Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes: The Woman Caught in Adultery

In Chapter 7 of Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes, Kenneth E. Bailey focuses on the story of the woman caught in adultery.

The basis of this story from John 7:53-8:11 is that the Pharisees bring a woman caught in the act of adultery (I'm not a feminist, but where was the man she was with?) to Jesus who was at the temple. Forget the violation of so many things here that the Pharisees did (brought her in a half-dressed, unkempt state, her ceremonial uncleanliness, etc.)...they want to catch Jesus in a quandary in order to invalidate Him. 

Jesus is sitting in the Temple, teaching (because teachers sat in Jewish culture, and listeners stood when speaking to them- see page 286 for more on this practice). This is the day after a major feast, which according to Jewish law, had to be observed as a sabbath. 

Bailey states, "The fact that they brought the woman but not her male partner clearly indicates that their concern was not preservation of the law but rather the public humiliation of Jesus" (page 232). Additionally, this is done in clear view of Roman soldiers who were observing from the military fort near the north end of the Temple.

The Pharisees think Jesus has 2 options: 1) to agree to stoning her, which would lead to His arrest in the midst of a public outcry or 2) say something that would let her go and show Him a coward/law breaker.

Here's the cultural stuff I didn't know before reading this chapter (in addition to it being in the view of the Roman soldiers): 

What Jesus does next (writes in the dust with His finger) shows direct knowledge of Jewish law and culture, because while writing was considered work, writing in the dust was permissible, since it wasn't permanent. "By doing this, He made it clear to His accusers that He was not only familiar with the written law but also well-versed in the developing oral interpretation of that law" (page 234).

When Jesus says, "Let the one among you who is without sin cast the first stone", that coupled with whatever He wrote (we don't know), is a direct challenge where "He asks each individual to acknowledge responsibility for participation in the act....[He is basically saying], 'Gentlemen, you clearly want me to go to jail for the law of Moses. I am willing to do so. I have ordered that she be killed. But I want to know which one of you is willing to volunteer to accompany me into that cell?" (page 235). Bailey also points out that in this honor/shame culture, for someone to declare Himself sinless (other than Christ) would bring shame, because since they know the law, they know it says that all have sinned. 

Wow! Later in the chapter, Bailey says Jesus walked a razor's edge between condemning her (following the law) and overlooking her sin (violating the law). I don't think I fully caught all the ramifications of this until reading this chapter. 

What about you? What do you think?

(Edit July 7, 2019: in What if it's True?, Charles Martin also has a very powerful chapter about this story).