Truth Magazine

By Mike Willis

Jesus went unto the mount of Olives. And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them. And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst, they say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou? This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not. So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground. And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst. When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? Hath no man condemned thee? She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go and sin no more (Jn. 8:1-11).

This incident from the life of Jesus graphically portrays many of his divine attributes: his omniscience, ability to convict sinners of their sin, compassion, forgiveness, demand for righteous living, etc. We will do well to study what this text reveals to us about our Lord.

The Sin of the Woman

The woman was guilty of adultery. Adultery is one of the sins condemned in the Ten Commandments (Exod. 20:14); it was punishable by death (Lev. 18:20). A promiscuous society may wink its eye at this sin, but not God. Adultery still is a sin, a work of the flesh punishable by eternal damnation (Gal. 5:19-21; Heb. 13:4). Whatever interpretation one puts on the series of events recorded in John’s gospel cannot conflict with these truths.

The woman was caught red-handed, “in the very act of adultery.” What an embarrassing situation she was in! In addition to being caught in the act of adultery, she also was dragged into the Temple and publicly exposed. She is not the only one who has been caught in adultery. Many unmarried fornicators are caught red-handed in their sin by an illegitimate pregnancy; many adulterers are exposed by a suspicious mate, This passage reminds us of the truth: “be sure your sins will find you out” (Num. 32:23).

Adultery is a sin with serious consequences. Under the law of Moses, an adulterer was to be put to death. Hence, this woman had committed a sin which could cost her life. Nevertheless, the lust of the flesh was so strong that she committed the sin, no doubt thinking that she would escape sin’s consequences. The same sin can destroy a marriage, alienate a person from his children, parents, brothers and sisters, bring public humiliation before the whole community, and scar children for life. Unrepented of, the sin also leads to eternal damnation. The lure of sensual lust is so strong that even Christians throw reason to the wind to fulfill the desires of inflamed lust.

Indeed, the adulterous woman was guilty of a terrible sin, a sin prominent in our own society.

The Sin of the Woman’s Accusers

In studying the woman taken in adultery, there is a possibility that we might not see the others who were caught redhanded in their sin, namely her accusers. The men who brought the adulterous woman to Jesus were hypocrites. This is seen from several evidences: (a) They did not bring the man with whom the woman was committing adultery; (b) Had their only interest been the enforcement of the Law of Moses, they would have carried out the judicial proceedings to execute both the man and the woman without bringing her to Jesus in the Temple; (c) The Scriptures plainly state that the accusers used the occasion to tempt Jesus (8:6).

Their main purpose was to find an occasion which would justify them in putting Jesus to death (cf. 7:1,19-20; 8:59). They had no interest in the soul of the woman guilty of adultery; they made no effort to bring her to repentance. Instead, they were interested in “using” the woman to accomplish their purpose of entrapping Jesus. When they were finished using her, they would discard her without concern for her soul.

These Jews were plotting the death of Jesus. While they manifested a sanctimonious righteousness at having found this woman guilty of adultery – caught in the very act, they were guilty of premeditating murder and were “caught in the very act” before the omniscient eye of Jesus. God is equally opposed to murder as to adultery.

Their plot was complex. When they asked Jesus whether or not the woman should be put to death, they intended to place him in a position in which they entrapped him regardless of which answer he gave. If he said the woman should not be put to death, he was in opposition to the Law of Moses. If he said the woman should be put to death in agreement with the Law of Moses, he could be accused before the Roman authorities which did not make adultery a crime punishable by death. Furthermore, Jesus would be usurping the role of a civil judge, either of the Jews or the Romans, in passing judgment; he steadfastly had refused the role of civil judge even as he refused the rule of an earthly king (cf. Lk. 12:13-14).

Jesus’ Answer to the Accusers

In giving answer to the accusers, Jesus faced several problems: (a) How can he join mercy and Law? He did not want to minimize the sin committed by the woman or approve her conduct. Nevertheless, he was interested in saving her soul. (b) How can he expose the sinfulness of the woman’s accusers, to bring them to a conviction of their own sins? (c) How can he save the woman’s accusers? Jesus’ answer manifests remarkable compassion and mercy in his effort to redeem the woman and her accusers. Jesus always worked toward man’s redemption, not his destruction.

In giving answer to the woman’s accusers, Jesus said, “He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her” (8:7). This answer might he misinterpreted. If one understands Jesus to say that judicial punishment cannot be administered except by sinless men, he has misunderstood Jesus. Such as interpretation undermines the entire judicial system of every country and at every level. Such an interpretation would put Jesus in conflict with the Law of Moses which mandated that eyewitnesses be the first to inflict punishment inasmuch as their testimony is what convicted the guilty (Deut. 17:6-7). Jesus was not acting as a legal judge at all. He was working to redeem the woman’s sinful accusers. The accusers needed to be brought to repentance just as certainly as did the woman.

Jesus’ answer to the accusers called on them to focus their attention on their own sins, not on the sins of the adulterous woman. Jesus called on the accusers to judge themselves instead of the woman. By Jesus’ reply, the accusers were forced to admit that they too were guilty of sin (cf. Rom. 3:23). To the credit of the accusers, each one silently dropped the case and walked away, Jesus’ words apparently having pricked his conscience.

The accusers left because their purpose was thwarted. When they saw that they were unable to use the woman to gain their advantage over Jesus, they walked away with no concern for the woman’s soul and her salvation.

Jesus’ Answer to the Adulterous Woman

After the woman’s accusers had gone away, Jesus turned to the woman. He asked, “Woman, where are those thine accusers? Hath no man condemned thee?” She said, “No man, Lord.” Jesus said to her, “Neither do I condemn thee: go and sin no more.”

“Neither do I condemn thee” is not to be understood to mean that Jesus did not hold her responsible for her sin or that he approved her conduct. What the statement emphasizes is that Jesus did not come to the world to condemn the world, but to save it (cf. 3:17). “Neither do I condemn thee” are the words of grace – words extended to every sinner. The gospel’s message is that the Lord’s redeeming grace is offered to every sinner. Paul preached the gospel of grace saying, “For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, teaching us that denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world” (Tit. 2:11-12). Because of God’s marvelous grace, we sinners can be forgiven, provided an opportunity to begin anew. What Jesus offered this adulterous woman, he offers to all of us. Redemption and forgiveness are the good news of the gospel.

“Go and sin no more” commands the woman to repent of her sins. The command to “sin no more” would demand strong resolution in view of the circumstances which faced the adulterous woman. She possibly faced a divorce. She faced her own feelings of bitterness brought on by the double standard in how she was treated in contrast to how the man was treated. She faced the temptation to bitterness brought on by the public exposure of her sins. Jesus’ demand, “Go and sin no more” was no “cheap grace.”

We wish we knew what became of the woman, but the Scriptures are silent as to whether or not she became a Christian and lived in obedience to the Lord’s word. From the record of John, we learn many valuable lessons regarding the Lord’s mercy, grace, love, and kindness. We also learn that we who confront sinners with their sins must avoid the sin of the woman’s accusers who showed no concern for the sinner’s soul. Like the Lord, let us work toward the salvation of sinners and not destroy those who have fallen into Satan’s snares.

Guardian of Truth XXXIV: 16, pp. 482, 501-502
August 16, 1990

By Andy Alexander

Our society is becoming increasingly hedonistic. Men and women are searching for ways to enjoy this life without any regard to eternity. One of the ways they have found to enjoy this life is by committing sexual immorality, such as homosexuality, fornication, and adultery. The wearing of immodest apparel, dancing, and viewing movies which portray all of these forms of sexual immorality are forms of lasciviousness which create lust in the minds of the viewer and if left unchecked will eventually bring death (Jas. 1:14-15).

Many have found that along with the uncontrolled fulfillment of their lusts comes some unpleasant and unwanted side effects. Various diseases (the most feared of which is AIDS), unwanted pregnancies, and divorces are some of the consequences which follow the fulfilling of these desires. Man’s answer to all of these diseases is to educate everyone, especially children, as to how they can commit these acts of immorality in a safe way. They have coined the phrase 4 ‘safe sex” and promoted this all over the country as the answer to all of the problems and consequences that come from the uncontrolled fulfillment of the lusts of the flesh.

God has provided for the lawful fulfillment of the desires that exist in men and women. Hebrews 13:4 states, “Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled; for fornicators and adulterers God will judge.” 1 Corinthians 7:23 says, “But because of immoralities, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband. Let the husband fulfill his duty to his wife, and likewise also the wife to her husband.” This is the only form of safe sex because it is the only form with God’s approval. Any sex outside the marriage relationship is not safe because it is sin and sin will keep one out of the kingdom of heaven (Gal. 5:19-21).

Children as well as most adults need teaching from God’s word on the subject of safe sex. Parents need to sit with their children and open God’s word and teach them the sanctity of marriage and the need for them to wait until they are married before engaging in the sexual relationship. Instead of feeding upon God’s word, most children are feeding from the trough of Hollywood via the television set and movies which openly advocate sexual immorality of every kind.

Following God’s law will end the problems that come from sexual immorality. Unwanted pregnancies, abortion, sexually transmitted diseases, divorce and all the other ills that accompany these sins will cease if all will just simply obey God.

Guardian of Truth XXXIV: 16, p. 487
August 16, 1990

By Kristiana Burk

The subject of modesty should be a topic of great importance. How should Christians adorn themselves? Are we, as children of God, pleasing our Heavenly Father with the way we dress?

People frequently use excuses to justify immodest apparel. The excuses, “It’s so much cooler to wear these clothes” and “The stores don’t sell anything else,” are used to justify the wearing of clothes which people know are wrong. True short shorts, halter tops, swimsuits, and things like that are cooler, but are you showing what you shouldn’t be showing? The excuse that stores don’t sell anything else is very poor. I find things constantly that are modest. Another excuse, “But Mom, everybody else does,” doesn’t make it right either. Being a teenager myself, I want everyone to accept me. In John 15:18-25, we find that to be an acceptable Christian, we will be different. That’s how our light will shine! Other verses, such as Matthew 7:13-14 and Luke 6:22-23,26 show why we are different. Are you willing to risk your soul just to be popular? Are you risking it just to be cooler or because everybody else does?

Parents and others admit that very tight pants and short shorts are immodest. The same goes with halter tops and very short mini-skirts. The problem is, we make exceptions. Let me bring to your attention exceptions made in everyday life. Gym clothes in schools are usually short shorts and a T-shirt. Can’t you wear longer shorts to run in? Cheerleading is another example. In our society it’s not proper to do flips and jump around in a dress while in public or really anywhere else, but isn’t that exactly what you’re doing while cheerleading? During pep rallies, what do the cheerleaders do but a dance with provocative movements in short, skimpy skirts with nothing but underwear beneath, for the benefit of the football players and everyone else. Is that not sinful?

The same thing goes for swimming. There is nothing wrong with swimming – you’re just getting wet. The thing that makes swimming in mixed company wrong is the swim wear. A few years ago I argued, “But Mom, that’s what everybody else wears.” She pointed out that a swimsuit (one piece) was no different from wearing a tank top and underwear. My brothers and I were looking for lawns to mow, when the oldest one came and said, “Kristi, that lady came to the door with her bra on!” It turns out she had on her bikini, with a towel draped around her waist. Is it any different?

Lots of people love to swim – so do I. Parents, invest in your own pool so you can set your own rules. My parents bought a cheaper, above the ground, four foot pool. I remember the day we put it up our whole neighborhood of kids helped. We told them they could go swimmiing if they wore a one piece bathing suit and long shorts (the boys wore a shirt and shorts) and everybody loved it. It’s a good investment, parents.

The Bible teaches the immutability of God. In Isaiah 47:1-3 we find what God calls immodesty; “Come down and sit in the dust, O virgin daughter of Babylon; sit on the ground: there is no throne, O daughter of the Chaldeans: for thou shalt no longer be called tender and delicate. Take the millstones, and grind meal; uncover thy locks, make bare the leg, uncover the thigh, pass over the rivers. Thy nakedness shall be uncovered, yea, thy shame shall be seen. I will take vengence, and I will not meet thee as a man.” Here we see that the uncovered thighs are called nakedness. If God never changes, then don’t you think he feels the same today? From the very beginning we can see that he demanded nakedness to be covered. In the beginning for Adam and Eve, he made robes. In Genesis 9:20-27 we find that it is shameful to be naked in public. Noah’s two sons, Shem and Japheth, covered their eyes so they wouldn’t see their father’s nakedness. Ham was cursed by him for seeing it and doing nothing about it. In Exodus 28:42, the priests were to have trousers from the waist to the thighs – this was to cover their nakedness. The definition of thigh, in the World Book Dictionary, is “part of the human body, from the hip to the knee.” Therefore, to “cover your nakedness,” the high, from the hip to the knee, must be covered.

As Christians, we are to love God and keep his commandments. We are to shine forth in the world. Yes, we’re to be different. It’s not easy, but as Paul said in Philippians 4:13, “I can do all things through Christ, who strengthens me.” We will suffer persecutions and trials, but think of the grand mansion and place by God’s side that awaits us. “Be thou faithful unto death, and I will give you the crown of life” (Rev. 2:10).

Guardian of Truth XXXIV: 16, pp. 481, 502
August 16, 1990

By J.T. Smith

Listening to arguments by different brethren who are close personal friends and not studying a position through for yourself, is far different from having to either affirm or defend said position for yourself. This is what I discovered in the early years of my preaching. Although I have been preaching for over 25 years, one of the hardest lessons that I had to learn was that one should not take a position simply because some friend or loved one, whom you consider to be a good Bible student, tells you it is right.

Institutionalism was probably one of the most difficult studies that I have ever had to “wade” through. There are a number of reasons why this is true. First of all, it was true because there were (and are) men of outstanding ability and Bible knowledge on both sides of the issue. Secondly, it is an issue, for the most part, where one is prone to allow his heart to rule his thinking instead of allowing his position to be based on the Bible teaching. And third, many of us worry and fret about some “label” that our friends and loved ones are going to place on us if we oppose church support to orphan homes, hospitals, a sponsoring church (Herald of Truth World Radio) type of cooperation by churches.

Before finally taking a stand against the above mentioned institutions and cooperative arrangements, I had vacillated from one position to another – according to the preacher friend with which I was talking. And like so many others, I didn’t want that terrible “anti” brand put on me. Finally, however, I had an opportunity to attend a debate on the subject in Louisville, Kentucky, between brethren Guy N. Woods and A.C. Grider. And though I had never met brother Woods, I knew of his reputation as a Bible scholar and an experienced debater. Of course I had known brother Grider most of my life, as we were reared within just a few miles of each other; and I just knew he would never be able to stand up under the powerful Guy N. Woods. But, to my amazement, not only did he stand, but how brightly the truth shone, especially on the Herald of Truth, sponsoring church arrangement. And it may have shined just as brightly on the Orphan Home question – except for the fact that as thousands of others I had “heart trouble” in being able to see the truth for those “poor little orphans” that brother Woods kept bringing up.

After the debate, I confronted brother Grider myself and told him that I wanted to meet with him later and discuss the matter especially of the orphan home. After many hours of study I thought I had some questions he could not answer. I remember well that day I made an appointment to go to his home in Louisville. With questions in hand, I confronted him and Jim Cope (who was in a meeting at Preston Highway in Louisville) with my questions and took the worst “whipping” I have probably taken on any religious issue before or since. They, in turn, gave me some questions to answer. They said, “If you can find scriptural answers to these questions, we will concede your position is right.”

Since that time until this day, I have read and listened to every discussion I could on these issues, as well as confronting preaching privately and engaging in public debates on these very issues. And, until this day, no one has given any Scriptures, that to my satisfaction, answered the questions that were asked of me that day. I repeat these questions for you here.

1. Where in the Bible did one church ever send money to another church to preach the gospel?

2. Where is the scriptural authority for a church making a donation to any kind of human institution?

3. Where is Bible authority for elders overseeing any work except that “which is among them” (1 Pet. 5:2)?

4. Where is the authority for the church engaging in providing suppers, parties, or entertainment for anyone?

Now in view of the fact that I could find no scriptural authority in answer to these questions, what was I to do? You know the answer to that as well as 1. When we find that the position we hold won’t stand the Bible test, there is only one thing to do – change your position. And that is exactly what I did.

But, for those of you who have come to the conclusion that there are no Bible answers to the above questions, but have not taken your stand for truth because of pressures brought to bear, I know your problem and can sympathize with you. For when I took my stand for truth, I immediately became “an orphan hater,” one of those dreadful “antis,” was fired from the congregation where I was preaching, and was told by one of my dearest preacher friends, “I hope you quit preaching.” But you know I realized, as you must on this and every other Bible subject, that I must take my stand for truth and right regardless of what anyone may say to me or about me. For, regardless of what men may say, God is right. And Jesus said, “Seek ye first the kingdom of God and his righteousness and all these things shall be added unto you” (Matt. 6:33). That is why I changed Jesus said I must! “And a man’s foes shall be those of his own household. He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me” (Matt. 10:36-38). In light of these passages of Scripture, we cannot allow anyone to stand between us and truth.

All of you who read this article, or who have read my writings in the past, know that I am still trying to obtain the answers to the questions that are stated in this article. It would be a happy day in my life if I could write or call those who are so bitterly opposed to me, and join hands and hearts with them again. Yes, with all the pleas I have made for Bible authority on these issues, few have even tried to give me scriptural authority for these things – and those who have tried gave scriptures that have nothing to do with the questions we have asked. Therefore, I will have to continue to speak out against institutionalism and those who espouse it, as much as I dislike being in opposition to my brethren. But Paul said “And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them” (Eph. 5:11). Thus, I must do this to be pleasing to God. If I preach anything that was not received from God, his curses will rest upon me (Gal. 1:6-9). And if I do not abide in the doctrine of Christ, I cannot have God (2 Jn. 9).

So, as you can well see, I can sympathize with your situation and feel sorry for you. I know it will be hard, but you too must take your stand against institutionalism and against anything for which you cannot find Bible authority. I beg of you – please stand up against these innovations or else give me scriptural authority for your practices so that I may stand with you! (Searching the Scriptures, Aug. 1978, pp. 174-175.)

Guardian of Truth XXXIV: 15, pp. 465-466
August 2, 1990