(1) Our reactions to this text
What strikes
you when you read this?
How would
you describe Jesus as portrayed here?
There is a
clear comparison being made here!
(2) A Callous trap
Even before
we knew this was a test or trap for Jesus, we would be horrified by the
behaviour of the scribes and Pharisees. These were supposed to be people
guiding relationships with God. They were supposed to be teaching and
interpreting God’s law, not being the moral police. So fixed had they become on
their own ways and agendas, that God could hardly get a look in. When God
literally stared them in the face (i.e. Jesus did), they didn’t recognise him.
They were religious control-freaks, who opposed Jesus from very early on – when
Jesus wanted to spend time with sinners and outcasts.
When Jesus
wanted to show them what God was really like (as opposed to how they had been
acting) they wanted none of it. In fact they wanted to destroy Jesus and his
brand (of ministry); in this case, by trapping him in a no-win situation. This
was dis-graceful behaviour – how does someone connect with God (or faith) ever
again when something like this happens to them. This would be completely
destructive and thoroughly isolating to any person.
In bringing
this woman out into the public, “… making her stand before all of them”, they
showed absolutely no regard for her at all. They clearly didn’t care. This was
a humiliating, depersonalising, devaluing thing to have done. This woman was
just a pawn in their attempts to trap Jesus. They were just so desperate to
discredit Jesus, and to dispense with the challenge that he brought to them. The
scribes and Pharisees [actually a bit of an awkward coalition] must have had
some long meetings planning this strategy. And they were probably congratulating
themselves for this seemingly ingenious plan.
Referring to
Jesus here as “teacher” (v.4) would have been sarcastic (rather than
respectful), as they were trying to back Jesus into a corner. Verse 5 delivers
the test. If Jesus disagrees with the stoning, then he is seemingly standing
against the Law of Moses (and being lax toward moral standards). If Jesus
agrees with the stoning, then he contradicts his own teaching on compassion and
mercy. This would also potentially cause Jesus some trouble with the Roman
authorities who controlled the issuing of death sentences. A no-win situation!
Jesus was either a law-breaker or a hypocrite.
Now in his
mind, Jesus would have to come up with a solution that would help this poor
isolated woman. Jesus would be most interested in what would help her personal
situation and spiritual condition. Jesus would also be interested in holding
these scribes and Pharisees to account for their dis-graceful and destructive
behaviour.
If we were
investigators of this incident, there might be quite a few questions we could
ask?
(a) How was it that this woman was
“caught in the very act of committing adultery”? Was this whole thing a set-up?
Could they really have been that devious!
(b) Where was the man who was a party to
this adultery? The Law of Moses treated the man just as guilty as the woman in
such a case (Lev.20:10, Deut.22:22), yet only the woman was brought to appear
here! [This is completely unjust! The woman is then just an easy and convenient
target.] Was the man in question actually in the employ of the accusers?
(c) Where were the required witnesses, as
proscribed in the same law (Deut. 17:6, 19:15)? Was the lawful need for
witnesses being ignored, while the most extreme penalty was being demanded?
This whole charge seems very suspect!! [The harshest penalty of death by
stoning was hardly ever applied. But this of course was very political, and was
really about power. The quest for power always obliterates mercy.]
(3) Jesus’ response
So Jesus
would want to achieve two things: uplift the woman and reverse some of the
damage that has been done; and challenge the hardheartedness and injustice of
the scribes and Pharisees. And this, in one concise sentence, is exactly what
Jesus did!
But first …
what was Jesus writing on the ground? This has been long debated. This is what
I think. Judges, in the courts of the time, wrote down their sentence before
they delivered it. I reckon that Jesus was imitating this, but with a twist …
not writing down any judgement against the woman, but rather writing down the
sins and potential sentence of this woman’s accusers. This would be consistent
with Jesus’ own teaching – “Do not judge, so that you may not be judged; for
with the judgement you make you will be judged, and the measure you give will
be the measure you get” (Matt.7:1-2).
What they
were doing with this woman, was likely far worse than anything she had done.
They probably didn’t know her background, or what incidents had led up to her
behaviour that day – what suffering there had been in her past. And it seems
they wouldn’t have cared. Not one of these accusers would be anywhere near
sinless, yet they still tried this on! [And this woman was a child of God.]
So Jesus
would, at the same time, want to disassemble this attempted trap, and also
offer the woman a vital and loving ministry of liberation, healing and
salvation.
Here it
comes …
Let anyone among you
who is without sin, be the first to throw a stone at her.
Brilliant!
The scribes and the Pharisees were caused to drop their stones to the ground
(at their own feet), and one-by-one follow their ringleaders (the “elders”),
right away from this scene. They were called to account for their own
behaviour. Some, we hope, would have taken stock and regretted what they had
done. We hope that some of the accusers might have been changed that day, and
never pick up a stone again.
In the eyes
of the public, a great injustice had been challenged, and a miscarriage of
justice averted. As those stones fell to the ground, injustice actually bowed
to Jesus. In this reply, there was no moral laxity, no contradiction of mercy
[and no premature conflict with the Romans]. Game, set, match!
Jesus was
left alone with the woman. There was one sinless person who could have thrown a
stone, but he did not! The way forward for this woman was not through
condemnation but rather through understanding. If she was not to sin anymore,
then she would need to be inspired in that direction through an offering of
love and grace (that would restore her sense of value). This was stunning,
gutsy, liberating grace!
Creatively, in
the way in which he speaks with her, Jesus restores this woman’s personhood and
gives her a voice. Would any of the callousness, or condemnation, or bold
accusations stick? Or could this woman be restored to health? Could this woman
even find salvation? Where are they … has no one condemned you?
The woman replies, “No one sir”. This releases the woman from EXTERNAL hindrances
… people getting in the way of God’s best intentions for her.
She is then released
from all INTERNAL hindrances … those feelings happening inside this woman that
were previously blocking out God’s love. Neither do I condemn you. Go your way, and from
now on do not sin again. She was released from shame (and any feelings
of unworthiness), because no one could rightly claim to be any better than her.
This also releases the woman from feelings of guilt. She receives forgiveness
and begins the process of discipleship. Clearly this woman responds to Jesus’
creative and compassionate approach to her, and she now embraces new
possibilities.
(4) Questions of us
(a) Do we turn people away – or rather
encourage them toward God (and offer them a place to belong)?
(b) Do we use certain labels – or rather
see the person that God wishes to love?
(c) Do we have any stones in our hands?
(d) Do we bring a positive or negative
view of God to the table?
(5) Our vision
What does
all this say about Jesus’ character?
The purpose of this church is to
allow Christ to transform us together so that His [i.e. Jesus’] character,
ministry and mission are expressed through all of us.
What does
all this say about Jesus’ ministry and mission??
·
Compassion/mercy
·
Justice
– opposing injustice
·
Lovingly
committed to people’s well-being
·
Proactive/outgoing
– looking for opportunities to minister
·
Offering
salvation
No comments:
Post a Comment