Jesus' sparing the adulteress

In my post, I was in no way questioning the legitimacy of Jesus' stance - I was merely trying to understand it.
Obviously, generally in a situation in which judges had to deal with a malefactor, if they used the idea "let him who is without sin...", then nobody would be carrying out justice.

I'm not saying it was the case in the account of the gospel, but to address the general question you asked:- Suppose a couple have just finished their coupling, and they hear people coming to confront them. He is frightened and spurred on by this, he gets up and escapes. She is soon seen and it is evident she has just had sex. Her husband is known to be away. It is clear she is guilty; however, the man is gone.
Is this not a feasible scenario?

brother where in the law does it say to spare an adulteress if the man isn’t present ? Consider that event they are discussing and then this one Jesus spares her also which Moses law does not

“And, behold, a woman in the city, which was a sinner, when she knew that Jesus sat at meat in the Pharisee's house, brought an alabaster box of ointment, and stood at his feet behind him weeping, and began to wash his feet with tears, and did wipe them with the hairs of her head, and kissed his feet, and anointed them with the ointment. Now when the Pharisee which had bidden him saw it, he spake within himself, saying, This man, if he were a prophet, would have known who and what manner of woman this is that toucheth him: for she is a sinner. And Jesus answering said unto him, Simon, I have somewhat to say unto thee. And he saith, Master, say on. There was a certain creditor which had two debtors: the one owed five hundred pence, and the other fifty. And when they had nothing to pay, he frankly forgave them both. Tell me therefore, which of them will love him most? Simon answered and said, I suppose that he, to whom he forgave most. And he said unto him, Thou hast rightly judged. And he turned to the woman, and said unto Simon, Seest thou this woman? I entered into thine house, thou gavest me no water for my feet: but she hath washed my feet with tears, and wiped them with the hairs of her head. Thou gavest me no kiss: but this woman since the time I came in hath not ceased to kiss my feet. My head with oil thou didst not anoint: but this woman hath anointed my feet with ointment. Wherefore I say unto thee, Her sins, which are many, are forgiven; for she loved much: but to whom little is forgiven, the same loveth little. And he said unto her, Thy sins are forgiven. And they that sat at meat with him began to say within themselves, Who is this that forgiveth sins also? And he said to the woman, Thy faith hath saved thee; go in peace.”
‭‭Luke‬ ‭7:37-50‬ ‭

sinners who know they were guilty like the adulteress and they are facing a death sentence by the law , if you spare this person they are going to dedicate thier lives to th one who saved them like the sinful woman in the other example.

Jesus is the savior he came for the purpose of saving sinners from the demand of the law upon their lives is why he spared all the sinners he came across whether the adulteress or all the others everyone he met was a sinner d he forgave them where the law accused and held them guilty



We are all the adulteress were all caught in sin

“for all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭3:23‬ ‭KJV‬‬

she was spared because she met the savior

“being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; to declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭3:24-26‬ ‭KJV‬‬

He forgave her d first he reminded all the self righteous trying to stone her that they were all sinners also s had no place stoning this other sinner we’ve all become the adulteress at some point in our lives and like her the only thing that can save us now is to meet Jesus in truths have the savior arrive on the scene

we’re all caught in the act , and we all need that same experience to meet Jesus and hear his word that saved her from the breaking of the law of sin and death

it has no matter whether the man was there if you look Jesus forgave sinners constantly regardless of others bekng around or not

sin is imputes to both adulterers and adulteresses each had the same sentence but it doesn’t matter if one runs away and escapes the other is still under the death sentance of Moses law

it’s a New Testament where he’s not imputing our sins against us

“This is the covenant that I will make with them After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, And in their minds will I write them; And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.”
‭‭Hebrews‬ ‭10:16-17‬ ‭

that’s not this covenant

“Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭3:19-20‬ ‭KJV‬‬

That covenant is why she was about to be executed she was held guilty by it d Jesus is speaking the new covenant not holding her sins against her but he’s also telling her “ now go and repent don’t keep sinning “

he’s saving her from the law of Moses and imparting his word into her heart and because he saved her life it’s going to reach her heart

Plausible

I am not aware where it does say spare the adulteress but I am away that both should be stoned if 2-3 witnesess can confirm that it took place.

In this instance we need to look at what the Pharisees were trying to and it certainly was not justice under the law of Moses.

It was to discredit Jesus and trap him.

With regards to the woman you talk about (Mary Magdalene) why was she not bought ti Jesus to be stoned?

Interestingly enough, while this story is subtitled "Jesus spares the adultress" in some bibles; no where in the story does Jesus actually spare this woman, because she was never properly accused in the first place- her accusers left. What the story also does not say, is that she believed on Jesus OR that her sins were forgiven by Jesus.

Because they had ALL broken the law from the least to the eldest, most likely they had broken the law with her, that's how they knew to catch her. So if she should be stoned they should be as well.

I don't understand the idea that because THEY had all broken the Law, the woman should go unjudged. EVERYBODY has broken the Law. If people are only going to be judged by morally perfect people, NO-ONE is going to be judged.
As for them having "broken the law with her", I see no evidence for this.

Everybody has broken the law, YOU have broken the law ... you deserve to die, that's the judgement.

I wonder why they didn't also bring the other half of the "event" to the Lord Jesus as well?????????????

Exactly!

The law was made disfunctional

The exact function of the law is to bring us to Christ. So the crowd was inadvertently doing what the law was intended to do. And then, when you consider Jesus' instruction to Peter that he must forgive his brother 77 times, and by the underlying meaning of numbers , this suggests an utterly complete forgiveness which implies that no of us have any right to the privilege of condemning anyone. This particular power is reserved to the only One worthy. to which it has been given.

It was to demonstrate the acts of compassion, mercy, and forgiveness. No such softening of dealing with sin as Jesus paid the price for the sins of that woman by dying on the cross.

I guess that guys that fooled around got a pass.

Sorry - you've lost me on that point.

I don't think so. For her to be caught in the act, both would have to have been seen committing adultery. Obviously
the man managed to get away somehow, though what the exact circumstances of his escape were, we may never know.

Otherwise any woman found in bed alone could be said to have just
committed adultery, and the man escaped unseen, fearing being caught.

There were no witnesses. They all left. And by the way, where was the guy she adulterating with???

I agree with everything you've said.

The woman WAS guilty. Jesus didn't bring up the fact that the man wasn't also present though.

There is nothing here to suggest Jesus was absolving the woman because her adulterous mate wasn't there.
The whole point of the account was to show that what the law couldn't accomplish, Grace, through the One who DID accomplish ALL the law, could.

He had the authority to forgive this woman, and give her the power to reject sin. NONE of them could ever fulfill all the law. No matter how hard they tried. That's why Jesus asked them who amongst them hadn't sinned.

It is only by Grace through faith in Jesus that she OR US, are able to "go and sin no more".

Them trying to trap Him is a pretty good point too that several have made here.
Maybe they thought this a good way to get the Romans to arrest and kill Jesus, thinking that this extremely well versed Rabbi would say something like, " Well, the law says to stone her. So go and carry out the Law".

I just had a "light bulb" moment regarding this passage.

For the longest time, I thought that Jesus' words of "he who is without sin among you" meant that the only way one could carry out a capital (death) sentence on someone else is if the executing party was sinless.

Of course, I had read in the Mosaic Law regarding cases of adultery and when the death penalty should be carried out. However, I never really put the two things together until now. God had already given His people the authority to carry out death sentences for various violations of the Law. So I think that Jesus' words in the case of the adulteress meant something to the effect of "You're not using the Law correctly; under these circumstances, this woman should NOT be stoned". The criminal justice system of the US is similar to this; we generally consider people "not guilty" if there isn't enough evidence to prove they committed crimes "beyond a reasonable doubt". "Not guilty" doesn't necessarily mean "innocent". In the same way, Jesus said that there wasn't enough evidence and/or proper procedures weren't followed so as to formally convict the woman of adultery and thus sentence her to death. That fact didn't justify or excuse her sin; indeed Jesus told her to "go and sin no more".

Remember that the apostle Paul would later write that "the law is good if one uses it lawfully". In the case of the adulterous woman, her accusers did not use the Law lawfully.