View source for Didn't Jesus disregard the law of the Hebrew Scriptures when dealing with the woman taken in adultery? (John 8:3-11)

<languages />{{:Navleft|Category:Answered Questions|<translate>Answered Questions</translate>}}
<div class="questionbody">

Quick answer: no. He followed Biblical law to the letter.

===How to be a judge in a capital crime, according to Biblical law===

When the scribes and Pharisees brought the adulterous woman to Jesus (John 8:3), they were essentially calling upon him to be a judge in accordance with Biblical law. Jesus called their bluff, by taking on that role, and then following Biblical law to the letter.

Under Biblical law, the judge would be informed of a crime by the complaining witnesses. Then he or she would do some or all of the following:

* call for witnesses, both direct and corroborative (Lev. 5:1)
* cross-examine their testimony in order to search out the truth (Deut. 17:4, Deut. 19:18)
* throw out any testimony that was either contradicted or not supported by others (Exod. 23:1-2, 6-8)
* determine if there were enough truthful witnesses to convict (Deut. 17:6, Deut. 19:15)
* pronounce conviction (or acquittal), calling upon the direct witnesses to execute the sentence (typically stoning - Deut. 13:9-10, Deut. 17:7)

Since the scribes and Pharisees claimed that the woman had been "caught in the act" then there must be actual eyewitnesses to the act. If there were at least two witnesses (and there probably were: the Pharisees would not have left this loophole) then there were enough to convict, according to Deuteronomy 19:15. If the witnesses were telling the truth, then the judge would, by his legal verdict, authorize the witnesses to execute the sentence (stoning, in this case). And the woman was almost certainly guilty (implied by Jesus' final statement to her: "go and sin no more").

===The importance of (just) witnesses in Biblical law===

On the face of it (judging by mere appearances, you might say), the case seemed open and shut. Of course, Jesus knew better. He pronounced judgment, without even cross-examining any of the witnesses, because he knew that they would cross-examine themselves:

{{:Scriptblock|John 8:7}}

"First stone" is a legal reference -- to Deuteronomy 17:

{{:Scriptblock|Deut 17:7}}

Why was it important for the actual witnesses to throw the first stone? Because if they were false or unjust witnesses, then they would be guilty of murder:

{{:Quote|The witnesses, by casting the first stones, accepted the onus of the responsibility; in the event of further evidence establishing the innocence of the (now deceased) accused, and thereby the false testimony of the witnesses, they would then assume the responsibility for wrongful execution, in effect murder.<ref>Craigie, ''Deuteronomy'', NICOT, 1976, p. 251</ref>}}

Under Biblical law, a false witness in a capital crime could get the death penalty: Deut. 19:18-20. Stop for a second and consider how this compares with modern law systems. Are there any modern law systems that threaten a death penalty for bearing false witness in a felony trial? None that I know about.

===Modern "justice" and rules of evidence===

Modern law systems are more interested in punishing the (alleged) guilty than in protecting the (falsely-accused) innocent. Prosecutors use the unjust plea-bargaining system to threaten people into pleading guilty to things they didn't do. Testimony by "unjust witnesses" (such as criminals who are promised lesser penalties, or even immunity, for testifying) is encouraged and rewarded. In the United States, potential witnesses can be threatened with prison sentences if they refuse to testify (something that could never happen under Biblical law). Given the conditions in many prisons, this is equivalent to kidnapping and torture by the civil government.

In many modern law systems, people can even be convicted solely on "indirect" (non-eyewitness) evidence. Modern utilitarian law is satisfied that someone gets punished: whether it's the right person is not as important as keeping those conviction statistics high.

Biblical law, on the other hand, has much stricter rules of evidence:

* a minimum of two actual eyewitnesses are required for conviction (Deut. 19:15)
* the witnesses cannot be themselves implicated in crime (Ex. 23:1 and see below)
* there is a threat of the death penalty for false testimony in capital crimes (Deut. 19:16-19)
* a Biblically-based civil government is never allowed to use torture and threats of prison in order to compel testimony

Biblical law forces human judges to err on the side of protecting the innocent at the expense of sometimes letting the (alleged) guilty go free.

===Is Jesus saying that only "sinless" people can participate in the justice system?===

Here's where we need to look at that Greek word which is translated "without sin." Most of the time, I prefer formal equivalent (sometimes called "literal") translations. But sometimes literalness can be misleading, and that is the case with the Greek word áναμáρτητος. When we hear "without sin" or "sinless," we think of Jesus Christ himself, the only man who was truly "without sin." But the literal English translation "sinless" is not quite what the Greek word means.

How do we know? The same way we know the meaning of any other Koine<ref>Koine means "common". It is the label scholars use for the style of Greek which was common between approximately 300 B.C. and 300 A.D. The New Testament and Septuagint (Greek translation of the Old Testament) were written in Koine Greek.</ref> Greek word: by seeing how it is used in other contexts. For example in the Septuagint (written in Koine Greek):

{{:Scriptblockformat|<sup>19</sup> And it shall be if one may hear the words of this curse, and may flatter himself in his heart, saying, "May good happen to me, for I will walk in the error of my heart," <sup>20</sup> lest the sinner destroy the guiltless [áναμáρτητον] with him: God shall by no means be willing to pardon him, but then the wrath of the Lord and His jealousy shall flame out against that man; [LXX]|scriptref=Deut. 29:19-20}}

The word is also used in the intertestamental Greek work called Second Maccabees, where it is used in the following context:

{{:Quote|The noble Ioudas exhorted the people to keep themselves free from sin (áναμαρτáµτους), for they had seen with their own eyes what had happened as the result of the sin of those who had fallen... [emphasis added]<ref>2 Maccabees 12:42</ref>}}

Notice that the word in both of these contexts is applied to regular, sinful human beings. Therefore it cannot mean "entirely without sin," like the sinlessness of Jesus. So what is Jesus asserting, when he calls for áναμáρτητος witnesses? Consider what Stephen James says, in his analysis of this passage:

{{:Quote|Jesus is asking the witnesses if they are truly eligible before the law to testify in the immediate case. The certainty of their having sinned at some time or other is not in mind. It is unfortunate that the term in question is translated "without sin," thus bringing to mind the general sinfulness of men. It would have been better translated, in context, as "competent to testify."<ref>S. A. James, "The Adulteress and the Death Penalty", ''Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society'', 1979, 22, p. 48</ref>}}

Thus the word translated "sinless" means something close to "blameless" or "innocent" with respect to the law. This is equivalent to a claim the apostle Paul made about himself, prior to his conversion:

{{:Scriptblockformat|{{:Erasesentence|{{#scripture:Philippians 3:6}}|1|... }}}}

In Biblical law, it isn't enough for a witness to be corroborated by others and unopposed in their testimony; they also cannot be a "malicious" or "criminal" witness: 

{{:Scriptblock|Exodus 23:1}} 

They have to be "blameless" (innocent) in the eyes of the law, or else their testimony (even if possibly true) cannot be accepted as legally true. Biblical law does not allow prosecutors or judges to cooperate with criminals in order to get testimony against other criminals. All such testimony is invalid.

Again, this small detail of the story shows how Jesus respected even the minor details of Biblical legal procedure. As usual, he set an example which we all should follow.

===Why did the witnesses walk away?===

We don't know why the Pharisees' witnesses disqualified themselves by walking away. Maybe because they had broken the law by not bringing the male adulterer: Deut. 22:22-24. Maybe because they had accepted a bribe for participating in the legal action: Exod. 23:7-8. Whatever it was, Jesus knew about it, and knew that it was enough to disqualify them as witnesses:

{{:Scriptblock|Matthew 7:2}}

No witnesses, no prosecution, no case.

===Did Jesus forgive the adulteress?===

{{:Scriptblockformat|{{:Erasesentence|{{#scripture:John 8:11}}|1|... }}}}

The next question you might ask is: "why didn't Jesus himself carry out the death penalty?" I'll let the scholar Stephen James answer this one:

{{:Quote|The failure of Jesus to condemn the woman must ... be strictly understood in the civil and temporal context of the entire passage. Extension of his statement to the spiritual and eternal is not valid on either hermeneutical or exegetical grounds. Indeed, it would have been a gross violation of Biblical law if Jesus had attempted to condemn the woman. He was not an eyewitness, and he could be only one witness in any case. Given the circumstances, Jesus could not have condemned the woman even if he had wanted to do so. He was required by law to release her, and his parting admonition to "sin no more" must be understood for what it is — excellent advice!<br/><br/>In brief, from a legal perspective the words and actions of Jesus recorded in the pericope of the adulteress are in strict conformity to the letter and spirit of Mosaic law, which sought to exact justice within the limits of procedures designed to protect the individual from the innocent errors or malevolent perjury of others. Jesus did not here set aside or modify the Mosaic law.<ref>S. A. James, "The Adulteress and the Death Penalty", ''Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society'', 1979, 22, p. 52</ref>}}

In addition to the above explanation, the following scripture passage could explain why Jesus did not carry out any temporal penalty upon the woman:

{{:Scriptblock|Hosea 4:14}}

We cannot know, from this story, whether Jesus ultimately forgave the woman. In other cases where he confronted sinners (Matt. 9:2, Luke 7:48), Jesus explicitly said (even without being asked) "your sins are forgiven." He did not say this to the adulterous woman. Nevertheless, we cannot know, one way or the other.

===The gravity of the crime of adultery===

The woman (assuming that she was guilty) deserved the civil death penalty, without question. So did the adulterous man who was conspicuously absent. But civil justice cannot be accomplished with unjust witnesses.

Jesus was in no way questioning the justice of the death penalty for adultery. As God, Jesus was the actual author of the death penalty statute in Lev. 20:10. Adultery is a crime that breaks the covenant at the heart of the foundational institution of civilization: the family. That makes it one of the greatest acts of treason against the ethical order which God has established. When the prophets needed a metaphor to compare Israel's rebellion against God, they used adultery.

Scripture could not be clearer on this issue. But Christian teachers have stumbled greatly in their teaching on the nature of the marriage covenant, the role of civil government, and the seriousness of Christian marriage as the public picture of Christ's relationship with the church. It's not surprising that local churches are now being torn apart over the issue of civil government and marriage.

Christian teachers can never make things better by softening the scripture's warning against adultery. Yes, people can be forgiven for adultery, just as they can be forgiven for rape and murder. But there are real consequences to all these crimes which persist long past repentance. Unless we represent the true position of the King, we are not good ambassadors.
</div>


{{DISPLAYTITLE:<translate>{{PAGENAME}}</translate>}}

[[Category:Adultery]]
[[Category:Answered Questions]]
[[Category:Capital Punishment]]
[[Category:Deuteronomy 17:7]]
[[Category:Deuteronomy 5:18]]
[[Category:Exodus 20:14]]
[[Category:John 8:7]]
[[Category:Leviticus 20:10]]
[[Category:Questions about Jesus' teaching on the law]]
[[Category:Questions about witnesses and evidence]]