John 8:4-6 - Stoning of adulterers?

8:4-6

They brought her before Jesus and questioned Him on the matter. They were doing this not because they wanted to learn something, but because they wanted to trap Him. The Law said one thing, but the state of the times meant that they could not actually do this, and so whatever Jesus said (or so they thought) would get Him in trouble.

As noted in the comments on verse 3, the teachers of the Law were actually only quoting half the Law, for it required the stoning of the man as well.

Now leaving aside the immediate situation, what are we to make of the Law’s requirement for stoning of adulterers? Let me say a little about this and our approach to the apparently “harsh” aspects of the Law. First, the Law is actually amazingly liberal in many of its social and legal requirements, treating all as equal before the Law, its concern for the poor, for immigrants and for slaves. And its financial system (Sabbaths and Jubilee years) stand in stark contrast to our current world system. The Law was certainly liberal in terms of the time it was given in, and actually is much more liberal than much of what we see in the world today.

Even so, there are parts, like stoning of adulterers, that we recoil from. We should remember that the Law was not the ultimate state. This was the mistake the Jews made, they saw it as the destination, rather than a stopping place along the way (Gal 3:1-4:8). It is perhaps helpful to see the Law as a picture of what things will be like in God’s kingdom. Now this does not mean that in God’s kingdom adulterers will be stoned, it does mean that in God’s kingdom there won’t be any adulterers. There won’t be any sin at all, we will all have been transformed (1 Cor 15:52).

We should bear in mind that adultery is definitely sin and is destructive to individuals and to society.

Jesus then wrote in the sand. Now we don’t know what He wrote, or if He was just doodling. Some see an allusion to the writing of the ten commandments. Or it could be just a demonstration that He was not going to get involved in the matter.