2 May 1999
Mike Tueller
This week's lesson falls into two parts. Unfortunately, the division between those two parts is not represented by the chapter division in the two chapters we read for the week. The division I'm talking about is between what is in John 7:53-8:11 and what isn't in that section. The section I'm talking about, the story of the woman taken in adultery, appears to have been inserted, rather than to have originally been written where it is. How can we tell? Well, the text seems to flow around it from 7:52 to 8:12 more easily than with it, and, more importantly, this episode is placed in a number of different places in our New Testament manuscripts, including 1) here, 2) after the end of John, 3) after chapter 21 of Luke, 4) after the end of Luke, 5) after John 7:36, or 6) nowhere (i.e., it seems to be missing entirely). Since I want to deal with Jesus's teachings at the Feast of Tabernacles as a whole, and those teachings flow around this episode, I'm going to take out the adulteress episode and deal with it first.
1. The woman taken in adultery.
OK, so let's start off with the woman taken in adultery. Can someone summarize this story for me? (A woman is caught "in the very act" [John 8:4] of adultery. The scribes and Pharisees bring her to Jesus in the temple, hoping either a) to extract a judgement of stoning from him, which will seem to everyone to be harsh, and thus decrease Jesus's enormous popularity, or b) to extract a judgement of mercy from him, which will show him to be unorthodox, and, again, thus decrease his enormous popularity. Jesus, however, responds by saying "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her" [John 7:7]. Her accusers then depart. Jesus, too, then, says that he does not condemn her, but tells her to depart and sin no more.)
Since this is a challenge about the law, I think it's appropriate that we examine first the details of the charge and then the parts of the law that apply. The details of the charge are...
Read John 8:4-5.
So we need to look at a section of the law that deals with adulteresses caught in the act, and that has the penalty of stoning. Now, if you look at footnote a in verse 5, you will, unfortunately, find the wrong reference. That footnote refers you to a verse which gives the penalty for adultery as deat: but the Pharisees who challenged Jesus didn't say "death"--they specifically said "stoning." This distinction is important because the rabbinical interpretation of death penalties in the Torah was that, whenever the mode of death was not specified, strangling was always to be understood. So the reference we want is not Lev. 20:10, but rather...
Read Deut. 22:22-24.
Although verses 23 and 24, which specifically seem referred to here, seem to deal primarily with rape cases, they are more broadly applicable to any case of sexual sin before marriage but after engagement. So we can understand that this woman was probably not yet married, but only engaged.
The law seems clear. But there is another section of the law that applies, though how it applies is not clear at first. I'm talking about Numbers 5:11-31. You might want to look that over as I talk about it. This is one of the stranger sections of the Old Testament, but it deals with an obvious question. The penalty for adultery has been set out: but how do you know when a person has committed adultery? Most people who commit adultery are wise enough to keep their sin hidden. The one catch should be obvious: it is a lot harder for a woman to hide adultery than for a man: after all, she may become pregnant. So this section takes up the question of married women who are found to be pregnant, when the husband believes the child is not his; with this case is grouped any other case of "jealousy" (i.e., the husband, whether reasonably or not, suspects the chastity of his wife).
The method of dealing with this admittedly sticky situation, given lack of DNA testing, is a little strange: The man takes his wife to a priest, who puts together a concoction called the "bitter water." The woman is made to drink this water, as the priest pronounces a curse, saying that if she is guilty the water will make her sexual organs to rot, but if not, she will be OK.
As you might imagine, most cases of adultery fell under this law instead of the other laws, because most people were not caught in the act. However, something interesting happened with this law very early in the Second Temple period, the priests and rabbis noticed something interesting: there were a lot of cases of adultery, but only women were being penalized. Since adultery had become so prevalent in society, and since the Torah (from the law seen in Lev. 20:10 and Deut. 22:22) clearly intended to penalize men and women equally, they decided that the test by bitter water should cease to be performed: the Torah did not legislate unfairness. While the prominence of adultery in their society was regrettable, it was not right that only women pay the price for it.
The result of this ruling was that adultery, whether flagrant or not, was no longer penalized by death by Jesus's time. You may remember that Mary was in a very similar situation with regard to Joseph: she was found to be pregnant while she was engaged, but before she was married, and Joseph contemplated the action which was usual at the time, namely a quiet "divorce" (more technically, a breaking off of the engagement, though it was a little more involved than that implies). As in American society, divorce replaced criminal penalty.
So this is the state Jewish society is in when the Pharisees question Jesus. Of course, they made sure to come up with a situation where the now-defunct "bitter water" test did not apply. But Jesus manages to remind them of it anyway (the following point from Lightfoot):
Read John 8:6, Num. 5:17.
We can't be sure, but it may be that Jesus was trying to make them think that He was going to take some dust from the temple floor (where He was) for the "bitter water" test. Imagine, then, the (unrecorded) thoughts of the Pharisees:
Read John 8:7
Jesus now makes them face some hard choices. What choices do the Pharisees have, and what makes each of them hard? (I think we can take it for granted that most of the Pharisees thought they were without sin--even Paul said he was, "touching righteousness which is in the law, blameless" [Philip. 3:6]--but to cast the first stone would be to fall into the trap they had set for Jesus and incur the charge of cruelty. So they don't want to do that. However, to depart without a word will make people say that they are not sinless. A third possibility is that, from the line of thinking above, they may have realized that, by letting the man go, they have, in fact, sinned--and thus Jesus may have some real grounds to accuse them. They certainly don't want to start that fight.)
Each one of the Pharisees then leaves. (John 8:9).
Now so far Jesus has stood on pretty good rabbinical ground. It might be expected, now that He is alone with the woman, that He will explain to her the same justification I explained to you. But Jesus, as usual, goes beyond this. The rabbinical teaching was based on fairness between men and women, and He has implicitly invoked that standard Himself. But to her, in her humbled state, Jesus gives an expansion of the doctrine:
Read John 8:10-11.
For Jesus, the point of the whole encounter was not justice, but mercy. He refused to condemn even the deserving: He had come to save people from sin, not have them die in sin.
2. The Feast of Tabernacles.
Let's now move to what I think is one of the most exciting parts of the New Testament. As we look at the beginning of John 7, we see that the Feast of Tabernacles (known today by its Hebrew name, "Sukkot") is coming up (v. 2). Jesus's brothers are going, but Jesus decides not to come quite yet (vv. 3, 8). He goes secretly in the middle of the feast (it lasted seven days) and starts to teach in the temple (vv. 10, 14).
Although the Mosaic law decreed a seven day feast, it had evolved to include an eighth day, which, while admittedly after the feast, was considered the most joyous occasion in Israel. The key ritual at the end of this harvest celebration was the pouring out of water from the pool of Siloam onto the altar. This was referred to as "the joy of the pouring out of the water," and it was said that "whoever has not seen the rejoicing that was upon the drawing of the water, has never seen any rejoicing at all." In Jesus's day, this was, if not the most holy, at least the most happy day of the year.
Let's back up a bit and describe the festival (omitting many details, as is necessary so that my description doesn't last as long as the feast itself). The key element according to the law of Moses was that the Israelites dwell in booths or "tabernacles" for the whole week. In addition, they would cut palm branches, lulavs (tree boughs), and etrogs (citrons) to carry and wave at the temple. On the eighth day, the water was fetched from the pool of Siloam, accompanied by a procession, and taken to the temple, where the people stood and watched it poured out, amid great rejoicing. The pouring of the water was thought to represent three things. First, it represented the coming of life-giving rains. It was thought that it was upon observing this ceremony that the Lord decided how much rain to send for the year. Second, some people thought it symbolized the law. Third, most rabbis say it represents the pouring out of the Holy Spirit upon the people.
It is this we are to imagine, this very moment of supreme joy, upon the pouring out of the waters on the eighth day, that Jesus makes Himself known:
Read John 7:37-38.
What is Jesus saying? (He is claiming the position of the water for Himself in a very marked way. Note that in verse 39 it explicitly shows that the people understood this to mean, as mentioned in the symbolism of the water, above, that this meant that He was the source of the Holy Spirit.)
How would you react if you heard this? (Extreme surprise would certainly be the first reaction: He had, after all, interrupted a sacred ceremony to shout something that was either blasphemy or an astounding claim to divinity.)
The people, as we read, were divided:
Read John 7:40-43.
There had already been some division among the people because Jesus had not yet been seized earlier in the festival. They had wondered as in verse 26:
Read John 7:26.
Well, as you might imagine, the temple officers are supposed to detain Jesus, and the chief priests expect Him to be brought in any minute. But see the testimony of the temple officers:
Read John 7:45-49.
The rulers of the people still don't get it. For them, the key element in deciding who Jesus is is the sort of people who believe Him--only the rabble.
We don't have time to go through this part, but note in the last few verses of chapter 7 that Nicodemus stands up and explicitly rejects this standard of judgement. He says Jesus should be judged by his deeds and words according to the law, not according to social prejudice against the poor and Galileans.
3. The Light of the World.
Well, what was going on while the high priests and rulers were engaged in their debate? The next step in the ceremony, we may presume, which was a fairly long one: the people were to sing the Hallel, which consisted of Psalms 113-118. During this time it seems that Jesus moved to the treasury of the temple (John 8:20). Let's read the last few verses of this song, so we know what was in people's minds:
Read Ps. 118:21-29.
What are the people thinking? (They are thinking about the rejected savior. Other verses in the psalm bring out the context even more.)
Jesus's position in the treasury encourages other thoughts as well. After the nightfall of the first day of the feast of tabernacles was the ceremony of illumination. On this night four huge golden candelabras were filled with oil and lighted at the temple. Light poured out of the temple as it glowed over all Jerusalem. It was on this day that the temple of Solomon had been dedicated, and it had been filled with the glory of the Lord (1 Kgs. 8:2, 11; 2 Chr. 5:3, 14) Similarly, the Lord's presence was seen to be symbolized, as in Moses's time, by a cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night (see Num. 14:14). The temple, illuminating the whole city, reminded people of--and represented--the real presence of the Lord among them.
Standing there in the treasury, among the candelabra which had been used just a week ago, and after having proclaimed Himself the source of the Spirit, with the words "God is the LORD, which hath shewed us light" (Ps. 118:27) fresh in their minds, Jesus says...
Read John 8:12.
I think it's good to just soak this one in for a while. For me, this is really the high point of this whole episode, and there is little to add to such a grand declaration of divinity.
4. The Truth.
The rest of Jesus's teachings here are almost lost in the debate which the Pharisees press upon Him. I'd rather not focus on the debate, but just go straight to one of the teachings.
Read John 8:32-34.
Jesus explained the word "servant" (really "slave"), but He didn't get the chance to explain the word "truth," because the word "servant" derailed the conversation. When Jesus says that "the truth" will make us free, what does He mean? (Many will say the gospel surely; there are probably many other good answers.)
Let me just add one additional idea to what "truth" may mean here, from a similar context:
Read 2 Ne. 2:27, 16 (yes, in that order).
Lehi's discourse on opposition, freedom, and redemption here is pretty involved, which can make it hard to follow. But it seems that Lehi's logic on this point is basically:
I have often understood this to be both Lehi's and Jesus's key point (though this is my own understanding here). By "truth," I see Jesus to mean that we have a complete understanding of the choices available to us and their consequences. Without this, we are not free to make effective choice: we are following Satan's plan. Free agency, He says, is not complete without complete and true knowledge.
(For anyone who is interested in Jesus's interesting declaration of divinity in John 8:58, I cannot deny the importance of this episode. However, we did already treat it in the lesson on the woman at the well, the first time Jesus makes such a declaration. Thus I omit it here, as this lesson is already quite full with a different and interesting declaration of divinity.)
Sources consulted for this lesson include:
Edersheim, Alfred (1825-1889). Chapter 14, on the Feast of Tabernacles, from The Temple: Its Ministry and Services As They Were at the Time of Christ.
Lightfoot, John (1602-1675). A selection from A Commentary on the New Testament from the Talmud and Hebraica. (I don't really recommend this source, which is frequently polemical and even anti-Semitic.)
Riskin, Shlomo. 1988. Naso--The Bridge over Bitter Waters at Shamash.org.
Tawil, Refael. 1995. Insights on Parashat HaShavuah Naso from The Judaic Seminar at Shamash.org.
Last update: 29 March 1999