John 8

Chap. VIII. Ver. 1—11. The woman taken in adultery, brought to Jesus—Notwithstanding the division among the people, and the attempt of the rulers to apprehend him, we find Jesus again in the temple early on the following morning; and no sooner does he appear, than the people again draw round him, and he sits down in one of the cloisters of the temple to instruct them. The Scribes and Pharisees, however, seeking by every possible means to ensnare him, bring before him a woman taken in adultery, whom they say Moses commanded to be stoned; but they wish to know his judgment on the case—“Master, what sayest thou?” The case indeed seems but obscurely stated. The law of Moses ((Deuteronomy 22:22-24)) made the crime capital only in the case of a betrothed woman, and then both parties were equally liable to the punishment.

The woman is brought for the purpose of tempting our Saviour, that they might have somewhat whereof to accuse him. Had he consigned her to punishment, they might have censured his severity to the woman: “Is this he that came to seek and to save that which was lost?” Had he discharged her, they might have blamed him for lack of zeal for the law and for good morals: “Behold the friend of publicans and of sinners!” The snare was laid artfully, but he avoided it by his prudence. He is silent for some time, and takes no notice, as if he did not hear them, writing with his finger in the dust, until their importunity at length compels him; and then, raising himself erect, he says to her accusers, “Let him among you that is without sin, cast the first stone at her.”

It seems going too far to say, that all her accusers were guilty of the same crime, though it was, unhappily, very common; but it should seem, if not of the same, they were conscious of other enormities, though secret, which no less disqualified them to punish her with severity. At length, however, they gradually withdrew, beginning with the elders, who, first seeing the impropriety of their conduct, were of course followed by the younger. This very unexpected answer seems to have disconcerted their design. Their consciences stung them, and they were silenced. “These men’s sins,” (says Bp. Hall,) “as they had been secret, so they were forgotten. It is long since they were done, neither did they think to have heard any more news of them.

And now, when time and sequent had quite worn them out of thought, he that shall one day be their judge, calls them to a back-reckoning. ‘One time or other shall that just God lay our sins in our dish, and make us possess the sins of our youth. These things thou didst and I kept silence, and thoughtest that I was like unto thyself: but I will reprove thee, and set them in order before thee.’ The penitent man’s sin lies before him, [for] humiliation; the impenitent’s, for his shame and con- “It is but just that there should be a requisition of innocence in them that prosecute the vices of others. The offender is worthy of stoning, but who shall cast them? How ill would they become hands as guilty as her own?

What do they but smite themselves, who punish their own offences in other men? Nothing is more unjust or absurd, than for the beam to censure the mote; the oven to upbraid the kiln. ‘It is a false and vagrant zeal that begins not first at home.’ No sooner did these hypocrites hear of their sins from the mouth of Christ, than they are gone. Had they been sincerely touched with a true remorse, they would have rather come to him upon their knees, and have said, ‘Lord, we find that thou knowest our secret sins: this argues thy divine omniscience. Thou that art able to know our sins, art able to remit them. O pardon the iniquities of thy servants.’ But what becomes of the woman? She is left standing among the people, struck, probably, with the wisdom of his decision, and waiting for a word of mercy to herself.

She receives it, and departs; “Go, and sin no more.” —“God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.” (John 3:17). Ver. 12—32. Christ the light of the world—the revealer of the Father’s will.—Our Lord now speaks of himself as the light of the world, under which character he is spoken of by this evangelist in the first chapter of this Gospel, ver. 4 and 5. When Christ is thus called, it must still be understood in reference to the sun, under which image he was promised by the prophet Malachi, (ch. iv. 2:) “Unto you that fear my name shall the Sun of righteousness arise, with healing in his wings:” and it is on account of this “healing under his wings,”

or beams, that he is called “the light of the.” This true light is not like the cold light of philosophy, which, though it may enlighten the intellect, does not affect the heart; nor is it like the sickly light of enthusiasm, which destroys the healthful vigour of the mind. It is life, and light, and joy, and peace, and happiness; and those who follow this light cannot walk in darkness; they shall neither be frozen to insensibility, nor heated to extravagance. But he says, “I am the light of the world;” implying that, though he arose first upon the Jews, yet should he, like the natural sun, pursue his course till all nations should see and enjoy his light. The Pharisees take offence at this discourse.

“Thou bearest record of thyself,” (say they,) and therefore, by thine own showing, thy evidence is invalid and inadmissible. (See (John 5:31), and note there.) To this Jesus replies, “Though I bear witness of myself, I do not alone bear witness; my heavenly Father bears witness with me, in the doctrines I deliver, and in the miraculous powers with which I am endowed. I cannot be deceived, because I certainly know whence I came, and whither I am going. Nor can you be deceived by me, because my witness is thus confirmed by him who ‘cannot lie:’ my Father himself beareth witness of me.” —“Thy Father?” return the Jews,—“Where is thy Father? see him and believe.” True, indeed, replies our Saviour, “Ye neither know me, nor my Father;”

for, “had ye known me, ye would have known my Father also:” Had ye known my true character, ye would have known that the most high God is indeed my Father. “These words spake Jesus in the treasury, as he taught in the temple;” and notwithstanding he spake so openly, and so boldly, claiming God to be his own Father, as he had done before, to their great offence and scandal, (in (John 5:18),) yet no man laid hands on him, “for his time was not yet come.” Our Lord here repeats a sentiment which he had already advanced in the preceding chapter: “I go my way, and whither I go ye cannot come;” upon which some, more extravagant than those who had heard him before, now exclaim, “Will he kill himself, and escape to the other world, where we cannot follow him?”

Far be it from the Saviour of the world in any degree to countenance suicide. No: they were the murderers, and the fatal principle was already fixed in their hearts—they sought his life. Jesus now explains the reason why they cannot enter into his views and principles. They were carnal and worldly men and acted upon carnal and worldly principles: they “judge according to the flesh.” On the other hand, He was of another world; judged and acted on far different principles; and always did and said those things which pleased God his While delivering this discourse, of which (as of all his discourses) we have only an outline, many believed on him, or at least professed to do so, to whom he said, “If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed:”

“And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free;” that is, my doctrine, which is from above, and is as true as God is true, shall set you at liberty from the slavery of ignorance and vice—ye “shall be free indeed.” “Oft still that needful grace impart, On thee my trembling soul I cast: Perfect thy work within my heart, And own my worthless name at last!” Ver. 33—47. The Jews boast of being Abraham’s seed, and therefore free, which Jesus controverts.—We must, for a moment, turn back to the preceding section, and notice the nature of the liberty here spoken of; which is illustrated by the servant (or slave) of sin. The unbelieving Jews take offence at the offer of spiritual liberty, as if it were a reflection upon their present situation.

“We are Abraham’s children,” say they, “and never were in bondage to any man;” which cannot mean that none of the children of Abraham had ever been in bondage, for they surely could not have forgotten Egypt and Babylon; but it must refer to themselves, the present generation of Jews, as not in bondage; and even this was hardly true, for, with all their show of freedom, Judea was subject to a Roman governor and his military guard. Our Lord, however, had no reference to political circumstances: His kingdom was “not of this world;” and the liberty which he offered them was of a nature purely spiritual—a freedom from the curse of the law, and from the power of sin, to which they were now under a worse subjection than that of They call themselves children of Abraham; and our Lord, alluding to his family, remarks, that there were slaves therein as well as children; and that the bondwoman and her son, Hagar and Ishmael, were expelled thence, while Isaac, the heir, remained to possess the inheritance: therein intimating that, if they ill-treated the Son of God, as Ishmael did Isaac, they also should be cast out of God’s house, and banished to foreign lands, as indeed proved to be the case.

To understand our Lord’s subsequent discourse, we must remember that Abraham had a twofold posterity—the children of his body, and of his faith. In respect of the former he admits—“I know that ye are Abraham’s seed;” but in respect of the latter, he denies their relation to the patriarch: “If ye were [truly] Abraham’s children, ye would do the works of Abraham;” but ye are the offspring of another father, and his deeds ye do. Ye seek to kill me, because I tell you the truth: Abraham did not thus. Ye therefore are the children not of Abraham, but of him who was a murderer from the beginning, and an enemy to the truth. “I speak [and do] that which I have seen with my Father [God;] ye, that which ye have seen with yours [Satan.] Hence the contrariety of our conduct and character—hence I seek to enlighten you; and hence ye seek to kill me.”

Ver. 48—59. Jesus accused of being a demoniac, challenges him, ‘He that is of God heareth God’s words; namely, those which I deliver in his name: “Ye therefore hear [them] not, because ye are not of God;” that is, not under divine influence, as he told them before. “No man can come unto me, unless the Father who hath sent me draw him.” ((John 6:44).) This is indeed a humbling truth, that salvation is of God alone; and, to proud hearts, the most humbling truths are the most offensive; and hence the Jews again cry out, “Say we not well, that thou art a Samaritan and hast a devil?” (or rather demon.) The most spiteful names they could think of are now called forth. To the former of them he makes no reply; they must know that he was a Jew: to the latter he gives a simple and dignified denial: “I have not a devil.”

God is my Father, and I honour him by attributing to him the glory that is his due. Ye dishonour me by such ridiculous and unfounded insinuations. Whatever you may think, I solemnly assure you, (ver. 51,) “If a man keep my saying, he shall never see death.” To see death, and to taste of death, (ver. 52,) appear to be synonymous expressions, meaning to experience it; the only question is—What death is here intended? Certainly not mere mortality, for Abraham was dead, and the prophets were dead, nor did our Lord ever intimate that either himself or his apostles should be exempted from it. But there is a second death, for which the expression is sometimes used, (see (Revelation 2:11), xx. 6, 14;) and the phrase is evidently equivalent to that which Jesus used to Martha, the sister of Lazarus, (ch.

xi. 25, 26:) “He that believeth in me shall never die;” and both phrases, literally taken, mean, “shall not die for ever.” “Now (say they) we know that thou hast a devil: Abraham is dead, and the prophets are dead: whom makest thou thyself?” Here our Lord introduces some expressions respecting his pre-existence and divinity, which have been the subject of no little controversy, even to the present time. But instead of offering any observations of our own, we shall present our readers with the following extract from a very superior pen:—

“The opponents of Jesus, in their virulent cavils against him, had mentioned Abraham, their national ancestor, a man so signally favoured of God, that his name served as a proverbial example of dignity and honour.

They understood our Lord’s declarations as involving such assumptions of superiority at the time when the Messiah should appear, and of the blessings of his reign, as filled him with pleasure and exultation! ‘Your father Abraham earnestly desired that he might see my day; and he did see it and rejoiced.’” This turned the conversation. The Jews, not understanding, or affecting not to understand, that Jesus spake of an anticipative vision, exclaimed, “Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?”—Now, therefore, the question was brought to the single point of co-existence. It was necessary for Jesus either to deny the assumption, or to admit and confirm it. He did not do the former; but he gave an answer which his opponents viewed as being either directly or constructively impious and blasphemous, i.e. as admitting their imputation.” (Smith’s Messiah.) The last declaration of our Lord, that he existed before Abraham, so enraged his enemies, that they took up stones to stone him; but he was not to die by stoning, nor was his time yet come: Jesus therefore concealed himself for the moment, and then mixing in the crowd, (and having nothing peculiar in his dress,) he passed through the midst of them without being perceived, more thus again for the present escaped the malice of his enemies.

Notes on the verses

Chap. VIII. Ver. 1—11. “It is well known, (says Doddridge,) that this story is wanting in the Syriac version, in the Alexandrian and Bodleian copies, and in most of the oldest MSS., which engaged Beza to question, and Le Clerc, with many others, to reject its authority.” But it is ably vindicated by Dr. Mill, Bp. Pearce, and the learned Nolan. Doddridge appears satisfied of its authenticity, but Campbell is doubtful. It is certainly more easy to account for its omission than its insertion; and many think it was omitted from a mistaken notion of our Lord being too indulgent to the adulteress. See Preb. Townsend’s New Testament Arr. [The subject of the story, says that eminent critic, Eusebius, forms as convincing a proof in support of its genuineness, as it does in the subversion of the contrary notion, that it is an interpolation.

There could be no possible inducement for fabricating such a passage, while there is an obvious motive for removing it from the canon. It has, besides, internal evidence of authenticity, in the testimony of the Vulgate, in which it is uniformly found; and external, in the express acknowledgment of its genuineness by St. Chrysostome, St. Jerome, St. Augustine, and St. Ambrose; and St. Augustine has specified the reason of its having been withdrawn from the text of the Evangelist. Add to this, that the plain and simple style is that of the Evangelist; and that every circumstance is completely in character; exactly what might be expected from the scribes and Pharisees, and from our Lord; while his answer, though perfectly suited to the purpose, would scarcely have ever been thought of by human ingenuity.

—Bagster. Ver. 6. Wrote on the ground.—This is not uncommon in the East. Some commentators think our Lord’s conduct had some reference to the law of jealousy, (Numbers 5:11), &c.—to the priest’s stooping to take up dust, and writing the curses pronounced upon her; but of this we are very doubtful—As though he heard them not.—What Christ wrote we know not, and it is in vain to guess: but if these words are genuine, his writing could have no reference to her case, or they must have known he heard them. Dr. Mill, however, omits these words, and Doddridge thinks justly, as they are wanting in the most valuable MSS., and several other printed editions besides Mill’s. Ver. 9. Being convicted by their own conscience.—Campbell says this clause is wanting in many MSS., and several versions and printed editions.

—Beginning at the eldest.—It would be straining the text too far, to suppose they all went out in exact rotation; but the elder and most respected members of the council, being self-convicted, first withdrew, and the others followed. Ver. 11. Neither do I condemn thee.—Our Lord carefully avoids assuming any appearance of magisterial authority. See (Luke 13:14). Ver. 15. Ye judge after the flesh—That is, from outward appearances, and on carnal principles. Compare (John 7:24).—I judge no man—i.e. my present commission is to save, and not to judge. See note on verse 11. Ver. 20. Treasury.—In the court of the women in the temple there was placed one chest, or more; the Jews say eleven, for receiving the voluntary contributions of the people towards defraying the charges of public worship; such as providing the public sacrifices, wood for the altar, salt, and other necessaries.

That part of the area where these chests were placed was the treasury. (Mark 12:41). Perhaps the whole court, or at least the piazza on one side, with the chambers over it, in which the sacred stores were kept, was from hence called by the same name.—Jennings’s Jew. Ant. Ver. 24. Ye shall die in your sins—That is, if ye accept not the Saviour whom God has provided, ye must die without pardon or salvation. Our Lord here tells the Jews, that they should die in their sins, and whither he went they could not come. But, according to the scheme of Universalists, they might live in their sins, and yet be able to go whither he went, and inherit eternal life. Whom shall we believe? Voltaire spent his whole life in malignant but vain attempts to ridicule and overturn Christianity.

He was the idol of a large portion of the French nation: but just when they were decreeing new honours for him, and loading him with fresh applause, the hour of his ignominy and shame was fully come. In a moment the approach of death dissipated his delusive dreams, and filled his guilty soul with inexpressible horror. As if moved by magic, conscience started from her long slumbers, and unfolded before him the broad extended roll of all his crimes. Ah! whither shall he fly for relief? Fury and despair succeed each other by turns, and he has more the appearance of a demon than a man. ‘To his physician he said, “Doctor, I will give you half of what I am worth if you will give me six months life.”

The Doctor answered, “Sir, you cannot live six weeks.” Voltaire replied, “Then shall I go to hell, and you shall go with me;” and soon after expired. —That I am he—Namely, the Messiah, as I have told you—even from the beginning. See next verse. Ver. 26. Judge of you.—Campbell, “Reprove in you.” Ver. 28. When ye have lifted up—i.e. crucified—Then shall ye know.—See (Luke 23:46-47). Ver. 33. They answered.—Campbell, “Some answered;” i.e. not the persons who believed in him, as the context shows, but others of them who believed not. So Doddridge. Ver. 34. Whosoever committeth—Doddridge, “practiseth;” i.e. He thinks it exactly parallel to “worketh iniquity,” and implying a course of habitual transgression.—Is the servant—Doddridge, “the slave;” which is more literal.

Ver. 36. If the Son… make you free, &c.—Abp. Tillotson says, that in some cities of Greece, the son and heir had a right to adopt brethren into the family; but Dr. Gill thinks that this refers to a custom among the Romans, of a son, after his father’s death, making free all the slaves that had been born in the house. Ver. 43. Because ye cannot hear my word.—Doddridge reads the latter clause interrogatively: “Is it because ye cannot hear my word?” But Campbell thinks the Greek word hear, in this place, means to hear patiently, and renders it, “ye cannot bear my words.” Compare verse 47. Ver. 44. He was a murderer.—Greek, “A killer of men.” He “brought death into the world.” —He is a liar, and the father of it—i.e. of lying. So Ver. 46. Which of you convinceth me—Campbell, “convicteth me?” —of sin?—i.e. of falsehood, here contrasted with the truth. Ver. 48. And hast a devil.—Greek, “Demon;” so verses 49, 52. Compare (John 7:20), and note. The word “devil,” in the original of verse 44, is di- Ver. 51. Shall never see death.—Campbell admits that this refers to eternal death; but remarks, that the ambiguity of the original should be preserved, as it is by our translators, to give a just idea of the dialogue. Ver. 55. “I shall be a liar.”—Campbell, “I should speak falsely, like you.” Ver. 56. Abraham rejoiced—Campbell, “longed” —to see. Bishop Vices sees a reference to a prophetic vision which Abraham was favoured with at the time he offered up his son Isaac, and to which St.

Ver. 57. Thou art not yet fifty years old.—He could not be more than 35; (nor, we think, so much,) but “his visage was marred more than any man’s,” ((Isaiah 53:2),) which might well give him the appearance of advanced age. Ver. 58. Before Abraham was, I am.—That our Lord by this expression asserted his divinity and eternal existence, as the great I AM, appears evident from the use of the present tense, instead of the perfect, from its being in answer to the Jews, who inquired whether he had seen Abraham, and from its being thus understood by the multitude, who were exasperated at it to such a Semmes that they took up stones to stone him. The ancient Jews not only believed that the Messiah was superior to and Lord of all the Patriarchs, and even of angels, but that his celestial nature existed with God, from whom it emanated, before the creation, and that the creation was effected by his ministry. —Bagster.

A celebrated foreign Professor remarks, that the common interpretation is required by the tenor of the discussion. The objection turned upon existence; therefore the reply must refer to existence also. The objection was, “Thou canst not have seen Abraham, for thou art not yet fifty years old; thou wast not then born.” Jesus answered, “I was before he was.” Thus the reply corresponds to the objection.” Rosenmuller. —I am.—This clause, according to Dr. Smith, is attended with some difficulty. We shall give an outline of his remarks.—1. Some suppose it alludes to Exodus iii. 14, but the Hebrew is in the future. 2. The predicate of the proposition may be left to be supplied by the minds of the hearers—[I am] [the Christ.] Compare

(Mark 13:6), with (Matthew 24:5). 3. The present, “I am,” may be taken in the sense of the past, “I was.” This is not unusual. Doddridge and Campbell render it, “Before Abraham was born I am;” which is perfectly literal. Ver. 59, Going through the midst, &c.—This latter part of the verse is wanting in some MSS. and versions, and is omitted by some learned Editors.