When one reads the account of the adulteress brought to Jesus, the scripture tells us she was caught in the very act. The OT law stipulated that BOTH are to be stoned. The Pharisees brought to Jesus only 1/2 of the problem - where was the other partner? The Pharisees wanted to stone the woman but let the man go free!

Now go figure! This is what was so terribly wrong with the Pharisees accusation: they a were not even 'Biblical' in their accusation.

The Pharisees consistently modified the law as given to Moses and imposed it upon the people. What the people had to live with was a far cry from what God commanded them in the law and what the Prophets taught.

To suggest the Pharisees were legalistic seems to be a stretch: they were applying the law illegally. The law said both man AND woman were to be stoned. The Pharisees wanted to stone only the woman and let the man go scot-free. We do not know what Jesus wrote on the ground but I do imagine...

_________________
Sandra Miller

I discovered this link when doing a search for “legalism” on the SI site. (And what a lot of hits there were!!!!!) Here Poonen is not confronting legalism per se, just one characteristic symptom of it: trying to deal with a speck when you have a log in your eye. He does a good job on that!

Only I don’t think the woman’s accusers were interested in speck-removing. They had zero interest in seeing this woman set free and restored into healthy moral relationships. It is a classic Tar-and-Feathering scenario – with a motive to trap Jesus. And isn’t it the same trap which legalism sets up for us when we are dealing with sinners: You’re damned if you do and damned if you don’t. Legalists lack the ability to integrate mercy and judgment.


Jesus could see that blindspot. He was careful not to absolve her from the law. He didn’t forbid stoning her. He simply left it up to them to decide who’d be first: The one without sin. Clever! And since none of them accused her, Jesus did neither. Instead, he gave her a fresh start: a clean slate to live a new life. Mercy triumphed over judgment.

Poonen has quite the way of saying: Mind your own business! I just wish he had brought the Holy Spirit into his message. Instead of telling people to judge themselves over and over again, I think he should have invited them to surrender themselves to the Lord, and ask God to do that heart searching. Otherwise you run the risk of obsessive navel-gazing. And you’ll never see your own blind spots. (So you just stay legalistic) David did it the right way. He prayed, “Search me O God…”

_________________
Diane

"The Pharisees brought to Jesus only 1/2 of the problem - where was the other partner?"


They probably had paid the fellow who bought her services so that they can have something to accuse Jesus with. I can see them scheming, planning and paying people off for the transgression. And I think that is why Jesus didn't say anything to them at the first because He knew what they had done.

Wouldn't be the first or last time they paid someone off to protect their influence over the people. They probably were not too happy with John the Baptist either. He called them a "brood of vipers". I wonder how well the Pharisees knew Herod?

_________________
Sreeram