27  Jesus Confronts Hypocrisy  (John 7:53–8:11)

Everyone went to his home. But Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. Early in the morning He came again into the temple, and all the people were coming to Him; and He sat down and began to teach them. The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman caught in adultery, and having set her in the center of the court, they said to Him, “Teacher, this woman has been caught in adultery, in the very act. Now in the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women; what then do You say?” They were saying this, testing Him, so that they might have grounds for accusing Him. But Jesus stooped down and with His finger wrote on the ground. But when they persisted in asking Him, He straightened up, and said to them, “He who is without sin among you, let him be the first to throw a stone at her.” Again He stooped down and wrote on the ground. When they heard it, they began to go out one by one, beginning with the older ones, and He was left alone, and the woman, where she was, in the center of the court. Straightening up, Jesus said to her, “Woman, where are they? Did no one condemn you?” She said, “No one, Lord.” And Jesus said, “I do not condemn you, either. Go. From now on sin no more.”(7:53–8:11)

Although it is often cited and taught, this familiar passage may not have actually been an original part of John’s gospel. Along with Mark 16:9–20, it is one of the longest and most famous New Testament texts whose authenticity is questioned. To determine whether or not it was in the original inspired manuscript, two lines of evidence must be considered: the internal evidence (of the passage itself), and the external testimony (of the Greek text, early versions, and church fathers).

The passage contains several internal indicators that cast doubt on its authenticity. Its placement here disrupts the flow of thought in this section. In 7:37–52 Jesus referred to one of the rituals associated with the Feast of Tabernacles, the water pouring ceremony (see the exposition of those verses in chapter 26 of this volume). In 8:12 the Lord alluded to the second great ritual associated with the feast, the lamp lighting ceremony (see the exposition of 8:12–21 in chapter 28 of this volume). Jesus’ claim to be the Light of the World in 8:12 follows logically after His claim to be the source of living water in 7:37–52. (The word “again” in verse 12 also implies a continuity between 7:37–52 and 8:12–21.) That claim to be the Light of the World may also be an allusion to Isaiah 9:1–2 (cf. Matt. 4:12–16), and thus an indirect reply to the Pharisees’ contemptuous remark in verse 52 that “no prophet arises out of Galilee.” Interposing the story of the woman taken in adultery obscures the Lord’s rebuttal of the Pharisees’ false claim (cf. Philip Comfort, “The Pericope of the Adulteress,” The Bible Translator 40 [January 1989], 145–47).

Since the story does not seem to fit here, some manuscripts insert it in different locations. While the majority place it after John 7:52, some locate it after 7:36, 7:44, 21:25, or even after Luke 21:38. As James R. White notes, “Such moving about by a body of text is plain evidence of its later origin and the attempt on the part of scribes to find a place where it ‘fits’” (The King James Only Controversy [Minneapolis: Bethany House 1995], 262). D. A. Carson adds, “The diversity of placement confirms the inauthenticity of the verses” (The Gospel According to John, The Pillar New Testament Commentary [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991], 333).

The vocabulary and style of the story offer further evidence that John did not write it (Carson, John, 334; Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John, The New International Commentary on the New Testament [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1979], 883 n. 3; B. F. Westcott, The Gospel According to St. John [Reprint; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978], 142). For example, the scribes and Pharisees (8:3), paired so frequently in the Synoptic Gospels (Matt. 5:20; 12:38; 15:1; 23:2, 13–15, 23, 25, 27, 29; Mark 2:16; 7:1, 5; Luke 5:21, 30; 6:7; 11:53; 15:2) do not appear together anywhere else in John’s gospel. The passage also suggests that Jesus spent the night on the Mount of Olives (8:1–2). Yet the Synoptic Gospels record that happening only during Passion Week (Luke 21:37; cf. 22:39), which was still about six months away. (It is, of course, possible that Jesus spent nights on the Mount of Olives during earlier visits to Jerusalem and the Synoptic Gospels did not record it.) And though the Synoptic Gospels refer to the Mount of Olives (Matt. 21:1; 24:3; 26:30; Mark 11:1; 13:3; 14:26; Luke 19:29, 37; 21:37; 22:39), John does not (outside of this passage).

The external evidence also casts doubt on the authenticity of these verses. The earliest and most reliable manuscripts, from a variety of textual traditions, omit it. Others that do include it mark it to indicate that there were questions regarding its authenticity. Many of the most significant early versions (translations of the Scriptures into other languages) also omit this section. None of the early Greek church fathers—even those who dealt with the text of John verse by verse—commented on this passage. The first to do so was Euthymius Zigabenus in the twelfth century, and even he acknowledged that the accurate manuscripts did not contain it.

Some (most notably Augustine) have speculated that overly zealous scribes may have excised this passage from the manuscripts because they feared it was too lenient on adultery. But there is no other known instance of scribes making such an extensive textual deletion on moral grounds (Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament [New York: United Bible Societies, 1975], 221). If that was the reason this section was deleted, why would the scribes have deleted 7:53–8:2? Those three verses have nothing to do with adultery, and would have connected well with 8:12. And why cut this passage, but leave in the text of John’s gospel the account of the Samaritan woman? She too was guilty of sexual immorality (4:17–18), and Jesus’ rebuke of her was even milder and less direct than His rebuke of the adulterous woman (cf. 8:11).

This passage, then, was most likely not part of the original text of John’s gospel. Yet it “is beyond doubt an authentic fragment of apostolic tradition” (Westcott, John, 125) that describes an actual historical event from Christ’s life. It contains no teaching that contradicts the rest of Scripture. The picture it paints of the wise, loving, forgiving Savior is consistent with the Bible’s portrait of Jesus Christ. Nor is it the kind of story the early church would have made up about Him. “No ascetically minded monk [most of the scribes who copied the early manuscripts were monks] would have invented a narrative which closes with what seems to be only a mild rebuke on Jesus’ part” (Bruce M. Metzger, The Text of the New Testament [New York: Oxford, 1982], 223).

The story was most likely history, a piece of oral tradition that circulated in parts of the Western church. (Most of the limited early support for its authenticity comes from Western manuscripts and versions, and from Western church fathers such as Jerome, Ambrose, and Augustine.) Eventually, it was written down and found its way into the later manuscripts. Because it is not possible to be absolutely certain that this story was added later, its exposition is included in this commentary.

This passage is not primarily the story of an adulteress, or of the hypocritical religious leaders who cynically used her to attack Jesus. The central figure of this gripping drama of immorality, hypocrisy, and forgiveness, as in all of John’s gospel, is the Lord Jesus Christ. From it a fourfold picture of Him emerges. The passage reveals His humility, His wisdom, His indictment, and His forgiveness.

HIS HUMILITY

Everyone went to his home. But Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. Early in the morning He came again into the temple, and all the people were coming to Him; and He sat down and began to teach them. (7:53–8:2)

Since this incident has disputable authenticity, it is obviously impossible to know for certain where it might fit into the chronology of Christ’s life. Because these three introductory verses closely parallel Luke 21:37–38, the event may have taken place during Passion Week. Jesus was evidently in Jerusalem, since when everyone else went to his home, He went to the Mount of Olives to spend the night. Whether the Lord slept out on the mountainside, or stayed at the home of Mary Martha, and Lazarus in Bethany (on the eastern slope of the Mount of Olives), is unknown.

That Jesus, the Creator of all things, had no place of His own to stay strikingly illustrates the humiliation and condescension of the Incarnation—when He “emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross” (Phil. 2:7–8). At His birth His mother “wrapped Him in cloths, and laid Him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn” (Luke 2:7). During His ministry He said to a would-be follower, “The foxes have holes and the birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay His head” (Matt. 8:20). Jesus Christ, God in human flesh, was not given the reception even the most minor human dignitary would have received (cf. 1:11).

The text notes that, simply and without fanfare, early the next morning He came again into the temple to teach. No angelic herald announced Jesus’ arrival, nor did He perform any sensational miracles to draw a crowd. But such was the power of His teaching (cf. 7:46; Matt. 7:28–29; Luke 4:22) that all the people were coming to Him (cf. Mark 2:13; Luke 21:38). In His humility, the Lord used no gimmicks to market or promote Himself, but offered His teaching freely to all who would listen. In typical rabbinical style, He simply sat down somewhere in the temple complex and began to teach the people.

Throughout Jesus’ ministry He exhibited this kind of humility. This is in stark contrast to His second coming, which will be marked by His exaltation and glory. When He returns, He will come “with power and great glory” (Matt. 24:30; cf. 16:27; Mark 8:38; Luke 9:26), “on the clouds of heaven” (Matt. 26:64), and “every eye will see Him” (Rev. 1:7).”He will sit on His glorious throne” (Matt. 25:31; cf. 19:28), and He will rule the nations with majesty and power (cf. Rev. 19:15).

HIS WISDOM

The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman caught in adultery, and having set her in the center of the court, they said to Him, “Teacher, this woman has been caught in adultery, in the very act. Now in the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women; what then do You say?” They were saying this, testing Him, so that they might have grounds for accusing Him. But Jesus stooped down and with His finger wrote on the ground. But when they persisted in asking Him, He straightened up, and said to them, “He who is without sin among you, let him be the first to throw a stone at her.” Again He stooped down and wrote on the ground. (8:3–8)

Suddenly, the Lord’s teaching was interrupted by scribes and the Pharisees. As noted above, those two groups appear together frequently in the Synoptic Gospels, but nowhere else in John’s gospel (John does not mention the scribes). The scribes (sometimes called lawyers) were the experts in interpreting the Law. They were usually, but not always, Pharisees, who along with the Sadducees, Zealots, and Essenes were one of the four major religious sects in first-century Judaism. The Pharisees were noted chiefly for their strict adherence to the Mosaic Law and their oral traditions. Though few in number (about 6,000 at the time of Herod the Great according to the first-century Jewish historian Josephus), they were the dominant religious influence among the Jewish people.

With the exception of Nicodemus (3:1ff.; 7:50–51; 19:39–40), the Pharisees are always hostile to Jesus in John’s gospel (4:1; 7:32, 45–52; 8:13; 9:13–16, 40–41; 11:46–53, 57; 12:19, 42; 18:3). (Later, some would come to believe in Him [cf. Acts 15:5]—most notably the zealous Pharisee [Acts 23:6; Gal. 1:14] Saul of Tarsus.) The Pharisees viewed Jesus’ popularity with alarm. They feared both losing their influence with the people, and retaliation by the Romans if Jesus’ followers started a revolt (John 11:47–48; cf. 6:15). (For more information on the Pharisees, see the exposition of 3:1 in chapter 8 of this volume.)

Bringing with them a woman caught in adultery, the scribes and Pharisees barged into the crowd of people listening to Jesus and set her in the center of the court. Addressing Him with mock politeness as “Teacher” (or “Rabbi”) they exclaimed, “This woman has been caught in adultery, in the very act.” Then they demanded a ruling from Him: “Now in the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women; what then do You say?” The last clause is emphatic in the Greek, and could be translated “You … what do you say?” or “What’s your opinion on this?”

The seventh commandment forbids adultery (Ex. 20:14; Deut. 5:18), and Leviticus 20:10 prescribes the death penalty for those who commit it: “If there is a man who commits adultery with another man’s wife, one who commits adultery with his friend’s wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.” Jesus Himself upheld the Old Testament condemnation of adultery (Matt. 5:27; 19:18). In fact, He made the prohibition stronger, condemning not only the physical act, but also the lustful attitude that conceives it (Matt. 5:28).

From a purely legal standpoint, then, these men were correct in saying that the woman deserved to die. But the circumstances suggest that they had something else in mind. By its very nature, adultery is a sin that involves two people—yet the Pharisees were accusing only the woman. The obvious question was: Where was the man? Those who had apprehended the woman had certainly seen him too, since she had been seized in the very act. Why had they not also arrested him and brought him before Jesus, since the Law demanded that both guilty parties be executed (Lev. 20:10)? And if justice was all they sought, why bring the woman to Jesus at all? Why not try her in their own courts, where such cases would normally be heard? Jesus was not a judge (cf. Luke 12:13–14) or a member of the Sanhedrin. Nor was there any legal difficulty that would necessitate consulting a rabbi; it was an open-and-shut case.

The Pharisees’ motive was obvious: they were merely using the woman in an attempt to trap Jesus. There was something far more important to them than seeing justice done; they were testing Him, so that they might have grounds for accusing Him. As was so often the case, they were trying to force Jesus to say something that they could use to destroy Him (cf. Matt. 12:10; 16:1; 19:3; 22:34–40; Mark 8:11; Luke 10:25; 11:53–54; 20:20–40).

The woman’s accusers thought they had the Lord between a proverbial rock and hard place. If He objected to stoning her, He would be guilty of opposing the Mosaic Law, and thus discredit His claim to be the Messiah. On the other hand, if He agreed with her accusers that she should be stoned, His reputation for compassion toward sinners (cf. Matt. 9:11; Luke 7:34; 15:2; 19:7) would be destroyed. Further, the Jewish leaders could then report Him to the Romans as having instigated an execution in defiance of Roman authority (cf. John 18:31).

The challenge brought by the scribes and Pharisees also raised a deeper issue—namely, how divine justice and mercy are to be harmonized. God is holy (Lev. 11:44–45; 19:2; 1 Sam. 2:2; Ps. 99:9; 1 Peter 1:15–16), and His “Law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good” (Rom. 7:12). The Law knows nothing of forgiveness (Rom. 3:20; 8:3; Gal. 2:16; 3:11; James 2:10). It declares, “The soul who sins will die” (Ezek. 18:4) because “all who have sinned under the Law will be judged by the Law” (Rom. 2:12), “for the Law brings about wrath” (4:15). How then does God forgive sinners without violating His holy law?

The answer is, through the Lord Jesus Christ. His sacrificial death fully satisfied the demands of God’s justice; as Paul wrote to the Romans: “For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh” (Rom. 8:3). Those who put their faith in Him are “justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus; whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith” (Rom. 3:24–25), because “He Himself bore our sins in His body on the cross, so that we might die to sin and live to righteousness; for by His wounds you were healed” (1 Peter 2:24; cf. 3:18; Isa. 53:4–6, 10; Matt. 20:28; John 10:11; Rom. 4:25; 5:8–10; 1 Cor. 15:3; 2 Cor. 5:14–15, 21; Gal. 1:4; 2:20; 3:13; Eph. 1:7; 5:2; 1 Tim. 2:5–6; Titus 2:14; Heb. 9:28; 10:11–12; 1 John 2:2; 3:16; 4:9–10; Rev. 1:5; 5:9).

In Jesus Christ divine justice and mercy harmonize. Because His sacrificial death paid the penalty for the sins of all who believe in Him, God can “be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus” (Rom. 3:26); in Him “lovingkindness and truth have met together; righteousness and peace have kissed each other” (Ps. 85:10). God poured out His wrath against sin on Jesus so He can pour out His grace and mercy on those who believe. And Jesus was the lamb “slain from the foundation of the world” (Rev. 13:8 NKJV), not only in the prophetic sense, but also in the sense of application. All through redemptive history, all who were forgiven and given eternal life had the future sacrifice of the Son of God applied to their sins.

The dramatic scene in the temple courtyard had reached its climax. The woman, her sin publicly exposed, was humiliated, terrified, and about to be stoned. The scribes and Pharisees were jubilant, thinking they had caught Jesus in an impossible dilemma. The crowd was hushed, watching intently to see how Jesus would react. But He, for the moment, surprisingly did nothing.

Seemingly oblivious to what was going on, Jesus stooped down and with His finger wrote on the ground. Because the text does not say what He wrote, some speculate that the Lord was acting out Jeremiah 17:13: “Those who depart from Me shall be written in the earth, because they have forsaken the Lord, the fountain of living waters” (NKJV). Others suggest that He wrote the words He would say in verse 7, or part of the Law (such as the prohibition against being a malicious witness in Ex. 23:1). Perhaps the most popular view is that He listed the sins of the woman’s accusers. What Jesus wrote is obviously not essential to the story, however, since it was not recorded; all of those suggestions are speculation.

The scribes and Pharisees were no doubt puzzled by Jesus’ silence. Perhaps they thought He did not know how to reply, so, thinking they finally had impaled Him on the horns of a dilemma, the scribes and Pharisees persisted in asking Him. Always the master of the moment, Jesus remained silent, allowing them to reveal unmistakably their hatred and hypocrisy as they insistently pressed their attack.

At last, He straightened up, no doubt gave His opponents a piercing glance, and said to them, “He who is without sin among you, let him be the first to throw a stone at her.” After making that startling and unexpected statement, He calmly stooped down once more and wrote on the ground, and said nothing.

The Lord’s reply was simple, yet profound. It upheld the Law, since He did not deny the woman’s guilt, and broadened the Law’s power by exposing the sins of the accusers. It also avoided the charge of instigating an execution in violation of Roman authority, since the Lord put the responsibility back on the accusers. And it mercifully spared the woman from being stoned for her sin.

Jesus knew that according to the Law, the witnesses to a capital offense were to be the first to throw stones at the guilty person (Deut. 13:9; 17:7). Obviously, they could not have been participants in the crime, or they too would have been executed. Jesus was not making sinless perfection a requirement for carrying out the Law (or else no one could have done so). It may be, then, that the woman’s accusers were themselves guilty of adultery (if not the physical act, certainly the lust of the heart [Matt. 5:28]).

Jesus’ masterful answer neither minimized the woman’s guilt, nor denied the Law’s sanctity. But it cut the ground out from under the scribes and Pharisees by revealing that they were unfit to be her judges and executioners. They were guilty of the hypocrisy that the apostle Paul condemned in Romans 2:1: “Therefore you have no excuse, everyone of you who passes judgment, for in that which you judge another, you condemn yourself; for you who judge practice the same things” (cf. Matt. 7:1–5).

HIS INDICTMENT

When they heard it, they began to go out one by one, beginning with the older ones, (8:9a)

Having heard the Lord’s devastating reply, the stunned scribes and Pharisees began to go out one by one. Some manuscripts add, “being convicted by their conscience,” which is certainly implied. That the accusers exited beginning with the older ones provides an interesting insight into human nature. It may be that they were the first to realize that they had suffered a humiliating defeat, and that it was pointless to continue. But they may also have been more keenly aware of their sins and the impossibility of meeting Jesus’ challenge. The older ones also had more sin to remember.

Ironically, those who came to put Jesus to shame left ashamed; those who came to condemn the woman went away condemned. Unfortunately, their indictment and sense of guilt did not lead them to repentance and faith in Christ. Like many who hear and feel the convicting truth of the law, they hardened their hearts and turned away from Him, not even open to gospel forgiveness.

HIS FORGIVENESS

and He was left alone, and the woman, where she was, in the center of the court. Straightening up, Jesus said to her, “Woman, where are they? Did no one condemn you?” She said, “No one, Lord.” And Jesus said, “I do not condemn you, either. Go. From now on sin no more.” (8:9b–11)

After the departure of the scribes and Pharisees, Jesus was left alone with the woman, who remained standing where she was, in the center of the court. The text does not say whether the crowd that had been listening to Jesus’ teaching (v. 2) had also left. Whether they were still there or not, the focus of the narrative is on the Lord and the woman.

For the first time, someone addressed the woman. Straightening

up from His posture of stooping to write, Jesus said to her, “Woman, where are they? Did no one condemn you?” The term woman was a polite, respectful form of address (cf. Matt. 15:28; Luke 13:12; 22:57), one with which Jesus addressed His mother (John 2:4; 19:26), the Samaritan woman at the well (4:21), and Mary Magdalene (20:13, 15). With her accusers gone, there was no one left to condemn her. Exercising His divine prerogative to forgive sin (Matt. 9:6; cf. John 3:17; 12:47), Jesus said, “I do not condemn you, either. Go. From now on sin no more.”

Forgiveness does not imply license to sin. Jesus did not condemn her, but He did command her to abandon her sinful lifestyle. Gerald L. Borchert writes,

As Paul wrote in Romans 6:1–2, “What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin so that grace may increase? May it never be! How shall we who died to sin still live in it?”

This story is far more than a battleground for textual critics. It paints a marvelous picture of the Lord Jesus Christ, whose gracious humility, infinite wisdom, convicting speech, and tender forgiveness are its central themes. All Christians should be grateful to God for sovereignly preserving it.