But this they said proving him, that they might have [something] to accuse him [of]. But Jesus, having stooped down, wrote with his finger on the ground.
Two verses earlier the accusers turned the scene into a courtroom, and the real defendant is not the woman but Jesus. He gives no answer at all — He bends down and writes in the dust, and readers have asked ever since what that silent act meant.
The words "to test him" tell us the question was never sincere. Either answer would cost Him something.
The provocative question "Now in the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. So what do you say?" had been designed as a trap. If He argued for anything other than the death penalty, they would at once accuse Him of encouraging people to break the law of Moses. But if He agreed to the deadly demands of the law, they would ask, "How does your teaching differ? What about this grace you were going to bring?" It was a trap that left no way of escape... or so they thought.
These were not ignorant people acting on impulse.
They were not ignorant men. They knew the Scriptures well. They were not part of the crowd that did not know the law, but men with 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 with her, does not appear. But they brought her hoping not only to perplex the Lord, but to find grounds to accuse Him... What deep wickedness was theirs! No horror at sin, even of the darkest kind, but a heartless use of the exposed adulteress to entrap the Holy One of God.
This is the only place in the Bible where Jesus writes anything. One writer also notes a translation detail: some older Bibles add words here in italics that the original text does not have.
He was silent and stooped down and wrote with His finger in the ground. (The words "as though He heard them not" are in italics and must be omitted.) It is the only time we read of our Lord that He wrote. The finger writing 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 symbol: the law against man is written in the dust, the dust of death. Not only the woman deserved death — all were equally guilty.
What God writes on carries meaning too. One writer sets three surfaces side by side.
The same finger had written a sentence of doom against a proud Gentile kingdom in the days of Daniel, on the plaster of the wall. The writing surfaces are striking. The unbending law was written on unbending stone. So the man who despised Moses' law "died without mercy," since the law cannot be bent the way rubber is bent. Plaster crumbles and breaks easily, like the strongest and proudest human kingdoms. Jesus wrote on the ground. What He wrote there we are not told. But we do know that He was going into "the dust of death" (Psalm 22:15), where He wrote a full declaration of the love of God.
The irony deepens when you notice whose finger touches the ground.
They had accused the sinner and were eager to accuse the Savior, but He makes them accuse themselves... There was the great Lawgiver Himself, the very One whose finger had written the first set of tablets. How little they knew this! They were quoting the law against a fellow sinner to find something against the Lawgiver. What a position for men to find themselves in! In the presence of the Lawgiver, quoting the law, themselves guilty before Him!
Commentators differ on what the pause was for. One reads it as time offered to their consciences.
But if the Lord wrote on the ground, it was in no way as if He did not hear them. Instead, it gave them time to weigh their guilty question and their even guiltier motive. Meanwhile their hope of trapping Him betrayed them more and more, and committed them further as He stooped to the ground.
Another takes the same act as a refusal to treat their question seriously.
The writing on the ground was in a way a dignified contempt of their hypocrisy.
Whatever the letters were, several writers see the act itself as the message — the contrast between the two things that same finger has written.
The finger that once wrote the words of the law on the tablets of stone was now writing something else, something of a very different character in this world, for with the finger of a Man the Son of God was writing before the eyes of men the wonders of the rich, heavenly grace of God.
- The trap. They built the question so that either answer condemned Him: back the stoning and lose His grace, refuse it and stand against Moses.
- The trappers. These were the most respected religious men there. They showed no horror at the sin and no pity for the sinner — the woman was only their tool.
- The finger. The hand writing in the dust wrote the law on stone. Without knowing it, they were quoting the Lawgiver's own words against Him.
- The surface. Stone cannot bend. Plaster crumbles. Dust is where He Himself was heading — into "the dust of death," where He wrote out the love of God in full.
- The silence. Perhaps it gave their consciences time to work. Perhaps it refused their hypocrisy an answer. Either way, His stooping did what stones could not: it left every accuser exposed.
But when they continued asking him, he lifted himself up and said to them, Let him that is without sin among you first cast the stone at her.
The scribes and Pharisees bring a woman caught in adultery to Jesus and demand a ruling, sure that the law has trapped Him. His answer turns the case around: instead of arguing the law, He asks who is fit to carry it out.
They built the question so that either answer would destroy Him.
The starting point is the occasion where a woman is caught in adultery. They had set the provocative question "Moses commanded us, that such should be stoned: but 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 demands, they would ask, "How does your teaching differ? What about this grace you were going to bring?" It was a trap that left no way of escape… or so they thought.
Their handling of the case shows what they were after.
They show no holy hatred of the evil, and they certainly feel no pity for the sinner… They hoped to trap Christ and leave Him only a choice between two hard options: either a useless repeat of the law of Moses, or open opposition to the law.
His reply does not weaken Moses. It grants the law full force and then turns it on the men holding the stones.
First, the Lord maintains the authority of the law to which these men have appealed. Let it be carried out. But those who carry out the law must make sure the law does not condemn them too. "Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her."
The question is no longer whether the sentence is right. It is who has the standing to carry it out.
True, the sentence was just, no one doubted the woman's guilt, and the law was clear. But who was to carry out the law? Man may easily condemn, but who has a right to carry out the sentence?… if not one of them could say, "I am without sin," then every one of them was under the same sentence as the woman. That sentence was death, for "the wages of sin is death." Here, then, was a strange situation: the accused and her accusers were alike caught in the same ruin — criminals all.
They wanted Him seated as judge. He refuses, and His reason goes back to why He came.
They were determined to have an answer, and truly He let them have one. If they were going to put Him in the judgment seat before the time, He would have to judge everyone. He could not give a partial judgment. He could not judge one and let another pass. In fact, He judged no man. The object of His blessed mission to a world of sinners was not judgment but salvation. He came not to cast a stone at a poor guilty sinner.
Grace is present in this scene. But one writer names something else as its main lesson.
This history is not so much an example of grace, though grace is here, of course. It shows Christ as the light, and the light brings conviction to the conscience.
Conviction reached these men. It did not change them.
In this case conscience is reached, but the will stays unchanged. So they "went out one by one, beginning with the older ones". The one with the most sins on his account goes out first; the others follow. They cannot endure the light that exposes their sin; they will not have the grace that could meet their sin. They leave the light of His presence to walk in the darkness of the world.
Every accuser has walked out. The woman is left in front of the one Person who could have thrown the stone.
She was standing before One who could say "without sin," and who therefore could cast the stone… She was alone with One who had the power of life and death. Everything rested on His word. What would He say? Man had not dared to cast the stone; now what would God do? "Neither do I condemn you; go, and from now on sin no more."
- Trap — Either answer was meant to ruin Him: deny Moses, or deny the grace He taught.
- Test — He leaves the law standing at full strength and asks who is clean enough to enforce it.
- Light — His words shine light on the conscience. The accusers walk out one by one instead of standing exposed.
- Refusal — Seated as judge He would have had to judge everyone present; He came to save, not to throw stones.
- Alone — The only Person entitled to throw the first stone is the one who says, "Neither do I condemn you; go, and from now on sin no more."
And again stooping down he wrote on the ground.
Commentary for this verse has not been generated yet.