I return to the story in John's Gospel of 'The Woman Taken in Adultery' as it is probably the most misunderstood Christian text of all time.If used as an example against the death penalty by the liberal church - as it frequently is - then logically it must also apply to ALL punishment.
If Jesus let her off with a warning, then we must expect similar treatment for arsonists and rapists - you cannot be arbitrary if you follow this as an example.
Similarly, in order to understand the story, you have to accept how heinous an offence adultery was in that society; they grasped its seriousness. Today, we miss the point when we consider it a minor aberration.
Many see the story as a mere test of Jesus's compassion when it is actually a dangerous trap to see whether he would endorse Jewish Law or Roman authority.
Many assume that the woman had indeed committed adultery - but had she? If so, even in a sexist society demanding witnesses, we are entitled to ask - "Where was the man?"
The story is announced as a trap at the outset so why do we assume that the adultery had actually taken place? Who was it who declared that it had? - The enemies of Jesus.
When Jesus told her "To sin no more", what was the sin? Adultery? More likely it was her involvement in the trap!
Many miss the rather obvious point that Jesus DID authorise her execution surely knowing that his "Let the one without sin cast the first stone" would put the ball back into their court.
Had Jesus said simply "Stone her" undoubtedly the pharisees and co would have had to pull the plug on the entire farce at that juncture.
A complex story oft used in a most facile manner. I have heard it preached four times and in three of those the preacher majored on the 'compassion of Christ' - if exemplified in this story, it is at best, peripheral.
