JOHN 8:1-11 WOMAN CAUGHT IN ADULTERY

There are many questions regarding the meaning of this story, but the first one to address is a rather basic one – Does it even belong in the Bible to start with? I am rather conservative in my approach to the Bible, and so that question may seem strange to some of you. However, this is a real issue that needs to be tackled head on and not just dismissed. Since it involves textual criticism, I went to my go-to reference first: Bruce Metzger's Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament. Here is what he says:

“The evidence for the non-Johannine origin of the pericope of the adulteress is overwhelming.” That evidence includes the fact that the vast majority of early manuscripts do not include it at all. In addition, the language used in this chapter does not resemble John's typical style of writing.

But Metzger adds, “At the same time the account has all the earmarks of historical veracity. It is obviously a piece of oral tradition which circulated in certain parts of the Western church and which we subsequently incorporated into various manuscripts at various places.” This can be seen in manuscripts which do include this story, but place it after John 7:36, 7:44 or 21:25. There is even one manuscript that places it in Luke's Gospel instead, after 21:38. They obviously felt the story was authentic but didn't know quite where to put it.

So at this point in the discussion, it is safe to say that, at the least, this story is historically true even if it may not have been written down by John. But I decided to explore this issue a little further using a tool that no one to my knowledge has yet applied to the controversy: literary structure. In my analysis of the Gospel of John (summarized in a post with the subtitle “Introduction to the Literary Structure”) I, as well as others. first proposed that the book consists of two parts: chapters 1-12 and chapters 13-21. Within the first part, one discrete section was identified as John 7-8. It possesses the symmetrical structure shown below:

The Structure of John 7-8

1. Opposition between Jesus and evil in the world (7:1-13)

    2. Jesus is sent from God (7:14-36)

        3. Jesus as the Living Water (7:37-52)

            (4. The woman caught in adultery: 8:1-11)

        3'. Jesus as the Light of the World (8:12-19)

    2'. Jesus sent from the Father (8:20-30)

1'. Opposition between Jesus and sons of the Devil (8:31-59)

Interestingly, this structural analysis John 7-8 gives mild support to the authenticity (at least at some time early in the Gospel’s formative history) of John 8:1-11. In the first place, its addition to the text between units 3 and 3' does not at all disrupt the symmetrical structure seen above. It merely transforms a six-part chiasm into a seven-part one, such as is present in two more sections in Part I.

Next to consider is the fit of the passage with the rest of the section above. In each of the other sections of Part I, all of the material contained therein is related thematically. Using that criterion, the narrative in question fares better than expected. One can detect several echoes of the particular details, themes and even specific words found in the undisputed passages of chapters 7-8:

    Attempts to execute a supposed lawbreaker (7:1,19-20,25; 8:3-5,40)

    “Where is he?” (7:11) // “Where are they?” (8:9) // “Where is your father?” (8:19)

    The law comes from Moses (7:19a,23; 8:5)

    No one keeps the law (7:19b; 8:7)

    Jesus teaches concerning right judgment (7:24; 8:7-11,16)

    Jesus teaches the people at the temple (7:28; 8:2b,20)

    Jesus stands / straightens up to speak (7:37; 8:7)

    No one lays hand on a supposed offender (7:44; 8:9-10)

    Pharisees make pronouncements concerning the law (7:49-51; 8:3-5)

    “At dawn he came again to the temple” (8:1) // “I am the light of the world” (8:12)

    An attempt to stone someone in the vicinity of the temple (8:2,5,59)

    “adultery” (8:3) // “fornication” (8:41)

    The presence of witnesses (8:4,17-18)

    Jesus acting as judge (8:5-11,26)

    Jews appeal to Patriarchs (8:5,33,52-53)

    The Jews as sinners (8:7,24,33-34)

    Jesus frees sinners (8:10-11,36)

    “Has no one condemned you?” (8:10) // “Which of you convicts me of sin?” (8:46a)

Lastly, it was proposed below that Section IC' is parallel to Section IC. In that context, it is interesting that Jesus tells an individual to “sin no more” in John 5:14 and 8:11. No firm conclusions can be reached concerning this problem passage on the slim, but provocative, evidence presented here, but perhaps the last chapter has not yet been written concerning the origin of John 8:1-11.

The Structure of John: Part I

A. First Passover (1:1-3:36)

    B. Samaritan Woman at the Well (4:1-54)

        C. Feast of the Jews (5:1-47)

            D. Second Passover (6:1-71)

        C'. Feast of Tabernacles (7:1-8:59)

    B'. Feast of Dedication (9:1-10:42)

A'. Third Passover (11:1-12:50)

Turning to the text of the story, it can be seen to also be arranged symmetrically, as the rest of John's Gospel:

The Structure of John 8:1-11

Setting: Jesus teaches in the Temple (1-2)

a. An sinful woman is brought to Jesus (3)

    b. Her accusers speak (4)

        c. Penalty of stoning (5-6a)

            d. Jesus writes on the ground (6b)

                e. They keep questioning Jesus (7a)

                    f. Jesus straightens up and talks (7b)                    

        c'. “Who will be the first to stone her?” (7c)

            d'. Jesus writes on the ground (8)

                e'. They do not reply, but leave (9)

                    f'. Jesus straightens up and talks (10a)

    b'. There are no accusers (10b-11a)

a'. “Sin no more” (11b)

Verses 1-2 For some reason I had always pictured this taking place in the open air near where the woman had been found. Instead it actually took place on the Temple grounds. The usual custom is followed here: the rabbi sat while his followers stood.

Verse 3 This is the only place in John's Gospel where the scribes are mentioned. The significance of this is not known to me, but it may indicate that this was a very important case to test Jesus with.

Verses 3-4 I have always been curious about several things regarding the scribe's and Pharisee's comments. First, where was the man involved if she had actually been caught in the act? He would have been equally guilty before the law. I have heard some teachers say that this was just another example of the male chauvinism found in the Bible. They preferred to punish the woman and let the man go free. Another possibility will be suggested at the end of the lesson.

Another interesting, and related, fact is that one could not be condemned without two eyewitnesses. So either two men actually saw her committing adultery (which would probably have been highly unlikely) or there is another explanation. The absence of any witnesses at this point in the story either shows that there were no such witnesses or that the trial had already finished and the only remaining question was the appropriate punishment.

Verse 5 The law referred to is found in passages such as Leviticus 20:10 and Deuteronomy 22:23-24.

Verse 6a makes it clear that they were not really interested in Jesus' opinion except in that it might be used to condemn him. They no doubt knew of his association with a wide spectrum of society including prostitutes and probably felt that he would somehow contradict the OT law.

Verse 6b is the most puzzling detail in the story since it is the only place in the NT where Jesus is actually said to have written anything. The NRSV Study Bible notes that one speculation was offered in a few ancient manuscripts. After “ground,” it added the words “the sins of each of them” to explain what Jesus had written. The only problem with that explanation is that it would have been impossible for any of the scribes and Pharisees to have easily read Jesus' writing in the dust of the paved area in the Temple, which was probably covered with colored tiles.

Verse 7 shows how insistent Jesus' questioners were in forcing an answer out of Jesus to use as ammunition against him.

Verse 8 has Jesus writing or scribbling in the dust again. My personal explanation is based on two occasions in junior high school when groups of bullies headed toward me while making threatening remarks. I just kept on walking and pointedly did not look any of them in the face as I passed, knowing that if I made any eye contact it would be an open invitation for aggression. I have been told that the same technique can also work when confronted with dangerous animals, but I'm not yet ready to try it out. I am convinced that Jesus did the same to allow the accusers space to slink away while not totally losing face. Parenthetically, this may also be an explanation of how Jesus earlier walked through the crowd that had led him to a cliff and tried to stone him (see Luke 4).

Verse 9-11 In contrast to the woman having to stand before a group of people, here she only has to face Jesus, and he will not condemn her.

In the Spring 2021 issue of Biblical Archaeology Review, James McGrath has written an interesting article offering quite a different interpretation of this story. A few details in his proposal go contrary to what is actually written in the text, but others are worthy of consideration.

He points out that the Pharisees were noted historically for their avoidance of the death penalty whenever possible. Thus, he feels that they brought her to Jesus in the hopes that he might provide them with some reason for not enforcing it in this case. Of course, that apparently flies in the face of John 8:6, which says that they brought her to Jesus in order to trap him. However, it would be consistent with the fact that they left without much of a fuss and left the woman free to go.

McGrath next says that the fact they mention stoning as the required punishment points to Deuteronomy 22:23-27 as the specific OT passage they are referring to, and it applied to betrothed virgins. Thus, the reference to her being caught in the act may mean that her intended husband found out before or shortly after the marriage that she was either not a virgin or actually pregnant. If so, it would explain the absence of the the man involved, the absence of two witnesses, and (in the case of pregnancy) the reluctance of the scribes and Pharisees to stone her.

Finally, McGrath points out that in disputed cases of adultery (and that also applied to infidelity of a betrothed party), there had always been a rather strange sotah ritual described in Numbers 5:11-31 involving the woman drinking water that contained dust from the floor of the Temple. It was a rather innocuous procedure that would have resulted in an innocent verdict for the woman most of the time and was designed to protect the woman from baseless charges. Parenthetically, for some reason I chose that obscure ritual years ago as a passage to illustrate with one of my artistic constructions (see post entitled “Strange Waters Series”).

Apparently, an early rabbi had discontinued the sotah ritual by this time because he felt it was unfair to women to force them to take part in it while adultery among the men was so prevalent. Unfortunately, that left no other option but to enforce the death penalty instead. McGrath feels that when Jesus called attention to the dust on the Temple floor, he was doing so to suggest that the scribes and Pharisees should re-institute the sotah ritual. An intriguing possibility, but highly speculative.