Why did Jesus forgive the adulterous woman?

[xdisciplex]

Somehow I don't understand this.
God created this law, that adulterers shall be stoned, this means he totally agreed with it. Then why did Jesus not demand that this woman shall be stoned? It looks as if Jesus was against this or as if he had a different opinion about it.
Imagine Jesus had said "stone her" then what would our impression of Jesus be like? Would this have shocked us? But God himself demanded it in the old testament.
On which basis did Jesus forgive this woman? I mean in the old testament adulterers had no chance to repent and to escape being stoned, right? Then why was this woman forgiven? Somehow this looks like Jesus has a different opinion than God but this cannot be.

 

[SpiritualMadMan]

They were not applying the Law correctly...

First, no mention of the man is made...

The law required they both be summarily stoned...

Yet, they didn't drag them man before Jesus only the woman...

Secondly, Jesus left the final act to the people...

But, apparently they were pricked to the heart by what ever He wrote on the ground...

(Perhaps, dates and times of their own unconfessed sins?)

In the end He told them that whoever had no sin should cast the first stone...

They all walked away...

Why, Did he do it? Because He came to seek and to save that which was lost...

John 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

She was lost and needed Jesus...

Mike Sr.

 

[Claudia_T]

The group of Pharisees said to Jesus, with a pretended show of respect, "Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest Thou?"

Their phony reverence hid a secret plot for His ruin. They wanted Jesus to be condemned, so that no matter what decision He would make regarding the matter, they would be able to accuse Him.

If He acquits the woman, they'd charge Him with deregarding the law of Moses. If He declares her worthy of death, then He'd be accused to the Romans as one who was taking the authority that belonged only to them.

But they didnt fool Jesus. These so-called guardians of the law were more guilty than the woman they were seeking to condemn. So Jesus began to write in the dust.

There, wites down the secrets of their own lives.
They were disregarding the law themselves.

The husband was supposed to be the one taking action against her, and all of the guilty persons involved in the crime were to be punished equally.

They themselves were not correctly following the law in this case. Jesus, however, met them on their own ground. The law says that in death by stoning, the witnesses in the case should be the first to cast a stone.

Jesus said, "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her."

Jesus neither set aside the law given through Moses, nor did He infringe upon the authority of Rome.

The accusers were defeated.

Not only that but their pretended holiness was torn from them and exposed to be a sham.

And so you see then that Jesus wasnt disregarding the law at all. He never did. He kept it as it should be kept.

 

[Eliyahu]

All human beings are adulterous, deserting the True Husband God, loving this world and making the world as the husband instead of God.

The woman obtained the mercy from Jesus, even though she was supposed to die according to the Law. We all are supposed to die according to the Law, but when we come to Jesus,

1) We obatined the freedom from sins.
2) We obtained the life, though we were destined to die according to the Law.
3) We obtained the forgiveness of our sins, from Jesus.

What a friend we have in Jesus !

 

[webdog]

I believe that since she was "caught in the act", the Pharisees had known about her action and were waiting and snooping in order to catch her in the act so they could bring her to Jesus to see what He would say.

 

[xdisciplex]

Does this mean that Jesus was very much of the opinion that this woman deserved death because of what she did? And supposing the man had also been there then he would have supported it? I mean when God created this rule in the old testament then he wanted it back then and then he also wants it at the time when Jesus was on earth, right?

What I don't udnerstand is why could an adulterer back then not repent and not be stoned? Why was there no chance to repent? And did such a person go to hell after being stoned?

 

[SpiritualMadMan]

No, my personal opinion is that Jesus saw the womans heart and knew she needed the Mercy of a Savior...

She was "caught" in the very act...

There is another biblical conotation to the word "caught"...

I believe she was seduced for the purposes of trapping Jesus... This would explain why the man convienently disappeared. He was a part of the plot.

Are we any different when we are 'caught' in a besetting sin?

Notice, also, that with the forgiveness and nercy came the edict to go and sin no more...

John 8:10 When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?
John 8:11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.

Notice also that she referred to Jesus in respectful terms of 'Lord'. I would think that it was clear to Jesus that repentence was in her heart before He ever started writing on the ground...

The Law was an inflexible written code that demanded swift and sure punishment of the guilty...

Jesus was instituting the concept of Grace and Mercy...

They had that knowledge but it was so much easier to go with the letter...

Matthew 23:23 "Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You give a tenth of your spices--mint, dill and cummin. But you have neglected the more important matters of the law--justice, mercy and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former.

Zechariah 7:9 "This is what the LORD Almighty says: 'Administer true justice; show mercy and compassion to one another.

SMM

 

[Gold Dragon]

Why did Jesus forgive your sins or my sins? Was it because our repentance demanded that he forgive them? Or was it because he wanted to show us grace?

 

[SpiritualMadMan]

Interesting Wording Gold...

To which, IMHO, there is only one answer...

He desired to show us His Grace...

He made all the arrangements...

He paid the Price... In Full...

We have but to accept it...

SMM

 

[Gold Dragon]

Originally posted by SpiritualMadMan:
Interesting Wording Gold...

To which, IMHO, there is only one answer...

He desired to show us His Grace...

He made all the arrangements...

He paid the Price... In Full...

We have but to accept it...

SMM

Agreed. Just like in our situation, Christ offered his grace to the adulterous woman before she accepted it.

 

[xdisciplex]

But somehow it seems like Jesus is placing himself above the rules and breaking them. I mean this is the impression which I got when I thought about this. I imagined how would I, as a pharisee, have reacted back then. I mean the pharisees kept the sabbath, right? And then Jesus comes along and breaks it? Could the pharisees have known that you can heal on the sabbath? Was there something in the old testament which indicated that you can do something like this? Or were the pharisees only trying to keep the old testament laws? I don't really understand it.

 

[SpiritualMadMan]

One possible answer is:

Hebrews 7:12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.

Jesus had come to fullfill the Law and replace it with Grace...

While the Levitical Preisthood was still in effect...

Could it be that in one sense Jesus was staking His claim, as it were, for the New Covenant?

That is once he came to earth, in a very real sense the Formal Law was already being forced to give way to the Way of Christ...

If that makes any kind of sense at all?

SMM

 

[Gold Dragon]

Originally posted by xdisciplex:
But somehow it seems like Jesus is placing himself above the rules and breaking them.

In one sense, Jesus was above the law. He was in the beginning. He created the law. He fulfilled the law. And yet he did not abolish it.

Regarding the adulterous woman, Jesus did not break the law and commit adultery, the woman did. Jesus also acknowledged that the proper punishment for her was stoning and upheld the law.

However he looked beyond what the law requires to why the law was written. To recognize our sinfulness before God and a way of living in community pleasing to God. And he took it a step further and helped everyone in that place recognize their sin, not just the adulterous woman.

Finally, He showed a better way, the way of grace.

Originally posted by xdisciplex:
I mean this is the impression which I got when I thought about this. I imagined how would I, as a pharisee, have reacted back then. I mean the pharisees kept the sabbath, right? And then Jesus comes along and breaks it? Could the pharisees have known that you can heal on the sabbath? Was there something in the old testament which indicated that you can do something like this? Or were the pharisees only trying to keep the old testament laws? I don't really understand it.

Regarding the Sabbath, it was what the Pharisees had turned the Sabbath into that Christ was rebuking. He remembered the Sabbath and kept it holy, but not the way the Pharisees understood it. Christ was a Torah observant Jew who got to the heart of the law.

 

[Jarthur001]

xdisciplex,

I still would like to know if you are saved? you have yet to post anything to support the faith. Just one word would do...do you trust in Christ as your only hope for salvation?

I have asked this before and you never replied.

If so..why not post a few things you believe in..and not always attach. Just a idea xdisciplex

 

[Gold Dragon]

Originally posted by Jarthur001:
xdisciplex,

I still would like to know if you are saved? you have yet to post anything to support the faith. Just one word would do...do you trust in Christ as your only hope for salvation?

I have asked this before and you never replied.

If so..why not post a few things you believe in..and not always attach. Just a idea xdisciplex

I think s/he is asking some good questions that are commonly asked in these last few threads. I don't see any attack but instead see civil discussion so far.