The Veracity of John 7:53-8:12When we look at the various Bible versions, eg the RV of 1881 has it in brackets, it appears we must decide for ourselves if we accept this as Divinely inspired and provided for our instruction.
Jesus said in
Matthew 5:17 (KJV): "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil."
It is evident that they were trying to entrap him. If he simply excused the woman, then he would be accused of not maintaining the Law. If he condemned the woman he would at least lose some popularity, amongst those he had previously forgiven at least. They had on another occasion accused him
Luke 15:2 (KJV): "And the Pharisees and scribes murmured, saying, This man receiveth sinners, and eateth with them."
There was the need to acknowledge the righteousness of the Law, while abounding in the mercy of God's character.
The Pharisees, in calling attention to the Law, were not interested in maintaining the Law, but simply were trying to entrap Jesus. Remarkably though, it is Jesus that had never sinned, and he alone was qualified to judge. He alone knew her heart, and with perhaps some patient waiting for all the events to transpire and her fear of death to turn to respect for Jesus, he forgave her, teaching her also to turn from her former way of life. In this sense he did maintain the Law and pass judgment, but as judge he showed mercy. If we examined our hearts like the accusers were forced to do, then we would either leave or plead for mercy after acknowledging both our unworthiness to stand in his presence, and the righteousness of the Law.
Let us briefly look at where this passage is now located. Some have suggested that it could be moved. Undoubtedly there are other possibilities, but someone at least decided to place it here. The context in the previous chapter is given in
John 7:1-2 (KJV): "1 After these things Jesus walked in Galilee: for he would not walk in Jewry, because the Jews sought to kill him. 2 Now the Jews' feast of tabernacles was at hand."
And further down John 7:37 (KJV): "In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink."
The occasion was the Feast of Tabernacles and although they wanted to arrest Jesus, he was able to preach openly
John 7:25-26 (KJV): "25 Then said some of them of Jerusalem, Is not this he, whom they seek to kill? 26 But, lo, he speaketh boldly, and they say nothing unto him. Do the rulers know indeed that this is the very Christ?"
When the chief priests and Pharisees sent officers to arrest him the officers came back with one of the most profound statements ever recorded.
John 7:44-46 (KJV): "44 And some of them would have taken him; but no man laid hands on him. 45 Then came the officers to the chief priests and Pharisees; and they said unto them, Why have ye not brought him? 46 The officers answered, Never man spake like this man."
A little echo here, compare his words in the passage under consideration, where justice and mercy is beautifully balanced to the revealing of the thoughts and the intents of the hearts, not only of the woman, but also those scribes and Pharisees who had brought her, and other Pharisees possibly lurking in the crowd, waiting to agitate the crowd when the moment arrived. They had failed in their direct attempts to arrest him, now they used subtefuge.
The verse directly after our disputed section has an echo.
John 8:12 (KJV): "Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life."
The woman had been dragged to Jesus, but with her heart cleansed she could stand in his presence, while those whose hearts were full of darkness had to leave. This is the lesson that Jesus had given to Nicodemus who came to Jesus in the cover of darkness, at night John 3:1-2. Jesus' message to Nicodemus on that occasion is an echo of what occured in our disputed passage.
John 3:19-21 (KJV): "19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. 21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God."
It is also significant that Nicodemus was taking tentative steps in support of Jesus during the day rather than at night in John 7:50-51. Also John 8:12,13, was Nicodemus also amongst these Pharisees, where Jesus is talking of "the Light of the world" and the need to follow Jesus.
The feast of Tabernacles was a time of rejoicing, an autumn festival when the harvests had been gathered in. They were to dwell in booths made from trees to remind them of their wilderness wanderings in tents, when they were dependant on the care and guidance of God. Even though they contributed with the work of their hands, the harvest was to be acknowledged as having it's source in God's care and love. Instead of rejoicing, the priests and Pharisees used the occasion to plot Jesus' death. When the feast was finished, and note John 7:37-52 is the last day of the feast, the connection with our disputed section comes clear, as the Word of God:
John 7:53-8:1 (RSV):
"And every man went unto his own house, but Jesus went unto the mount of Olives." The Pharisees had "kept" the feast of Tabernacles and returned home, just as they would six months later keep the feast of Passover (apart again from a few business matters concerning a particular problem). He whose whole life was lived in dependance of God, who had nowhere to lay his head, was the living embodiment of the rejoicing and rest of the feast of Tabernacles. He went to the Mount of Olives (as he did six months later John 18:2,3), to be renewed and strengthened with prayer, fellowship and the olive oil, so that on the morrow that light could fully glow, and dispel the darkness, and save the woman and Nicodemus.
Kind regards
Trevor
Author