Caught in the Act

A Disturbing Story

(Date unknown, probably AD 29)

One of the most intense stories in the Gospels is that of a woman caught in the very act of committing adultery (John 7:53-8:11). She is brought to Jesus by "scribes and Pharisees" who ask him what should be done with the woman. The Law of Moses said she should be stoned to death.

But does this story even belong in the Bible? Overwhelming evidence from the earliest manuscripts show that this story could not have been present in the original release of John's Gospel. When it does appear, it is often found at other locations in the Gospel, such as at the very end, and often set apart with an asterisk or obelisk.

On the other hand, the same scholars who discount its placement in the Bible agree that the story is historically factual, and that it was told in the oral traditions of earliest Christianity. There are early witnesses who say this was a story told by John the Apostle and handed down by those who knew him. It is also found apart from the Bible in other manuscripts from the first and second centuries.

The story as presented in John's Gospel appears to have been written by Luke rather than John. It uses the phrase "scribes and Pharisees," which is not found elsewhere in John's Gospel but appears frequently in Luke's Gospel.

The best explanation of the history of this story is that John the Apostle was an eyewitness to its occurrence, and he retold it many times as he travelled. Luke gathered it from John as part of his research project that resulted in the Gospel of Luke and the Acts of the Apostles. He did not include it in his original release of the Gospel of Luke, but it does show up in a manuscript of the 13th century right after Luke 21:38.

Why did this event occur?

Some writers have implied that this event was a trial for the accused woman. It should have properly proceeded with at least two witnesses who agreed to the alleged facts, and concluded with her being stoned to death, with the first stones thrown by the two witnesses. This is incorrect. The subtext behind the story shows that the trial has already occurred, with the woman found guilty.

This was brought to Jesus to test him, according to verse 6: "They were saying this, testing him, so that they might have grounds for accusing him." There are two facets to this: conflict with the Law of Moses, and conflict with Roman Law.

If their prime interest was conflict with the Law of Moses, they would be hoping Jesus would disavow the death penalty for divorce. They could then discredit him before conservative Jewish believers in hope of perhaps reducing his following. But Jesus would have committed no violation of Jewish law by offering his opinion. What could they do? Bar him from the temple? That would be a hard sell before the Sanhedrin (the high council of the Jews), which had members with a wide range of opinions.

If their prime interest was conflict with Roman law, they would be hoping Jesus would call for the death penalty to be enforced, and they could charge him with inciting the people to break the Roman law which forbade the Jews from using the death penalty. If their complaint was successful, Jesus could be imprisoned or even possibly be executed.

But there is a third facet. History tells us that about AD 30, the Jewish authorities ruled that the death penalty for adultery could no longer be enforced. No such change could have come about among the Jews except at the end of an extended period of discussion, lasting several years. These years would have overlapped with Jesus' ministry, and perhaps some of the Jews genuinely wanted Jesus' opinion on the subject. Perhaps it was even Jesus' opinion here that turned the tide and resulted in the death penalty being  thrown out!

A Weak Case?

There are potential weaknesses in the "scribes' and Pharisees' " legal case against the woman. There is no mention of the required two witnesses present at this scene, so that the penalty could be properly carried out. Perhaps they had been willing to testify, but were not willing to participate in the stoning.

There is also no mention of the other party involved in the adultery. If they were indeed caught in the act (as required for the death penalty to be carried out) the other party would be known and should be executed along with the woman. Perhaps the other party was beyond their legal reach. He could have been a Roman soldier, upon whom they could not enforce Jewish law. It would not be unlikely that such a soldier would have strayed beyond the available prostitutes and persuaded a betrothed woman to go to bed with him. Or perhaps consent for the adulterous act was lacking.

A weak case would be another possible incentive to throw their dilemma into Jesus' lap. Let Jesus make the decision, so they would not have to take the blame themselves!

Jesus' Response: Who Has Moral Authority?

"Let he who is without sin among you cast the first stone." Jesus showed the scribes and Pharisees that they lacked the moral authority to carry out the death penalty, for each of them were guilty of sin, just as the woman was guilty of sin.

The New Testament clearly tells us that the governing authorities have the legal power of the sword to wreak vengeance against evil-doers (Romans 13:1-4). But what if we are the government? Does our part in the governing process allow us to lay aside Jesus' admonition?

Can Christians justify the death penalty for any offense (other than in self-defense) when Jesus appears to set such a penalty aside for those who would follow God?

An Act of Mercy

Jesus in this story exercises an act of mercy. By no means does he excuse the sin that has taken place. He asks the woman, "Did no one condemn you?" She answers, "No one, Lord."

Jesus answers, "I do not condemn you, either. Go. From now on sin no more."

If we repent of our own misdeeds, we can count on Jesus to not condemn us, just as he did with the woman caught in the act of adultery.