Is that stated in the Bible or another reliable source? I don't understand why both would be required. There may well be a good reason, but it seems to me like - in a robbery committed by two men, one is caught and the other got away - and the "catchee" is released because they didn't catch his accomplice.
Jesus' sparing the adulteress
- Thread starter AndrewMorgan
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Is that stated in the Bible or another reliable source? I don't understand why both would be required. There may well be a good reason, but it seems to me like - in a robbery committed by two men, one is caught and the other got away - and the "catchee" is released because they didn't catch his accomplice.
Is that stated in the Bible or another reliable source? I don't understand why both would be required. There may well be a good reason, but it seems to me like - in a robbery committed by two men, one is caught and the other got away - and the "catchee" is released because they didn't catch his accomplice.
I'm
Why is that so unthinkable?! As for why they only brought the woman - because the man had gone!
Why is that so unthinkable?! As for why they only brought the woman - because the man had gone!
She was no longer under the law because Jesus saved her!
Iwondered if Jesus' presence had something to do with it, but would it be true that punishment would be suspended on all occupied Israel in this period?
That sounds potentially chaotic!
If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife—with the wife of his
neighbor—both the adulterer and the adulteress are to be put to death.
Leviticus 20:10 = man and woman are both to be brought out for stoning.
Deuteronomy 22:22
If a man is found lying with another man's wife, both the man who slept
with her and the woman must die. You must purge the evil from Israel.
John 8:11
She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.
It's a passage often used to decry that the law was suspended. However, Jesus never said that. As God, He was sinned against by the two having violated the law. He decided to forgive her.
As to the men who brought her before him we aren't told that they had any authority to stone her. Due process should have taken place and a ruling by the appointed judge.
These men were not there to carry out justice, but rather were trying to condemn the Just One.
The Just One was the only One qualified to offer Himself in place of her and all others.
Those who wish to be justified BY the Law will be judged by the Law.
Those who wish to be forgiven by the Redeemer must decide to trust Him alone without adding their own "good" deeds, mistakenly believing that God will cut them slack because they kept some of the law.
I hope this helps.
You opened with
. It seems the accusers were obeying the Mosaic Law when bringing the woman to justice.
They were not obeying the law because they only bought the woman.
P
persistent
Guest
Reading thru all the posts here it seems that some of these teachings are 'intentionally' difficult to understand? Any to do with parables which Jesus said himself were intentionally obscure.
Do you believe that those who bought her to Jesus were actually witnesses to the act of adultery, in that they caught them both?
John 8:3 The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They
made her stand before the group 4 and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act
of adultery. 5 In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?”
6 They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.
It doesn't say though that they caught them.
If that is the case then the man would have been bought forth as well?
I don't know, but I've tended (perhaps wrongly) to assume they were. I don't see 'though how, whatever the case, it alters the situation.
I'd like to sum up this particular point once and for all to anyone who'd like to lay this to rest.
1) Do you think the man in the gospel account fled before getting caught?
2) If, generally, a man and a woman are caught in adultery and the man or woman manages to flee, is the other offender freed because the other's not is custody?
1) Do you think the man in the gospel account fled before getting caught?
2) If, generally, a man and a woman are caught in adultery and the man or woman manages to flee, is the other offender freed because the other's not is custody?