Did Jesus have to keep the Law to achieve atonement and break it's curse?

[Carl Emerson]

Hi there,

I notice Jesus opposed the stoning of the woman in adultery which the Law required to be done.

He also harvested on the Sabbath when the disciples were hungry.

Was He then fulfilling the Law by keeping a higher 'Law of the Spirit'?

Comments welcome.

 

[RDKirk]

The Son wrote the Law, which means He has the perfect interpretation of the Law.

 

[Carl Emerson]

The Son wrote the Law, which means He has the perfect interpretation of the Law.

So when the Law requires adulterers to put to death and Sabbath breakers to be stoned - what then ???

Both these aspects of the Law were not followed by Jesus.

Numbers 15
32 While the people of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man gathering sticks on the Sabbath day. 33 And those who found him gathering sticks brought him to Moses and Aaron and to all the congregation. 34 They put him in custody, because it had not been made clear what should be done to him. 35 And the Lord said to Moses, “The man shall be put to death; all the congregation shall stone him with stones outside the camp.” 36 And all the congregation brought him outside the camp and stoned him to death with stones, as the Lord commanded Moses.

Lev 20
10 “If a man commits adultery with the wife of his neighbour, both the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.

 

[RDKirk]

So when the Law requires adulterers to put to death and Sabbath breakers to be stoned - what then ???

Both these aspects of the Law were not followed by Jesus.

Numbers 15
32 While the people of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man gathering sticks on the Sabbath day. 33 And those who found him gathering sticks brought him to Moses and Aaron and to all the congregation. 34 They put him in custody, because it had not been made clear what should be done to him. 35 And the Lord said to Moses, “The man shall be put to death; all the congregation shall stone him with stones outside the camp.” 36 And all the congregation brought him outside the camp and stoned him to death with stones, as the Lord commanded Moses.

Lev 20
10 “If a man commits adultery with the wife of his neighbour, both the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.

It means they didn't understand the Law, nor do we.

With regard to the woman caught in adultery, an additional facet is that her accusers made the tactical mistake of putting the matter wholly within Jesus' hands...beyond the Law.

Jesus returned to the Mount of Olives, 2 but early the next morning he was back again at the Temple. A crowd soon gathered, and he sat down and taught them. 3 As he was speaking, the teachers of religious law and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in the act of adultery. They put her in front of the crowd.

4 “Master,” they said to Jesus, “this woman was caught in the act of adultery. 5 The law of Moses says to stone her. What do you say?”

6 They were trying to trap him into saying something they could use against him, but Jesus stooped down and wrote in the dust with his finger. 7 They kept demanding an answer, so he stood up again and said, “All right, but let the one who has never sinned throw the first stone!” 8 Then he stooped down again and wrote in the dust.

9 When the accusers heard this, they slipped away one by one, beginning with the oldest, until only Jesus was left in the middle of the crowd with the woman. 10 Then Jesus stood up again and said to the woman, “Where are your accusers? Didn’t even one of them condemn you?”

11 “No, Lord,” she said. And Jesus said, “Neither do I. Go and sin no more.”

Nothing in the Law says that they had to capture both lawbreakers in order to prosecute one, and the story of Daniel and Susanna is another example. If having only one lawbreaker was a defense from prosecution, the lawyers would certainly know such a simple fact.

Jesus actually added a new provision to the Law. He knew He could do that because He wrote the Law. The lawyers and Pharisees made the tactical mistake of putting the matter into His hands by first acknowledging Him as their Master (teacher, superior authority) and then asking for an opinion beyond the Law. They played themselves.

 

[Carl Emerson]

Jesus actually added a new provision to the Law. He knew He could do that because He wrote the Law. The lawyers and Pharisees made the tactical mistake of putting the matter into His hands by first acknowledging Him as their Master (teacher, superior authority) and then asking for an opinion beyond the Law. They played themselves.

Then Jesus was beyond the Law, and as the author of it could fulfil its intent while contradicting its written requirement?

Psalm 19:7
The law of the Lord is perfect, reviving the soul; the testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple;

Is this quote in reference to the higher Law of the Spirit ?

Romans 8:2
For the law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death.

Romans 2
26 So, if a man who is uncircumcised keeps the precepts of the law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision? 27 Then he who is physically uncircumcised but keeps the law will condemn you who have the written code and circumcision but break the law.

 

[Carl Emerson]

So my conclusion is that Jesus did not keep the 'letter of the Law' but it was His perfectly keeping the 'precepts of the Law' that broke the curse in the atonement.

 

[BobRyan]

Hi there,

I notice Jesus opposed the stoning of the woman in adultery which the Law required to be done.

He also harvested on the Sabbath when the disciples were hungry.

Was He then fulfilling the Law by keeping a higher 'Law of the Spirit'?

Comments welcome.

1 John 3:4 "sin is transgression of the Law"
1 John 2:1 'These things I write that you sin not"
1 John 2:3-7 we are to "walk as He walked".

2 Cor 5:21 "God make Him who knew NO sin , to be sin in our behalf"

2 John 2:2 "He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins"

Lev 16 -- the "sin offering" is "without blemish"

"The Law of the Lord is perfect - converting the soul" - Ps 19:7

Sin is the problem of fallen man - it is not a defect in God's Word, God's Law ...etc

 

[BobRyan]

So my conclusion is that Jesus did not keep the 'letter of the Law' but it was His perfectly keeping the 'precepts of the Law' that broke the curse in the atonement.

He kept the Law perfectly.

He did not "take God's name vain" -- perfectly, in every sense of the command.
He did not worship other gods -- in perfect obedience - in every sense of the command
He was the way the truth and the life.

He is called "The WORD" in John 1:1 and in Rev 19 "The Word" -- perfect representation of God's Word

 

[BobRyan]

Romans 8:2
For the law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death.

The "Law of SIN and death" in Rom 8 is a reference to the "problem" defined in Rom 7 a few verses earlier.

Rom 7 - AN EVIL law within -- the LAW of our sinful nature
21 I find then a law, that evil is present with me, the one who wills to do good. 22 For I delight in the law of God according to the inward man. 23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. 24 O wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? 25 I thank God—through Jesus Christ our Lord!

So then, with the mind I myself serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin (Law of sinnING even when it is against my will)

 

[Carl Emerson]

Then if we have to keep the letter of the Law, why are not all christians circumcised ???

Paul answered it like this -

Romans 2
26 So, if a man who is uncircumcised keeps the precepts of the law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision? 27 Then he who is physically uncircumcised but keeps the law will condemn you who have the written code and circumcision but break the law.

Let us all then walk in the Spirit - keeping the Precepts of the Law as Jesus did which are summed up in Loving God and one's neighbour.

 

[Joseph G]

Romans 9:15 KJV

"For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion."

God's sovereignty trumps all. Expressed perfectly by His Son Jesus - in words, life, death, and resurrection.

If the Pharisees had had a relationship with God through faith, they would have been able to discern the spirit of the law through the voice of the Spirit Himself.

And the Spirit of the law is grace - since the moment God breathed life into Adam to present.

Thank God for all of us who believe!

Yes, indeed, they encountered that Spirit personally when they appealed to Jesus appropriately as Master.

 

[KevinT]

Hi there,

I notice Jesus opposed the stoning of the woman in adultery which the Law required to be done.

I think there is a lot of context that needs to be understood in this situation.

• First, this entire situation was a trap. It was just like when Jesus was asked if it was right to pay taxes to Caesar. And with His heavenly wisdom, He found a way free of the trap. "Not fair," I can imagine the trap-makers thinking. But Jesus found a way to explain underlying principles when He said "Return to Caesar that which is Caesar's, but unto God that which is God's."
  
  
• Not every aspect of the Mosaic law came directly from God. Rather, God entrusted Moses with the leadership of His people, and Moses had to formulate regulations consistent with the principles taught him by God. Yes, most of the Law came directly from God, but consider the text below.

Mat 19

3 Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?”

4 “Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’ 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? 6 So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”

7 “Why then,” they asked, “did Moses command that a man give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away?”

8 Jesus replied, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. 9 I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.”

Jesus was the great I AM that met with Moses in the burning bush and on Mt Sinai. He is the one who, before coming to Earth to be born as a human, had instructed Moses and written on the tablets with His finger. And here He clearly points out that it was Moses, who had written in an exception to the perfect plan set out from the beginning.

Notice that Jesus is not throwing Moses "under the bus", or criticizing him for what he did. Rather He is explaining the circumstances. There is a larger context that the law of marriage needs to be understood within. Like why Jews should accept paying taxes to Caesar.
My point here is that the commandments to stone adulterers is a provision of the law that God never really wanted to be carried out. Instead, He wanted people to understand the seriousness of marriage and keep it sacred. God is the God of life; He is not wishing to kill wrong-doers, but rather to teach. He wanted such a punishment to be carried out at most, just once. Then all Israel will hear and be afraid, and no one among you will do such an evil thing again. (Deut 13: 11)

• So what was the Mosaic, legal requirement of the woman caught in adultery? Notice that it was NOT just the woman who was to be punished.

Lev 20:10 “‘If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife—with the wife of his neighbor—both the adulterer and the adulteress are to be put to death.

And who were to be the enforcers of these capital offenses? The people who directly connected to the situation by proximity.

Deut 22

13 If a man takes a wife and, after sleeping with her, dislikes her 14 and slanders her and gives her a bad name, saying, “I married this woman, but when I approached her, I did not find proof of her virginity,” ... 20 If ... the charge is true and no proof of the young woman’s virginity can be found, 21 she shall be brought to the door of her father’s house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death. She has done an outrageous thing in Israel by being promiscuous while still in her father’s house. You must purge the evil from among you.

22 If a man is found sleeping with another man’s wife, both the man who slept with her and the woman must die. You must purge the evil from Israel.

23 If a man happens to meet in a town a virgin pledged to be married and he sleeps with her, 24 you shall take both of them to the gate of that town and stone them to death—the young woman because she was in a town and did not scream for help, and the man because he violated another man’s wife. You must purge the evil from among you.

• Did these regulations apply to the messiah? Jesus, in the situation of the temple tax, asserted that, as the messiah, He was exempt from certain regulations.
  
  Matt 17:24-27 After Jesus and his disciples arrived in Capernaum, the collectors of the two-drachma temple tax came to Peter and asked, “Doesn’t your teacher pay the temple tax?” “Yes, he does,” he replied. When Peter came into the house, Jesus was the first to speak. “What do you think, Simon?” he asked. “From whom do the kings of the earth collect duty and taxes—from their own children or from others?” “From others,” Peter answered. "Then the children are exempt,” Jesus said to him. “But so that we may not cause offense, go to the lake and throw out your line. Take the first fish you catch; open its mouth and you will find a four-drachma coin. Take it and give it to them for my tax and yours.”

To summarize:

1. The purpose of these laws was to establish marriage as a sacred union. It was not a trap set by God so that He could surprise and kill people.
2. The people responsible for enforcing the regulations was to be the people involved in the situation, not some outside police force.
3. Both guilty parties -- not just the woman -- were to be punished.
4. Even if one could argue that Jesus, because he happened to be in the same town as the guilty parties, was responsible to participate in the stoning, He could assert that this regulation did not apply to the messiah.

Analyzing the situation:

1. A woman was brought before Jesus. Where was the man? Why was he not brought in? Clearly the accusers set the entire situation up to trap Jesus, and the man was very likely part of the nefarious plan. They couldn't try to kill him because he was their co-conspirator.
   
   
2. Jesus did NOT have responsibility to participate in the stoning of the woman. He did not encounter the guilty parties (both the woman AND the man) or have any connection to the situation. The responsibility lay on those who brought her to Jesus. Why did they ask for His opinion and not just carry out their duty on their own? It was because they didn't care about respecting marriage and only wanted to trap Jesus.
   
   
3. Jesus, completely aware of the unfairness of the situation and the corruption of the accusers, did not issue any pronouncement in opposition to the stoning -- instead He told those who were innocent should throw the first stone. Jesus knew of all of the wrong doing of all the inhabitants of the town. And as God, He could have called for an army of angels to come and burn it all with fire. But His purpose was to teach people to do right and to follow a loving God, not to destroy them in their sinful state. A regulation that was originally intended to enhance the life of His people had been twisted by evil-doers into something horrible. And Jesus correctly refused to go along with it.

The Escape from the Trap

The trap was, "are you going to follow the Law, at the risk of opposing Roman restrictions?" @Carl Emerson seems to be asserting that Jesus met the trap by failing to follow the law. I disagree. Instead, just as in the situation of Caesar's coin and the taxes trap, Jesus escaped it in a way that they didn't expect. He simply wrote on the ground and all her accusers left.

So let's look at the entire story

2 At dawn he appeared again in the temple courts, where all the people gathered around him, and he sat down to teach them. 3 The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group 4 and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. 5 In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” 6 They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.

But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. 7 When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” 8 Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.

9 At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. 10 Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”

11 “No one, sir,” she said.

“Then neither do I condemn you,” Jesus declared. “Go now and leave your life of sin.”

Jesus did NOT violate any Mosaic law through this interaction. Instead, He found a wonderful way out of the trap and a means of saving the woman in two ways: first, from her immediate death through stoning, and second, by filling her soul with love and thus a desire to put her wrong ways behind her.

He also harvested on the Sabbath when the disciples were hungry.

Was He then fulfilling the Law by keeping a higher 'Law of the Spirit'?

Comments welcome.

I could provide a similar analysis of the Sabbath situation, but this post is already too long.

So my conclusion is that Jesus did not keep the 'letter of the Law' but it was His perfectly keeping the 'precepts of the Law' that broke the curse in the atonement.

I disagree, but see above.

I also would counter the assertion that the law was a "curse." It may have had the effect of cursing us, because it highlights our inability to follow it. But the intent of God's instructions were never to harm or "curse" us.

Best wishes,

Kevin

 

[Jim Campbell]

I think there is a lot of context that needs to be understood in this situation.

• First, this entire situation was a trap. It was just like when Jesus was asked if it was right to pay taxes to Caesar. And with His heavenly wisdom, He found a way free of the trap. "Not fair," I can imagine the trap-makers thinking. But Jesus found a way to explain underlying principles when He said "Return to Caesar that which is Caesar's, but unto God that which is God's."
  
  
• Not every aspect of the Mosaic law came directly from God. Rather, God entrusted Moses with the leadership of His people, and Moses had to formulate regulations consistent with the principles taught him by God. Yes, most of the Law came directly from God, but consider the text below.

Jesus was the great I AM that met with Moses in the burning bush and on Mt Sinai. He is the one who, before coming to Earth to be born as a human, had instructed Moses and written on the tablets with His finger. And here He clearly points out that it was Moses, who had written in an exception to the perfect plan set out from the beginning.

Notice that Jesus is not throwing Moses "under the bus", or criticizing him for what he did. Rather He is explaining the circumstances. There is a larger context that the law of marriage needs to be understood within. Like why Jews should accept paying taxes to Caesar.
My point here is that the commandments to stone adulterers is a provision of the law that God never really wanted to be carried out. Instead, He wanted people to understand the seriousness of marriage and keep it sacred. God is the God of life; He is not wishing to kill wrong-doers, but rather to teach. He wanted such a punishment to be carried out at most, just once. Then all Israel will hear and be afraid, and no one among you will do such an evil thing again. (Deut 13: 11)

• So what was the Mosaic, legal requirement of the woman caught in adultery? Notice that it was NOT just the woman who was to be punished.

And who were to be the enforcers of these capital offenses? The people who directly connected to the situation by proximity.

• Did these regulations apply to the messiah? Jesus, in the situation of the temple tax, asserted that, as the messiah, He was exempt from certain regulations.
  
  Matt 17:24-27 After Jesus and his disciples arrived in Capernaum, the collectors of the two-drachma temple tax came to Peter and asked, “Doesn’t your teacher pay the temple tax?” “Yes, he does,” he replied. When Peter came into the house, Jesus was the first to speak. “What do you think, Simon?” he asked. “From whom do the kings of the earth collect duty and taxes—from their own children or from others?” “From others,” Peter answered. "Then the children are exempt,” Jesus said to him. “But so that we may not cause offense, go to the lake and throw out your line. Take the first fish you catch; open its mouth and you will find a four-drachma coin. Take it and give it to them for my tax and yours.”

To summarize:

1. The purpose of these laws was to establish marriage as a sacred union. It was not a trap set by God so that He could surprise and kill people.
2. The people responsible for enforcing the regulations was to be the people involved in the situation, not some outside police force.
3. Both guilty parties -- not just the woman -- were to be punished.
4. Even if one could argue that Jesus, because he happened to be in the same town as the guilty parties, was responsible to participate in the stoning, He could assert that this regulation did not apply to the messiah.

Analyzing the situation:

1. A woman was brought before Jesus. Where was the man? Why was he not brought in? Clearly the accusers set the entire situation up to trap Jesus, and the man was very likely part of the nefarious plan. They couldn't try to kill him because he was their co-conspirator.
   
   
2. Jesus did NOT have responsibility to participate in the stoning of the woman. He did not encounter the guilty parties (both the woman AND the man) or have any connection to the situation. The responsibility lay on those who brought her to Jesus. Why did they ask for His opinion and not just carry out their duty on their own? It was because they didn't care about respecting marriage and only wanted to trap Jesus.
   
   
3. Jesus, completely aware of the unfairness of the situation and the corruption of the accusers, did not issue any pronouncement in opposition to the stoning -- instead He told those who were innocent should throw the first stone. Jesus knew of all of the wrong doing of all the inhabitants of the town. And as God, He could have called for an army of angels to come and burn it all with fire. But His purpose was to teach people to do right and to follow a loving God, not to destroy them in their sinful state. A regulation that was originally intended to enhance the life of His people had been twisted by evil-doers into something horrible. And Jesus correctly refused to go along with it.

The Escape from the Trap

The trap was, "are you going to follow the Law, at the risk of opposing Roman restrictions?" @Carl Emerson seems to be asserting that Jesus met the trap by failing to follow the law. I disagree. Instead, just as in the situation of Caesar's coin and the taxes trap, Jesus escaped it in a way that they didn't expect. He simply wrote on the ground and all her accusers left.

So let's look at the entire story



Jesus did NOT violate any Mosaic law through this interaction. Instead, He found a wonderful way out of the trap and a means of saving the woman in two ways: first, from her immediate death through stoning, and second, by filling her soul with love and thus a desire to put her wrong ways behind her.




I could provide a similar analysis of the Sabbath situation, but this post is already too long.


I disagree, but see above.

I also would counter the assertion that the law was a "curse." It may have had the effect of cursing us, because it highlights our inability to follow it. But the intent of God's instructions were never to harm or "curse" us.

Best wishes,

Kevin

Very good Kevin! I would add out of Romans 7 that sin is a deceiver that held all the offspring of fallen Adam's seed so powerfully nobody was able to obey all the law of Moses, which Paul declared was holy and good, yet "killed him". The Law revealed what sin is about, that indeed it announced curses upon violators, as well as blessings for keeping parts, even though being a curse-threat hanging over all people. Jesus was not of Adam's seed so completed the desire of Father God by paying that price for mankind, putting loving neighbor as ourselves as answer for fulfilling the Law, the curses of disobedience to some/all by failure in just one commandment, nailed to His cross. Even the ordinances and observances have no power of judgment by any of us in Christ Jesus according to Colossians 2:12-17 "Buried with him in baptism, wherein also you are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who raised him from the dead. And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, has he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; and having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a show of them openly, triumphing over them in it. Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ."

That reached to the corruption of false religion of scribes, Pharisees, priests, rabbis, Sadducees et.all that added curses and misery.

 

[Jim Campbell]

Hi there,

I notice Jesus opposed the stoning of the woman in adultery which the Law required to be done.

He also harvested on the Sabbath when the disciples were hungry.

Was He then fulfilling the Law by keeping a higher 'Law of the Spirit'?

Comments welcome.

Deuteronomy 23:24-25
24 When thou comest into thy neighbour's vineyard, then thou mayest eat grapes thy fill at thine own pleasure; but thou shalt not put any in thy vessel.
25 When thou comest into the standing corn of thy neighbour, then thou mayest pluck the ears with thine hand; but thou shalt not move a sickle unto thy neighbour's standing corn.

They had a right to pluck and eat any day.

 

[RDKirk]

• So what was the Mosaic, legal requirement of the woman caught in adultery? Notice that it was NOT just the woman who was to be punished.

However, having caught only one guilty party was not a "get out of jail" card for the one they caught. It would have been fairly common for them to have physically detained only the woman while the man fought his way out. As I mentioned earlier, the story of Daniel and Susanna was all about the commonality of that situation and the prosecution of the woman anyway.

 

[BobRyan]

The "Law of SIN and death" in Rom 8 is a reference to the "problem" defined in Rom 7 a few verses earlier.

Rom 7 - AN EVIL law within -- the LAW of our sinful nature
21 I find then a law, that evil is present with me, the one who wills to do good. 22 For I delight in the law of God according to the inward man. 23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. 24 O wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? 25 I thank God—through Jesus Christ our Lord!

So then, with the mind I myself serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin (Law of sinnING even when it is against my will)

Then if we have to keep the letter of the Law, why are not all christians circumcised ???

Because "The letter of the Law" never said the gentiles have to be circumcised to be saved -- OT or NT.

1 Cor 7:19 "what matters is KEEPING the Commandments of GOD"
Rev 14:12 "the saints KEEP the Commandments of God AND their faith in Jesus"
1 John 5:3-4 "This IS the LOVE of God that we KEEP His Commandments"

where "the first commandment with a promise - is Honor your father and mother" Eph 6:2
Ex 20:6 "Love Me and KEEP My Commandments"
John 14:!5 "if you Love Me KEEP My Commandments"

Paul answered it like this -

Romans 2
26 So, if a man who is uncircumcised keeps the precepts of the law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision?

indeed. True in both OT and NT when it comes to individual salvation

Let us all then walk in the Spirit - keeping the Precepts of the Law as Jesus did which are summed up in Loving God and one's neighbour.

Amen -

Lev 19:18 "Love your neighbor as yourself" - as Christ affirms in Matt 22.
Deut 6:5 "Love God with all your hear" -- as Christ affirms in Matt 22.

 

[Carl Emerson]

I think there is a lot of context that needs to be understood in this situation.

• First, this entire situation was a trap. It was just like when Jesus was asked if it was right to pay taxes to Caesar. And with His heavenly wisdom, He found a way free of the trap. "Not fair," I can imagine the trap-makers thinking. But Jesus found a way to explain underlying principles when He said "Return to Caesar that which is Caesar's, but unto God that which is God's."
  
  
• Not every aspect of the Mosaic law came directly from God. Rather, God entrusted Moses with the leadership of His people, and Moses had to formulate regulations consistent with the principles taught him by God. Yes, most of the Law came directly from God, but consider the text below.

Jesus was the great I AM that met with Moses in the burning bush and on Mt Sinai. He is the one who, before coming to Earth to be born as a human, had instructed Moses and written on the tablets with His finger. And here He clearly points out that it was Moses, who had written in an exception to the perfect plan set out from the beginning.

Notice that Jesus is not throwing Moses "under the bus", or criticizing him for what he did. Rather He is explaining the circumstances. There is a larger context that the law of marriage needs to be understood within. Like why Jews should accept paying taxes to Caesar.
My point here is that the commandments to stone adulterers is a provision of the law that God never really wanted to be carried out. Instead, He wanted people to understand the seriousness of marriage and keep it sacred. God is the God of life; He is not wishing to kill wrong-doers, but rather to teach. He wanted such a punishment to be carried out at most, just once. Then all Israel will hear and be afraid, and no one among you will do such an evil thing again. (Deut 13: 11)

• So what was the Mosaic, legal requirement of the woman caught in adultery? Notice that it was NOT just the woman who was to be punished.

And who were to be the enforcers of these capital offenses? The people who directly connected to the situation by proximity.

• Did these regulations apply to the messiah? Jesus, in the situation of the temple tax, asserted that, as the messiah, He was exempt from certain regulations.
  
  Matt 17:24-27 After Jesus and his disciples arrived in Capernaum, the collectors of the two-drachma temple tax came to Peter and asked, “Doesn’t your teacher pay the temple tax?” “Yes, he does,” he replied. When Peter came into the house, Jesus was the first to speak. “What do you think, Simon?” he asked. “From whom do the kings of the earth collect duty and taxes—from their own children or from others?” “From others,” Peter answered. "Then the children are exempt,” Jesus said to him. “But so that we may not cause offense, go to the lake and throw out your line. Take the first fish you catch; open its mouth and you will find a four-drachma coin. Take it and give it to them for my tax and yours.”

To summarize:

1. The purpose of these laws was to establish marriage as a sacred union. It was not a trap set by God so that He could surprise and kill people.
2. The people responsible for enforcing the regulations was to be the people involved in the situation, not some outside police force.
3. Both guilty parties -- not just the woman -- were to be punished.
4. Even if one could argue that Jesus, because he happened to be in the same town as the guilty parties, was responsible to participate in the stoning, He could assert that this regulation did not apply to the messiah.

Analyzing the situation:

1. A woman was brought before Jesus. Where was the man? Why was he not brought in? Clearly the accusers set the entire situation up to trap Jesus, and the man was very likely part of the nefarious plan. They couldn't try to kill him because he was their co-conspirator.
   
   
2. Jesus did NOT have responsibility to participate in the stoning of the woman. He did not encounter the guilty parties (both the woman AND the man) or have any connection to the situation. The responsibility lay on those who brought her to Jesus. Why did they ask for His opinion and not just carry out their duty on their own? It was because they didn't care about respecting marriage and only wanted to trap Jesus.
   
   
3. Jesus, completely aware of the unfairness of the situation and the corruption of the accusers, did not issue any pronouncement in opposition to the stoning -- instead He told those who were innocent should throw the first stone. Jesus knew of all of the wrong doing of all the inhabitants of the town. And as God, He could have called for an army of angels to come and burn it all with fire. But His purpose was to teach people to do right and to follow a loving God, not to destroy them in their sinful state. A regulation that was originally intended to enhance the life of His people had been twisted by evil-doers into something horrible. And Jesus correctly refused to go along with it.

The Escape from the Trap

The trap was, "are you going to follow the Law, at the risk of opposing Roman restrictions?" @Carl Emerson seems to be asserting that Jesus met the trap by failing to follow the law. I disagree. Instead, just as in the situation of Caesar's coin and the taxes trap, Jesus escaped it in a way that they didn't expect. He simply wrote on the ground and all her accusers left.

So let's look at the entire story



Jesus did NOT violate any Mosaic law through this interaction. Instead, He found a wonderful way out of the trap and a means of saving the woman in two ways: first, from her immediate death through stoning, and second, by filling her soul with love and thus a desire to put her wrong ways behind her.




I could provide a similar analysis of the Sabbath situation, but this post is already too long.


I disagree, but see above.

I also would counter the assertion that the law was a "curse." It may have had the effect of cursing us, because it highlights our inability to follow it. But the intent of God's instructions were never to harm or "curse" us.

Best wishes,

Kevin

Nice response Kevin - thanks.

The Curse of the Law which Jesus took on Himself is referenced in Galatians.

It seems then that the obligation to stone the woman was not in the Written Law from your POV.

You seem to dismiss the fact that Jesus righteousness was direct from the Father and well above the Law's requirements.

You introduce the idea that what was written in the Torah was a mix of God's instruction and mans best judgement. This throws doubt on what is truely in the Law and what is not.

So the question in the OP cannot be answered if we cant be sure what was legitimately in the Law.

This would be a departure from believing the plain text and being accountable to it.

However if Moses was inspired to allow divorce the problem goes away.

Going back to the question in the OP then - can you give a short answer ?

 

[Carl Emerson]

Deuteronomy 23:24-25
24 When thou comest into thy neighbour's vineyard, then thou mayest eat grapes thy fill at thine own pleasure; but thou shalt not put any in thy vessel.
25 When thou comest into the standing corn of thy neighbour, then thou mayest pluck the ears with thine hand; but thou shalt not move a sickle unto thy neighbour's standing corn.

They had a right to pluck and eat any day.

So the Pharisees were unaware of that verse ???

 

[Carl Emerson]

Because "The letter of the Law" never said the gentiles have to be circumcised to be saved -- OT or NT.

1 Cor 7:19 "what matters is KEEPING the Commandments of GOD"
Rev 14:12 "the saints KEEP the Commandments of God AND their faith in Jesus"
1 John 5:3-4 "This IS the LOVE of God that we KEEP His Commandments"

where "the first commandment with a promise - is Honor your father and mother" Eph 6:2
Ex 20:6 "Love Me and KEEP My Commandments"
John 14:!5 "if you Love Me KEEP My Commandments"

indeed. True in both OT and NT when it comes to individual salvation

Amen -

Lev 19:18 "Love your neighbor as yourself" - as Christ affirms in Matt 22.
Deut 6:5 "Love God with all your hear" -- as Christ affirms in Matt 22.

OK so far so good.

Can we agree on what the 'precepts' of the Law are ???

Is this a reference to the principles behind the written detail ?

 

[BobRyan]

OK so far so good.

Can we agree on what the 'precepts' of the Law are ???

Is this a reference to the principles behind the written detail ?

According to Paul -- we are to honor parents because God's Law says "Honor your father and mother" and it is "the first commandment" in the Law of God -- with a promise Eph 6:1-2

In Matt 22 Jesus said "all the Law and the prophets" are firmly founded on these two commands in the Law of Moses
1. Love God with all your heart - Deut 6:5
2. Love your neighbor as yourself - Lev 19:18

In Eph 6:1-2 Paul does not say "The Law says - honor your father and mother - but the real command is something else"