The Gospel of John

The Woman Taken in Adultery

Professor: Dr. R.J. Rushdoony

Subject: Conversations, Panels and Sermons

Lesson: 22- 70

Genre:

Track: 022

Dictation Name: RR197M24

Location/Venue:

Year:

Let us worship God. Praise ye the Lord, sing unto the Lord a new song and His praise in the congregation of saints. For the Lord taketh pleasure in His people, He will beautify the meek with salvation. Let us pray.

Our Lord and our God we give thanks unto Thee that Thy purpose governs all things. And all things shall serve Thee, the ends of the earth shall praise Thee. The nations shall declare Thy glory and Thy praise. We thank Thee that Thou hast ordained victory in every sphere. Give us therefore patience as we wait for these things, make us diligent as we work for these things and joyful as we serve Thee. Grant us this we beseech Thee in Christ’s name, Amen.

Our scripture this morning is in John, the eighth chapter, verses one through eleven. John 8:1-11, our subject: The Woman Taken in Adultery.

“Jesus went unto the mount of Olives.

2 And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them.

3 And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,

4 They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.

5 Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?

6 This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.

7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

8 And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.

9 And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.

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?

11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.”

If you have a modern translation of the Bible you may not find this passage in the text. It may be put in as a footnote, a long footnote, or it can be at the end of the Gospel of John with a note saying that it is of questionable authenticity. Of course a century and a half ago approximately Dean Burgon, one of the greatest biblical scholars in the history of Britain, wrote a book on precisely this text exploiting the theories which were then in his days arising challenging the historicity of this text. But of course no attention was paid to him because this was the longest of a number of texts in the bible that were being dropped by the modern translators. They liked to believe that somehow the text was defective and not authentic until they came along. And even then of course while they were ready to grant that the text they had prepared was authentic that did not mean it was historical. So behind all of this there has been basically an assault on the integrity of the scripture. What’s the truth about this text? Well this famous episode was not popular with many in the early church. We know so because we are told so. Saint Augustine tells us that many men cut these eleven verses out of their copies of the gospel to prevent their wives from reading it and thinking adultery could be condoned. Now all these scholars know that fact but they choose to ignore it. They do not even cite what Augustine tells us nor the fact that many copies were intact.

The death penalty for adultery in biblical law could not be exercised under Rome. As a result substitute penalties were legislated by the early church. The Council of [unknown] required seven years penance, Saint Basil’s canons fifteen years penance, the Council of [unknown] in Spain required a five year penance for a single act and ten years if repeated. As against all this, our Lord who upheld the law still said the publicans and the harlots go into the kingdom of God before you. This He said to the religious leaders of the nation. Our Lord was teaching in the temple when the scribes and Pharisees triumphantly brought before Him for judgment a woman taken in adultery in the very act. They then demand a decision from Him as to her judgment and their purpose was destroy Him. If Jesus forgave the woman He was then setting aside God’s law and He could be condemned as faithless to it. Because even the people at large who were not for the law still would have said ‘well, he’s not faithful to God’s law’. If He demanded the death penalty in terms of the law then Jesus would run afoul of Roman law and popular opinion which favored laxity. This was the staged episode in order to destroy His credibility. Either answer meant serious trouble. The woman had in fact been taken in adultery. That was true enough but can’t you see that there’s something staged and fraudulent about this episode?

Adultery is not a solitary act. Where was the man? The Pharisees and the scribes showed their own false standard clearly. They were condoning in the man what they would not excuse in the woman. The man had been allowed to go his way but the woman was taken to the temple to be ostensibly publicly shamed as would be also Jesus whatever answer He gave. What sayest Thou, they demanded, what sayest Thou? With all the people there crowding around to hear Him, they felt it was the ideal occasion to show Him up. But Jesus acted as though He had heard nothing. He stooped down and wrote on the ground just with his finger on the dust. They continued their demands for an answer certain they had Jesus in a thorough bind and finally He lifted up Himself and said unto them ‘he that is without sin among you let him first cast the stone at her’. Judges, witnesses and executioners had to show clean hands in dealing with an offender and an offense, in this case, adultery. All of them were guilty men, adulterers, and their conscience convicted them. As a result all left quietly beginning with the eldest even unto the last. That’s a very choice statement because correct form then required that men wait for the eldest to leave first and even in their sin they maintained proper form like good church men. Finally Jesus was left alone and the woman standing in the midst.

The Pharisees and scribes or accusers were all gone, only His disciples and the crowd who had been there to hear His teaching remained. When Jesus had lifted up Himself and saw none but the woman He said unto her woman, where are thine accusers? Have no man condemned thee? Her answer was no man, Lord. The men who had brought her to Jesus had called Him Master, the word master translates ‘teacher’. The woman taken in adultery could not have been ignorant of Jesus’ existence. Seeing Him now in action her spontaneous reaction is to call Him Lord. By the grace of God she had now come to know who He was and her response reflected it. Our Lord’s response was direct, simple, and final. Neither do I condemn Thee, go, and sin no more. He had not set aside the law, the religious leaders had. Because the law could not be used to commit sin and the purpose of the scribes and Pharisees was thoroughly evil, first, whereas the purpose of God’s law here is to make the family the basic institution in society, secure against treason to it, the accusers were all guilty men, adulterers, and their use of the law was evil and obscene. Moreover they had limited its application to the woman! They had allowed the man to go His way. Because a man has more authority in God’s law he also has greater responsibility and culpability. Our Lord Himself declares ‘for whomsoever much is given of him shall much be required. And to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more’. Men are always held more accountable by God because headship has been given to them.

Their sins are therefore more culpable in the sight of God. The Pharisees and scribes had a double standard that gave men permission for sexual sins while denying them severely to women. This double standard is offensive to God and it does incur God’s judgment. Then second, this double standard was revealed in their arrest of the woman and not the man so that they thereby incurred for themselves a greater offense. They had used God’s law to confirm their sinful order. It is a serious enough offense to break God’s law but even worse to use His law to further a sinful situation. There is a long history of the evil use by men of laws against adultery. These abuses have been done in the name of protecting the family but since husbands are the heads of their families their sins are far more serious in God’s sight. Then third, God makes very clear that when men will not obey Him He will not punish the sins of their wives and daughters. So that their families become in effect free to sin as the judgment on their own apostasy and sin. We are told in Hosea 4:12-14:

“My people ask counsel at their stocks, and their staff declareth unto them: for the spirit of whoredoms hath caused them to err, and they have gone a whoring from under their God.

13 They sacrifice upon the tops of the mountains, and burn incense upon the hills, under oaks and poplars and elms, because the shadow thereof is good: therefore your daughters shall commit whoredom, and your spouses shall commit adultery.

14 I will not punish your daughters when they commit whoredom, nor your spouses when they commit adultery: for themselves are separated with whores, and they sacrifice with harlots: therefore the people that doth not understand shall fall.”

This I think should make us aware of what we have today. Before the present sexual revolution we had a double standard like the Pharisees did and God says well then, I will punish you. Your wives and daughters will become promiscuous and I will not punish them. Why? Because you will bring judgment upon all the people unless they repent. Those who have authority must best exemplify obedience to the law of God from their heart and in all their being or else God’s judgment will in time turn against them rather than those under their authority. During most of history men with power and authority have seen themselves as above the law whereas God requires them most of all to obey it. For unto whomsoever much is given of him shall be much required. God’s judgments in history shatter first the centers of authority because they are the derelict ones of whom much is required. God makes that clear repeatedly. This means that judgment begins at the top where the authority is the greatest because such have betrayed their trust and therefore God condemns them. Well before the fall of Jerusalem and Judea it was recognized even by the religious leaders that common place disobedience to the law had led God to abandon personal judgment.

They knew this but they felt it was because the people at large were faithless, they did not see their own hypocrisy. In 66-70 A.D. national judgment followed. We live now in an age asking for judgment by its sins and therefore very much in need of repentance and a return to God. Let us pray.

Our Father we give thanks unto Thee for this Thy word. Thy word is true and Thy word condemns our time, our generation. Do Thou in Thy grace and mercy bring about a renewal, a regeneration of Thy people and of Thy church that we may be in this situation more than conquerors by Thy grace. In Christ’s name, Amen.

Are there any questions now about our lesson? Yes?

[Unintelligible Question]

[Rushdoony] Well, our courts today are clear examples of that because it is no longer become a question of justice when the appellate system operates but rather a question of technicalities. So the law now turns on technicalities, on top of that all kinds of extraneous things are brought in without any evidence whatsoever. For example, police in testifying for some years have been put on trial rather than the accused and liberties are taken with the courtroom proceedings with the police officers that will never be permitted with the accused. On top of that, and part of it, the defense attorneys can bring in extraneous things without a shadow of evidence. A very good friend, a man who is a notable figure for reform, in a trial where this had nothing to do with anything, it was a hearing, not a criminal proceedings, was accused by the other attorney of being anti-Semite. Well of course he immediately said I am selling my house and until I relocate I will be living for some months with my closest friend who happens to be Jewish. But that meant nothing.

The other attorney had brought in the charge of anti-Semitism in a hearing, not in a trial, and it was allowed to stand he was not rebuked. Now, I could go on and cite other like examples but our judicial system has become a corrupt system. The courts in Washington D.C. are a scandal, they are not much better across country. The corruption however begins at the top. Any other questions, yes?

[Unintelligible Question]

[Rushdoony] It means that you change your course. The biblical word repentance means that you were moving in one direction and you reversed your course.

[Unintelligible Question]

[Rushdoony] Penance means in the catholic tradition means doing something to show your contrition. Now, as it developed it became not too important or serious a matter but its origin was not penance but restitution. And the penitential system is a corruption of the word restitution.

[Unintelligible Question]

[Rushdoony] Well of course that was not right but a lot of things have been done…

[Unintelligible Question]

[Rushdoony] Not necessarily, not necessarily. They were often a place where girls were dumped by their fathers because they didn’t want the expense of marrying them off. So they were full of women from important families who were disposed of by their families and very often substantial gifts made to the convent to make it worthwhile to keep the girls.

The system of dowries over the centuries in Europe became perverted so that it meant that the father gave a dowry to the groom whereas in the biblical system the young bridegroom worked on average three years and gave the equivalent of that because he was living at home to the bride’s father to give to the bride. And it was her capitol in case he ever proved false and it meant that it was a good guarantee against him misbehaving because just calculate three years of your income, you’d think twice before you forfeited that. But the medieval dowry system meant that the birth of a girl was a very, very great problem because of the expense of the dowry. And if you had two, three, four girls you made sure they became nuns because if you were hard up for cash you didn’t like the idea. Now this meant it was a very grave social tragedy that the daughters of the poor had no course but prostitution. Their families didn’t want them, they were a burden and the convents didn’t want them they didn’t bring in any profit to them, so by and large their only course was the streets and that’s why Saint Charles in Milan as bishop set aside a fund as the dowry for all poor girls in his [unknown] so that they would not have to hit the streets at a certain age. It meant of course since these girls could not marry without a dowry a lot of men went unmarried, poor men. Any other questions or comments?

Yes?

[Unintelligible Question]

[Rushdoony] No that’s not true. As we saw an earlier chapter of John our Lord said ‘judge righteous judgment’ and in the famous passage ‘judge not let ye be judged’ our Lord goes on to say ‘what measure you judge it shall be measured unto you’. In other words, be careful about judging is what He said because the standard you use will be used against you and if you use a standard that is not from the law of God it’s no good and you’re going to be hit with something that’s no good. If you judge someone because you don’t like their looks then somebody is going to judge you for a trifling thing also.

[Unintelligible Question]

[Rushdoony] If either party had been married it would have been death. They wanted a death penalty statement from Him. So either, well apparently she was also married because the death penalty would have been applied to her, it would not have been if it had been seduction. Well if there are no further questions let us conclude with prayer.

Our Father we give thanks unto Thee for Thy word. Thy word is indeed true and Thy word is like refreshing water unto our souls. We thank Thee that in Thy grace and mercy Thou hast spoken to us and by Thy holy spirit enabled us to understand Thy word. Make us ever faithful and joyful in Thee and in Thy word and kingdom. And now go in peace, God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Ghost bless you and keep you, guide and protect you, this day and always, Amen.