The Narrow Path Ministries

In another thread I already brought up this question why Jesus dealt with the adulterous woman the way he did. The law demanded her to be stoned. The law was from God. Jesus is God. This would actually make it seem pretty logical that Jesus would want this woman to be stoned. But he forgives her and when you read this you might get the impression that Jesus has somehow different opinions or that he doesn't agree with people being stoned, but this cannot be because Jesus and the Father will agree on these things. But then I don't understand why Jesus forgave her when he demands in the law that such persons shall be stoned. Let's say the same thing had happened 1 week before and Jesus had not been there then the woman would have been stoned according to God's law and God would have agreed with it, right? Then why did Jesus forgive her and on what basis did he forgive her? Did something change as soon as Jesus came to earth? Was God able to finally deal different with sin from this moment on? Was it all because of the upcoming sacrifice that God was able to deal with sin differently and to forgive?
What I also don't understand is this. The bible says God is the same. But if God is the same there why could adulterers in the OT not repent and not be stoned? Why was there no chance to be forgiven? Today you can commit adultery and God doesn't kill you right away. You can repent and everything is okay. Why not back then? And did such an adulterer who was stoned automatically go to hell or is it possible that such a person was still saved?

Let me give you a few thoughts Beaver. The situation that Jesus had was the enemy(pharisees religious zealots) were trying to set Jesus up. Yes the law clearly stated stoneing was appropriat. But they only brought the woman the law said both partys should be stoned. Jesus saw through their tricks. He turned it back on them when he said you who is without sin cast the first stone. They couldn't and he could but he didn't because it's not gods will for any to perish.

David was a murdered and an adulterer and deservrd to be stonned but God said he was a man after Gods own heart.

Abraham was a liar but he was called the friend of God.

Moses was a murderer but was the one God used to deliver his people.

The letter of the law kills but grace redeems something lost.

She deserved death but found grace.

The bible says God is the same. But if God is the same there why could adulterers in the OT not repent and not be stoned? Why was there no chance to be forgiven? Today you can commit adultery and God doesn't kill you right away. You can repent and everything is okay. Why not back then? And did such an adulterer who was stoned automatically go to hell or is it possible that such a person was still saved?

God is the same but He apparently revealed himself gradually and in the OT gave the law for a purpose which was to demonstrate that sinful man could not keep it. Christ had the authority to forgive by himself which he did as he came to bring the New Covenant which replaced the Old Covenant and provided forgiveness of sins. It never says anything about hell in the OT at least not in the hebrew, it only mentions the grave or perishing.

Beaver wrote:In another thread I already brought up this question why Jesus dealt with the adulterous woman the way he did. The law demanded her to be stoned. The law was from God. Jesus is God. This would actually make it seem pretty logical that Jesus would want this woman to be stoned. But he forgives her and when you read this you might get the impression that Jesus has somehow different opinions or that he doesn't agree with people being stoned, but this cannot be because Jesus and the Father will agree on these things. But then I don't understand why Jesus forgave her when he demands in the law that such persons shall be stoned. Let's say the same thing had happened 1 week before and Jesus had not been there then the woman would have been stoned according to God's law and God would have agreed with it, right? Then why did Jesus forgive her and on what basis did he forgive her? Did something change as soon as Jesus came to earth? Was God able to finally deal different with sin from this moment on? Was it all because of the upcoming sacrifice that God was able to deal with sin differently and to forgive?
What I also don't understand is this. The bible says God is the same. But if God is the same there why could adulterers in the OT not repent and not be stoned? Why was there no chance to be forgiven? Today you can commit adultery and God doesn't kill you right away. You can repent and everything is okay. Why not back then? And did such an adulterer who was stoned automatically go to hell or is it possible that such a person was still saved?

A couple of additional thoughts, color coordinated at no extra charge :

(1)
Repenting of a sin doesn't prevent the offender from suffering the consequences of their actions. In our society, if a someone murders another, they will suffer punishment, even if they are truly repentent of their actions. Why? For the purposes of deterrence, justice and the segregation of evil. Likewise, in the Old Covenant, adultery was punishable by stoning (both parties that were involved as DonO pointed out) to deter anyone from pursuing the sinful action, justice and to sequester sin or evil from the nation. In fact, a truly repentent person will submit themselves to the consequences of their sin, because they understand the gravity of what they have done.

(2)
So why didn't Jesus acquiesce to following what the Law prescribed? Remember, the Old Covenant Law didn't transcend God; God authored the Law. Israel was ruled by God as king. He had (and has) the authority to change consequences and determine punishments for individuals because He alone knows the heart. The OT is replete with instances where repentence by offenders caused God to rescind judgement. Jesus carried the same authority.

In the 2nd Century there developed a view that the God described in the Tanakh (OT) is different in personal character and modus operedi than the God revealed in Messiah in the Brith Chadashah (NT). Thus a looney gnostic priest in Italy developed a Gnostic Gospel and Rival Church which held that the god of the Old Testament was the Demiurge who created nasty Physical heaven and earth and seeks to enslave us under his Law which no man can keep. He taught that Messiah was the Son of the "Unknown" True God who is all about Love, Charity, Mercy and Universal Restoration. The Evil Jews worshipped the Demiurge god of the Law but Messiah came to show is the True God and His Way of Salvation through divine knowledge (i.e. Gnosis) handed down in private from the Apostles to Marcion! It was Marcion to whom we need to thank for our Bible Canon, as he created a "Canon" in which an edited and revised Gospel of Luke, Acts and Paul's Letters were the main corpus.

The "Orthodox" Churches of East & West then declared what we now posses as the "Canon" known as the Orthodox Bible (i.e. The LXX Tanakh (OT) & Canon and the 27 Books of the Koine Brit Chadashah (NT)) in retaliation. Thus we owe Marcion a thank you, for forcing us to form our own canon verses his mutilation of it.

It is the misconstruing of God, as revealed in the New Covenant Scriptures, from God as He reveals Himself in the Old Covenant Scriptures. Understand that Messiah, the Apostles and the early Chuch had only the LXX Tanakh as it's "BIBLE"...so they saw no contradictions, but merely a confirmation and complimentary revelation in Messiah and the Writings soon to be authored by His Apostles.

Messiah showed Divine Mercy and Wrath as He did as YHVH's Angel in the Old Testament. He showed Salvation and Condemnation as the Angel of YHVH and as Messiah..no contradiction. The Right Hand of God has been revealed since Genesis unto the Book of the Apocalypse as God's Hand of Mercy as well as His Hand of Justice, as the Source of Life and the Source of Death, as Life Giver and Life Taker...as the Origin and Terminus of All Things.

It is a miopic and cursory perspective which sees the Divine Entity in the 27 Books of the Brith Chadashah (NT) as someone different from the Divine Entity revealed in the Tanakh (OT). Jesus is Jehovah the Savior...and God does not chang. He is the same today as He was Yesterday and will be tomorrow. Many seek to focus on one attribute of Messiah (i.e. His Mercy & Loving Kindness), while overlooking the other attribute of Messiah (i.e. His Justice & Retribution). Just wait and ask pld Hananiah and his wife Shappirah if God did not strike them dead for lying, as He did to many other Hebrews in the Wilderness of Testing. Someday ask the Sadduccaean Priesthood and Herodian Temple worshippers if Messiah and His Father are not the same God and Divine Anget who again used Gentiles Armies to destroy a forsaken Temple and it's wayward Priesthood a second time on the same date!! Messiah was the God who met Moshe on Mt. Horeb, and the same God who again met Israel on Pentecost in a whirlwind of Fire..carving His Law into the Hearts of His People in the Upper Room.

No....the same Divine Entity is clearly reveals Himself in all the Books of the Bible.....His Covenant agreements have changed as man has faltered, but His Being, Nature, Will, Actions and Royal Law has never changed. Messiah walked with Adam & Eve in the Garden as God's Image and Form, and He died at Golgotha so we can again walk with Him in Paradise and in the New Heaven and Earth to come. He Loves, Hates, Challenges Us, Disciplines us, Speaks to us and Inspires us..what has changed? If we see differences and a change...it is our Vision which needs correction.


In Messiah,
Rev. Ken

I've struggled with this myself. One day I figure I'll get a good book on the subject and read it. Until then, however, I kinda like Wayne Jacobsen's theory that while sin in the NT was "cured" by the cross, the only "cure" for sin in the OT was death.

He sees sin as a disease that had to be destroyed lest it destroy its host, the sinner, and spread to infect others; thus God's decree of death was actually an act of mercy for both the sinner and others. Of course, this makes more sense if you consider that sin destroys the spirit rather than than the flesh (although some effects of sin often do destroy the flesh as well).

He explains it this way: Say there's a baby with a life-threatening disease. There's a cure for it, but the cure is so strong that it would kill the body while killing the disease. Then the doctor suggest to the parents an experimental cure his colleagues are researching. "We'll inject the disease in your blood," the doctor tells the parents, "and your blood will produce antibodies that can be injected into your baby to cure her. You'll die from the disease, but your baby will live."

Wayne posits there's no reason to think those who were killed for their sin went to hell, but that doesn't explain how a person who didn't have a chance to repent (a la Korah) before they died could be saved. It's also hard to see how the deaths of Annanias and Sapphira figure into this. But, it's an interesting point of view, and I'd definitely like to study it out further.