Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of John 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.
7. they continued asking ] They will not take the hint, whatever His gesture meant.
without sin ] The Greek word occurs nowhere else in N.T., but it is quite classical: it may mean either ‘free from the possibility of sin, impeccable;’ or ‘free from actual sin, sinless: ’ if the latter, it may mean either ‘free from sin in general, guiltless;’ or ‘free from a particular sin, not guilty.’ The context shews that the last is the meaning here, ‘free from the sin of impurity:’ comp. ‘ sin no more,’ Joh 8:11, and ‘sinner,’ Luk 7:37; Luk 7:39. The practical maxim involved in Christ’s words is that of Mat 7:1-5; Rom 14:4. As to its application to them comp. Mat 12:39; Mar 8:38. He is contending not against punishment being inflicted by human law, but against men taking the law into their own hands.
a stone ] Rather, the stone, according to the Received Text and some MSS.; i.e. the stone required for executing the sentence. Others take it of the first stone, which the witnesses were to throw (Deu 17:7). But Christ does not say ‘let him cast the first stone,’ but ‘let him be first of you to cast the stone.’
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
They continued asking him – They pressed the question upon him. They were determined to extort an answer from him, and showed a perseverance in evil which has been unhappily often imitated.
Is without sin – That is, without this particular sin; he who has not himself been guilty of this very crime – for in this place the connection evidently demands this meaning.
Let him first cast a stone at her – In the punishment by death, one of the witnesses threw the culprit from the scaffold, and the other threw the first stone, or rolled down a stone to crush him. See Deu 17:6-7. This was in order that the witness might feel his responsibility in giving evidence, as he was also to be the executioner. Jesus therefore put them to the test. Without pronouncing on her case, he directed them, if any of them were innocent, to perform the office of executioner. This was said, evidently, well knowing their guilt, and well knowing that no one would dare to do it.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 7. He that is without sin] , meaning the same kind of sin, adultery, fornication, c. Kypke has largely proved that the verb is used in this sense by the best Greek writers.
Let him first cast a stone at her.] Or, upon her, . The Jewish method of stoning, according to the rabbins, was as follows: The culprit, half naked, the hands tied behind the back, was placed on a scaffold, ten or twelve feet high the witnesses, who stood with her, pushed her off with great force: if she was killed by the fall there was nothing farther done; but, if she was not, one of the witnesses took up a very large stone, and dashed it upon her breast, which generally was the coup de grace, or finishing stroke. This mode of punishment seems referred to, Mt 21:44. However, this procedure does not appear to have been always attended to. See Le 24:16, and ver. 59 of this chapter. Joh 8:59
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
They will not let our Saviour alone, but importune him for an answer. He saith,
He that is without sin, let him first cast a stone at her. The law of God was, Deu 17:7, that in the execution of malefactors, The hands of the witnesses shall be first upon him to put him to death. In reason those who are zealous for the punishment of others, should neither be guilty of the same, nor of greater crimes, themselves. By this saying of our Saviour, we must not understand it the will of God, that those who are magistrates, and employed in executing the Lords vengeance on malefactors, should themselves be free from all guilt, for then no justice should be done. The vengeance is Gods, not theirs; it is the law of God which they execute. He only by this minds them of that compassion which ought to be found in persons prosecuting others justly, that they may execute judgment with compassion and tenderness, and such moderation as the law will allow them, considering that they are not free from guilt, but as obnoxious to the justice of God for other sins, as those poor creatures whom God hath suffered to fall into sins punishable by human judges.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
7. He that is without sinnotmeaning sinless altogether; nor yet, guiltless of a literal breach ofthe Seventh Commandment; but probably, he whose conscience acquitshim of any such sin.
cast a stone“thestone,” meaning the first one (De17:7).
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
So when they continued asking him,…. For observing that he put himself in such a posture, they concluded that they had puzzled and perplexed him, and that he knew not what to say; and therefore they were more urgent for a speedy answer, hoping they should get an advantage of him; and that they should be able to expose him, and that his confusion would appear to all the people:
he lift up himself and said unto them; having raised up himself, he looked wistly at them, and returned them this wise answer to, their confusion:
he that is without sin among you; meaning, not that was entirely free from sin, in heart, in lip, and life; for there is no such person; the most holy man in life is not, in such sense, free from sin; but that was without any notorious sin, or was not guilty of some scandalous sin, and particularly this of adultery; which was in this age a prevailing sin, and even among their doctors; hence our Lord calls that generation an adulterous one, Mt 12:39; and which was literally true of them; with this compare Ro 2:22. Adultery increased to such a degree in this age, that they were obliged to leave off the trial of suspected wives, because their husbands were generally guilty this way; and the waters would have no effect, if the husband was criminal also: so the Jews say q,
“when adulterers increased, the bitter waters ceased; and Rabban Jochanan ben Zaccai (who was now living) caused them to cease.”
In vindication of which, he cited the passage in Ho 4:14; and this agrees with their own account of the times of the Messiah, and the signs thereof, among which stands this r;
“in the age in which the son of David comes, the house of assembly (the gloss interprets it the place where the disciples of the wise men meet to learn the law) shall become, , “a brothel house”.”
And that this sin so greatly prevailed, our Lord well knew; and perhaps none of those Scribes and Pharisees were free from it, in one shape or another; and therefore bids him that was,
let him first cast a stone at her; alluding to the law in De 17:7, which required the hands of the witnesses to be upon a person first, to put him to death; and as Dr. Lightfoot thinks, referring to their own sense and opinion, in trying a wife suspected of adultery; that if the husband was guilty the same way, the waters would have no effect: by this answer of our Lord, he at once wrought himself out of the dilemma, they thought to distress him with; for though he passed no sentence upon the woman, and so took not upon him the judiciary power, with which they could accuse him to the Roman governor, yet he manifestly appeared to agree with Moses, that such an one deserved to be stoned; wherefore they could not charge him with being contrary to Moses; and by putting him that was without sin, to cast the first stone at her, he showed himself merciful to the woman, and to them, to be the searcher of hearts.
q Misn. Sota, c. 9. sect. 9. r Misn. ib c. 9. sect. 15. T. Bab. Sanhedrin, fol. 97. 1.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
When they continued asking ( ). Imperfect active indicative of (waiting in addition or still, , old verb) with supplementary active participle of , to question. See same construction in Ac 12:16 The verb does not occur in John. They saw that Jesus seemed embarrassed, but did not know that it was as much because of “the brazen hardness of the prosecutors” as because of the shame of the deed.
He lifted himself up (). First aorist active indicative of , the opposite of , to bend down (verse 8) or of (verse 6).
He that is without sin ( ). Verbal adjective ( privative and from ), old word, either one who has not sinned as here and De 29:19 or one who cannot sin, not in the N.T.
Among you (). Objective genitive.
First cast ( ). The nominative means first before others, be the first to cast, not cast before he does something else. See 20:4. The verb is second aorist imperative of , old verb to fling or cast. Jesus thus picks out the executioner in the case.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
1) “So when they continued asking him,” (hos de epemenon erontes auton) “Then as they remained (went on) questioning him,” repeatedly about the charges, and what He would say they should do, to entrap Him.
2) “He lifted up himself and said unto them,” (anekupsen kai eipen autois) “He stood upright (erect) and said directly to them,” knowing the wicked motive and intents of their hearts, Jer 17:9; Joh 2:24-25. He lifted the issue from the legal to the moral sphere of judgement.
3) “He that is without sin among you,” (ho anamartetos humon) “The one of you all who is sinless,” implying with regards to the manner in which you have seized and brought this woman before me, without the other party of adultery, as per your own laws, procedure of such judgement, Lev 20:10; Rom 3:23; 1Ki 8:46.
4) “Let him first cast a stone at her.” (protos ep’ auten baleto lithon) “Let him first cast a stone upon her,” according to Moses’ law, Deu 17:7; Rom 2:1; Rom 2:22. There were apparently “reversible errors” in the matter of their seizure of, and accusations against the woman, while they covered up part of the testimony involved, knowingly, Joh 1:1; Joh 1:5. Jesus challenged those who were normally competent before the law to proceed to throw the first stone. The hypocrisy of their whole plot was mirrored before them by the challenge of Jesus.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
7. He who is without sin among you. He said this according to the custom of the Law; for God commanded that the witnesses should, with their own hands, put malefactors to death, according to the sentence which had been pronounced on them; that greater caution might be used in bearing testimony, (Deu 17:7.) There are many who proceed rashly to overwhelm their brother by perjury, because they do not think that they inflict a deadly wound by their tongue. And this very argument, had weight with those slanderers, desperate as they were; for no sooner do they obtain a sight of it, than they lay aside those fierce passions with which they were swelled when they came. Yet there is this difference between the injunction of the Law and the words of Christ, that in the Law God merely enjoined that they should not condemn a man with the tongue, unless they were permitted to put him to death with their own hands; but here Christ demands from the witnesses perfect innocence, so that no man ought to accuse another of crime, unless he be pure, and free from every fault. Now what he said, at that time, to a few persons, we ought to view as spoken to all, that whoever accuses another, ought to impose on himself a law of innocence; otherwise, we do not pursue wicked actions, but rather are hostile to the persons of men.
In this way, however, Christ appears to take out of the world all judicial decisions, so that no man shall dare to say that he has a right to punish crimes. For shall a single judge be found, who is not conscious of having something that is wrong? Shall a single witness be produced who is not chargeable with some fault? He appears, therefore, to forbid all witnesses to give public testimony, and all judges to occupy the judgment-seat. I reply: this is not an absolute and unlimited prohibition, by which Christ forbids sinners to do their duty in correcting the sins of others; but by this word he only reproves hypocrites, who mildly flatter themselves and their vices, but are excessively severe, and even act the part of felons, in censuring others. No man, therefore, shall be prevented by his own sins from correcting the sins of others, and even from punishing them, when it may be found necessary, provided that both in himself and in others he hate what ought to be condemned; and in addition to all this, every man ought to begin by interrogating his own conscience, and by acting both as witness and judge against himself, before he come to others. In this manner shall we, without hating men, make war with sins.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(7) So when they continued asking him.He would have avoided their question, and continued, as is here implied, for some time in the action of writing; but they will now interrupt that action. It seems to them that He cannot avoid the snare in which they have placed Him, and that He is seeking the only escape in silence. But there is an answer of which they think not, and this He stands up to give.
He that is without sin among you.The word rendered without sin is frequent in the classical writers, but is found in this place only in the New Testament. It takes here a special meaning from the context, and is to be understood of the class of sins of which her sin was an instance. (Comp. the word sinner as used in Luk. 7:37.) Of the immorality among the Jewish rulers, which gives force to these words, evidence is not wanting. Still the wider meaning is probably not excluded. They who ask this question about the Seventh Commandment were themselves breaking the Sixth and the Ninth. It is to be noted, in the application of this answer, that our Lord does not lay down sinlessness as the necessary condition of fitness for taking part in the punishment of guilt. This would be to nullify law, for there could be then no human executive power. He is not speaking in a case brought before the appointed tribunal, but in a case where men assume to themselves the position of judges of anothers guilt. In the judge, while he wears the robe of justice, the individual man ceases to exist, and he becomes the representative of God; but these can now speak only as men, and condemn her only by the contrast of a higher purity. (Comp. Notes on Joh. 10:34 et seq.)
Let him first cast a stone at her.The Received text and some MSS. (not including the Cambridge MS.) read the stone, the stone referred to in Joh. 8:5. Let him first means let him first of you; not let him cast the first stone. This was the duty of the witnesses. (See marginal reference.) We must not take the words to express permission only; it is an imperative, expressing command.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
7. Continued asking They do not easily take a hint that their room is better than their company. They do, at this moment, doubtless understand that he intimates his rejection of all prerogative in the case. But they mean that no amount of finger-writing shall defeat their purpose.
Said unto them Thus doth Judge Messiah decide: The accused is beyond all question worthy of death. Let, then, the low standard of modern degeneracy be at once abolished, and let the pure ideal of Moses’s law be restored in its severest purity. As soon, therefore, as a court, witnesses, and executioners of the true Mosaic standard are furnished, let them execute the absoluteness of the Mosaic sentence by casting the first stone!
Without sin That is, without a sin of such enormity as would render him liable to stand in the woman’s place if Mosaic or Messianic law should be applied. No man who cannot stand this test has a right to require the old ideal to be revived.
First cast a stone Each man is now himself put to a still more trying test than they had applied to Jesus. All the responsibility is rolled back upon themselves. Some one must lead; and he, unless purer than the woman, slays her without authority, and is so a murderer. All can readily follow if some one will lead; but which will single himself out for the deed? The retort is complete. They would impose on him the hazard of pronouncing sentence of capital punishment; and he, without incurring that, flings upon them the hazard of inflicting it. And yet they are unable to pretend that he has declined the Messianic office, or lowered the Mosaic law. Indeed, they are placed in a predicament of shame likely to prevent all desire on their part to allude to the matter.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘But when they continued asking him he lifted himself up and said to them, “He who is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her”.’
His next action is specific and underlines the words that He speaks. ‘He lifted Himself up’. He straightens up and looks round on them. We can almost see the sad yet compassionate, look in His eye as He passes His verdict, so unexpected to those who are seeking to trap Him and are awaiting their moment of triumph. He agrees that the one among them who has never broken the Law shall be permitted to carry out the sentence. If they are without sin as He is, then they have a right to do as they suggest.
To their credit Pharisees did acknowledge that they had failed to keep God’s Law. They even believed that the sinfulness of Israel and their own sinfulness was why Israel was suffering and they believed, and taught, that if only the Law could be kept fully God would bless Israel. Thus they had to be wary. To pick up a stone would have been to deny their own teaching. They were caught in their own trap.
Furthermore there may be in Jesus’ reply the suggestion, which He expected them to be aware of, that He was aware that some of the Pharisees themselves had dubious reputations. This may help to explain why the eldest left first. If there were one or two in that situation the remainder could hardly claim innocence as a group. They were condemned by the company they were keeping.
Had the questioners been sincere and genuine in their question, they would have received a different response, but Jesus was well aware that it was not their sense of purity but their hatred of Himself that motivated their action. He thus turns the tables on them by His reply, for none of them would dare to suggest to the crowds, or to each other, that they were without sin.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
The Savior’s solution:
v. 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.
v. 8. And again He stooped down, and wrote on the ground.
v. 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.
v. 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?
v. 11. She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee; go, and sin no more. The fact that the Lord so pointedly ignored their question nettled the scribes and Pharisees. They persisted in their questioning; their importunity bordered on impudence. And so the Lord finally straightened up and put a question to them, in the form of a permission to carry out their aim with respect to the accused woman. The sinless one of them should cast the first stone upon the woman. Christ did not. shield, did not excuse the sinner; He did not utter one word in extenuation of her guilt. But His words were a most emphatic and cutting reproof for the self-sufficient Pharisees that were often guilty, in secret, of all the sins in the Decalogue. Having made this statement, the Lord once more bent down and wrote on the ground. Whether He wrote actual words and connected sentences or merely traced figures in the sand, is an idle speculation. But His manner conveyed the reproof more loudly than if He had shouted it, condemning them and their self-righteous sanctimoniousness. And the effect was all that could be desired. For once, under the prodding of Christ’s words, the consciences of the scribes and Pharisees became active. Undoubtedly the dignity and majesty, the solemn, searching earnestness of the Lord did much to add to the weight of His rebuke. And so, one by one, they began to file out of the hall, the older ones leading, and the others following in due course. They might have brazened the matter out before others, before mere men, but they made a miserable failure of it before the majesty of Jesus. “This, then, is the difference between the kingdom of Christ and the kingdom of the world, that Christ makes all men sinners. But He does not let that be the end, but it follows that He absolves her. All the accusers having left, and the audience and the disciples having removed to a respectful distance, there was only Jesus and the woman left in the area, in the midst of the hall where this incident took place. And Jesus now purposely permitted the silence to continue, in order to prove effective. For He was most truly angry and provoked at the sin, but His Savior’s heart was overflowing with mercy and love for the sinner. But at last Jesus straightened up once more and addressed Himself to the woman, who was now standing there in the abject misery and shame of her repentance. He asked her: Where are they? Has no man condemned thee? And when she answered: None, Lord, thus voicing her humble pleading for mercy and her belief in Him as the Savior of sinners, He spoke the words of absolution. Neither would He condemn her, although He, the Sinless One, might well have done so; not the death, but the life of sinners, was the object of Christ’s work. But He adds an emphatic warning that she should go, and sin no more. He that sins after receiving the grace of the Savior, he that willfully and deliberately persists in spurning the merciful love of the Redeemer of which He once became the partaker, has only himself to blame, if the time of grace is brought to a sudden close and his unbelief is punished in accordance with the magnitude of its guilt. Note: This story teaches, in a most effective manner, the necessity of practicing merciful charity toward the fallen sinner and to win him back, if possible, to the way of righteousness. The uncharitable attitude which is often taken, by so-called Christians, toward those that have fallen, has, times without number, resulted in the final hardening of the sinner’s heart, while the willingness to help in a spirit of Christlike forgiveness has resulted in making anew person. “Therefore only those sinners belong into the kingdom of Christ that acknowledge and feel their sins, and then eagerly catch at the word of Christ which He here speaks and says: I do not condemn thee; they are the kingdom of Christ. He does not permit the saints to enter, He blows them all out, Be thrusts everything out of the Church that wants to be holy in itself. But if sinners enter, they do not remain sinners, He places the mantle (of His righteousness) over them and says: wherever thou hast sinned, I forgive thee thy sin, and cover it over.”
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
Joh 8:7. He that is without sin among you, &c. Alluding to the law, Deu 17:7 which ordered that the hands of the witnesses, by whose testimony an idolater was convicted, should be first upon him, and afterwards the hands of all the people. We learn from the Mischna, that the first stone, which was usually large and fatal, was always thrown by the witness who had been instrumental to the conviction of a person. Itis evident that the accusers shewed great partiality, from their apprehending the woman only, and not the man also, when the law condemned both; and they must have favoured his escape, as it is said they were both taken in the fact. It is plain, however, that our Lord’s certain knowledge of what the effect would be, at once vindicated the wisdom of his putting the matter upon this issue, and freed him from the snare which was laid for him.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Joh 8:7 . ] faultless , here only in the N. T., very often in the Classics. Whether it means freedom from the possibility of fault (of error or sin), as in Plato, Pol . I. p. 339 B, or freedom from actual sin (comp. , Herod. v. 39), whether, again, it is to be understood generally ( 2Ma 8:4 ), or with reference to any definite category or species of ( 2Ma 12:42 ; Deu 29:19 ), is a matter which can be decided by the context alone. Here it must signify actual freedom from the sin, not indeed of adultery specially, for Jesus could not presuppose this of the hierarchy as a whole, even with all its corruption of morals, but probably of unchastity , simply because a woman who was a sinner of this category was here in question, and stood before the eyes of them all as the living opposite of . Comp. , Luk 7:37 ; , Jacobs, ad Anthol . x. p. 111; in chap. Joh 5:14 , also, a special kind of sinning is intended by ; and the same command, in Joh 8:11 , addressed to the adulteress , authenticates the sense in which is used. The men tempting Him knew how to avoid, in outward appearance rather than in reality, the unchastity which they condemned. Taking the words to mean freedom from sin generally (Baur, who draws from the passage an erroneous doctrinal meaning, Luthardt, Ewald, Hengstenberg, Godet, following early expositors), we make Jesus propose an impracticable condition in the given case, quite unfitted to disarm His opponents as convicted by their own consciences; for it would have been a purelyideal condition, a standard impossible to man. If we take , however, in the concrete sense above explained, the condition named becomes quite appropriate to baffle the purpose of the tempting questioners; for the prescription of the Mosaic law is, on the one hand, fully recognised; [7] while, on the other, its fulfilment is made dependent on a condition which would effectually banish from the mind of His questioners, into whose consciences Jesus was looking, all thought of making His answer a ground of accusation to the authorities.
Observe, further, how the general moral maxim to be deduced from the text condemns generally in the Christian community, viewed as it ought to exist conformably to its ideal, the personal condemnation of the sins of others (comp. Mat 7:1 ; Gal 6:5 ), and puts in its place brotherly admonition, conciliation, forgiveness in a word, love, as the of the law.
] the stone which He would cast at her in obedience to the law.
] upon her . See Bernhardy, p. 249; Ellendt, Lex Soph . i. p. 467.
] not mere permission, but command , and therefore all the more telling. The place of stoning must be conceived as lying outside the city (Lev 24:14 ; Act 7:56 ). We must further observe that Jesus does not say the first stone , but let the first (i.e. of you , ) cast the stone , which does not exclude that casting of the first, which was obligatory on the witnesses (Deu 17:7 ; Act 7:58 ).
[7] The section cannot therefore be used, as Mittermayer uses it ( d. Todesstr. 1862), as a testimony of Jesus against capital punishment.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
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.
Ver. 7. He that is without sin among you ] Not that is impeccable, and not subject to sin (as the Greek, , may here seem to sound), but that allows not himself, wallows not in some gross sin, yea, perhaps in this very sin Clodius aecusat moechum. (Juvenal.) Thus our Saviour wrings those supercilious and censorious hypocrites, who hated virum, non vitium; as it is said of Crassus the Roman, that he was very severe against covetousness in others, when there was not a more covetous person than himself. Carere debet omni vitio qui in alterum paratus eat dicere, said a heathen. a He had need be unblamable that blameth another. And therefore the apostle, after that he had said, “Have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but reprove them rather;” he soon after addeth, “walk circumspectly, not as fools,” &c., Eph 5:11 ; Eph 5:15 .
a Anabaptiatae scripserunt adulteria non esse punienda per homines, &c. Joh.. Manl.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
7. ] . is common in the classics: see instances in Lcke. It is not here used in the general sense, ‘ without sin ’ (E. V.), nor in the strictest, ‘ free from the crime of adultery ’ (it can hardly be that any of the Pharisees should have held themselves sinless , or that all should have been implicated in adultery ): but as , Luk 7:37 , of the sin of uncleanness generally. Stier, who contends strongly for the genuineness of this narrative in this place , finds in Joh 8:46 an allusion to this saying. I cannot say that his attempts to establish a connexion with the subsequent discourse are to me at all satisfactory: I am much more inclined to think with Luthardt (i. 16), that the whole arrangement and plan of our Gospel is broken by the insertion of this passage. The Lord Jesus was not sent to be a ruler and a judge in this or that particular case of crime, see Luk 12:14 ; but the Ruler and Judge of all: and His answer expresses this, by convicting them all of sin before Him. (see digest), if genuine, refers to the first stone, which by Deu 17:7 the witnesses were to cast.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Joh 8:7 . The scribes, however, did not accept the silence of Jesus as an answer, but “went on asking Him”. For this use of with a participle cf. Act 12:16 , ; and see Buttmann’s N.T. Gram. , 257, 14. And at length Jesus lifting His head, straightening Himself, said to them: , “let the faultless one among you first cast the stone at her”. only here in N.T. In Sept [62] Deu 29:19 , . It can scarcely have been used on this occasion generally of all sin, but with reference to the sin regarding which there was present question; or at any rate to sins of the same kind, sins of unchastity. They are summoned to judge themselves rather than the woman.
[62] Septuagint.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
asking. App-134.,
lifted up. Greek. anakupto. Only here, Joh 8:10. Luk 13:11; Luk 21:28.
without sin = sinless. Greek. anamartetos. Compare App-128. Occ, nowhere else in the N.T.
a stone = the stone, i.e. the heavy stone for execution. Compare Joh 8:69.
at = upon. Greek. epi. App-104.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
7.] . is common in the classics: see instances in Lcke. It is not here used in the general sense, without sin (E. V.), nor in the strictest, free from the crime of adultery (it can hardly be that any of the Pharisees should have held themselves sinless,-or that all should have been implicated in adultery):-but-as , Luk 7:37,-of the sin of uncleanness generally. Stier, who contends strongly for the genuineness of this narrative in this place, finds in Joh 8:46 an allusion to this saying. I cannot say that his attempts to establish a connexion with the subsequent discourse are to me at all satisfactory: I am much more inclined to think with Luthardt (i. 16), that the whole arrangement and plan of our Gospel is broken by the insertion of this passage. The Lord Jesus was not sent to be a ruler and a judge in this or that particular case of crime, see Luk 12:14; but the Ruler and Judge of all: and His answer expresses this, by convicting them all of sin before Him. (see digest), if genuine, refers to the first stone, which by Deu 17:7 the witnesses were to cast.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Joh 8:7. , but when they were persevering) For there is in most of the Latin copies ergo [not in the best copies of the Vulg., the Cod. Amiatinus, etc., cum autem perseverarent]. This is according to the custom of John; who, however, in this paragraph more often employs , which occurs frequently in this gospel even elsewhere: for instance, in ch. 9- , he who is without sin) , if respect be had to the termination, is, either one who cannot sin, or one who hath not sinned. Septuag. Deu 29:19 : . Comp. 2Ma 8:4 [ ], Joh 12:42 [ ]. The witnesses were wont to be the first in the act of stoning. [Hence the expression is , with the article.-V. g.] These witnesses had all contracted guilt, worthy of capital punishment, either in that very act [such as they accused the woman of], or in similar deeds of shame.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Joh 8:7
Joh 8:7
But 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.-The law of Moses required the witness to cast the first stone. The hand of the witnesses shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterward the hand of all the people. So thou shalt put away the evil from the midst of thee. (Deu 17:7). The simplicity and ease with which he caught those in the trap set for him marks the record as genuine. [They were determined to succeed so kept pressing the question, What then sayest thou? His answer was like a bolt of lightning. It affirmed nothing, set them back on their own hearts and bade them thus decide. It was as if he had said to them Wherefore thou art without excuse, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest dost practise the same things.]
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
sin
Sin. (See Scofield “Rom 3:23”).
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
and said: Joh 7:46, Pro 12:18, Pro 26:4, Pro 26:5, Jer 23:29, 1Co 14:24, 1Co 14:25, Col 4:6, Heb 4:12, Heb 4:13, Rev 1:16, Rev 2:16, Rev 19:15
He that: Deu 17:6, Psa 50:16-20, Mat 7:1-5, Mat 23:25-28, Rom 2:1-3, Rom 2:21-25
Reciprocal: Deu 13:9 – thine hand Psa 130:3 – shouldest mark Ecc 7:22 – also Eze 23:45 – after the manner of adulteresses Mat 7:3 – but Mat 19:20 – All Mat 22:46 – no Luk 6:41 – but Luk 17:17 – but Joh 8:46 – convinceth
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
8
Jesus placed the termination of the case at the feet of these hypocrites, then stooped down and resumed his writing to let them think upon the proposition.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Joh 8:7. But when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him be the first to cast the stone upon her. The scribes and Pharisees press for an answer. Then Jesus lifted Himself up (as we may well believe) with slow and solemn dignity, and spoke the words recorded of Him with a glance which must have showed His hearers that He read their hearts. They had no official right to condemn the woman; and our Lords words embodied the truth, which finds always, as it found now, an answer in the heart of man, that we have no personal right to judge the guilty unless we ourselves are free from blame. There seems no reason to confine the thought of sin here to the particular sin with which the woman was chargeable; the expression is quite general. It is from the mention of the stone that we may draw the conclusion that the womans accusers had stones in their hands.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Joh 8:7-9. When they continued asking him That is, pressed him with great importunity to give an answer, thinking, no doubt, that they had him at a great advantage; he lifted up himself, and, without replying directly to their demand, said, He that is without sin among you He that is not guilty (his own conscience being the judge) either of the same sin or of some nearly resembling it; let him As a witness; first cast a stone at her He alludes to the law, (Deu 17:7,) which ordered, that the hands of the witnesses, by whose testimony an idolater was convicted, should be first upon him, and afterward the hands of all the people. Our Lords meaning was, Persons exceedingly zealous in getting punishment executed on others, ought to be free themselves at least from gross sins; for which cause, as you are all guilty of equal, or greater, or, it may be, the like offences, and deserve the wrath of God, you should show mercy to this sinner, who may have fallen through the strength of temptation, rather than of evil inclination, and who is now truly sorry for her offence. Our Lords words made such an impression on the minds of these hypocrites, and raised in them such strong convictions of sin, as soon put their zeal to shame; and made them afraid to stay, lest Jesus should have made their particular sins public. And he again stooped down and wrote on the ground Giving them an opportunity to withdraw, which they embraced; and being convicted by their own consciences That is, their consciences smiting them with remorse, because, at some time or other of their lives, they had been guilty, either of the very sin for which they proposed to have this woman stoned, or of some crime or crimes equally great: they went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last . This, Keuchenius interprets, beginning at the most honourable, even unto the lowest of them, and this they did, although, when they first came, they had been exceedingly incensed against her. And Jesus was left alone By all those scribes and Pharisees who proposed the question. But many others remained, to whom our Lord directed his discourse presently after.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Vv. 7, 8. The admirable, yet at the same time very simple, art of the answer of Jesus in Joh 8:7 consists in bringing back the question from the judicial domain, where His adversaries were placing it, to the moral ground, beyond which Jesus does not dream for a moment of extending His authority; comp. Luk 12:14. A judge in his official function may certainly pass judgment and condemn, though being himself a sinner. But such is not, at this moment, the position of Jesus, who is not invested with the official function of a judge. It is also quite as little the position of those who submit the question to Him. In order to have the right to make themselves of their own motion the representatives and executors of the justice of God, it would be necessary therefore, that at least they should themselves have been exempt from every sin which was fitted to provoke a like judgment against themselves. Undoubtedly it might be objected that in former times the entire people was called to condemn such criminals by stoning them. But the time when God committed to the people the function of judges in the case of similar crimes had long since passed. Jesus takes the theocracy, not as being in its ideal form, but such as He finds it, providentially deprived of its ancient constitution and subjected to the foreign yoke. The interpreters who, like Lucke, Meyer, and so many others, restrict the application of the term without sin to adultery or, in general, to impurity, misconstrue the thought of Jesus. In His eyes he who has offended in the matter of one commandment, is guilty of all (Jam 2:10). The skill of this answer consists in disarming the improvised judges of this woman, without however infringing in the least upon the ordinance of Moses. On one side, the words: let him cast the stone, sustain the code, but on the other, the words: without sin, disarm any one who would desire to apply it.
Fuente: Godet Commentary (Luke, John, Romans and 1 Corinthians)
Verse 7
Without sin; pure, in respect to the charge which they had brought against the woman.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
8:7 {2} 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.
(2) Against hypocrites who are very severe judges against other men, and flatter themselves while they are sinning.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
When Jesus finally answered His critics, He cited passages in the Mosaic Law. Jesus lived under this Law and respected it. These verses required that in cases of stoning at least two witnesses of the sin, who had not participated in it, should be the first to throw the stones (Lev 24:14; Deu 13:9; Deu 17:7). Jesus did not mean that the accusers needed to be sinless. The law did not require that but that they be innocent of the particular sin of the accused. Jesus meant that they needed to be free from the sin of adultery or at least free of complicity in prearranging this woman’s adultery. They had asked Him to pass judgment, and now He was exercising His rightful function as the judge of humankind. Instead of passing judgment on the woman He was passing judgment on her judges.
Jesus’ reply put the dilemma back on His accusers’ shoulders. If they proceeded to stone the woman, they were claiming that they had not sinned. If they did not stone her, they would be admitting that they had sinned. Jesus now took the place of the woman’s defense attorney as well as her judge (cf. 1Jn 2:1).