Thought experiment

[Moonobserver]

To illustrate the inconsistency in the teaching of Jesus, one can conduct the following experiment:

 

Turn to chapter 8 of the Gospel according to John and read the first seven verses. Then go back and read that passage again and this time, when you get to the point in verse 7 where Jesus begins to speak, replace what he says there with Matthew 5:17-19. Then consider the following questions:

 

1. In John 8:7, is Jesus confirming the words of the law (Deuteronomy 22:22) to do them as the law requires in Deut. 27:26?

 

2. If he is not, is he violating the law?

 

3. Is he teaching others to violate the law?

 

4. What does Jesus himself say in Matthew 5:19 about anyone who breaks any command of the law and teaches others to do likewise?

 

5. If the people in the Matthew passage took the words of Jesus to heart, what would they have done to the woman in the John passage?

 

6. If the men in the John passage had brought the woman to Jesus in the Matthew passage, how could he have responded to them as he does in John without invalidating what he had just told his audience in Matthew?

 

7. Assuming that the men in the John passage knew the law, how would Deut. 27:26 have required them to regard Jesus?

 

8. Do the answers to these questions point to the conclusion that Jesus was the Jewish Messiah, or to the conclusion that he wasn't?