I have been thinking on Brother Luke's thread, "What do you think about this sermon." and what that preacher said about the words "whore" and "harlot" and my thoughts took me to the woman recorded in John that was caught in adultery.
Quote:John 8:1-12
1 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.
12 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.
.
Just some simple observations.
"Woman" That word sounded or I get the idea that that word meant or sounded different the way the religious hypocrites said it than the way Jesus said it. They said it with contempt, Jesus said it with compassion and understanding.
"[they] went out one by one" When the "whited sepulchers" (the keepers of the Torah and holy men) began to leave with convicted consciousness' they beginning with the eldest to the youngest. The eldest had a little wisdom and understanding, and experience with sin. The young are more brash and stout in heart.
Jesus allowed them to leave with some dignity intact, his eyes were upon the ground, he didn't watch as they unclenched their hands and released the rocks to turn and leave.
"no man, lord" To Jesus' question, "Hast no man condemned thee?", she answered, "no man, lord". Imagine the relief this woman felt, all of her accusers have gone back to their daily routines - she was free. Free to go where she pleased and do what she pleased.
"Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more." First thought, what signs of repentance did she manifest for Christ to forgive her sin. Would he have said the same of every adulteress in Israel? Just some thoughts to provoke some thoughts. Take it from here.
(06-12-2010 04:42 AM)Ronnie Wrote: [ -> ]I have been thinking on Brother Luke's thread, "What do you think about this sermon." and what that preacher said about the words "whore" and "harlot" and my thoughts took me to the woman recorded in John that was caught in adultery.
Quote:John 8:1-12
1 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.
12 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.
.
Just some simple observations.
"Woman" That word sounded or I get the idea that that word meant or sounded different the way the religious hypocrites said it than the way Jesus said it. They said it with contempt, Jesus said it with compassion and understanding.
"[they] went out one by one" When the "whited sepulchers" (the keepers of the Torah and holy men) began to leave with convicted consciousness' they beginning with the eldest to the youngest. The eldest had a little wisdom and understanding, and experience with sin. The young are more brash and stout in heart.
Jesus allowed them to leave with some dignity intact, his eyes were upon the ground, he didn't watch as they unclenched their hands and released the rocks to turn and leave.
"no man, lord" To Jesus' question, "Hast no man condemned thee?", she answered, "no man, lord". Imagine the relief this woman felt, all of her accusers have gone back to their daily routines - she was free. Free to go where she pleased and do what she pleased.
"Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more." First thought, what signs of repentance did she manifest for Christ to forgive her sin. Would he have said the same of every adulteress in Israel? Just some thoughts to provoke some thoughts. Take it from here.
No man remained to accuse the woman , therefore Jesus was not going to pass sentence on her, and exercise the law of Moses. Had He done so, the Jews would have accused Him of taking magisterial authority into His own hands.
Also, keep in mind that Jesus came to save, rather than destroy. He was not condoning the sin, but simply forgiving the sinner. She wasn't really free to do whatever she wanted - after all, he told her quite frankly to "go, and sin no more." Jesus openly taught against adultery, as shown in Matthew 27:27-32; Matthew 19:9, 18. (Hopefully, her "want-to" had been changed by this whole experience).
Just a couple of thoughts.
God Bless.
Quite a different way of dealing with a sinner the fellows mentioned on the other thread.
This is the first scripture that comes to my mind.
Quote:John 3:16 Â For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
17 Â For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
18 Â He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
19 Â 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 Â For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
21 Â But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.
(06-12-2010 04:42 AM)Ronnie Wrote: [ -> ]"Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more." First thought, what signs of repentance did she manifest for Christ to forgive her sin. Would he have said the same of every adulteress in Israel?
Repentance was not an issue at this point, for three reasons:
1. She had been snatched away from an adulterous act, and frog-marched, in her disarrayed condition, to the feet of Jesus by her accusers. She was probably in some sort of emotional and/or psychological shock. Repentance, when it comes, comes as the result of conviction and deep reflection. It is not something that "happens" the moment one is caught in sin. If her sinful act had been as recent as it seems, she hadn't had
time to repent.
2. Who said repentance was necessary for Jesus' forgiveness? It was for John the Baptist, apparently;
he's the one who said,
Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance (Matthew 3:8). Jesus
did say,
I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance (Matthew 9:13); but that was hardly what was going on in this incident, and, anyways,
Jesus did not make repentance a prerequisite for forgiveness: He simply said that repentance was required at some point. Christians are still having trouble with this concept, and a whole subset of "preachers" spends all their time making Christians doubt their salvation, by questioning whether they "repented the right way."
True repentance
follows the new birth. It does not precede it, although sorrow for one's sins may be present.
3. Of course, it's idle to speak of the new birth, or the requirements of salvation, in the context of John 8. This was a different dispensation, when Jesus was physically present on the earth; not even the disciples had experienced the new birth, much less this woman. These people were not saved in the same way that we are saved. We don't even know if this woman became a follower of Christ at all, although it's hard to imagine that she wouldn't. We only know that the Law demanded justice of her (although a perverted, unscriptural justice); and Jesus offered forgiveness instead.
But "repentance" wasn't part of the equation.
(06-15-2010 09:05 AM)William Wrote: [ -> ] (06-12-2010 04:42 AM)Ronnie Wrote: [ -> ]"Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more." First thought, what signs of repentance did she manifest for Christ to forgive her sin. Would he have said the same of every adulteress in Israel?
Repentance was not an issue at this point, for three reasons:
1. She had been snatched away from an adulterous act, and frog-marched, in her disarrayed condition, to the feet of Jesus by her accusers. She was probably in some sort of emotional and/or psychological shock. Repentance, when it comes, comes as the result of conviction and deep reflection. It is not something that "happens" the moment one is caught in sin. If her sinful act had been as recent as it seems, she hadn't had time to repent.
2. Who said repentance was necessary for Jesus' forgiveness? It was for John the Baptist, apparently; he's the one who said, Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance (Matthew 3:8). Jesus did say, I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance (Matthew 9:13); but that was hardly what was going on in this incident, and, anyways, Jesus did not make repentance a prerequisite for forgiveness: He simply said that repentance was required at some point. Christians are still having trouble with this concept, and a whole subset of "preachers" spends all their time making Christians doubt their salvation, by questioning whether the "repented the right way."
True repentance follows the new birth. It does not precede it, although sorrow for one's sins may be present.
3. Of course, it's idle to speak of the new birth, or the requirements of salvation, in the context of John 8. This was a different dispensation, when Jesus was physically present on the earth; not even the disciples had experienced the new birth, much less this woman. These people were not saved in the same way that we are saved. We don't even know if this woman became a follower of Christ at all, although it's hard to imagine that she wouldn't. We only know that the Law demanded justice of her (although a perverted, unscriptural justice); and Jesus offered forgiveness instead.
But "repentance" wasn't part of the equation.
Thanks for starting this thread. And to all for the thoughts. This has been a really interesting study., and something I've never given much thought to in the past. And I've learned a lot from it. I love exercising my mind on these issues.
Have a wonderful, Christ-filled day.
(06-16-2010 06:24 AM)graceforme Wrote: [ -> ]Thanks for starting this thread. And to all for the thoughts. This has been a really interesting study.
Thank you! I am not a teacher or Bible student or Bible authority and I don't purport to be, I should be extremely careful, especially in my weakened condition, what I put out to be digested by others. It is all about Christ.
(06-16-2010 06:32 AM)Ronnie Wrote: [ -> ]Thank you! I am not a teacher or Bible student or Bible authority and I don't purport to be, I should be extremely careful, especially in my weakened condition, what I put out to be digested by others. It is all about Christ.
Nor am I a teacher, but I really enjoy subjects that prompt this type of study. There is always so much to learn, and threads like this always lead to interesting thoughts.
God Bless.
(06-16-2010 06:49 AM)graceforme Wrote: [ -> ]threads like this always lead to interesting thoughts.
God Bless.
So true graceforme...and my interesting thought is,this woman is caught in the very act of adultery,the very act! so where's the geezer she was doing it with?
Great Thread
I think there is a lesson for all of us . The next time and I mean me too because i am the worst about this ,, The next time we decide to condemn anyone .We should ask ourselves .. Are we without sin ? Have we ever been without sin ? We should always think on this before we cast stones .