AN ADULTEROUS WOMAN, A BLIND MAN, and ARGUMENTATIVE PHARISEES

In the last post, we saw that the particular point of contention about whether or not Jesus was the Messiah, was not the miracles or even His teaching (though they complained about His teaching and healing on the Sabbath). The point of contention was this:

“But we know where this man comes from, and when the Christ appears, no one will know where he comes from.”
‭‭John‬ ‭7‬:‭27‬ ‭ESV‬‬

But the counter-argument is:

“Has not the Scripture said that the Christ comes from the offspring of David, and comes from Bethlehem, the village where David was?”
‭‭John‬ ‭7‬:‭42‬ ‭ESV‬‬

So which is it? Is it possible to know where the Messiah is from or not?

In chapter 8, Jesus almost taunts the Pharisees when He picks this thread of His origin back up.

“Jesus answered, “Even if I do bear witness about myself, my testimony is true, for I know where I came from and where I am going, but you do not know where I come from or where I am going.”

“They said to him therefore, “Where is your Father?” Jesus answered, “You know neither me nor my Father. If you knew me, you would know my Father also.””
‭‭John‬ ‭8‬:‭14‬, ‭19‬ ‭ESV‬‬

It’s like He’s reminding them: “You said yesterday that no one would know where the Messiah comes from. Well, you don’t know where I came from, but I know where I came from.”

I don’t think these arguments suggest that they didn’t have Jesus’ home address in Capernaum.

The leadership in Israel was a very tight “old-boys-club.” It’s not what ya know, it’s who ya know. And nobody knew Jesus. He hadn’t been the pupil of any of the Jerusalem rabbis or anyone in their network. He wasn’t the cousin or nephew of a powerful man. And who was his father? Jesus’ earthly father, Joseph, has passed away. But he hadn’t gone to rabbi-school either, so no one knew anything about the humble carpenter from the wide spot in the road called Nazareth. Jesus has no connections to the Jerusalem elites.

And rather than listening to Jesus, laying down preconceived ideas and studying the scriptures to verify His claims, they refuse to consider that Yahweh would have their Messiah-King be someone outside of their power-circles. Whether they realize it or not, these experts in the Law and political leaders of the Pharisee party have set themselves up as the “board of approval” for the Messiah. They assume that the true Messiah will think like them, take their side politically, and have the same goals they have. They assumed wrongly. Jesus isn’t on anyone’s side but the Father’s. The question is: “Who is on the LORD’s side?”

Remember good ol’ Nicodemus? He was inclined to believe in Jesus but that was becoming a very dangerous thing to do. In fact, the Pharisees had decided that if anyone was caught saying that Jesus was the Messiah, that person would be excommunicated from the synagogue.

At the end of John 7, Nicodemus and the other leaders are debating about Jesus. The trump card played by the Pharisees was there wasn’t a single verse they could quote from the OT saying that a great prophet would come from Galilee.

☝️🤓 What about Isaiah 9:1-2? The one about the people of Galilee seeing a great light?

I guess they forgot about that one.

😐 That’s a pretty important Messianic prophecy. I feel like that should’ve been on their radars. I thought these guys really knew their Bibles?

Maybe they were being what Peter called “willfully ignorant.”

🤓 What’s that?

🤨 It means to be dumb. On purpose.

🤓 Oh… Well… When I’m dumb, it’s unintentional.

🙄 Yes. We know.

🤓 Ok. Just so long as we’re clear.

Anyway the scholars went home and Jesus went to the Mount of Olives to stay in His little tabernacle. And that night, somehow the scribes and Pharisees contrived to uh… (ahem) catch a woman in the act of adultery. They capture her and then take her to the temple early in the morning where Jesus is already in teaching His first “class.” They interrupt the lesson with their accusations and citations from the Law of Moses about stoning adulterers.

What we should ALL be wondering is:

WHERE WAS THE MAN?

If they caught the woman “in the act,” there had to have been a man involved. That’s how these things work. If you look up the passages to which they refer (Lev. 20:10, Deut. 22:22-24) BOTH the man and the woman involved were to be stoned. It seems they just let the man go.

It has been conjectured that the woman was set up by one of them for this very purpose. I mean, usually the way a woman is caught “in the very act” is if a man walks in on his wife with another man…

I’m not saying that one of these guys arranged to have his own wife used as bait to trap Jesus (and then stoned to death), but I’m not not saying that either.

They’re trying to see if Jesus will outright contradict the Law of Moses. And if He does, they will have legal grounds on which to stone him for leading the people astray and teaching things contrary to the Law.

Jesus IS the Word that was written on tablets of stone at Sinai with the finger of God. He’s not going to contradict His own Word. But, His Word ALSO says,

“With the merciful you show yourself merciful; with the blameless man you show yourself blameless;”
‭‭Psalm‬ ‭18‬:‭25‬ ‭ESV‬‬

Or, as James the brother of Jesus will put it:

“For judgment is without mercy to one who has shown no mercy. Mercy triumphs over judgment.”
‭‭James‬ ‭2‬:‭13‬ ‭ESV‬‬

Instead of answering them, Jesus stoops down and writes on the ground.

Some film adaptations of this scene have Jesus digging letters into soil. And that makes for great cinema, but there’s a rather significant problem with it. The temple courts didn’t have a “dirt floor.”

If you go further down in the narrative, John 8:20 tells us where Jesus was in the temple. He was in “the Treasury,” which was also known as “The Court of the Women.”

According to Josephus, the open courts of the temple were paved with large limestone slabs. The covered porticoes were paved with multi-colored tile work which has recently been recreated. [The link will take you to a video just under 12 minutes showing how that came about. It’s SUPER cool and will give you an idea of the floors of the temple in Jesus’ time.]

Jesus writes in the dust on the stones.

Kinda like this:

People have conjectured about what Jesus wrote…

• Exodus 20:14, “Thou shalt not commit adultery.”
• Perhaps ALL of the 10 Commandments
• Perhaps some other OT text

Whatever He wrote, the imagery of the “finger of God” writing on stone again should not be lost on us.

While we do not know what Jesus wrote, there is one verse that may suggest an idea.

“O Lord, the hope of Israel, All who forsake You shall be ashamed. “Those who depart from Me Shall be written in the earth, Because they have forsaken the Lord, The fountain of living waters.”
‭‭Jeremiah‬ ‭17‬:‭13‬ ‭NKJV‬‬

This is taking place the very morning after Jesus has just stood in the temple and told them that HE IS the Fountain of Living Waters. We are watching the leaders of Israel forsake the Fountain in real time.

Since all we can do is speculate about what text Jesus wrote in the dust, perhaps He wrote the names of the accusers.

Being “written in the earth” is a euphemism for death and burial.

Without contradicting the Law, Jesus invites the one who had no sin to be the first to cast a stone. And one by one they leave. Jesus does not condemn her either and she goes.

Then Jesus picks back up with His interrupted class and the first thing He says is, “I am the light of the world.” He had just exposed the sin and hypocrisy of the scribes and Pharisees who brought the woman. And that’s what light does. It exposes the things lurking in the dark.

The debate about Jesus’ origin and parentage resumes and escalates from not-so-subtle jabs at Jesus being born out of wedlock in verse 41, then to calling Him a Samaritan with a demon, and finally taking up stones to stone Him.

But Jesus does the mysterious trick of disappearing in a crowd and leaves the temple.

---

JOHN 9 – THE BLIND (YOUNG) MAN

On their way from the temple mount they encounter “a man which was blind from birth.” His disability is not the result any sin on his or his parents’ part. But it’s also not “random chance” either. This young man was born blind for a reason. And it was so “the works of God might be displayed in him.” In fact, I have a reason for wondering if this man was born without eyes.

Jesus involves spitting again in healing a blind man. This time He spits on the ground and makes “clay” which He – the Greek word suggests that Jesus rubs the clay on or into the man’s eyes.

😧 Uhh… ouch? Have you ever got a bit of sand or dirt in your eye? It hurts!

Which is one reason why I wonder if the man even had eyes.

The Greek text does not use the usual word for “anoint,” like pouring oil on someone. John does use that word elsewhere. This is the word most associated with being consecrated for service. And he was indeed. This man was set apart from birth for this moment to display the glory of God.

I think it probably stretches the text too much to be adamant that Jesus formed new eyes out of the clay (like He had done for Adam??) and popped them into his sockets, but I kinda wonder if maybe that’s what’s happening here.

🤓 Like when you make a ball with PlayDoh?

😑 Ugh. Thanks for that mental image.

🤓 You’re welcome.

Jesus sent him to wash in the pool of “Sent.” To be “sent” is the Greek word apostello. That’s where we get the word apostle.

The word “Siloam” means “sent” because it comes from the Hebrew and Aramaic root word shalach, which means “to send” or “an outflow of water sent through a channel.”

• Hebrew Root: Shiloah (Isaiah 8:6) or Siloam derives from shalach (to send).
• Physical Reality: The pool received its water that was “sent” or channeled from the Gihon Spring through the underground tunnel built by King Hezekiah.

Here is where the pool was in relationship to the temple:

The traditional tourist site called “The Pool of Siloam” is this:

This little pool was built in the 5th century AD by the Byzantine Empress Eudocia [You-DOE-see-ya] at the end of Hezekiah’s Tunnel. It was built the same time as the Our Savior The Illuminator Church (which is right next to it) to commemorate the site of the blind man washing and being healed. They weren’t far from the correct location.

In 2004, during excavations in The City of David, some steps of the actual pool were discovered just over 54 yards from the Byzantine-era pool. But the rest of the original Siloam pool was buried beneath a beautiful garden owned by the church.

In 2022 an agreement was made between the Greek Orthodox Church which owned the garden and the Israel Antiquities Authority and the 2 other organizations involved, and excavations began. Incredible new things have been uncovered, including structures that predate King Hezekiah! The pool excavations are not yet complete as I write this, but they are getting close.

The ancient “Pilgrim Road” (which is what the blind man would’ve traveled to and from the pool) has been extensively excavated and is already open. I got to see a little bit of it in 2013.

Here’s a lovely 10-min video that takes you on the walk from the pool to the temple. Of course, some things have changed since Jesus’ time and parts of the first century road are buried beneath equally-important sections from later eras which they have decided to keep. Also, just to clarify, the road is now underground like a tunnel because it was buried by centuries of rubble and rebuilding. It was originally a normal road open to the sky.

Back to John 9…

The now-healed-and-seeing man makes his way back to the spot where he used to sit and beg, and pretty soon people take him to the Pharisees and there’s this whole interrogation because it’s the Sabbath day and Jesus – GASP! – made clay. And that’s WORK!

The reasons why I think this blind man is a young man:

• He gets smart-alecky in verse 27
• His parents are both still alive
• His parents clarify to the leaders that their son is “of age” and can speak for himself so he must’ve looked young enough for there to be some doubt as to his age, so I’m guessing age 12-15? (v21)
• He has the brashness of a teen in talking back to the elders (v30-33)

I wouldn’t be a bit surprised if some extra-biblical document were dug up that said:

Ye Olde Attendance Sheet

from the Upper Room at Pentecost:

The 12 (Matthias replacing Judas), the 70, Jesus’ family, the women disciples, the Lazaruses, Nicodemus & Joseph of Arimathaea and their families (in disguises), and that kid who was born blind.

When Jesus went to find the young man after he had been thrown out (probably from the temple), Jesus speaks to him about spiritual blindness.

“Those who were with Him from the Pharisees heard these things and said to Him, “We are not blind too, are we?” Jesus said to them, “If you were blind, you would have no sin; but now that you maintain, ‘We see,’ your sin remains.”
‭‭John‬ ‭9‬:‭40‬-‭41‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

I’ve always thought that these were more random Pharisees just listening in to Jesus’ private conversation. But it says “those who were with Him from the Pharisees…” I think it’s saying that Jesus had some followers (not the 12) which were from the Pharisee sect. (We see some of them in Acts 15.) I don’t think these are random strangers.

Jesus has just suggested to the young, no-longer-blind man that the Pharisees who threw him out are the ones who are blind.

And perhaps some young Pharisee guys who have been learning at the feet of Rabbi Jesus are wondering if He thinks ALL Pharisees are blind. Their question is more like a statement. “We aren’t blind too, are we?”

“There are none so blind as those who will not see.” That is a very old proverb based on the biblical idea of willful blindness; refusing to see the truth.

The most difficult impossible person to teach is the one who thinks he already knows it all.

Before one can learn, one must humble himself and recognize that he wouldn’t know if he had blind spots. That’s why they’re called “blind spots.” You can’t see them. You have to have someone else tell you about them. You can’t repent of sin or character flaws you don’t or won’t see.

Is it uncomfortable to have our actions, beliefs, attitudes, and motives held up to the light of truth and be told that we’re wrong? Yes. Of course it’s uncomfortable. Hell is uncomfortable too. Choose your hard.

Jesus’ debates with the scribes and Pharisees are not over yet. And the next round is gonna be so intense that Jesus will have to leave town to avoid an early death.

This isn’t accidental.

He started gently with a call and Beatitudes and miracles. Some have believed. But the nation as a whole and its governing authorities? Nope. They are persisting with the gotcha-questions and will not believe any amount of proof. Jesus isn’t wooing them now. He’s openly challenging them.

Tomorrow I’m going to deviate from the schedule. I’m swapping Wednesday and Thursday’s readings. I’m going to cover the remainder of Luke 10 (verses 25-42), THEN we’ll do John 10 on Thursday.

And by the way… in the Jesus timeline…