We are now arrived at a section of our Gospel, the external condition of which is to the reflecting mind a solemn evidence of human unbelief, here as daring as usually it appears to hesitate. No evangelist has suffered as much in this way, not even Mark, whose close disappears from two of the most ancient manuscripts. But as, we saw, the angel's visit to trouble the waters of Bethesda was unwelcome to not a few copyists of John 5, so here again incredulity indisposed some to reproduce the story of the adulteress. This is plain from some copies (as L A), which leave a blank—a fact wholly inexplicable, if the scribe had not been aware of a paragraph which he knew to exist, but, for reasons of his own, thought fit to omit. Others, again, transposed it to another place, as the cursives, 1, 19, 20, 129, 135, 207, 301, 347, &c, to the end of the Gospel (and 225 after chap. 7:36), and even to another evangelist, as 13, 69, 124, and 461, though alien in tone from all but John, and suiting no place in John but here, where the mass of authority gives it. à A (probably) Β C (probably) Τ X with many cursives and ancient versions simply omit the passage; D F (defective) G Η Κ U Τ (defective), not far short of 300 cursives, and many versions have it. It is marked by an asterisk, or obelisk, in E M S Λ, &c. The variations of the copies which do give it are considerable. This brief view of the evidence may suffice for the general reader, as it is more than enough to prove the peculiarity of the case externally.
As regards the internal evidence, some have alleged against the passage its entire diversity from the style of the Gospel elsewhere; and this, not merely in words and idiom which John never uses, but in its whole cast and character, which is said to savor more of the synoptic Gospels.
All this, however, fails to meet the positive weight of truth in the passage, and its fitness at this very point of the Gospel utterly unaccountable in a forgery or a tradition. The Lord is displaying the true light in His person, as contrasted with others who boasted in the law. We have seen their conscienceless discussion in the preceding chapter. “And they went each to his home, but Jesus went to the Mount of Olives.” Afar from man's uncertainty and contempt, the Son of God retired to enjoy the fellowship of the Father. Thence He returns for service. “And early in the morning he came again to the temple, and all the people were coming unto him; and he sat down, and was teaching them.” (Ver. 2.) The Lord's habit in this respect, recorded by Luke (21:37, 38; 22:36), is a strange reason for discrediting John's mention of this particular instance. Nor do I see any reason to question that it was not merely “the crowd” (ὄχλος), but “the people” in a large sense (λαός) which here flocked to the Lord's teaching in the temple.
“And the scribes and the Pharisees bring to him a woman taken in adultery, and having set her in [the] midst, they say to him, Teacher, this woman was taken in the very act of adultery. Now in the law Moses charged us that such should be stoned: thou, therefore, what sayest thou? But this they said proving him, that they might have [whereof] to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger was writing on the ground.” (Vers. 8-6.)
Such is man at his best estate when he sees and hears Jesus, but refuses the grace and truth which came by Him. They were not ignorant men, but learned in the scriptures; they were not the crowd that knew not the law, but possessed of the highest reputation for religion. Nor could there be a question as to the guilt and degradation of the woman. Why they brought her, and not her paramour, does not appear. But her they brought in the hope, not only of perplexing, but of finding ground of accusation against, the Lord. It seemed to them a dilemma which allowed of no escape. Moses, said they, bade the Jews stone such as she. What did Jesus say? If He only confirmed the decree of the law, where was the grace so much boasted of? If He let her off, did He not evidently set Himself in opposition, not only to Moses, but to Jehovah? What profound iniquity! No horror at sin, even of the darkest dye, but an unfeeling perversion of the exposed adulteress, to entrap the Holy One of God.
But if the Lord wrote on the ground, it was in no way as if He heard them not. Rather was it to give them time to weigh their guilty question, and guiltier motive, while their hope of entrapping Him betrayed them more and more to commit themselves as He stooped to the ground.
“And when they continued asking him, he lifted himself up, and said to them, Let him that is without sin among you first cast the stone at her; and, again stooping down, he was writing on the ground. But they, having heard [it] and being convicted by their consciences, kept going out one by one, beginning from the elder ones until the last; and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in [the] midst.” (Ver. 79.) Thus did the Lord show Himself the true light which lightens every man. Occupied with the law in its condemnation of the adulteress, and indeed far more essaying to condemn the Lord Himself, their darkness is laid bare by these few solemn words. God judges sin, not gross sins, but all sin, be it what it may be; and the Judge of quick and dead was He who thus searched them through and through. It was no question of the law for either now: they shrank abashed from the light, even though Jesus stooped down again, and was writing on the ground. Assuredly He heard their question, and discerned their iniquitous aim, veiled as it was; and now they heard Him, and cowered before His all scathing words of light. Convicted by their consciences, but in no way repentant, they sought to flee, ashamed to see His face, who stooped once more, and thus gave them time to retire, if they refused to bow with broken spirit and heartfelt confession. This, however, it is not the object of the passage to illustrate, but the supremacy of divine light in Jesus, let Him be ever so lowly, and in presence of the proudest. And they were going off, one by one, beginning at the elder until the last, beginning at those who dreaded most their own exposure—an exposure which the youngest could not bear, only less ashamed of their fellows than of Jesus, who had awakened the feeling. How awful the contrast with their own sweet singer, who, spite of his sins, could say by grace, “Thou art my hiding place!” —hiding in God, not from Him, and having before him One who could, and would, cover all his iniquities, and impute nothing. Vain indeed is our effort to cover our sins, or to escape from His presence. But unbelief trusts itself, not Him, and shows the will to get away from His light, as it may for a little season, till judgment come. How will it be then? It will be theirs to stoop in shame and everlasting contempt, when evasion cannot be even for a moment, and all is fixed forever.
Jesus, then, was left alone, as far as the tempting scribes and Pharisees were concerned, and the woman in the midst; for “all the people” appear to have been around, and He addresses them in a subsequent discourse, which seems to be founded on this very incident, as giving occasion to it. (See vers. 12 and seqq.) “And Jesus lifting himself up, and seeing no one but the woman, said to her, Woman, where are they, thine accusers? Did no one condemn thee? And she said, No one, Sir. And Jesus said to her, Neither do I condemn thee: go and sin no more.” (Vers. 10, 11) It is the mistake of Augustine, as of others in modern no less than ancient times, that we have here “misera” in the presence of “misericordia,” which is much more true of the scene at the end of Luke 7. Here the Lord acts as light, not only in the detection of His self-righteous and sinful adversaries, but throughout. There was no need, however, for His exposure of the woman caught in the very act of sin. Hence the ignorance of the scribes who left out the tale was as glaring as their impiety was without excuse. There is not the last semblance of levity in dealing with her evil. The Lord simply brings out the fact that her accusers retreat from the light which convicted their conscience, when the law had utterly failed to reach it; and as they could not condemn her, because they were sinners no less truly than herself, so He would not. It was not His work to deal with causes criminal any more than civil. But if grace and truth came by Him, He is none the less the true light; and so He abides here. As we do not hear of repentance in the woman, so we have no such words from Him as,” Thy sins are forgiven thee,” “Thy faith hath saved thee,” “Go in peace.” He is the light still, and goes not beyond “go and sin no more.” By-and-by He will act as a king, and judge righteously; on their own showing He speaks as a “teacher,” not a magistrate. And it was a question of sin, but most unexpectedly of theirs as well as hers, if they face the light of God.
The words of our Lord are utterly lowered by each as infer that, either to the accusers or to the accused, He restrains sin to that offense against purity of which the woman was guilty. He means any and all sin as intolerable to God, who is light, and in whom is no darkness at all.