Godly system of law and order. His listeners were an oppressed people living under Satanic Roman law. To resist an evil person would not only have been useless but would likely have brought greater problems.
If a Roman soldier forced you to carry his luggage for a mile [as they had the right to do] and you refused, all you were likely to get was a sword through the stomach. On the other hand, voluntarily offering to carry his bags an extra mile was an attempt to win his favour. It would certainly be a witness and perhaps get him thinking about this "new" God. In other cases, by taking this soft approach to win favour, a person might be brought into a place of influence within an ungodly system and slowly work to bring about God's ways in the situation.
The instructions of Jesus in Matt. 5 were on how to react when ungodly, oppressive men have the rule over us. It is not an excuse for us to allow wickedness to run rampant when we have the power to stop it. Jesus was making a specific statement under and for specific circumstances.
With this teaching, Jesus forbade all vigilante action. We are not to take private revenge. It must go through the proper courts or, if we cannot get Godly justice there, it must be left in the hands of God, and He will repay. Again, this is in perfect accord with the Law.
"You shall not take vengeance, nor bear any grudge against the children of your people, but you shall love your neighbour as yourself." [Lev. 19:18, NKJV
Now, for those who may still insist that the statement of Jesus [I tell you not to resist an evil person] must apply in every situation, please consider the following Scriptures:
"Resist the devil, and he will flee from you." [James 4:7, NKJV]
Do we resist evil or not? James commands us to resist the devil, and who is more evil than that? All wicked people are expressers of Satan, whether they realize it or not.
"But Elymas the sorcerer [for so his name is translated] withstood them, seeking to turn the proconsul away from the faith. Then Saul, who is also called Paul, filled with the Holy Spirit, looked intently at him and said, 'O full of all deceit and all fraud, you son of the devil, you enemy of all righteousness, will you not cease perverting the straight ways of the Lord? And now, indeed, the hand of the Lord is upon you, and you shall be blind, not seeing the sun for a time'. And immediately a dark mist fell on him, and he went around seeking someone to lead him by the hand. Then the proconsul believed, when he saw what had been done, being astonished at the teaching of the Lord." [Acts 13:8-12, NKJV]
Did Paul turn the other cheek to Elymas? Was Paul acting in the flesh when he resisted Elymas? No, he was filled with the Holy Spirit. There is a time and a place to turn the other cheek, and there is also a time and a place to take a stand and resist evil. We need the wisdom of God flowing through our lives, giving us the discernment to know when each principle is in operation.
Jesus In Support Of The Law
Everything we have studied so far shows that Jesus kept and upheld the Law. As we end this section, let's look at one more Scripture.
"Woe to you, Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you pay tithe of mint and anise and cumin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law; justice and mercy and faith. These you ought to have done, without leaving the others undone." [Matt. 23:23, NKJV]
Jesus criticized the Pharisees because they were only keeping part of the Law [the parts they liked!]. Jesus wanted them to keep the whole Law, including justice, mercy, and faith. Jesus will not allow us to pick and choose. We cannot say part of the Law is for Old Testament times and part is for New Testament times. Jesus requires that we submit to the entirety of His Law given through Moses [this is explained when we get to How The Law Applies Today].
Next lesson, we will look at What The Apostles Taught About The Law and then start on How The Law Applies Today.
Master Life Assignments
Note: These assignments are written from the assumption that the student has completed the Feed Yourself Course. Some of the assignments may not make sense if you have not taken that course.
1. Read through Paul's life in the Book of Acts and record how he reacted to opposition in various situations.
2. Memorize Matt. 23:23.
Return to the Lessons.
For more information about Glenn Davis, see our About Glenn page or visit Glenn Davis Books.
Follow us on social media for daily Scripture comments and more at MeWe, Facebook or YouTube.
Sitemap -
Newsletter -
Statement Of Faith -
Donate
Sign up for our free monthly newsletter or take one of our free Bible Study courses.
Please note: We no longer have the commenting feature [maybe again in the future]. Joshua Institute students who have questions or comments on their courses can use the contact button and mention the course name and lesson number in the email. Thank you. Glenn
Privacy - Disclosure
Copyright © 2004–