Jesus violated the law!

[other one]

written by Kevin Cornette (kevincornette@yahoo.com) Kevinator Cornbread Oct 9 2004, 03:08 AM Post #1
April 04 From: Houston Texas Area

Okay. First a little history. This event takes place in John 8, the day after the events that took place in Chapter 7:37 through verse 53. Let's look there first:

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. He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.) Many of the people therefore, when they heard this saying, said, Of a truth this is the Prophet. John 7:37-40
When Jesus stands and cries in the Temple is, in my opinion, one of the most beautiful and meaningful events in the life of Messiah. In John 7:2, we read that this was during the Feast of Sukkot (Tabernacles), one of the three Feasts of Ascension (when all Jewish men from 12 years old and upward were required to be in Jerusalem).
On the last day, the great day of the Feast, is Hosannah Rabbah, and a special ceremony took place as long as the Temple of God stood. The priest would be split into three divisions and perform certain functions. The first would stay in the Temple and prepare to shout the Hallel and glorify God (along with the Levitical Choir and musicians) when the other two groups got back from their assigned duties.
The second division of priests would go out to the Kidron valley on the north of the Temple to cut down huge (25-30 foot long) willow branches. The willow branch is a symbol of the resurrection, for when these willow branches were put into the ground, they would take root and grow into trees. These priests would bring the branches into great stands to wave them over the Altar of sacrifice to make the sound of a mighty rushing wind to commemorate the day that God lit the fire of the Altar in Solomon's Temple (2 Chronicles 7:1-4). They would enter the Temple through the Eastern Gate (where the resurrected Jesus will enter at His return) and wait til the appropriate time.
The last group accompanied the Kohen HaGaddol (High Priest) to the pool of Siloam, where he dipped a silver pitcher into the pool to draw out of the well "Living Waters". As he drew the water out, he would sing/chant chapter 12 of Isaiah:

And in that day thou shalt say, O LORD, I will praise thee: though thou wast angry with me, thine anger is turned away, and thou comfortedst me. Behold, God is my salvation; I will trust, and not be afraid: for the LORD JEHOVAH is my strength and my song; he also is become my salvation. Therefore with joy shall ye draw water out of the wells of salvation. And in that day shall ye say, Praise the LORD, call upon his name, declare his doings among the people, make mention that his name is exalted. Sing unto the LORD; for he hath done excellent things: this is known in all the earth. Cry out and shout, thou inhabitant of Zion: for great is the Holy One of Israel in the midst of thee.
(can you see the Messianic prophecy here. The underlined part reads in Hebrew "Behold, God is Y'shua. I will put my confidence in and reverence him. YAH, YHVH is my strength, my rejoicing, and has become my Y'shua" -- Y'shua is Jesus name in Hebrew! )
After the water is drawn, the Kohen HaGaddol and his company would come up to the Temple through the Water Gate and wait outside the entrance. (as a quick aside, as soon as the companies of Kohen left, everyone would bow down and wait until the ceremony began)
What these three companies were waiting for is the sound of the flute. The ceremony began with the sound of a flute playing from the pinnacle of the Temple of God. This flute was called "The Pierced One" and had five holes in it (remember Jesus had five wounds: 2 hands, 2 feet and his side!). As soon as the pierced one cried out, the ceremony began. However, in this year, while everyone is bowing and waiting for the Pierced One to cry out, Jesus STOOD and cried instead (for He truly is the Pierced One - Zechariah 12:10, Psalm 22:16, John 19:34-37 & Revelation 1:7!)! HalleluYAH!
Jesus cries out and tells them "This ceremony we have celebrated together for 1500 years, it is pointing to this: I will cause the Ruach HaKodesh [Holy Spirit] to come and dwell in you, if you will put your confidence in me, just like the Scripture said that the Kohen HaGaddol just quoted!" Many believed on Him on this day. And Jesus spoke with such power and authority that the Levitical Officers (who operated as policemen in the Temple complex and were commissioned to arrest anyone who disturbed the ceremony) could not arrest Jesus but simply said "No man ever spoke like this Man!" (John 7:46).
All of this takes place on the last day of Sukkot, the 21st day of Tishre. The following day is a minor Feast of the LORD called "Simchat Torah", or "Rejoicing with the Torah". It was supposed to be a great day of celebration and rejoicing before the LORD because God had given His people the Living Torah (who is, indeed, Jesus). Instead of rejoicing that Jesus had come bringing salvation, deliverence and the forgiveness of sin, the accusers came to bring accusation. On this day, Jesus was once again in the Temple teaching (John 8:2) -- the common Jews rejoicing with the Living Word, and the leaders bringing the accusation.
(I am sorry that this is taking so long to set up, but this information is needed to rightly divide the Word here, and have understanding of what Jesus said and did).
And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst, they say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou? 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. 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. And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground. 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.

Now just a little more history: Whenever someone was caught in adultery, both the man and the woman would be brought to the Nicanor gates and accused. If witnesses could be gathered to confirm that adultery had indeed been committed, then there was a certain ceremony that would be done in order to bring judgment. However, in this instance they only brought the woman. This was a violation of the Oral Law of God. Strike One.
Secondly, the priest was required to then stoop down and write the law that had been broken (na'aph, or 'adultery' would be written in Hebrew), along with the name of the accused, in the dust of the floor of the Temple (which Jesus did) [actually, the priest could write the law and the names anywhere, as long as the marks were not permanent - and the dust of the floor of the Temple was the most common place]. By doing this, Jesus showed these accusers that THEY were not keeping the law, but He would anyway. Strike Two.
So these men ignored the law, brought the woman only, and then continued with accusation. So Jesus stood up (after plainly demonstrating they were violating the law themselves) said "He who is without sin among you, lem him first cast a stone at her" John 8:7). THEY did not want to cast the stone, they wanted Jesus to condemn her, so they continued accusing.
Now to get this last part, lemme throw in just a little more history. Every year on Yom Kippur (The Day of Atonement), the Kohen HaGaddol would immerse up to 11 times in a Mikveh (a baptismal tank) in order to be ceremonially cleansed between each separate portion of the day's sacrifices. At the end of Yom Kippur, there was a celebration at the home of the Kohen HaGaddol, and there would be great rejoicing that God had received the sacrifice, and everyone’s sins had been rolled fore ward another year (as they were waiting on Messiah). To end the day, and announce to everyone the party was over (and it was time to go home), the Kohen HaGaddol would come out and quote Jeremiah 17:13 "'Oh YHVH, the Mikveh of Israel...' just as the mikveh cleansed me on this day, may the Holy One (Messiah), blessed be his name, cleanse all Israel when He comes".
(The KJV reads "Oh LORD the hope of Israel"... however, if you get your Strong's Concordance out, you can look up the word translated hope, and it is #4723 'mikveh' -- which is a baptismal tank).
So any religious Jewish man had heard this verse quoted by the High Priest every year since he was 12 years old. At 50, he would have heard it 39 times! (although Yom Kippur was NOT a Feast of ascension, many would come up for YOMA anyway, because of it's close relationship in time to Sukkot, when they had to be there anyway). The entire verse is as follows:
O LORD, the hope of Israel, all that forsake thee shall be ashamed, and they that depart from me shall be written in the earth, because they have forsaken the LORD, the fountain of living waters. Jeremiah 17:13

The way it reads in Hebrew is:
"Oh YHVH, the Immerser of Israel, all those who leave your way shall be put to shame (publicly embarassed), those who turn aside from my ways will have their names written in the dust and blotted out, for they have departed from YHVH, the fountain of Mayim Hayim (the waters of life).."
So Jesus gave them a chance -- they could have been just embarassed and then repented before the LORD. but instead they rejected, and in turn had their names written in the dust. This passage in Jeremiah is a Messianic prophecy of what Messiah would do when He came - and in this passage in John, we see Jesus fulfill the prophecy.
In my opinion, one og the most interesting parts is verse 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.
They heard the voice of God in their conscience, the Spirit of God bringing to their remembrance all the times they heard the Kohen HaGaddol quote the verse -- but instead of receiving the conviction and repenting, they departed from Him (just as it was prophesied!). They left from the eldest to the youngest, the older having heard the verse quoted more often (imho). And Jesus did this on the day following His announcement that HE was the fountain of living waters (John 7:37-39). Strike Three and they were out!
(as one more aside, then Jesus returns to his teaching of the multitude in the Temple, by saying "I am the light of the world"... this was the very morning that the four great lamps of the court in the Temple (which were called "The light of the world" were being extinguished after being kept lit for the entire celebration of Sukkot).
That is my take on it, and I can't wait to see the video of it in heaven.

 

 

[Roymond]

On 1/14/2023 at 5:39 AM, Mr. M said:

Paul taught that if there is  matter between members of the fellowship, they should be able to resolve the dispute

without going before the civilian courts. There is nothing to suggest that this caused any alarm among authorities.

Christians were already suspect for saying "Jesus is Lord" instead of "Caesar is lord"; ignoring the Roman courts by judging their own cases would have looked subversive to the Romans.  A second aspect is that those who ran the Roman courts would not be getting their usual bribes.

On 1/14/2023 at 5:39 AM, Mr. M said:

1 Corinthians 6:

3 Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?

4 If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge

who are least esteemed in the church. (**modern translations change this??)

5 I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no,

not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren?

**4 If then you have judgments concerning things pertaining to this life, do you appoint

those who are least esteemed by the church to judge?

6:4 is a tough passage because the word for "judge" here -- καθίζετε (ka-THI-dzete) -- is a rare instance of a verb with two possible moods in the same spelling:  it could be imperative, giving a command, or it could be indicative; and it taken to be indicative it could be either a declaration of fact, "You do judge" or a question, "Do you judge?"

The phrase "those who are least esteemed by the church" is also not clear; different commentators have taken it to mean those saints who are least esteemed while others take it as referring to Roman courts.  If it refers to Roman courts, there's an implied warning because while Christians to many Romans just seemed a strange sort of Jew, if they were seen as separate from the Jews they had a serious problem:  Christianity was not a legal religion.  And that puts weight onto Paul's argument:  are you actually taking matters to court before Roman magistrates who could see you as rebels against Rome?!?

I've never been able to come to a clear conclusion, and plainly neither have scholars making translations for publication.  But it doesn't really change the sense of the passage unless it's taken as a command -- it would seem very odd indeed if Paul is saying to take legal matters between Christians to the least respected members of the church!

 

Edited January 20, 2023 by Roymond

[Jayne]

On 1/14/2023 at 2:22 AM, Roymond said:

So we as Christians dare to be so radical today as Jesus and those early believers were?  to refuse to take legal matters to the authorities and resolve them among ourselves?  That certainly seems to be what Jesus' example points us to; do we have the courage to actually follow Him?

I totally disagree with what you are saying Jesus' "point" was.

He broke no law - but if he had said "yes", let's stone her, he would have violated three laws.

• The law said that in cases of adultery, the man AND the woman were to be stoned.  Leviticus 20:10.  Only the woman was there.
• The law said that the witnesses were to be the first to throw the stones.  Deuteronomy 17:7.  No witnesses were given - no testimony made.  No legal judgment made.  Just a mob accusation.
• The law said that there musts be "diligent inquiry" into major offenses using priests/judges.  Deuteronomy 17:8-13. There was no trial and Jesus was NOT an earthly priest, judge, or legal authority.  Even though he was and is the LORD of the universe.

What did Jesus write in the dirt?  We will never know.  I suspect it may have been those three laws.

The men, leaving from oldest to youngest, HAD to have understoodd that THEY were breaking the law.  No man.  No witnesses.  No legal testimony.  No pronouncement from a priest or judge.  They sought out no legal authority.  Just some guy on the street who had no legal authority to pass judgment.

It would have been like a mob of people acting as a jury asking a guy checking water meters if they should bash in the skull of an allegeded child-molester.

THEY blew it.  Jesus did nothing wrong.

Edited January 20, 2023 by Jayne

[David1701]

45 minutes ago, Jayne said:

I totally disagree with what you are saying Jesus' "point" was.

He broke no law - but if he had said "yes", let's stone her, he would have violated three laws.

• The law said that in cases of adultery, the man AND the woman were to be stoned.  Leviticus 20:10.  Only the woman was there.
• The law said that the witnesses were to be the first to throw the stones.  Deuteronomy 17:7.  No witnesses were given - no testimony made.  No legal judgment made.  Just a mob accusation.
• The law said that there musts be "diligent inquiry" into major offenses using priests/judges.  Deuteronomy 17:8-13. There was no trial and Jesus was NOT an earthly priest, judge, or legal authority.  Even though he was and is the LORD of the universe.

What did Jesus write in the dirt?  We will never know.  I suspect it may have been those three laws.

The men, leaving from oldest to youngest, HAD to have understoodd that THEY were breaking the law.  No man.  No witnesses.  No legal testimony.  No pronouncement from a priest or judge.  They sought out no legal authority.  Just some guy on the street who had no legal authority to pass judgment.

It would have been like a mob of people acting as a jury asking a guy checking water meters if they should bash in the skull of an allegeded child-molester.

THEY blew it.  Jesus did nothing wrong.

I think, although we can't prove it, that Jesus was writing what the following verse describes, and that the accusers knew the implication.  I believe that this ties in perfectly with Jesus telling the one who is without sin to cast the first stone.

Jer. 17:13 (KJV) O LORD, the hope of Israel, all that forsake thee shall be ashamed, and they that depart from me shall be written in the earth, because they have forsaken the LORD, the fountain of living waters.

 

[AdHoc]

On 1/14/2023 at 9:22 AM, Roymond said:

We read the story of Jesus and the woman caught in adultery and rejoice in His judgment:  "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone", and finally "Neither do I condemn you".  But there's a little detail in that story that doesn't get mentioned, one that points to why the Romans hated and feared and persecuted the early Christians:  when Jesus told her to go, He broke two laws -- the law of the land of Israel, which said adultery was a crime, and the law of Rome, which said the same.

Picture it in modern terms replacing adultery with something today's law penalizes, like arson or car theft:  the guilty criminal is brought to Jesus, He says let whoever is without sin prosecute the criminal, and everyone melts away -- and Jesus tells the criminal, "I don't condemn you, either -- go, and don't go back to your crime."

Early Christians took that seriously, as we see when Paul admonishes the Corinthians for taking each other to court, reminding them that they should judge between each other, not take matters to the authorities.  By following Jesus' example and Paul's admonition, Christians were seen by the Romans as trying to replace Roman law with their own, which made the assertion that "Jesus is Lord!" instead of "Caesar is lord" sound treasonous.  Indeed it didn't just sound treasonous, it looked that way, too, as more and more people turned to the Gospel and joined this "kingdom" growing in the midst of the Romans' empire.

Not that the Romans particularly cared what some itinerant preacher did -- but they began to care a lot when that preacher's followers claimed that he was "Lord" and ignored the Roman courts by solving such issues among themselves instead of going to the authorities.

So we as Christians dare to be so radical today as Jesus and those early believers were?  to refuse to take legal matters to the authorities and resolve them among ourselves?  That certainly seems to be what Jesus' example points us to; do we have the courage to actually follow Him?

The Title is provocative because it directly contradicts Hebrews 4:15

15 For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

But the answer is very simple. The Law is based on the substitute sacrifice system. When our Lord Jesus let the woman go He signed His OWN death warrant. He would only have broke the Law if He didn't die for her.

But this is not all. As some have pointed out, the accusers should have, by the same Law, brought the man, seeing as they "were caught IN THE ACT." But this is not all. The Law requires that if a false witness testifies at a trial, the penalty due to the accused becomes the penalty for the false witness. That means that not only the woman must die, but the man, AND the accusers! Jesus let them ALL go free - and so signed His death warrant for FRIEND and FOE alike!

What a Savior!!! Not only did He NOT violate the Law, but He stood in for the GUILTY!

[other one]

1 hour ago, Jayne said:

I totally disagree with what you are saying Jesus' "point" was.

He broke no law - but if he had said "yes", let's stone her, he would have violated three laws.

• The law said that in cases of adultery, the man AND the woman were to be stoned.  Leviticus 20:10.  Only the woman was there.
• The law said that the witnesses were to be the first to throw the stones.  Deuteronomy 17:7.  No witnesses were given - no testimony made.  No legal judgment made.  Just a mob accusation.
• The law said that there musts be "diligent inquiry" into major offenses using priests/judges.  Deuteronomy 17:8-13. There was no trial and Jesus was NOT an earthly priest, judge, or legal authority.  Even though he was and is the LORD of the universe.

What did Jesus write in the dirt?  We will never know.  I suspect it may have been those three laws.

The men, leaving from oldest to youngest, HAD to have understoodd that THEY were breaking the law.  No man.  No witnesses.  No legal testimony.  No pronouncement from a priest or judge.  They sought out no legal authority.  Just some guy on the street who had no legal authority to pass judgment.

It would have been like a mob of people acting as a jury asking a guy checking water meters if they should bash in the skull of an allegeded child-molester.

THEY blew it.  Jesus did nothing wrong.

I really wish you guys would read my posts..

[Michael37]

30 minutes ago, other one said:

I really wish you guys would read my posts..

I do. I was just about to thank you for your fine exposition earlier in this thread. It may be the best I have ever considered on the subject, and I've been exposited to on Scripture for more than 68 years.

Jesus was considered to be a Rabi by many, but we know He was more than that and was well aware of efforts to discredit Him. 

Just a bit of context there. 🙂

[Wayne222]

Jesus as Messiah has the legal right to dismiss the charges. Just as God forgives sin. Jesus can forgive sin as the son of God. 

[RealReligionofPeace]

On 1/14/2023 at 3:22 AM, Roymond said:

We read the story of Jesus and the woman caught in adultery and rejoice in His judgment:  "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone", and finally "Neither do I condemn you".  But there's a little detail in that story that doesn't get mentioned, one that points to why the Romans hated and feared and persecuted the early Christians:  when Jesus told her to go, He broke two laws -- the law of the land of Israel, which said adultery was a crime, and the law of Rome, which said the same.

Picture it in modern terms replacing adultery with something today's law penalizes, like arson or car theft:  the guilty criminal is brought to Jesus, He says let whoever is without sin prosecute the criminal, and everyone melts away -- and Jesus tells the criminal, "I don't condemn you, either -- go, and don't go back to your crime."

Early Christians took that seriously, as we see when Paul admonishes the Corinthians for taking each other to court, reminding them that they should judge between each other, not take matters to the authorities.  By following Jesus' example and Paul's admonition, Christians were seen by the Romans as trying to replace Roman law with their own, which made the assertion that "Jesus is Lord!" instead of "Caesar is lord" sound treasonous.  Indeed it didn't just sound treasonous, it looked that way, too, as more and more people turned to the Gospel and joined this "kingdom" growing in the midst of the Romans' empire.

Not that the Romans particularly cared what some itinerant preacher did -- but they began to care a lot when that preacher's followers claimed that he was "Lord" and ignored the Roman courts by solving such issues among themselves instead of going to the authorities.

So we as Christians dare to be so radical today as Jesus and those early believers were?  to refuse to take legal matters to the authorities and resolve them among ourselves?  That certainly seems to be what Jesus' example points us to; do we have the courage to actually follow Him?

So what's the problem here? The book of Jeremiah states that we should obey the laws of our enemies but to also remember that God is king and his laws are greater and more important than any worldly ruler's laws.

[Markie51]

John 8:1-11 are deemed to have been added several centuries after John’s penned this inspired gospel.  Consequently, they are suspect and not all version/translations of the Bible contain them.

 It is suspect to me that this account does not mention, imply, accuse, and condemn the woman’s partner.   Have you considered this?  Was she married?  Was the participating partner married?  Was she single and therefore actually guilty of committing fornication?  Under the Mosaic Law, fornicators were not subjected to the same discipline under fleshly adultery.

 Just as verse 6 states: “…they were saying this to put him to the test….”  There are other scriptures where the scribes and Pharisees tried to put Jesus to a test with the intention to make accusations against him.  In verse 7, Jesus was making a point of showing mercy.  It seems to me that he indicated/implied that the accusers may themselves have been guilty of adultery/fornication.  The difference was that their conducts were not uncovered.  Is it not the same in modern times?  For example, is not a woman’s sexual misconduct viewed differently than a man’s?