
I’m going to post several excerpts from one of Kenneth Baily’s books I’ve been reading “Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes – Cultural Studies in the Gospels.” Personally, I haven't read anyone with a better understanding of Middle Eastern customs and reading the parables that Jesus taught give these teachings color. Anyway I recommend this book (not his theology) to those interested in a better perspective of what Jesus was/is saying to his disciples and those who believe in Him.
[Excerpts are from pages 231-236]
The Woman is not for Stoning
by Kenneth Baily
Properly understood the story opens at John 7:37-38, which reads:
On the last day of the feast, the great day, Jesus stood up and proclaimed, “If any one thirst, let him come to me and drink. He who believes in me, as the scripture has said, ‘Out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water.’”
The feast mentioned was and is a seven day celebration called Succoth, known commonly as “the Feast of Booths.”Jesus was in attendance in Jerusalem, and on the last climatic day he stood up and made the claim (John 7:37-38) that is suspiciously close to what God says about himself in Isaiah 55:1-3. This naturally caused a huge stir.
Jesus was not, however, the first Jew of the time to take language about God and apply it to himself. One generation before Jesus, the famous rabbi Hillel made the same kind. The late Israel scholar David Flusser has noted these claims and has pointed out that the Jewish tradition decided that Hillel did not mean what he said. The Gospels and the birth of the Church are clear witness to the fact that the disciples of Jesus believed him when he made such claims, but not immediately.
John recorded two instantaneous reactions to Jesus’ Jerusalem speech. The crown was confused and divided. The chief priests and the Pharisees were sufficiently angered that they ordered his arrest. But the officers sent to apprehend him were unable to carry out their orders because Jesus was too popular. As they reported, “No man ever spoke like this man” (John 7:46). The Pharisees then opened the subject of the law and said, “this crowd, who do not know the law, are accursed” (John 7:49). Jesus was barely thirty years old. How dare he make such incredible claims about himself! Nicodemus tried feebly to defend Jesus but was quickly silenced. Everybody then went home (vv. 50-53). Round one was over.
THE TRAP
Overnight Jesus’ opponents were able to plan “round two.” The issues were clear. Jesus had claimed to be the living water promised by God to his people. “The Law” in popular usage often meant all the books that were considered authoritative, and by the time of Jesus this included the Prophets and the Psalms (Luke 24:44). In all likelihood, therefore, the Pharisees were upset over the Isaiah 55 passage. This challenge to them and their authority had been made on their turf. They had to respond, and their initial reaction was to craft an astute “game plan.”
If they could humiliate Jesus in public by posing a question of interpretation of the law that Jesus could not answer without destroying himself, his popularity would fade quickly and their problem would be solved. Presumably overnight they arrested a woman whom they claimed was “caught in the act of adultery” and held her for the showdown with Jesus.
The following morning Jesus could have avoided the temple. The previous day he had made a stunning public statement. He knew that there was considerable confusion among his listeners over his claims and he must have known that the temple guards had appeared to arrest him. The next morning, the temple police might well be waiting for him at the gates of the temple to apprehend him before a crowd could gather…
According to Jewish law the day after any major feast had to be observed as a Sabbath. On such a day, no work was allowed. On this “eighth day of the feast” Jesus returned to the temple area. A crowd quickly gathered. In good rabbinic style Jesus sat down (affirming his authority as a teacher) and began to teach them. Only then did the Pharisees make their move. They wanted witnesses, lots of them!
The scribes and Pharisees suddenly appeared and interrupted Jesus in front of his listeners. They brought with them the woman they had arrested the previous day night, and publicly declared that she had been caught in the act of adultery.
The inevitable question immediately arises: How do religious professionals catch a woman in the act of adultery? Furthermore, adultery is rather difficult to do alone, and if she was “caught in the act” her partner was seen and thereby identified. The law dictated that both should be stoned (Lev 20:10). Where was the man? And why did they not arrest both of them if they were so zealous for the law? The precious day these same leaders had invoked a curse on the crowds that did not know the law. Now they were violating the law in the name of enforcing it! What therefore was the real agenda?
The fact that they brought the woman but not her male partner clearly indicates that their concern was not for preservation of the law but rather the public humiliation of Jesus. The woman was merely a prop in their plan. But the story has a second important component. The temple area is about thirty-five acres. At that time, around three sides of that large enclosure there was a long, covered walkway. The best English word we have for this is cloister. Connected to this walkway on the north end of the temple area, Herod the Great had constructed a large military fort. He knew that civil unrest often began in the temple enclosure, so he insured that there was access from the fort both to the temple area and to the roof of this covered walkway. Josephus, a Jewish historian of the first century, records that during the feast days Roman soldiers would patrol along that walkway and through the crowds, keeping an eye out for any unrest. He wrote, “A Roman legion went several ways among the cloisters, with their arms, on the Jewish festivals, in order to watch the people, that they might not there attempt to make any innovations.” The entire scene unfolding around Jesus was under Roman observation, and everyone was conscience of this armed military presence.
Jesus Responds
The Pharisees did not ask a hypothetical question –“What if we caught a woman…?” Instead they brought the accused, presented her and then asked:
Teacher, this woman has been caught in the act of adultery.
Now in the law Moses commanded us to stone such,
What do you say about her? (Jn 8:4)
The scene could hardly be more dramatic. They quoted Moses and then directly challenged Jesus, in public, to agree or disagree with the great lawgiver. The crowd was listening intently, and the Roman soldiers were watching.
The Pharisees assumed that Jesus had two options. On the one hand, he could say, “Yes, let’s stone her.” Such a ruling would have caused an outcry and triggered enough emotion that Jesus surely would have been arrested even if the violence against the girl had not begum. John records that the Romans had denied the Jews the right to put anyone to death (Jn 18:31).
Jesus’ other option was to say something like:
“Gentleman, we know that the law of Moses requires, but the realities of the political world in which we live cannot be avoided. Just look around you. Yes, we long for the day of liberation from Rome, after which we will be able to obey the law of Moses in strict fashion. But in the interim we are obliged to be patient and make allowances.”
If he had given such a speech, his opponents would have accused him of cowardice =. Was he against the law of Moses? Or was he simply unwilling to pay a price to pursue the national cause? In short, if he decides to carry out the law of Moses, he will be arrested. If he opts to set it aside he will be discredited. What is going to be: Moses or Rome? Either way he loses and his opponents win.
Because of their total confidence in victory, the Pharisees planned this confrontation in public on their own turf. How did Jesus respond?
All through the rest of the story, Jesus is subtly debating the nature of justice. Is justice primarily a strict application of law, important though that may be? Or must the prophetic definition of justice found in the Servant Songs of Isaiah be considered? Concerning that Suffering Servant, Isaiah wrote:
A bruised reed he will not break,
and a dimly burning wick he will not quench;
he will faithfully bring forth justice. (Is 42:3)
The Pharisees want strict application if the law. Jesus fights for compassion for the bruised reed and the dimly burning wick that he sees in the woman before him. Each seeks “justice.” In this case, which should prevail? Jesus makes hic choice and acts on it.
The “eighth day of the feast” was treated as Sabbath with all the Sabbath laws in force. The primary requirement for keeping the law on the Sabbath was to refrain from work, and the rabbis defended writing as work. They then determined that “writing” was making some kind of permanent mark like putting ink on paper. Writing with ones finger in the dust was permissible because “it leaves no lasting mark…”
Jesus’ first response was to bend down and write with his finger in the dust…
What does he write? Scholars have argued this question for centuries. I am convinced that he wrote, “death” or “kill her” or stoner her with stones.” His following words presuppose that he decreed the death penalty. He opted for a strict observance of the law of Moses.
But when Jesus says, “Let him who is with out sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her.” Jn 8:7. Mobs will do anything! In the aftermath of war, or even when civil authority breaks down, or when a crowd overwhelms the police force, mobs will loot, destroy, kill, burn—anything! With so many people involved, there is no one to arrest. In a mob, individuals can escape accountability for their behavior. If therefore everyone in the crowd stones the woman, no individual will bear responsibility for her death.
But when Jesus says, “Let the one among you with out sin cast the first stone,” he puts a name and a face on everyone in the crowd. He asks each individual to acknowledge responsibility for participation in the act.
When the Roman guards step forward to “break up the crowd,” their first question will be “Who started this?” The second question “Who ordered it?” would likely come later.
With this challenge Jesus says to his opponents, “Gentleman, you clearly want me to go to jail for the law of Moses. I am willing to do so. I have ordered that she be killed. But I want to know which one of you is willing to volunteer to accompany me into that cell?”
Furthermore, the Middle East is a “shame-pride culture.” The child is not told, “That’s wrong!” but “Shame on you!” Certain acts bring shame on others and others bring honor to the family. He or she is to avoid shame and defend honor. In this story, if a person steps out of the crowd claiming to be sinless, such an act will be remembered to his shame because Isaiah wrote, “All we like sheep have gone astray” (Is 53:6). Ecclesiastes 7:20 says, “Surely there is not a righteous man on earth who does good and never sins.” With such texts in tradition, would any religious teacher dare claim to be sinless?
Suddenly and dramatically the entire scene is changed. Jesus’ opponents are now under pressure, and each of them must make a decision. In the Middle East, in such circumstances, people naturally turn to the eldest person present. The crowd turns to see if that elder has the courage to respond to Jesus’ challenge. From the oldest to the youngest his opponents withdraw, humiliated. As this is happening Jesus bends down and writes a second time in the dust. The story leaves no clue to what he wrote, but by looking at the ground, he chooses not to watch the public humiliation of his opponents. He does no crowing and refrains from “twisting the knife.” It is a nice touch that fits perfectly with the larger Gospel picture of Jesus. He takes no pleasure in humiliating them-he simply wants to save the woman.
The stage empties and Jesus is alone with the accused. In any culture, one of the quickest ways to get into trouble is to humiliate powerful people in public on their own turf. Yet this is precisely what Jesus does. The Pharisees planned to humiliate Jesus but were themselves put to shame before a crowd. A few minutes earlier the terrified woman had expected brutal violence and a painful death. Suddenly the Pharisees are angry at Jesus rather than her. At great cost he has shifted their hostility from her to himself, and he doesn’t even know her name! The famous Servant Song of Isaiah affirms, “with his stripes we are healed” (Is 53:5 KJV).
She knows that Jesus’ opponents will be back with a bigger stick and that Jesus is in the process of getting hurt because of what he is doing for her. She is the recipient of a costly demonstration of unexpected love that saves her life. Jesus demonstrates the life-changing power of costly love. This scene provides an insight into Jesus’ understanding of the significance of his own suffering. A core aspect of his “doctrine of the atonement” is here displayed.
In his final words to the woman Jesus neither condemns her nor over looks her self-destructive lifestyle. He walks a razors edge between the two with the words, “Neither do I condemn you; go, and do not sin again.”
[Excerpts are from pages 231-236]
The Woman is not for Stoning
by Kenneth Baily
Properly understood the story opens at John 7:37-38, which reads:
On the last day of the feast, the great day, Jesus stood up and proclaimed, “If any one thirst, let him come to me and drink. He who believes in me, as the scripture has said, ‘Out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water.’”
The feast mentioned was and is a seven day celebration called Succoth, known commonly as “the Feast of Booths.”Jesus was in attendance in Jerusalem, and on the last climatic day he stood up and made the claim (John 7:37-38) that is suspiciously close to what God says about himself in Isaiah 55:1-3. This naturally caused a huge stir.
Jesus was not, however, the first Jew of the time to take language about God and apply it to himself. One generation before Jesus, the famous rabbi Hillel made the same kind. The late Israel scholar David Flusser has noted these claims and has pointed out that the Jewish tradition decided that Hillel did not mean what he said. The Gospels and the birth of the Church are clear witness to the fact that the disciples of Jesus believed him when he made such claims, but not immediately.
John recorded two instantaneous reactions to Jesus’ Jerusalem speech. The crown was confused and divided. The chief priests and the Pharisees were sufficiently angered that they ordered his arrest. But the officers sent to apprehend him were unable to carry out their orders because Jesus was too popular. As they reported, “No man ever spoke like this man” (John 7:46). The Pharisees then opened the subject of the law and said, “this crowd, who do not know the law, are accursed” (John 7:49). Jesus was barely thirty years old. How dare he make such incredible claims about himself! Nicodemus tried feebly to defend Jesus but was quickly silenced. Everybody then went home (vv. 50-53). Round one was over.
THE TRAP
Overnight Jesus’ opponents were able to plan “round two.” The issues were clear. Jesus had claimed to be the living water promised by God to his people. “The Law” in popular usage often meant all the books that were considered authoritative, and by the time of Jesus this included the Prophets and the Psalms (Luke 24:44). In all likelihood, therefore, the Pharisees were upset over the Isaiah 55 passage. This challenge to them and their authority had been made on their turf. They had to respond, and their initial reaction was to craft an astute “game plan.”
If they could humiliate Jesus in public by posing a question of interpretation of the law that Jesus could not answer without destroying himself, his popularity would fade quickly and their problem would be solved. Presumably overnight they arrested a woman whom they claimed was “caught in the act of adultery” and held her for the showdown with Jesus.
The following morning Jesus could have avoided the temple. The previous day he had made a stunning public statement. He knew that there was considerable confusion among his listeners over his claims and he must have known that the temple guards had appeared to arrest him. The next morning, the temple police might well be waiting for him at the gates of the temple to apprehend him before a crowd could gather…
According to Jewish law the day after any major feast had to be observed as a Sabbath. On such a day, no work was allowed. On this “eighth day of the feast” Jesus returned to the temple area. A crowd quickly gathered. In good rabbinic style Jesus sat down (affirming his authority as a teacher) and began to teach them. Only then did the Pharisees make their move. They wanted witnesses, lots of them!
The scribes and Pharisees suddenly appeared and interrupted Jesus in front of his listeners. They brought with them the woman they had arrested the previous day night, and publicly declared that she had been caught in the act of adultery.
The inevitable question immediately arises: How do religious professionals catch a woman in the act of adultery? Furthermore, adultery is rather difficult to do alone, and if she was “caught in the act” her partner was seen and thereby identified. The law dictated that both should be stoned (Lev 20:10). Where was the man? And why did they not arrest both of them if they were so zealous for the law? The precious day these same leaders had invoked a curse on the crowds that did not know the law. Now they were violating the law in the name of enforcing it! What therefore was the real agenda?
The fact that they brought the woman but not her male partner clearly indicates that their concern was not for preservation of the law but rather the public humiliation of Jesus. The woman was merely a prop in their plan. But the story has a second important component. The temple area is about thirty-five acres. At that time, around three sides of that large enclosure there was a long, covered walkway. The best English word we have for this is cloister. Connected to this walkway on the north end of the temple area, Herod the Great had constructed a large military fort. He knew that civil unrest often began in the temple enclosure, so he insured that there was access from the fort both to the temple area and to the roof of this covered walkway. Josephus, a Jewish historian of the first century, records that during the feast days Roman soldiers would patrol along that walkway and through the crowds, keeping an eye out for any unrest. He wrote, “A Roman legion went several ways among the cloisters, with their arms, on the Jewish festivals, in order to watch the people, that they might not there attempt to make any innovations.” The entire scene unfolding around Jesus was under Roman observation, and everyone was conscience of this armed military presence.
Jesus Responds
The Pharisees did not ask a hypothetical question –“What if we caught a woman…?” Instead they brought the accused, presented her and then asked:
Teacher, this woman has been caught in the act of adultery.
Now in the law Moses commanded us to stone such,
What do you say about her? (Jn 8:4)
The scene could hardly be more dramatic. They quoted Moses and then directly challenged Jesus, in public, to agree or disagree with the great lawgiver. The crowd was listening intently, and the Roman soldiers were watching.
The Pharisees assumed that Jesus had two options. On the one hand, he could say, “Yes, let’s stone her.” Such a ruling would have caused an outcry and triggered enough emotion that Jesus surely would have been arrested even if the violence against the girl had not begum. John records that the Romans had denied the Jews the right to put anyone to death (Jn 18:31).
Jesus’ other option was to say something like:
“Gentleman, we know that the law of Moses requires, but the realities of the political world in which we live cannot be avoided. Just look around you. Yes, we long for the day of liberation from Rome, after which we will be able to obey the law of Moses in strict fashion. But in the interim we are obliged to be patient and make allowances.”
If he had given such a speech, his opponents would have accused him of cowardice =. Was he against the law of Moses? Or was he simply unwilling to pay a price to pursue the national cause? In short, if he decides to carry out the law of Moses, he will be arrested. If he opts to set it aside he will be discredited. What is going to be: Moses or Rome? Either way he loses and his opponents win.
Because of their total confidence in victory, the Pharisees planned this confrontation in public on their own turf. How did Jesus respond?
All through the rest of the story, Jesus is subtly debating the nature of justice. Is justice primarily a strict application of law, important though that may be? Or must the prophetic definition of justice found in the Servant Songs of Isaiah be considered? Concerning that Suffering Servant, Isaiah wrote:
A bruised reed he will not break,
and a dimly burning wick he will not quench;
he will faithfully bring forth justice. (Is 42:3)
The Pharisees want strict application if the law. Jesus fights for compassion for the bruised reed and the dimly burning wick that he sees in the woman before him. Each seeks “justice.” In this case, which should prevail? Jesus makes hic choice and acts on it.
The “eighth day of the feast” was treated as Sabbath with all the Sabbath laws in force. The primary requirement for keeping the law on the Sabbath was to refrain from work, and the rabbis defended writing as work. They then determined that “writing” was making some kind of permanent mark like putting ink on paper. Writing with ones finger in the dust was permissible because “it leaves no lasting mark…”
Jesus’ first response was to bend down and write with his finger in the dust…
What does he write? Scholars have argued this question for centuries. I am convinced that he wrote, “death” or “kill her” or stoner her with stones.” His following words presuppose that he decreed the death penalty. He opted for a strict observance of the law of Moses.
But when Jesus says, “Let him who is with out sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her.” Jn 8:7. Mobs will do anything! In the aftermath of war, or even when civil authority breaks down, or when a crowd overwhelms the police force, mobs will loot, destroy, kill, burn—anything! With so many people involved, there is no one to arrest. In a mob, individuals can escape accountability for their behavior. If therefore everyone in the crowd stones the woman, no individual will bear responsibility for her death.
But when Jesus says, “Let the one among you with out sin cast the first stone,” he puts a name and a face on everyone in the crowd. He asks each individual to acknowledge responsibility for participation in the act.
When the Roman guards step forward to “break up the crowd,” their first question will be “Who started this?” The second question “Who ordered it?” would likely come later.
With this challenge Jesus says to his opponents, “Gentleman, you clearly want me to go to jail for the law of Moses. I am willing to do so. I have ordered that she be killed. But I want to know which one of you is willing to volunteer to accompany me into that cell?”
Furthermore, the Middle East is a “shame-pride culture.” The child is not told, “That’s wrong!” but “Shame on you!” Certain acts bring shame on others and others bring honor to the family. He or she is to avoid shame and defend honor. In this story, if a person steps out of the crowd claiming to be sinless, such an act will be remembered to his shame because Isaiah wrote, “All we like sheep have gone astray” (Is 53:6). Ecclesiastes 7:20 says, “Surely there is not a righteous man on earth who does good and never sins.” With such texts in tradition, would any religious teacher dare claim to be sinless?
Suddenly and dramatically the entire scene is changed. Jesus’ opponents are now under pressure, and each of them must make a decision. In the Middle East, in such circumstances, people naturally turn to the eldest person present. The crowd turns to see if that elder has the courage to respond to Jesus’ challenge. From the oldest to the youngest his opponents withdraw, humiliated. As this is happening Jesus bends down and writes a second time in the dust. The story leaves no clue to what he wrote, but by looking at the ground, he chooses not to watch the public humiliation of his opponents. He does no crowing and refrains from “twisting the knife.” It is a nice touch that fits perfectly with the larger Gospel picture of Jesus. He takes no pleasure in humiliating them-he simply wants to save the woman.
The stage empties and Jesus is alone with the accused. In any culture, one of the quickest ways to get into trouble is to humiliate powerful people in public on their own turf. Yet this is precisely what Jesus does. The Pharisees planned to humiliate Jesus but were themselves put to shame before a crowd. A few minutes earlier the terrified woman had expected brutal violence and a painful death. Suddenly the Pharisees are angry at Jesus rather than her. At great cost he has shifted their hostility from her to himself, and he doesn’t even know her name! The famous Servant Song of Isaiah affirms, “with his stripes we are healed” (Is 53:5 KJV).
She knows that Jesus’ opponents will be back with a bigger stick and that Jesus is in the process of getting hurt because of what he is doing for her. She is the recipient of a costly demonstration of unexpected love that saves her life. Jesus demonstrates the life-changing power of costly love. This scene provides an insight into Jesus’ understanding of the significance of his own suffering. A core aspect of his “doctrine of the atonement” is here displayed.
In his final words to the woman Jesus neither condemns her nor over looks her self-destructive lifestyle. He walks a razors edge between the two with the words, “Neither do I condemn you; go, and do not sin again.”

