the Pharisees twenty times — sixteen times alone, and four timea In conjunction with the chief-priests.
This fact is thought by some to be an argument against the genuineness of the passage, but without just cause. St. Mark, in his Gospel, speaks twelve times of the Pharisees, and only twice mentions the Scribes in conjunction with them. More* over, this is the only occasion recorded in St. John, when a formal attempt was made to entrap our Lord by a subtle ques- tion. That being so, there may be a good reason why the Scribes should be mentioned as well as the Pharisees, as prin- cipal agents in the attempt.
[Brought unto Him a woman, etc.'} It seems not improbable that this attempt to ensnare our Lord was one result of His ene- mies' failure to apprehend Him during the feast. Defeated in their effort to meet Him in argument, or to apprehend Him in the absence of any legal charge, they tried next to entrap Him into committing Himself in some way, and so giving them a handle against Him. No time was to be lost. They had failed yesterday, and found their own officers unwilling to apprehend our Lord. They resolved to try another plan to-day. They would ensnare our Lord into cloim; something illegal or indis-
[Set her in the midst.] This means in the middle of a ring or circle, composed of themselves and their followers, our Lord and His disciples, and the crowd listening to His teaching.
4. — [They say. ..this woman... taken... etc.~] It throws some light on this charge to remember what immense crowds came up to Jeru- salem at the great public feasts, and especially at the feast of tabernacles. At such a season, when every house was crowded, as at a fair time, when many consequently slept in the open air, and no small disorder probably ensued, we can well understand that such a sin as a breach of the seventh commandment would be very likely to be committed.
5. — [Now Moses.. .law commanded... stoned.] This is the legitimate conclusion of the two texts, Lev. xx. 10 and Deut. xxii. 22, when compared. There seems no ground for the comment of some writers, that Moses did not command an adulteress to be put to death by stoning.
It is worth notice, that the expression, "Moses in the law," is not used either by Matthew, Mark, or Luke. But it is used by St. John both here and at chap. i. 45.
[But what sayest thou ?] This would be more literally ren- dered, "What therefore sayest thou?" The Greek word ren- dered " but " by our translators is hardly ever so rendered in the New Testament; and in most places is either "therefore," "then," "so," "now," or "and." John ix. 18, and Acts xxv. 4, are the only parallel cases.