they say to him, Teacher, this woman has been taken in the very act, committing adultery.
The scribes and Pharisees call Jesus "Teacher" and state their charge as a settled fact. It sounds like a request for a ruling. But why bring only the woman, and why bring her to Him at all?
These accusers knew the Scriptures well. The guilt they described was not in doubt. That mix is what makes the scene so grim.
These were not ignorant men, but men learned in the Scriptures. They were not part of the crowd that did not know the law, but held the highest reputation for religion. Nor could there be any question about the guilt and degradation of the woman. Why they brought her and not the man involved does not appear. But they brought her hoping not only to perplex the Lord, but to find grounds for accusing Him.
Their own case had a gap in it. If they wanted the law enforced, two people should have been standing there.
They were the rulers. So why did they not judge the case themselves, instead of bringing it to Him? The law had said that not only the woman, but the man also was to be put to death for such sin (Deut. 22:22). Where was the man? In such cases men considered the woman's guilt greater than the man's. The Pharisees were willing to forget him!
Notice what they did to her before they spoke. The public shaming shows what they cared about.
In reality, they were moved neither by hatred of the sin nor love for the sinner. They had very little respect for Moses and still less regard for the Lord's words. Their real motive was to find some cause of accusation against the Lord. With this evil purpose in view they set the guilty woman in the middle. They shamefully exposed her in front of "all the people" (verse 2). Then they invited the Lord to pass judgment on her.
The charge in verse 4 exists to set up the question in verse 5. Whichever way He answered, they had a ready accusation.
The starting point is the occasion where a woman is caught in adultery. The provocative question, "Now in the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. So what do you say?" (v.5) had been designed as a trap. If He called for anything other than the death penalty, they would at once accuse Him of encouraging others to break the law of Moses. But if He simply agreed with the deadly requirements of the law, they would ask, "Then how is your teaching any different? What about this grace you were going to bring?" It was a trap with no way out — or so they thought.
He never lowered the law. He asked instead who was fit to use it, and that question searched everyone there.
See again how the Lord uses the law in the case of the woman taken in adultery (John 8). The Lord does not weaken the authority of the law. Instead He turns the light on them all. He tells them, "Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her." They found they were in the presence of God. They went out one by one, admitting in practice that they had all sinned and were under the condemnation of the law.
Their sentence was correct. The problem was the hand that wanted to carry it out.
True, the sentence was just. The woman's guilt was proved, and the law was clear. But who was to carry out the law? Man may condemn, but who has the right to carry out the sentence? "Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her." Who could say "without sin"? And if not one of them could say, "I am without sin," then every one of them was under the same sentence as the woman — death, for "the wages of sin is death." Here, then, was a strange situation. The accused and her accusers alike were caught in the same ruin — criminals, all of them. No longer "such should be stoned," but all should be stoned. From the oldest to the last, all convicted sinners.
- Charge — the guilt was real and public. The accusers were the most respected religious men there.
- Concealment — the law they quoted condemned the man too, and they quietly dropped him from the case.
- Motive — they had no hatred of the sin and no love for the sinner; the woman was bait for a charge against Christ.
- Trap — a merciful answer made Him a lawbreaker; a severe one emptied His grace. They saw no third road.
- Reversal — He upheld the law and turned its light on them. Accusers and accused ended on one level, all convicted.
Now in the law Moses has commanded us to stone such; thou therefore, what sayest thou?
The scribes and Pharisees put a woman caught in adultery in front of Jesus, quote the law of Moses at Him, and wait for His verdict. It sounds like a request for a ruling, but it is a trap, and the real subject is what men will do with God's law to catch the Son of God.
Their appeal to Moses was not a search for guidance. They built the question so that either answer would give them something to use against Him.
They designed the provocative question "Moses commanded us to stone such women. So what do you say?" (v.5) as a trap. If He argued for anything other than the death penalty, they would at once accuse Him of encouraging others to break the law of Moses. But if He agreed with the law's deadly demand, they would ask, "how is your teaching any different? What about this grace you were going to bring?" It was a trap with no way out — or so they thought.
The men quoting the law had little respect for it. Their handling of the woman gives them away.
In reality, they were moved neither by hatred of the sin nor love for the sinner. They had very little respect for Moses and still less regard for the Lord's words. Their real motive was to find some charge to bring against the Lord. With this evil purpose in mind they stand this guilty woman in the middle of the crowd, shame her in front of "all the people" (verse 2), and invite the Lord to pass judgment on her.
They say "Moses commanded us" — but the law they quote condemned two people, and they brought only one. Two questions expose them.
But since they were the rulers, why did they not judge the case themselves instead of bringing it to Him? What is more, the law said that the man must die for such sin as well as the woman (Deut. 22:22). Where was the man? In such cases men counted the woman's guilt as greater than the man's, and the Pharisees were willing to forget him!
Jesus never says the sentence is wrong. He asks instead who is fit to carry it out, and that turns the scene from the accused to the accusers.
No: He does not reverse Moses' sentence. Let it be carried out — only let the hands that carry it out be spotless. "Let the one among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her." The sentence of the law is right, yes! But on whom does that sentence really fall? Who will escape it, if it is applied strictly? Clearly He is answering as a teacher, not as a judge… They wanted to hold Him up as an opponent of Moses. He makes them see that He alone understands Moses. He uses the law on them for the very purpose it was given: to make them feel its sharp edge of condemnation on everyone, so that they may see their need of the grace they sneer at.
Before He speaks, He stoops and writes in the dust. Commentators link that hand to the hand that engraved the commandments Moses received.
He was silent, stooped down, and wrote with His finger in the ground… This is the only time we read of our Lord writing. The finger that wrote in the ground was the same finger that had written the law on the tablets of stone. What He wrote we do not know, but it was a picture: the law against man is written in the dust, the dust of death. The woman was not the only one who deserved death; all were just as guilty… He did not set the law aside, and yet He showed His marvelous grace.
If the outcome they demanded was the right one, nothing new had arrived in the world. That is the point on which the trap collapses.
No answer, no sentence, no executioner — not a single stone of judgment. How was this? Was she not a sinner? Yes, a flagrant one. Was not the law against her? No doubt. How was it then? Jesus was there — the divine embodiment of "grace and truth," and He was not going to stone a poor convicted sinner. He had not left that bright and blessed world above for such a purpose. If it were only a question of stoning the sinner, Moses could have managed that. There was no need for Moses' Master to come down into this world to do that.
- Trap — The question left two exits, both fatal. Rule against stoning and He breaks Moses. Rule for it and His grace means nothing.
- Motive — The men quoting the law neither hated the sin nor loved the sinner. They wanted a charge against Jesus, and used a woman to get it.
- Half-quoted — Their own law sentenced the man too. They were the rulers and could have judged the case themselves. They came for Jesus, not for justice.
- Turned — He never reverses the sentence. He asks only for spotless hands to carry it out — and the law's edge lands on the accusers.
- Reason — Stoning a sinner needed no one greater than Moses. He came for what Moses could not do.