A Different Pattern)

Thus far in this study I have noted that God created this earth life, defined its purposes, and introduced us to it as His gift to help us cultivate our souls to their full potential. Given all of that, He also has the right to determine when a person is so contrary to that purpose that they ought to be removed from this life. He also has the right to determine when the penalty is delayed to give the offender time to repent. He sets these bounds according to His wisdom, and wherever He does place them He is justified in so doing.

Looking at the scriptural record, we see that those bounds appear to have evolved from the Old Testament to the New. According to the Mosaic Law, adultery was one of the sins for which the death penalty would always apply. In the New Testament, Jesus seemed to make this law even more strict, proclaiming that anyone who “looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart” (Matthew 5:28). So, did this mean that now the death penalty would apply to anyone who even had a lustful thought? One might think so, at least until the incident with the woman taken in adultery occurred.

And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery.

"Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned." 

Jesus lifted up himself, and said unto them, "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her."

And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.

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."
-John 8:3-11, shortened

It is worth asking, why was adultery a sin punishable by death under Moses, but then when Jesus was presented the woman taken in adultery, he chose to extend mercy instead?

Reason for the Change)

I already spoke a little on this in the first post of this series and also in prior posts, but I think the important thing to realize is that Jesus didn’t, in fact, contradict the law as it was given. Nowhere do we hear him say that having death as a consequence of adultery was unjust. Nowhere does he say that his new law was “correcting” the old one. Instead, he told his disciples:

Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. (Matthew 5:17-18).

Furthermore, Jesus’s statement “neither do I condemn thee” seems to suggest that he rightfully could. If Jesus, however, let the adulterous woman go without executing her, did a jot or a tittle of the law go unfulfilled? No. Because as it turns out, there was an execution carried out for her sin, only it was carried out in Jesus’s body and not her own. In that moment that Jesus let her go, he was assuming her place.

And this is not only for the woman in that one instance. Every adulterer, or blasphemer, or rebellious son ever since has been spared a death penalty. Not because the penalty was withheld, but because it was executed upon Jesus. When Jesus died on the cross, he stood in for the execution of all of mankind.

Change of Subject, not Policy)

The important thing to recognize here is that Jesus did not change what most people seem to think he changed. He did not change either the principles or the policies underlying the Law of Moses. The principle is that severe violation of the purpose of life warrants removal from that life. The policy is that a man must be killed for mortal sins. Now the principle and the policy still hold true, but the person is put to death in Jesus.

Mortal sins remain mortal sins, the wages of sin are still death, the law is still just as strict in imposing justice, all that has changed is the subject upon whom the punishment is exacted. By this, mercy can be offered to us without robbing justice one iota.

Note: I am aware that the authenticity of the story of the woman taken in adultery is debated. Even if it turned out that such did not occur, it is still clear that the Christian movement included deferment of the death penalty, and the reasons why remain the same.