Dr. Sproul discusses this section of scripture since its validity has been questioned. He discusses textual criticism and how it is applied to the text. Dr. Sproul then proceeds to review the story of the woman caught in adultery. When Jesus was challenged with this issue, Dr. Sproul points out that if she was caught in the act, then where is the man? From there Dr. Sproul considers what Jesus may have written.

Our Scripture this morning is from the gospel according to Saint John. I will be reading from John 8:1–12. Some of you may have difficulty reading along with me, because the text that I am reading may not appear in your version of the gospel of John. It may appear as a footnote, or it may appear somewhere else in your Bible. God willing, I will explain that in a few moments. John 8:1–12:

But Jesus went to the Mount of Olives.

Now early in the morning He came again into the temple, and all the people came to Him; and He sat down and taught them. Then the scribes and Pharisees brought to Him a woman caught in adultery. And when they had set her in the midst, they said to Him, “Teacher, this woman was caught in adultery, in the very act. Now Moses, in the law, commanded us that such should be stoned. But what do You say?” This they said, testing Him, that they might have something of which to accuse Him. But Jesus stooped down and wrote on the ground with His finger, as though He did not hear.

So when they continued asking Him, He raised Himself up and said to them, “He who is without sin among you, let him throw a stone at her first.” And again He stooped down and wrote on the ground. Then those who heard it, being convicted by their conscience, went out one by one, beginning with the oldest even to the last. And Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst. When Jesus had raised Himself up and saw no one but the woman, He said to her, “Woman, where are those accusers of yours? Has no one condemned you?”

She said, “No one, Lord.”

And Jesus said to her, “Neither do I condemn you; go and sin no more.”

Then Jesus spoke to them again, saying, “I am the light of the world. He who follows Me shall not walk in darkness, but have the light of life.”

He who has ears to hear the Word of God, let him hear it. Let us pray.

Now, our Father, as we give attention to this well-known passage from the New Testament, so beloved in Your church for the way it bears witness to Your mercy and grace, we ask that you grant understanding to us and to our lives. For we ask it in Jesus’ name. Amen.

Textual Criticism

Before we look at the content of this text, let me just take a moment to explain what I meant when I said some of you may not find this particular passage in the eighth chapter of the gospel of John. I have with me my copy of Nestle’s Greek New Testament.

I have pointed this out before, and the reason is this: At the bottom of the page in the Greek text is what is called the apparatus. The purpose of the apparatus is to help us, as we are reading the text, to discern what was in the original text.

In biblical scholarship, we distinguish between two types of criticism directed toward the Bible. The first is called higher criticism, which criticizes the content of the Bible itself—a task with which I am not enamored. In addition to higher criticism, there is also lower criticism, or textual criticism, which is an exact science by which efforts are made to reconstruct the original text of Scripture as best as possible.

The oldest parchment we have of any portion of the New Testament is a fragment believed to be from the first century—and the closest thing we have to an original portion of Scripture. This so-called Rylands Fragment is a very small portion of the gospel of John.

When John wrote his gospel, people did not take it and put it in a museum to preserve it for future generations. When Paul wrote his letters to the Galatians, the Ephesians, and the Romans, those letters would be read in the churches and then circulated throughout the Christian community.

It became the task of people within the church to make copies of those original documents. In terms of the Old Testament, they had a professionally trained group of scholars called the Masoretes whose task was to copy the Old Testament manuscripts for future generations.

The church has historically confessed her faith in the inspiration of the Bible as follows: The original writers of Scripture were so superintended by God the Holy Spirit, who inspired the original writings, that these documents were received as nothing less than the veritable Word of God. But the church has not taken the position that every copyist who copied the original down through the ages received the same divine superintendence. Rather, we restrict inspiration to what is called the autographa, the original manuscripts of the Bible.

All that to say, the science of textual criticism weighs and evaluates thousands of extant copies of the New Testament. There are different families and schools of those copies, some of which are obviously older and more accurate than others. The copies do not always agree on every detail.

Variant Readings

With respect to the main substance of Scripture, 99.44 percent of it is in agreement in all the families of the copies. But less than 1 percent of the texts in the Bible have variant readings. No major doctrine of the Christian church is affected by those variant readings. But the one that is perhaps the most interesting is the story I have just read from the beginning of John 8.

Frankly, the best gospel of John manuscripts from antiquity do not include this story. The overwhelming consensus of textual critics is that it was not part of the original gospel of John—at least not this portion of John. At the same time, the overwhelming consensus is that this account is authentic, it is Apostolic, and it should be contained in any edition of the New Testament. I believe this account is nothing less than the Word of God. Whether it belongs here in John’s gospel, at the end of Luke 21, or somewhere else, I leave for the ages. But I am treating it as the very Word of God. That is a little excursus on textual criticism.

I hope it does not disturb anyone that there are copy errors in the textual record. Because of this, some say, “We don’t have the originals, so how can we say that the Bible is the Word of God?” That is like saying that if someone put a bomb in the Bureau of Standards in Washington and blew up our yardstick, there would not be enough extant yardsticks and copies to reconstruct what a yard is without the original. Of course, we can reconstruct it, and we can reconstruct it with infinitesimal variation.

The Deterioration of the Scribes and Pharisees

Let us look at this text that has created so much difficulty. This is an appropriate place in John to put it, because it follows the same kind of dispute that has been going on between Jesus and the scribes and Pharisees. We read, “Now early in the morning He came again into the temple, and all the people came to Him; and He sat down and taught them.”

While Jesus is in the midst of this teaching, we are told, “The scribes and the Pharisees”—let me comment on that briefly. Sometimes we tend to think that the scribes and the Pharisees were one and the same. They were not. The scribes were the theologians. The scribes were the jurists, and they were called lawyers because they were experts in interpreting the Old Testament law.

Not all who were scribes, which was a particular career, were members of the party of Pharisees. The Pharisees were a party. They were a group. Many of the scribes were members of the Pharisee party, and vice versa. But not all scribes were Pharisees, and not all Pharisees were scribes. So, John—or whoever wrote this pericope—makes a distinction.

Here we have the scribes and the Pharisees together, the theologians and the rulers of the Jews, dragging a woman who has been caught in adultery. They set her in the midst, right where Jesus is engaged in teaching. He is interrupted by this kangaroo court of the leaders of the Pharisees and scribes, dragging the woman in her embarrassment before Jesus. They make the announcement: “Teacher, this woman was caught in adultery, in the very act. Now Moses, in the law, commanded us that such should be stoned. But what do You say?”

What is wrong with this picture already? If the woman was caught in the act, where is her partner? Did he flee for his life? Did he escape? Or was the woman a victim of unbelievable chauvinism by the Pharisees and the scribes, who singled her out as the guilty party and dragged her out for public exposure? Maybe the man was someone of such importance that they did not want to get him in trouble. We do not know, but you have to ask the question, Where is he?

Instead, the rulers take the most defenseless one, the woman, and they bring her in her shame for public humiliation. They are not doing this out of their zeal for the law. In one sense, this episode reflects the depths to which the Pharisees had deteriorated.

The term Pharisee means “separated one.” During the intertestamental period, in the post-exilic time of Israel, many of the people had moved away from zealous obedience to the law of God. They were cavalier about obeying the terms of God’s covenant with His people. In the midst of that, a group of people committed to spiritual, moral, and theological reform banded together in an effort to purify the Jewish community. They committed themselves to a zealous and passionate pursuit of obedience to the law, and so they were called the “separated ones,” the Pharisees.

The Pharisees were the Puritans of ancient Israel. You could see them as equivalents to people of the Reformed faith in ancient Israel. They were us in ancient Israel. They began with a godly passion and zeal to obey the law of Moses.

Jesus Put to the Test

On this occasion, we are told why the Pharisees brought the woman before Jesus. It is not because they were zealous for the law. They did not bring her because they were scandalized by her behavior and wanted Jesus to clean up Jerusalem. No, we are told why they brought her: to put Jesus to the test. The woman was being used by the scribes and the Pharisees in order to trap Jesus. Can you imagine someone who is zealous for the things of God using a person in this kind of situation to destroy the Son of God? But that is what was going on.

What was the test? They said to Him: “‘Now Moses, in the law, commanded us that such should be stoned. But what do You say?’ This they said, testing Him, that they might have something of which to accuse Him.” Accuse Him to whom? What was the subject of the test?

During Roman occupation, the Romans gave much self-rule to the nations they conquered. They let them practice their religions, and they let them have a strong measure of freedom, but they did not allow vassal nations to exercise the death penalty in capital cases. If someone was to be put to death for a crime in a Roman province, it had to be through the Roman judicial system. That is why Jesus was sentenced by Pilate and not by Caiaphas, the high priest.

The people hated Roman occupation, and they were following after Jesus. The sly Pharisees were setting up Jesus, putting Him to the test because if Jesus said, “Stone the woman,” then they could run to the Roman headquarters and say, “This preacher is advocating that we exercise capital punishment against someone, and to do it without going through the Roman system.” So, they would get Jesus in trouble with the Romans. But if Jesus said, “Don’t stone her,” then the Pharisees could run back to the Sanhedrin and say, “This Jesus really is a heretic, because He denies the law of Moses, and Moses’ law requires that such be executed by stoning.”

Here is another little excursion. We have to distinguish between three sins. Fornication is an unjustifiable sexual relationship between unmarried people. Adultery, to the Jew, was a sexual involvement between two people, at least one of whom was married. Also, under Jewish law, if a man and a woman were engaged but not yet married, and if either of them was unfaithful sexually with another partner, that was considered adultery, even though they were not yet married. The specific mode of execution for the despoiling of an engaged woman was stoning. Regular adultery required execution, but it did not necessarily prescribe stoning. They could do it in other ways. But stoning was particularly required for a woman who was not yet married.

So this is the test, and they have Jesus on the horns of a dilemma. If He says, “Stone her,” He is in trouble with the Romans. If He says, “Don’t stone her,” He is in trouble with the Jewish authorities. No matter how He answers the question, He is in serious trouble. That is exactly what the Pharisees were trying to do.

What Jesus Wrote

What did Jesus do? Did He give a lecture on capital punishment? No, listen to what He did; it is incredible: “But Jesus stooped down and wrote on the ground with His finger, as though He did not hear.” If there is any verse in all of the Bible that has sparked speculation, it is this one. The question is this: What did He write? This is the only occasion in Scripture when Jesus wrote anything.

We know that Jesus was literate, but He did not write an autobiography—at least that we know of—or any epistles or treatises in theology or religion. This is the only occasion where you hear of Jesus writing anything, and He was writing like a quarterback in a sandlot football game, when everyone is on their knees in the huddle and the play is drawn in the dirt. He was kneeling on the ground. The Pharisees and scribes were waiting for Him to answer the question, and He knelt down and started writing in the dirt.

Again, we have to be careful about our speculation. Calvin said, “When God closes His holy mouth, let us desist from inquiry.” But sometimes the temptation is just too great not to speculate, and scholars through the ages have speculated on what Jesus was doing with this particular action.

One of the ideas goes back to an Old Testament text where God says that for those who are disobedient to Him, the law will be written in the sand. Some say that Jesus was symbolically reminding the Pharisees that the finger of God will write in the sand against them one day. Maybe that is what was going on.

Another view is that Jesus was simply doodling to buy some time. He was being impaled on the horns of this dilemma; they were waiting for an answer, and He said, “I have to think about it,” so He scribbled in the sand while He thought about His reply. That is another speculation.

My favorite speculation is the one I am almost positive really happened because it is linked with when Jesus said, “Let Him who is without sin pick up the first stone,” and then went back to write some more. In Roman law, before a judge would give His verdict, He would write it down and then announce it. But I do not think Jesus was doing that, because this was not a Roman court. My guess is that Jesus got down in the dirt, looked at one of the Pharisees, wrote, “embezzler,” and let the man see what He was writing. Then that Pharisee cleared his throat and slinked away. For the next one, He wrote, “murderer,” and the murderer left.

Hypocritical Accusers

More precisely, notice that Jesus said, “He who is without sin, cast the first stone.” The specific content of that phrase refers to the Old Testament practice that if you accuse someone of a capital offense, you yourself must be on hand to throw the stones. You have to participate in the execution (Deut. 17:7).

Perhaps the sin that Jesus has in mind is the same sin for which they are ready to convict the woman. It could be that Jesus is surrounded by a bunch of adulterers. So, He looks at Sam, and He writes, “Judy.” Sam drops his stone and walks away. Jesus looks at Frank and writes, “Sarah.” There goes his reputation.

I think this is the way it will be on the day of judgment. None of us will be going out of our way to go to the rock pile. When Jesus says, “Let him who is without sin cast the first stone,” He is not completely destroying the whole judicial system of the law of God. What He is speaking to are people who, hypocritically, are bloodthirsty in their desire to shame and punish those who have fallen. They have no concept of the grace of God.

It is not wrong to punish criminals for their crimes. The Bible does not teach that. But it is wrong to have a kangaroo court, and it was wrong to drag the woman out and to add insult to her injury. So, Jesus deals with the manifest hypocrisy of those who are judging the woman.

Neither Do I Condemn You

One by one, they walk away, and the woman is left alone with the only person who meets the qualifications Jesus had given for carrying out the execution. Notice that Jesus does not hedge between the Jewish law and the Roman law. He sides with Moses. He gives His verdict: “She is guilty. Stone her.” Then He appoints the executioners and finds them lacking. But again, the only One qualified to do it, the only One without sin, was Jesus.

After all the accusers leave, and Jesus is left alone with the woman, He says: “Woman, where are those accusers of yours? Has no one condemned you?” The only words recorded for us in this entire passage that come from the lips of the woman are her simple reply to Jesus’ question: “No one, Lord.”

The word for “Lord” there is kyrios. It could mean that she is simply saying, “No one, sir,” because the lowest use of the word kyrios is the polite form of address to a man. She may be saying, “No one’s here, sir.” Or, by the grace of God, her eyes may have been opened to understand that she was in the presence of her redeeming Lord, and there is more in that word than meets the eye at first.

The woman says, “There’s no one here to accuse me, Lord.” You might expect Jesus to say, “Well, I’m still here.” He does not do that. Jesus says to her the sweetest words that any human being could ever hear from His lips: “Neither do I condemn you.”

As the former Detroit Lions defensive back Lem Barney once said when we were speaking together in a prison, “If that doesn’t turn you on—if it doesn’t captivate you—you don’t have any switches.” If you cannot relate to that, then your heart has been hardened, because, beloved, that is how each one of us stands in the presence of God. We are naked and ashamed before Him. But Christ has stood in our midst and clothed us with the cloak of His righteousness, covered our nakedness and our shame, and said to us, “Neither do I condemn you.”

Then what? Now that grace has abounded, let sin abound? No. Jesus says to her, in essence: “Don’t do this anymore. Be done with this kind of life. Go now in peace. Go now in newness of life. Go now in your forgiveness and sin no more.” He follows this with one of His I AMs: “I am the light of the world. He who follows Me shall not walk in darkness, but have the light of life.”

He is the light that comes not to expose our sin but to deliver us from the darkness that would destroy our lives, the light that says: “Neither do I condemn you. Go and sin no more.” Let us pray.

Father, how we thank You for this story by which we see so vividly the tender mercy of Jesus, without which none of us would stand. We thank You for it in His name. Amen.

This transcript has been lightly edited for readability.