Why Jesus could not condemn the Woman who was caught in the very act of adultery?

[PloughBoy]

Great question.

I will share my thoughts.

So I hear two questions implied. You ask for "The reason why he did not condemn her"
and in the post it says "why he could not condemn her".

Would not and could not are different. But I'm not making a big point about it, just mentioning as I proceed.

When I think could not, I think one lacks the ability or capacity.
When I think would not, I think that one makes a choice, although sometimes one would not because they could not.
Meaning sometimes the choice is made based on their ability.

So why didn't David kill the Lion, ---- Oh he COULD not, he was not strong enough. (limited by ability, barriers, restricted)
question again, why didn't David kill the Lion -- He WOULD not, he loves animals (choice made based on desire, values)

COULD NOT -- I hear abilities
WOULD NOT -- I hear choice, make a decision.


So the question I would ask (@PloughBoy, @God's Truth , @GodB4Us , @AnneOminous , @Sue D. , @Dave M )
is did Jesus make a choice to forgive her, or was he obligated to do so by the law or a lack of witnesses?


We know that some do get condemned in the last days, and we know that Sodom and Gomorrah got condemnation
and Ananias and Sapphira were struck dead for their acts of sin.

So with this lady, is it a matter of why JESUS WOULD NOT condemn her (made a choice) or
why JESUS COULD NOT ( he was bound by law to forgive her)?
or something in the middle?

Thanks for your answer in advance.
Love and God Bless

LOL, I like this.
Now you also are among The “Quick” here on “TalkJesus”. Com. So in Great Detail of “Explanation” is not needed. So I am going to “Leap Frog” across what you do know.

Would not, Could not.

Would not, because He Cannot deny Himself. For He is “The Christ of GOD” wrap up in Flesh,
100 % “GOD” and 100% man!. For the Religious Rulers approach him In his “Humanity” and he address them in a language they understand, For they where experts in The Law, not realizing They Were Speaking to “The Law”.

“Are you still there”!

For in His “Divinity”He knew all things, Even He Knew of His own “Humanity”, and knew exactly what was in Man, Full “Corruption” None righteous no not one. The wh’ore and The Rulers! he knew it all, their past and future! Since they question Him in Humanity he answer in His Humanity and defended The Law.

But when He wrote on The Ground I do believe He Wrote from His “Divinity” and by the works of The Law every mouth will be stop and every man will be condemn.

“Be careful how we judge for with the same judgment we use shall be measure to ourselves by our very words.

So he would not because he could not within his “Humanity” he came to fulfill The Law, not to break it. It is impossible for him to break The Law. He is The Law of “GOD” in The Flesh, He had to die, Before a New Covenant could come into existence. He is everything, without him Nothing exist that exists. When He Got up From The Grave, The New Covenant” came to Life and was “Ratified” when He Appeared before HIS FATHER! Sit Down, until “I MAKE your Enemies your “Foot Stool”!

So it is a matter concerning his “Humanity” and His “Divinity”.

For Jesus is 100% man and 100% GOD, He can walk in his Divinity or His Humanity any time he pleases and still be in agreement with His FATHER. For they are one.

 

[God's Truth]

Can you imagine what it would be like if we never got the new covenant and were still under the law?

Thank God for Jesus and the New Covenant, AMEN .

Amen!

 

[God's Truth]

Can you imagine what it would be like if we never got the new covenant and were still under the law?

Thank God for Jesus and the New Covenant, AMEN .

Amen.

And, you got me thinking about David, a prophet of God's who had the Holy Spirit, as all the Prophets did...

David was a man after God's own heart, and he had to live by the old covenant, the old law.

When David sinned by committing adultery, and then having Uriah, Bathsheba's husband killed...David knew that under the law he should be put to death, but David was an example, a prophecy of what God was going to bring to us through Jesus, a New Covenant based on faith, mercy, and forgiveness.

David pleads with God to forgive him of the guilt of blood shed of innocent blood, and he begs God not to take His Spirit from him.

That is what we have through Jesus and the New Covenant now.

God did not take His Spirit from David, but, God did allow the natural consequences of sin to take place, such as the damage his sins did to himself and his families life.

We might have to suffer punishment from our Government for our sins, crimes, if any, or we might have to suffer personally with health for sins, but the important thing to know that if we repent, it does not mean we will be cut off from God, if we repent.

 

[Bill]

You are not a good person. Don't come into a discussion where people are sharing so much of their beliefs only to just come and be insulting as you are.

It's a free country and this website is open to the freedom of speech as well I mean within reason of course

Anna has the right to say what she is thinking but I would like to see more of what she's thinking though

 

[GodB4Us]

Thanks @God's Truth for sharing. Good points.

So if I hear you correctly, your position is Jesus would not -- it is not a matter of could not.

I hear you saying that Jesus came to introduce the new covenant and he was showing people that they would not
longer be bound by the law (the old conventant), but now it would be grace (or faith and mercy).

Correct?

@God's Truth

Verse 17 may be why He "could" not condemn her.

John 3:15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. 16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

When you consider verse 18 for also why He could not condemn her is because sinners were condemned already.

18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

All sinners are going to hell for why they are condemend already and that is why Jesus Christ is the Good News to man and also why Jesus "could not condemn her" because as a sinner, she was already condemned and why Jesus did not condemn her because He was sent into the world to save sinners like her.

 

[Brad Huber]

There are people who KNEW Jesus was the Messiah prophesied to come. They knew he was the Savior. It doesn't mean they knew immediately that he was the Son of God.

Bill listed the people that scripture speaks of as knowing, the others hoped He was the mesiah, some thought Him only a troublemaker, but few "knew" He was the Son of God. Humble people would have called him either rabbi or Lord simply because He seemed to have some sort of religious authority, and expected the respectful title like Pastor, Priest, etc just like today.

 

[God's Truth]

It's a free country and this website is open to the freedom of speech as well I mean within reason of course

Anna has the right to say what she is thinking but I would like to see more of what she's thinking though

This "Anna" person has been going around giving likes to anyone who says anything rude to me, and then just comes in on a discussion I spent a lot of time and great interest in, and sharing scriptures...just to have someone say nothing about the topic, but only make a rude comment to me. You really want to stand up for that?

 

[God's Truth]

@God's Truth

Verse 17 may be why He "could" not condemn her.

Jesus came to give a New Covenant. The New Covenant was based on faith and mercy and forgiveness.

John 3:15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. 16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

When you consider verse 18 for also why He could not condemn her is because sinners were condemned already.

18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

All sinners are going to hell for why they are condemend already and that is why Jesus Christ is the Good News to man and also why Jesus "could not condemn her" because as a sinner, she was already condemned and why Jesus did not condemn her because He was sent into the world to save sinners like her.

I do not go along with saying Jesus could not condemn her, because if you read some of the reasons why others think Jesus couldn't condemn her.

It seems you are missing the point. Jesus didn't condemn her because he came to teach us how to be forgiven and be saved according to the New Covenant that he was teaching.

John 8:16 And yet if I judge, my judgment is true: for I am not alone, but I and the Father that sent me.

 

[PloughBoy]

This "Anna" person has been going around giving likes to anyone who says anything rude to me, and then just comes in on a discussion I spent a lot of time and great interest in, and sharing scriptures...just to have someone say nothing about the topic, but only make a rude comment to me. You really want to stand up for that?

Stop crying, that’s my sister! And I am her big brother. And I ain’t the only one she got on here. You do remember “Levi” concerning “Dinah”?

If you need a bible interpreter concerning “Biblical Motifs” I think we got some on “TalkJesus”. Com

 

[God's Truth]

Bill listed the people that scripture speaks of as knowing, the others hoped He was the mesiah, some thought Him only a troublemaker, but few "knew" He was the Son of God. Humble people would have called him either rabbi or Lord simply because He seemed to have some sort of religious authority, and expected the respectful title like Pastor, Priest, etc just like today.

I was just agreeing with Bill on what he said and I elaborated that people knew he was the promised Messiah to come, but that they didn't know he was the Son of God.

 

[God's Truth]

Stop crying, that’s my sister! And I am her big brother. And I ain’t the only one. You do remember “Levi” concerning “Dinah”?

lol

 

[PloughBoy]

lol

Have you forgotten:
New American Standard Bible
“Blessed are you when peopleinsult you and persecute you, and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of Me.

I am glad you can laugh!

Shalom

 

[Bill]

Jesus came to give a New Covenant. The New Covenant was based on faith and mercy and forgiveness.

I do not go along with saying Jesus could not condemn her, because if you read some of the reasons why others think Jesus couldn't condemn her.

It seems you are missing the point. Jesus didn't condemn her because he came to teach us how to be forgiven and be saved according to the New Covenant that he was teaching.

John 8:16 And yet if I judge, my judgment is true: for I am not alone, but I and the Father that sent me.

I dont agree with your conclusion here . Because it is obvious to me Jesus was plenty mad with the Pharisees as well as the merchants in the temple.

There were a number of times that Jesus was plenty upset with them in the scripture.

I have to honestly agree with plowboys first statement where Jesus had to abide by the law of the Old Testament where there had to be two witnesses to make the accusation.

As scripture States they all walked away and there was no one left, except for Jesus and the woman. And Jesus who could have condemned her, chose an alternative route which was to forgive her.

 

[God's Truth]

Have you forgotten:
New American Standard Bible
“Blessed are you when peopleinsult you and persecute you, and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of Me.

I am glad you can laugh!

Shalom

Are you rebuking yourself with that scripture?

 

[God's Truth]

I dont agree with your conclusion here .

You are saying Jesus didn't come and teach and die for a New Covenant?

Because it is obvious to me Jesus was plenty mad with the Pharisees as well as the merchants in the temple.

There were a number of times that Jesus was plenty upset with them in the scripture.

And? What is your point?

I have to honestly agree with plowboys first statement where Jesus had to abide by the law of the Old Testament where there had to be two witnesses to make the accusation.

There is nowhere in the passage about not having enough witnesses.

As scripture States they all walked away and there was no one left, except for Jesus and the woman. And Jesus who could have condemned her, chose an alternative route which was to forgive her.

The New Covenant is about coming to the Father by forgiveness through Jesus first. That is about the New Covenant. The Old Covenant wasn't about forgiveness through Jesus.

 

[GodB4Us]

Jesus came to give a New Covenant. The New Covenant was based on faith and mercy and forgiveness.

I do not go along with saying Jesus could not condemn her, because if you read some of the reasons why others think Jesus couldn't condemn her.

It seems you are missing the point. Jesus didn't condemn her because he came to teach us how to be forgiven and be saved according to the New Covenant that he was teaching.

John 8:16 And yet if I judge, my judgment is true: for I am not alone, but I and the Father that sent me.

One can apply what Jesus said in John 8:16 as referring to judging works as evil as He did in John 7:7 whereas John 3:17 testify why He could not condemn her because she was already condemned per John 3:18 as a sinner, as He was sent into the world to save sinners. When she said Lord unto Him, this woman caught in adultery apparently heard enough about Jesus to recognize that a miracle has happened for why she was not stoned to death, and she saw Him as Lord for why the Lord said neither does He condemn her because she called Him Lord, believing in Him for what has just happened.

John 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

So I say that at that time, Jesus was fulfilling the Father's will for what He was sent to do; not to condemn the world, i.e. sinners, but to save them.

 

[complete]

Ok this is why he could not condemn her. Because of the law of God. To condemn someone you had to have two witnesses Jesus had patience and knew everything. And after he wrote something on the ground that convince them to walk away one by one, convicted by their conscience. Jesus was Left Alone and the woman standing in the mist, [guilty]. He said to her, where are your accusers, have any man condemned you? She answered: NO MAN, Lord. Jesus said : neither do I , go and SIN no more. THE WOMAN HAD NO ACCUSERS, NO ONE CONDEMNED HER. Jesus could not condemn her! HE Was not there to see the act, if he was there to see the act, he still could not condemn her it took 2 witnesses. That is why He said: Neither do I condemn thee! He was not there! Another reason why He is also called a “Paraclete” [Advocate]. And knew the Law! LOL

'At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses,
shall he that is worthy of death be put to death;
but at the mouth of one witness he shall not be put to death.'
(Deu 17:6)

Hello @PloughBoy,

Yes, all those who had brought accusations against her, had left, and she was alone before the Lord.

Yet, as a man's wife (which the Lord knew her to be - though not told), the punishment was not by stoning: as the Lord indicated by writing on the ground (see reply#82). Stoning was the punishment of one who was a virgin betrothed to a man, and not the man's wife.

So, the absence of witnesses was not the reason that the Lord did not stone her, though would have been the reason he could not, if the punishment had fit the crime under the law.

Thank you
In Christ Jesus
Chris

 

[PloughBoy]

Are you rebuking yourself with that scripture?

Sad, but yet , many are called, but only a few are chosen.

 

[PloughBoy]

'At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses,
shall he that is worthy of death be put to death;
but at the mouth of one witness he shall not be put to death.'
(Deu 17:6)

Hello @PloughBoy,

Yes, all those who had brought accusations against her, had left, and she was alone before the Lord.

Yet, as a man's wife (which the Lord knew her to be - though not told), the punishment was not by stoning: as the Lord indicated by writing on the ground (see reply#82). Stoning was the punishment of one who was a virgin betrothed to a man, and not the man's wife.

So, the absence of witnesses was not the reason that the Lord did not stone her, though would have been the reason he could not, if the punishment had fit the crime under the law.

Thank you
In Christ Jesus
Chris

“When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense seek no other sense”
For “Biblical interpretation” is an “art”. And “Biblical interpretation” has rules. There is a “order”.
“Knowing Scripture”.
It is not “Learning Scripture” “It is “Gift” given by “GOD”. Less any man or women should boast and be proven a Liar! [in The Courts of Justice].
No one takes upon This honor only him who has been called of “GOD”.

7In the days of His humanity, He offered up bothprayers and pleas with loudcrying and tears to the One able to save Him from death, and He was heardbecause of His devoutbehavior. 8Although He was a Son, He learnedobedience from the things which He suffered. 9And having been perfected, He became the source of eternal salvation for allthose who obey Him,10being designated by Godas High Priest according to the order of Melchizedek.

11Concerning [g]him we have muchto say, and it is difficult to explain, since you have become [h]poorlisteners. 12For though Hebrews 5 New American Standard Bibleby thistime you ought to be teachers, you have need again for someone to teach you the [j]elementaryprinciples of the actual words of God, and you have come to needmilk and not solid food. 13For everyone who partakes only of milk is unacquainted with the wordof righteousness, for he is an infant. 14But solid food is for the mature, who because of practicehave their senses trained to distinguish between good and evil.

PS. You can try to defend her all you want, she was guilty and would have been stone to death if those cowards and sinners had not walked away! She was “guilty”! A blind man can see that far backwards even from the 22nd century!

 

[Bill]

You are saying Jesus didn't come and teach and die for a New Covenant?

And? What is your point?

There is nowhere in the passage about not having enough witnesses.

The New Covenant is about coming to the Father by forgiveness through Jesus first. That is about the New Covenant. The Old Covenant wasn't about forgiveness through Jesus.

I am rolling my eyes . ( PloughBoy, you still have that padded room, i may need it after all this )