Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of John 8:2
And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them.
2. And early in the morning, &c.] Comp. Luk 21:37-38; ‘and in the day time He was teaching in the temple, and at night He went out and abode in the mount that is called the mount of Olives. And all the people came early in the morning to Him in the temple for to hear Him.’ The phrase for ‘all the people’ used by S. Luke is the phrase which occurs here: S. John never uses it. S. John uses the word for ‘people’ only twice; it occurs more than thirty times in S. Luke, and more than twenty times in the Acts. The word for ‘came early’ is a verb derived from the word for ‘early’ which occurs here: S. John uses neither.
sat down ] To teach with authority. Comp. Mat 5:1; Mat 23:2; Mar 9:35.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Joh 8:2
And early in the morning He came again unto the Temple
The Temple
We have in our version only one word, Temple, with which we render both and , but there is a very real distinction between the two, and one the marking of which would often add much to the clearness and precision of the sacred narrative.
(= templum) is the whole compass of the sacred enclosure, the , including the outer courts, the porches, porticoes, and other buildings subordinated to the Temple itself. But (= aedes), from , habito, as the proper habitation of God (Act 7:48; Act 17:24; 1Co 6:19): the (Mat 12:4; cf. Exo 23:19) is the Temple itself, that by especial right so called, being the heart and centre of the whole; the Holy, and the Holy of Holies, called often . (1Ma 1:37; 1Ma 3:45). This distinction, one that existed and was acknowledged in profane Greek, and with reference to heathen temples, quite as much as in sacred Greek, and with relation to the Temple of the true God (see Herodotus 1.181-3; Thucydides 5.18; Act 19:24-27) is, I believe, always assumed in all passages relating to the Temple at Jerusalem, alike by Josephus, by Philo, by the Septuagint translators, and in the New Testament The distinction may be brought to bear with advantage on several passages in the New Testament. When Zacharias entered into the Temple of the Lord to burn incense, the people who waited His return, and who are described as standing without (Luk 1:10) were in one sense in the Temple too–that is, in the , while he alone entered into the , the Temple in its more limited and auguster sense. We read continually of Christ teaching in the Temple (Mat 26:55; Luk 21:37; Joh 8:21), and perhaps are at a loss to understand how this could have been so, or how long conversations could there have been maintained, without interrupting the service of God. But this is ever the , the porches and porticoes of which were eminently adapted to such purposes, as they were intended far them. Into the the Lord never entered during His earthly course: nor, indeed, being made under the law, could He do so, that being reserved for the priests alone. It need hardly be said that the money changers, the buyers and sellers, with the sheep and oxen, whom the Lord drives out, He repels from the , and not from the . Irreverent as was their intrusion, they yet had not dared to establish themselves in the Temple properly so called. (Mat 21:12; Joh 2:14). On the other hand, when we read of another Zacharias slain between the Temple and the altar (Mat 23:35) we have only to remember that Temple is here, at once to get rid of a difficulty, which may perhaps have presented itself to many–this, namely, Was not the altar in the Temple? How, then, could any locality be described as between these two? In the , doubtless was the brazen altar to which allusion is here made, but not in the , in the court of the House of the Lord (cf. Josephus, Antiq. 8.4, 1), where the sacred historian (2Ch 24:21) lays the scene of this murder, but not in the House of the Lord, or , itself. Again, how vividly does it set forth to us the despair and defiance of Judas, that he presses even into the itself (Mat 27:5), into the adytum which was set apart for the priests alone, and there casts down before them the accursed price of blood. Those expositors who affirm that here stands for should adduce some other passage in which the one is put for the other. (Abp. Trench.)
And He sat down and taught
Christ as a religious Teacher
I. HE WAS DEVOUTLY STUDIOUS. It was from the solitudes of Olivet where He had spent the previous night that He goes into the Temple. To preach the gospel three things are essential, and these can come only by solitude.
1. Self-formed conviction of gospel truth. The gospel is the power of God unto salvation; but how is it to be wielded–by Bible circulation, recitation of its contents, or repeating the comments of others? All these are useful, but conviction is indispensable. Heaven has so honoured our nature that the gospel, to win its victories, must pass as living beliefs through the soul of the teacher. The men who teach it without such convictions–conventional preachers–can never enrich the world. They are echoes of old voices, mere channels through which old dogmas flow. But he who speaks what he believes and because he believes, the doctrine comes from him instinct and warm with life. His individuality is impressed upon it. The world never had it in that exact form before. Now, devout solitude is necessary to this. Alone with God you can search the gospel to its foundation, and feel the congruity of its doctrine with your reason, its claims with your conscience, its provisions with your wants.
2. Unconquerable love for gospel truth. There is an immense practical opposition to it. Mens pride, prejudice, pleasures, pursuits, and temporal interests are against it. It follows, therefore, that those who think more of the favour of society than of the claims of truth, will not deal with it honestly, earnestly, and therefore successfully. The man only who loves truth more than even life, can so use it really to benefit mankind. In devout solitude you can cultivate this invincible attachment to truth, and you may be made to feel with Paul, I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ,
3. A living expression of gospel truth. Our conduct must confirm and illumine the doctrines which our lips declare. For this there must be seasons of solitude. When Moses talked with God the skin of his face shone. But in devout seclusion our whole nature may become luminous. John the Baptist gained invincible energy in the wilderness; Paul prepared for apostleship in Arabia; and in Gethsemane Jesus was prepared for His work.
II. HE WAS SUBLIMELY COURAGEOUS. On the previous day His life had been threatened and His arrest attempted, yet with a noble daring He goes early in the morning to the same scene. Distinguish this spirit from what the world calls courage.
1. Brute courage is dead to the sacredness of life. Soldiers hold life cheaply, and their courage is an animal and mercenary thing. But Christ deeply felt and frequently taught the sanctity of life. He came not to destroy mens lives, etc. What shall it profit, etc.
2. Brute courage is indifferent to the grand mission of life. The man of brute valour is not inspired with the question, What is the grand object of my life? Am I here to work out the great designs of my Maker or to be a mere fighting machine? On the contrary, Christs regard for the grand mission of His life made Him courageous. He came to bear witness to the truth; and to fulfil this work He willingly risked His own mortal life.
3. Brute courage is always inspired by mere animal passion. It is when the blood is up the man is daring, the mere blood of the enraged tiger or the infuriated lion. When the blood cools down the mans courage, such as it is, collapses. Not so with the valour of Christ, which was that of deep conviction of duty. As Luther, Dr. DAubigne informs us, drew near the door which was about to admit him into the presence of his judges (the Diet of Worms), he met a valiant knight, the celebrated George of Freundsberg, who, four years later, at the head of his German lansquenets, bent the knee with his soldiers on the field of Pavia, and then, charging to the left of the French army, drove it into the Ticino, and in a great measure decided the captivity of the King of France. The old general, seeing Luther pass, tapped him on the shoulder, and shaking his head, blanched in many battles, said kindly, Poor monk, poor monk! thou art now going to make a nobler stand than I or any other captain have ever made in the bloodiest of our battles. But if thy cause is just, and thou art sure of it, go forward in Gods name and fear nothing. God will not forsake thee. A noble tribute of respect paid by the courage of the sword to the courage of the mind. Nothing is more necessary for a religious teacher than courage, for his mission is to strike hard against the prejudices, self interests, dishonesties, etc., of the masses. No man without valour can do the work of a religious teacher. The popular preacher must more or less be cowardly conciliatory. Dead fish swim with the stream; it requires living ones with much inner force to cutup against the current.
III. HE WAS SUBLIMELY EARNEST. Early in the morning He did not indulge Himself sleep–I must work, etc. Two things should make the preacher earnestly diligent.
1. The transcendent importance of His mission–to enlighten and regenerate is perishable spirits that are in a morally ruinous condition. What is involved in the loss of one soul?
2. The brevity of life. How short the time, even in the longest-lived for this greatest of human understandings.
IV. HE WAS BEAUTIFULLY NATURAL. He sat down, etc. There was nothing stiff or official. All was free, fresh, and elastic as nature.
1. He was natural in attitude. Modern rhetoric has rules to guide a public speaker as to his posture, etc. All such miserable directions are not only unlike Christ, but degrading to the moral nature of the speaker, and detrimental to his oratorio influence. Let a man be charged with great thoughts, and those thoughts will throw his frame into the most beseeming attitudes.
2. He was natural in expression. He attended to no classic rule of composition; the words and similes He employed were such as His thoughts ran into first, and such as His hearers could well understand. To many modern preachers composition is everything. What solemn trifling with gospel truth!
3. He was natural in tones. The tones of His voice, we may rest assured, rose and fell according to the thoughts that occupied His soul. The voice of the modern teacher is often hideously artificial. Just so far as a speaker goes away from his nature, either in language, attitude, or tone, he loses self-respect, inward vigour, and social force. (D. Thomas, D. D.)
We must do good against great opposition
That is a poor engine that can only drive water through pipes down hill. Those vast giants of iron at the Ridgway waterworks, which supply this city day and night, easily lifting a ton of water at every gush, so that all the many thirsty faucet mouths throughout our streets cannot exhaust their fulness; those are the engines that I admire. (H. W. Beecher.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
So at our Lords last passover Luke notes, Luk 21:38, that all the people came early in the morning to him in the temple, to hear him. Our Saviours early going into the temple to teach, and the peoples diligence in coming so early to him to hear, ought to check our slothfulness in sacred business. Multitudes of people came to him; for so the universal particle all must be expounded in a multitude of Scriptures.
He, after the manner of the Jewish teachers, sat down, and taught them. Of this custom of theirs, for their doctors, while they taught, to sit down, we have had occasion to speak before.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
And early in the morning he came again into the temple,…. Which shows his diligence, constancy, and assiduity, in his ministerial work, as well as his courage and intrepidity; being fearless of his enemies, though careful to give them no advantage against him, before his time:
and all the people came unto him; which also commends the industry and diligence of his hearers, who were forward to hear him, and were early at the temple for that purpose, and that in great numbers:
and he sat down and taught them; he sat, as his manner was;
[See comments on Mt 5:1]; and taught them as one having authority, and such doctrine, and in such a manner, as never man did; with all plainness, boldness, and freedom.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Early in the morning (). Genitive of time, meaning daybreak, old word, not in John, though in Luke 24:1; Acts 5:21. John uses (John 18:28; John 20:1; John 21:4).
He came again into the temple ( ). If the paragraph is genuine, the time is the next day after the eighth and last day of the feast. If not genuine, there is no way of telling the time of this apparently true incident.
And all the people came unto him ( ). Imperfect middle of picturing the enthusiasm of the whole () crowd now as opposed to the divisions in chapter 7.
Taught (). Imperfect active of . He took his seat (, ingressive active participle of ) as was customary for Jesus and began to teach (inchoative imperfect). So the picture.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
1) “And early in the morning,” (orthou de) “Then at dawn of day,” after a night of rest in the mount of Olives, eager to continue His work and finish His course.
2) “He came again into the temple,” (palin paregeneto eis to hieron) “Again he arrived(and went) into the temple courts,” where He had taught earlier that week, Joh 7:14-15; Joh 7:28-37. Here He was sure of an audience and braving all danger to His last teaching in His Father’s house, as He had done the Father’s Will on special occasions, since He was twelve years of age, Luk 2:45-49.
3) “And all the people came unto him; (kai pas ho laos ercheto pros auton) “And all the laity-people came to him,” of their own accord, will or choice, voluntarily, because they wanted to, to see Him, to hear Him teach, and perhaps to see Him perform miracles again, as in Joh 2:23; Joh 5:8-9; Joh 5:15.
4) “And he sat down and taught them.” (kai kathisas edidasken autous) “And sitting down there, he taught them,” in His and His Father’s house, for it really belonged to them, Joh 2:16-17; Many of these people had already believed on Him earlier in the week, when they heard Him teach, and beheld the unnumbered miracles that He did, Joh 7:28; Joh 7:31; Joh 20:30-31.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
(2) And early in the morning he came again into the temple.This agrees with His custom during the week preceding the Crucifixion. (Comp. Luk. 21:37-38.) The words, and He sat down and taught them, are not found in the Cambridge MS., which is the oldest authority for the section.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
82. THE WOMAN TAKEN IN ADULTERY, Joh 8:2-11 .
A majority of the best biblical scholars agree that this narrative of the adulteress, (including Joh 7:53,) though of apostolic antiquity, could scarce have been written by John. The external proofs are: 1. Its absence from a large share of the best manuscripts. 2. The absence of quotations of the passage in the earliest Christian writers. And, 3. The great variety of readings in the different copies of the passage. The internal proofs are: 1. Its unlikeness to the style of John, both in its general tenor and its particular terms. 2. The possibility of removing it from the text without producing any break. 3. Its discordance with the current of thought, so as to form an actual interruption. To the force of these arguments we are obliged to yield. In the entire context there is an open hostility between the Jews and Jesus; but in this passage there is on the contrary a state of pretended friendship and deference. They come with submissive air to receive from him, as authoritative judge, a legal decision, tempting him. This mode of tempting him is precisely of the same cast, and implies the same state of things, as we find in 115. In some manuscripts, indeed, the passage is found at the end of Luke 21. The most suitable place for it is, perhaps, among the similar attempts at tempting in Mar 12:13-35. There can be no reasonable doubt of its forming a true part of Gospel history. The only questions are as to its authorship and place.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
2. Early in the morning See note on Luk 10:38.
Sat down Quietly, and as an admitted teacher; unlike his position in the entire context.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘And early in the morning he came again into the Temple, and all the people came to him, and he sat down and taught them.’
Thus it is that early in morning He is again in the Temple ready to teach the people. So in spite of the constant danger of arrest, next morning He is seen as having gone to the Temple where He ‘sits down’ to teach the people who have gathered to Him. There are many who are still concerned to hear Him and He will not leave them as sheep without a shepherd. Sitting to teach in the Temple was commonplace for Rabbis, and their disciples would gather round to listen to their words, which were also open to any in the crowds who were interested. Anyone could ask questions (compare Luk 2:46).
In view of the previous chapter and the following reference to the light of the world (Joh 8:12) it may be that ‘early in the morning’ here is to be seen as significant. As a Galilean He has come to bring men from darkness into day in accordance with the words of Isaiah in Isa 9:1-2, where ‘Galilee of the nations’ is made glorious in the fact that ‘the people that walked in darkness have seen a great light’. Thus it may be being suggested that the early light was not for those who were of the Judean religious establishment, but were for the poor and the meek and the spiritual.
It is interesting to note that this passage in Isaiah does not appear to have occurred to any of the Pharisees in their religious deliberations. They were simply not interested in any promises connected with Galilee.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
The Woman Caught in Adultery Joh 8:2-11 tells us of the story of the woman caught in adultery. This event takes place the day after the Feast of Tabernacles. There in the Temple, the scribes and the Pharisees tempt Jesus to break the Law of Moses by presenting to Him a woman who was caught in adultery and should be stoned according to the Law of Moses.
Application – The religious Pharisees did not care about this poor woman. They wanted to make her a public, shameful display in order to trick Jesus Christ into violating the law of Moses. Religious people do not care about individual souls. They simply want to promote themselves. However, Jesus cares about souls. He loved this woman caught in adultery, and forgave her sins.
Textual Criticism Joh 7:53 to Joh 8:11 is found in numerous locations in ancient Greek manuscripts. For this reason, scholars debate as to its authenticity in the original text. It is obvious that the Greek vocabulary is more complex in this passage of Scripture. However, there are statements made within this controversial passage that are clearly connected to text outside this passage. For example, there are three references to Jesus teaching in the Temple in Joh 8:2; Joh 8:20; Joh 8:59.
Joh 8:2 And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them.
Joh 8:2
Joh 8:20, “These words spake Jesus in the treasury, as he taught in the temple: and no man laid hands on him; for his hour was not yet come.”
Joh 8:59, “Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by.”
Joh 8:5 Comments – Note what the Law says about this situation in Deu 22:22. The Law commanded that both the man and the woman be killed. These scribes and Pharisees knew this Law well. They disobeyed the Law by only bringing the woman, and not the man, to be stoned. Joh 8:6 says they were trying to tempt Jesus, to see if He consented to stoning her without stoning the man.
Joh 8:6 This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.
Joh 8:6
Joh 8:6 “But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not” – Comments What did Jesus write in the sand in Joh 8:6? Jesus could have written this passage of the Law in Deu 22:22. Their hearts were evil and they were disobeying the Law. Therefore, they themselves were with sin (Joh 8:7).
Deu 22:22, “If a man be found lying with a woman married to an husband, then they shall both of them die, both the man that lay with the woman, and the woman: so shalt thou put away evil from Israel.”
Sadhu Sundar Singh says that Jesus wrote the sins of each of her accusers in the sand with his finger.
“With my finger I wrote upon the ground the sinful state of each of those who, regardless of their inner vileness, brought the woman taken in adultery for condemnation, so that they left her one by one and went away abashed and ashamed. With My finger, too, I point out in secret to My servants their wounds of sin, and when they repent, with a touch of the same finger I heal them; and in the same way as a child grasps his father’s finger and by it help walks along with him, so I with My finger lead My children along the road from this world to their home of rest and everlasting peace (John xiv. 2, 3).” [205]
[205] Sadhu Sundar Singh, At the Master’s Feet, translated by Arthur Parker (London: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1922) [on-line], accessed 26 October 2008, available from http://www.ccel.org/ccel/singh/feet.html; Internet, “III Prayer,” section 3, part 6.
Joh 8:7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
Joh 8:7
The Pharisees were trying to get Jesus to teach other to break the Law. As Jesus gave the Holy Spirit a few minutes to give Him the words to say, so do we need to learn to speak slowly under false pretenses.
Jesus’ response was according to the Mosaic Law and according to the commandment of love.
Joh 8:8 “he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her” – Comments Jesus was the only one without sin, so He was the only one qualified to stone her; yet, He chose to extend God’s grace and forgiveness unto her. John opens his Gospel saying, “For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.” (Joh 1:17) On this occasion, Jesus respected the Law of Moses, but undergirded it with grace and truth in order to bring about the redemption that the Law was originally intended to produce in the lives of the Jews.
Joh 8:8 And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.
Joh 8:8
Joh 8:9 And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.
Joh 8:9
Joh 8:10 When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?
Joh 8:11 Joh 8:11
Joh 3:17, “For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.”
Rom 5:8, “But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.”
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
Jesus Testifies of His Deity: The Light of the World – In Joh 8:2-59 Jesus is in the Temple teaching the Word of God. The Feast of Tabernacles ended the day before and may people were still in Jerusalem. There in the Temple, the scribes and the Pharisees tempt Jesus to break the Law of Moses. Thus, Jesus declares Himself as the Light of the World (Joh 8:12), which, according to Joh 8:12, requires men to follow Him as the source of instruction and guidance. This testimony follows Jesus’ testimony of His deity by the doctrine that He teaches (Joh 7:1-36) and precedes the miracle of Jesus opening the eyes of the blind man (Joh 9:1-34), which both have relevance to light, symbolizing man’s need to walk daily in God’s Word and fellowship with Jesus Christ. However, this light is revealed to the inner man through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit (Joh 7:37 to Joh 8:1), for the natural man cannot understand the things of God since they are spiritually discerned (1Co 2:14).
Outline Here is a proposed outline:
1. The Woman Caught in Adultery Joh 8:2-11
2. Jesus Testifies to the Jewish Leaders Joh 8:12-59
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
2 And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them.
Ver. 2. And taught them ] See Trapp on “ Joh 8:1 “
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
early in the morning = at dawn.
into = unto, as in Joh 8:1.
temple. Greek. hieron. See note on Mat 23:16.
people. Greek. laos. In John’s Gospel only here, Joh 11:50; Joh 18:14. Not ochlos, or plethos.
unto. Greek. pros. App-104.
sat down . . . and = having sat down.
taught = was teaching.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Joh 8:2. , was coming) as being expected.-, He was teaching) On this account His interrupters were the more intrusive: Joh 8:3.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Joh 8:2
Joh 8:2
And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them.-Spending his nights at Olivet, he returned early in the morning to teach in the temple.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
early: Joh 4:34, Ecc 9:10, Jer 25:3, Jer 44:4, Luk 21:37
and he: Mat 5:1, Mat 5:2, Mat 26:55, Luk 4:20, Luk 5:3
Reciprocal: Jer 26:2 – Stand Jer 32:33 – rising Mar 11:11 – he went Mar 14:49 – was Luk 21:38 – General Joh 7:14 – the temple Joh 8:6 – But Joh 8:9 – alone Joh 18:20 – I spake Act 5:21 – entered Act 16:13 – and we
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
2
The people evidently understood where Jesus spent the nights, and that he would return in the morning. In the early morning the people were on hands to greet Jesus. He did not disappoint them, but sat down and taught them.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Joh 8:2. And at dawn he came again into the temple courts, and all the people came unto him, and he sat down and taught them. With the return of day Jesus resumed His teaching of the people; and they, on their part, seem to have been powerfully attracted by His words. According to the custom of the time, He sat with His hearers gathered round Him. The custom may be observed in Turkish mosques at the present day. The sitting of Jesus while teaching is not mentioned elsewhere in this Gospel. (Comp. for it, Mat 5:1; Mar 9:35)
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Section 1. (Joh 8:2-59.)
The Life the Light.
The first section, then, shows us sovereign grace in action, God Himself the only hiding-place of the convicted and condemned, and freedom therefore by the truth. Here where divine grace is so fully displayed, the history of the text is a lamentable illustration of how little that grace is realized by Christians themselves. We have but to take up indeed the writings of some of the earliest “fathers,” to discover how soon the glory of its light became dimmed in the professing Church, -how soon the Judaism which combatted the apostle Paul from the beginning had overgrown or displaced the gospel which he preached. We may wonder indeed that it could venture to mutilate Scripture itself in such a manner as the MSS. and versions show has been done in this case; but this is what Augustine, as is well known, in a day little later than the earliest copies, charges against “some of little, or rather enemies to the true faith.” We can, in fact, easily understand the motive which would lead to the omission of such a story as is here before us: who could imagine any bold enough to insert it where he did not find it? or the manufacture of so exquisite a piece of forgery as this would be? Indeed, few if any would venture to go quite so far as this. They speak of it rather as of some apostolic tradition, some fragment of true history, not perfectly preserved. They bow it out, in short, regretfully, but in no wise does this compensate for the greatness of the loss.
Of course, I am aware that there are difficulties urged, entirely apart from questions of the text. Thus Edersheim objects: “That a woman taken in the act of adultery should have been brought before Jesus (and apparently without the witnesses to her crime); that such an utterly un-Jewish, as well as illegal procedure should have been that of the Scribes and Pharisees, that such a breach of law, and what Judaism would regard as decency, should have been perpetrated to tempt Him; or that the Scribes should have been so ignorant as to substitute stoning for strangulation, as the punishment of adultery; lastly, that this scene should have been enacted in the temple, presents a veritable climax of impossibilities.”
But much of this seems to be misconception merely; the rest a strange pledging oneself to what would be impossible for Scribes and Pharisees to do, mad with disappointed hatred against Christ, and bent upon compassing His destruction. As to the penalty of adultery being strangulation, “Michaelis,” says Lange, “has justly denied the authority of the Talmud, and has asserted, on a comparison of Exo 31:14; Exo 35:2, with Num 15:32-35, that the formula ‘put to death’ generally means stoned. Besides strangulation is frequently used first, only as an alleviation of the prescribed penalty, as in the burning in the middle ages.”
As to bringing her for judgment to the Lord, there is no evidence of any formal trial instituted, such as would need the production of witnesses. The appeal is to a prophet who should know the mind of God rather than to a judge, who should decide as to the fact. The case was decided according to Moses, law; but were they to act as Moses commanded? Thus the illegality vanishes: they were not setting up a new court, even feignedly; but knowing the grace they cavilled at, they would make Him either act in opposition to this, or come out in opposition to the law itself.
As for their respect for decency or the temple, under the pressure of such an opportunity, they were the children of those who murdered Zacharias, perhaps on the very spot where the Lord was at this time: and it would be scarcely safe to theorize in regard to it.
The narrative is witness to itself in its inimitable beauty and simplicity, its union of holiness and grace. It is witness also in the place in which it stands, as the introduction to the chapter, the key to what follows in it. In all this part of John the doctrine develops out of a narrative, -some miracle or significant thing, the text (as we have called it) of the sermon following. Take the story of the woman away, you will not realize in the same way at all the meaning of what is left, a broken statue without a head. This one can hardly show aright except as we take up the chapter, and therefore we may go on to this at once.
1. The Lord returns from the mount of Olives to the temple, and the people flock around Him. His manifest victory over the rulers on the previous days has discouraged open attempts upon His Person; while all the more it has shown the necessity of some bold stratagem to make Him commit Himself in the eyes of the people as an offender against the law, for which they were zealots. It was just the time for such an effort as we find here, which if it were in some respects extreme, only made manifest the more the extremity to which they had been brought. As against the Friend of publicans and sinners also, their plot was well conceived. He had dared, as they murmured, to assume the prerogative of God in forgiving sins, and would evidently not be intimidated from the course He was pursuing by any fear of consequences. Yet He had not as yet ventured to pronounce the pardon of one openly condemned by Moses’ law. Here was a new case therefore for Him to decide, in which He might easily come into collision with it. Did He not go after that which was lost until He found it? They would bring one lost indeed to Him, and see if He would take the burden of such: “a woman taken in adultery, in the very act!” The law had decided what was to be done: would He venture to annul its sentence? But if not, His reception of sinners must receive some modification; if He did -as they surely rather hoped -His followers would have to make open choice between Him and Moses, and the crowd would certainly drop off from Him.
The temptation is obvious, and they had much reason to expect success. Had He not in His sermon on the mount contrasted His own sayings with those of the ancients? And perhaps they had already heard such a saying as that “the law and the prophets were until John.” Such things, doubtless exaggerated and multiplied by common rumor, would encourage them in their hope, as they came forward with their appeal to the Teacher for His judgment. Their surprise must have been great when, instead of answering them, “Jesus, stooping down, wrote with His finger on the ground.” The common version adds: “As though He heard them not;” and others have given a similar interpretation. But He could not have repeated such an action with such a meaning. On the contrary, though we have nothing of any words which might be written, it is plainly the sentence itself which they are to find in the ground. But they do not understand Him, and as they continue asking, He lifts Himself up at last, and faces them.
No: He does not reverse Moses’ sentence; let it be carried out: only let there be spotless hands to execute it. “Let him that is without sin among you cast the first stone at her.” The sentence of the law is right: yes! but on whom really is the sentence of the law? who shall escape it, if it be strictly applied? Manifestly, it is as a teacher, not a judge, that He is answering. They might say, Is law and order to come to a stand-still, because there are no spotless hands to execute it? Plainly not: nor, if the Lord were speaking as a judge, would it seem to have been in place to require any such thing. The judge in a given case has to do with the accused, and not with the executioner. But the Lord distinctly refuses to take such a place in Israel: “Man,” He says to one who would have put Him in it, “who made Me a judge or a divider over you?” But if, as here, He is appealed to as a teacher, He will answer as a teacher; and then very differently. In this character, it is with the appellants that He has first of all to do, and not directly with the accused; and this is accordingly His course at this time. They would exhibit Him as one in opposition to Moses; He makes them realize that He alone it is who understands Moses, and uses the law with them for the purpose for which it was given, making them feel the sharp edge of its universal condemnation, in order that they may realize their need of that grace at which they cavil, and which He had come to declare and minister to men. “He that was without sin” was indeed the man the law was seeking. For the lack of finding one, the death it threatened brooded over all; and none could see the face of God and live. Here was the first thing they needed to realize, in order to know the joy of that open face of God, which revealed in grace in the Person of the Son, brought life instead of death -eternal life.
“And again He stooped down, and wrote upon the ground.” There it was indeed that man’s sentence was written: that ground out of which man was taken, to which he must return, -dust to dust. Was that sentence upon the woman merely? Was it only upon the gross transgressor? There was the law’s settlement of the question: “the man that doeth them shall live in them”; “the soul* that sinneth it shall die.” Ah, yes: if the glory of God were in the face of Moses, they could not look upon it there: grace was the sinner’s only refuge; it was theirs.
{*That is, “the person”: a common use of the word soul in Scripture, and which is still preserved to our day. See for the argument as to the death-penalty of the law the notes on Exo 34:1-7.}
But they will not bow themselves to this. They stand in the light convicted, but only to flee out of it into the covering darkness. “And they, having heard that, went out one by one, beginning with the elder ones until the last; and Jesus was left alone, and the woman where she was in the midst.”
Thus the attack has failed; the would-be accusers are silenced; they leave behind them even the sinner herself: it has become impossible for them to touch her. On her part, she remains: the light which they have found so intolerable reveals no more as to her than she has known already. Guilty, lost, she was and is: the retreat of her accusers has not altered that; to what it has left her as yet she knows not. He has not reversed Moses’s law, whose words have yet inexplicably for the moment freed her. To herself He has not yet spoken. What will He say -what can He -with whom there is an authority that can make the leaders of the people bend and give way before it? Now she hears His voice again, and to herself, questioning, “Where are those thine accusers? has no one condemned thee?” And she says, “No one, Lord.” He says again: “Neither do I condemn thee: go thy way; henceforth sin no more.”
Now we cannot say what, or if any work, was wrought in the woman’s soul. She utters no word which would entitle us to say that there was faith in her to lay hold of the grace that there was in Him for the chief of sinners. On His part He says nothing as to forgiveness of sins or of salvation. He has not come to judge the world, but to save the world. If the judges in Israel throw up her case, therefore, she is free. It is a great deliverance for her, and may be the type and prelude of one far greater. But the question as to this that remains does not at all affect the truth as presented to us here of God revealed in grace in the Person of the Son, in whom every soul hopelessly condemned and guilty may find refuge. Grace and truth are in Christ Jesus, and the Life is the Light of men. Whether she availed herself of it or not, on His side the sanctuary was opened; and in a world where righteousness was not, -where those who would claim it had to retire abashed and confounded from the presence of Him who for those accepting condemnation was but a hiding-place. The sanctuary is opened then in sovereign grace, though the actual bringing to God, and the work that brings there, have not as yet found adequate expression. Holiness is found, however, in its true relation and due order: no condemnation leading on to no more sin. Grace and not law is the power for holiness.
2. The Lord returns to His speech with the multitude, interrupted by the appeal of the scribes and Pharisees, in words which have plain reference to what has just taken place. In that temple which, up to the moment of His final rejection, He was accustomed to speak of as His Father’s house, where the Glory of old had tabernacled, and in the treasury in which the gifts of the worshippers were deposited, He openly claims that glory as His own. “I am the Light of the world,” He says: “he that followeth Me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.” The Sun is indeed rising above the hills of Judea; and the nations far and wide are to enjoy its light. Not only so, but Israel herself is beginning to be seen as part of that world which has been lying in the darkness. Sin and unbelief have shut out from her the glory which was or should have been her own, and now are shutting out the fuller splendor into which that earlier light has broadened. Israel has not vindicated any peculiar claim to that for which she has as a nation had no eyes, no heart. Light is for those that have eyes, and for practical use. So now it is “he that followeth Me”: his alone is the blessing; he “shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.”
Christ is the Life which objectively is the Light of men. In His words and acts the manifestation of God, the world in its contradiction of Him was necessarily manifested also. He was the test and touchstone of all, and in His presence every thing stood out in its true character. But thus also Christ received in the heart, the life received, becomes subjectively the light for it. In His light it finds light, and thus in following Him it has the “light of life.”
A full, divine claim; and the Pharisees from their side naturally at once challenge it. “Thou bearest witness concerning Thyself,” they say: “Thy witness is not true.” But it is plain that that can rightly mean only “invalid.” Obviously, a man may speak truly concerning himself; but his testimony, if unsupported, is insufficient. The Lord tells them that He speaks from knowledge; whereas they have only ignorance to oppose to it. They ought to have been able to recognize His divine mission at least, and owning this, they would have recognized His ability to testify also. But with all their ignorance they judged after a fleshly manner: putting themselves self-confidently into the judge’s seat, for which they were incompetent; and ready to cut off, as in His case, those whom they ignorantly condemned. On His part, He was not taking the judge’s seat, as the case of the woman illustrated. (Had He come to judge, they would all have been cut off.) And yet He truly was the One competent to do so, always in the mind of the Father, and one with it.
And if He bore witness concerning Himself, He did not stand alone in this. His witness was valid, for the Father who sent Him was bearing witness also concerning Him. He speaks evidently of those works of power, of which elsewhere He says, “The Father that abideth in Me, He doeth the works”: a witness they could not deny, yet would not accept. And still they meet His claim with their mere ignorance: “Where is Thy Father?” The way to know His Father was to know Himself; and indeed they knew neither.
So He spoke in the treasury of the temple, and the hand of God was still upon them: they could do nothing. No one laid hand upon Him; for His hour to deliver Himself up, which waited His will, not theirs, was not yet come.
3. There is still no ear and no heart. He can only tell them, therefore, that He is going away -going to that place inaccessible to them, of which He had elsewhere spoken. They would seek Him, though not in true repentance, thus with no answer: they would die in their sin.
The men of Judea in sarcastic mockery say, He must mean to kill Himself: for the suicide’s place of punishment is the only place they can think of where they cannot find Him. He tells them that they are from beneath, He from above: there is in them no work of God; the world in opposition to God has made them what they are: they are of it, as He is not. Thus they will die in their sins, because they will not by faith in Him lay hold of that mercy which God is holding out to them.
“Who then is He?” they ask. He can only answer that He is just what He is saying to them. Of what use to go on telling them things for which they have no ear? And concerning themselves also He has much to say and to judge; but of what use? Still the True One has sent Him, and He has truly declared His words to the world. But they do not know of whom He is speaking.
Then He goes on to speak of His lifting up which they in their unbelief are going to accomplish. Then will come His manifestation and His vindication. And even now He who has sent Him is with Him, He cannot leave to Himself One who constantly does the things that please Him.
4. A wave of conviction passes over the multitude, and on hearing these words many, we are told, believed on Him; but the expression is no stronger than with regard to those who “believed on His Name” when at the feast-day they saw the miracles that He did; and of whom it is said that “Jesus did not commit Himself to them” (Joh 2:23-25). Of these also the Lord speaks doubtfully, and presently they resent His words and lapse into unbelief the fiercer for their disappointment in Him. Perhaps they had caught at the lifting up of which He had spoken, as exaltation by the people, followed as He had said it would be by the manifestation of Himself. The Lord’s words to them are certainly words well suited to turn them from any thought of mere political liberty to be gained, and to test them as to their need of a real salvation. Abiding in His word, He tells them, would prove them to be really His disciples. They would know the truth, and the truth would make them free. But at once they resist and resent this. They, the seed of Abraham, in bondage, needing to be made free? they cry: how can He speak of that? they were never in bondage to any! Spite of its notorious contradiction to the truth, their protest shows of what bondage they were thinking. But the Lord will not raise a question here, but goes deeper. “Verily, verily, I say unto you, Every one that practiseth sin is the bondman of sin;'” and this, though men often count it freedom, is the bitterest bondage. Hence, as this is the condition of man in general, the first thing that he needs is to be set free. There is no such thing in the spiritual realm as self-attained freedom: salvation from sin must be of God.
But what then must be the relationship to God of those who are the slaves of sin? Freemen towards God they cannot be, and yet, though rebels in heart and will, cannot escape from service. But unwilling service is again but bondage: the slaves of sin are therefore the slaves of God.
Man being what he is, what then can the law, the boast of the Jew, in fact, do for him? To the “soul that sinneth” it denounces death, and the shadow of this hangs over all. The covenant of Sinai is that “which gendereth to bondage, which is (typically) Hagar” (Gal 4:24); and freedom is unknown to it.
We see, therefore, to what the Lord is going on in the next words, seemingly disconnected as they are from what precedes them. “Now the bondman,” He says, “abideth not in the house for ever; but the son abideth ever.” The apostle’s illustration of Hagar and Ishmael cannot but come into remembrance; and the casting out of the bondwoman and her son was now soon to come to pass. Even this is but the dispensational shadow of the dread final rejection into outside darkness which the unsaved sinner, zealous law keeper as he may be, must surely experience.
“But the son abideth ever.” He is in the freedom begotten of relationship, and not under the bond man’s law which may cast him out. The principle is general, but there is no application of it with regard to Christians, as the Christian status of sonship was not yet known. In fact, only Christ Himself can make free, and this is the Lord’s application of it here: “If therefore the Son shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.” For the Son is no mere servant in the Father’s house, but one in word and purpose with the Father; and His work is that salvation-work which alone can make free. Thus again to abide in His word leads into that communion with the Father and the Son, in which alone is found the mastery of all restraints and difficulties whatever. Blessed then is freedom such as this! for ever blessed He who brings us into it.
The Lord goes on to speak of how little their Abrahamic lineage was manifested in their ways, -how little they could really claim him for their father. And when they dare to go further, and resting on their national privilege would assert God Himself to be their Father, He shows they have no spiritual character corresponding to this, and the devil was indeed their father: murderer as he was from the beginning, and not abiding in the truth, which just as such found no reception from them. Convict Him of sin they could not, and yet they would not hear what they could not confute.
5. They turn upon Him with a two-fold thrust in answer to His double charge. To the first, that they are no true children of Abraham, they retort that He is a Samaritan. To the second, that their father is the devil, that He is Himself possessed with a demon. The Lord quietly puts it away with the remark that they are dishonoring Him who seeks His Father’s glory, not His own. But His Father seeks and judges. Then closing His assurance, still held out to whosoever will, of freedom by the truth, He takes up and removes the shadow which the law left hanging over its disciples, with His strongest form of affirmation: “Verily, verily, I say unto you, If a man keep My word, he shall never behold death.”
They meet it only with a shout of derision, for they know no removal of death save one, and without exercise of conscience know not even the sting of it -what makes death death. Abraham is dead and the prophets: is He greater, this man who will not permit, to His very disciples, even a taste of death?
But He answers: If He is but a man glorifying Himself, that glory is empty enough. Nay, but it is His Father glorifies Him, -He whom without true knowledge they call their God. On His part, if He denied the knowledge that He had of Him, He would be as false as they were now in professing that they knew Him. He did know Him, and kept His word. Then He looks back over the expectant ages awaiting Him whom now, being come, they refused, and affirms, “Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day; and he saw it and was glad.” “Thou art not fifty years old,” they reply; “and hast Thou seen Abraham?” His answer is the full disclosure of His glory, the claim of the incommunicable title of Deity for Himself: “Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham came into being, I AM.”
It is Immanuel; but there is no knee bent to Him, no loving homage tendered. They take up stones to stone Him; and He, hiding Himself for the moment from their sacrilegious violence, passes out of the temple.
Fuente: Grant’s Numerical Bible Notes and Commentary
This verse also sounds similar to the Synoptic Gospels’ accounts of Jesus’ activities during His final few days before His crucifixion (cf. Luk 21:37-38). Yet we know that Jesus taught in the temple courtyard at other times as well (Joh 5:19-47; Joh 7:14-52).