The prophet Nathan (Hebrew “He gave” or “Gift of God”) served during the reigns of both King David and his son Solomon.  Although Nathan was usually “behind the scenes” during the reigns of these kings, it is probable that no other single person was more influential during that pivotal era of biblical history.

Nathan is mentioned many times throughout the Books of Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles – mainly during the darkest and most troubled times of King David’s reign. We first meet him in 2 Samuel 7:2 when David told the prophet of his desire to build a temple for God.  At first Nathan encouraged the king, but we are told that later that night God spoke to Nathan, telling him in detail why he would not accept a temple built by David, stressing that David had shed much blood (1 Chronicles 28:3).
 
It was not a flattering message to have to relay, but we see something of Nathan’s character in that he did not attempt to smooth over the reason for God’s refusal of David (or to cover the fact that he himself had been wrong to originally encourage the king) – we are specifically told that “Nathan reported to David all the words of this entire revelation” (2 Samuel 7:17, emphasis added).

Later, Nathan had to confront David with the king’s sins of adultery with Bathsheba and of having her husband Uriah killed (2 Samuel 12:1-15).  Considering the fact that David had already killed to hide this situation, we see Nathan’s tremendous strength of character and faith in boldly accusing the king.  Nathan not only accused David as God had commanded him to do, but also predicted that David’s first child by Bathsheba would die, and that the king would suffer great anguish as a result of the actions of his own family members.

Close to the end of David’s life, Nathan related to David the news of his son Adonijah’s plan to seize the throne.  In this way the prophet skillfully enabled the hasty coronation of David’s chosen heir – Solomon. 
 
Nathan was not simply a bringer of bad news, however. He also encouraged the king and informed David that his throne would be established forever (1 Chronicles 17:1-15).  He was clearly a trusted advisor throughout his service to the king and a man of important accomplishments.  There appears to have been a book written either by Nathan himself or about his service as a prophet (1 Chronicles 29:29), and Nathan apparently wrote a history of King Solomon along with two others (2 Chronicles 9:29).

But Nathan’s major accomplishment was undoubtedly the true faith he repeatedly showed in expressing tough love for David and confronting the king with his errors.  Nathan’s character and faithfulness in conveying the word of God, no matter how negative the message sometimes may have seemed, obviously gained him the respect of Israel’s greatest king. True to his name, the prophet surely was a “Gift of God” to David in helping him to correct his course when he went astray (for example, Psalm 51) – something the king must surely have appreciated over time.
​
In fact, it is doubtless a sign of David’s respect and love for Nathan that the king named his third son after the prophet (1 Chronicles 3:5).  And it is through that Nathan – not Solomon or any of David’s other powerful sons – that Jesus Christ was descended (Luke 3:31).
​
The prophet Nathan served in a “behind the scenes” career, but one which had a tremendous effect for good.  He is an example to all of us of the value of truth spoken in love, and of faith in dealing with difficult situations concerning those we strive to serve.

Does the woman caught in adultery (John 7:53-8:11) belong in your Bible? It is a story we may know well, but one which is hotly disputed in terms of its authenticity. This is because the earliest known manuscripts of the New Testament do not include the story, and when it does appear there is confusion as to where it should be placed – some manuscripts place the story in different parts of the Gospel of John and some even place it in Luke!

Yet many early manuscripts do have the story, and several of the early church fathers regarded it as authentic.  The passage certainly appears to be authentic in style, and everything about the section is in keeping with the character of the scribes and Pharisees who repeatedly tried to trap Jesus (Matthew 16:1; 19:3; 22:35; Mark 8:11; 10:2; 12:15; Luke 10:25; 11:16). Given this conflicting situation, we must look at the problem more closely.

Negative Evidence

Almost every one of the disputed verses in John 8 gives some indication that they were not composed by the apostle John.  Consider a few examples that use vocabulary that is never used anywhere else in John’s writings:

In verse 1 we are told that Jesus “went to” the Mount of Olives – a phrase that is never found in John’s Gospel apart from in these contested verses – and the place name “Mount of Olives” is likewise never used by John (see, for example, John 18:1 where John simply refers to Jesus going to “a garden.”). 
In verse 2 the expression “came early” is never used by John, nor is the phrase “all the people.”
In verse 3 the scribes are mentioned – John nowhere mentions the scribes.
In verse 6 the word “tempting” is used in the sense of trying to trap Jesus in a difficult situation.  John never uses this word in this way.
In verse 9, the word “conscience” is never used by John.  
In verse 10, the word translated “but” or “except” is never used by John.

Considering the combined evidence of all the verses in this section, it is difficult to believe that these words were written by John.  Why would the apostle suddenly use totally different vocabulary than that which he used throughout his Gospel, three epistles, and the Book of Revelation?

An Alternative Possibility

But just because it seems unlikely that John composed the verses we call John 7:53-8:11 does not necessarily mean that they are not authentic.  When they do appear in early manuscripts, these verses sometimes appear in the Gospel of Luke, and so we should consider the possibility of their Lukan origin.

When we look at this possibility, we find that every one of the expressions considered above, that never appear anywhere else in John’s writings, can be found – often on numerous occasions – in the writings of the Evangelist Luke.  For example, consider the phrase “all the people” that appears in verse 2. Although this expression was not used by John, it is a characteristic phrase used by Luke – it appears some twenty times in his writings.  Even the word “people” by itself is used only twice by John, but over fifty times in the writings of Luke.  In a similar way, the mention of the “scribes” in the “scribes and Pharisees” in verse 3, although never used by John, is found multiple times in Luke.
 
These facts should make us seriously consider the possibility that “John 7:53-8:11” originated not in manuscripts of John’s Gospel, but in the Gospel of Luke. But if that were the case, why are they not in the earliest manuscripts and why the confusion as to where they belong?

We must remember that Luke, perhaps more than any other Gospel writer, collected a great number of eyewitness accounts in composing Luke and Acts.  John reminds us that Jesus did many other things that could have been included into the Gospel narratives (John 21:25), and this doubtless applies especially to the situation with Luke’s many sources.   Ancient books were written on scrolls, of course, and Luke doubtless had to select his material carefully to make it fit on a fairly standard scroll.  This would mean that the story of the woman caught in adultery may well have had to be put aside along with other excess material that could not fit in the production of Luke’s Gospel.

This could easily have led to a situation where the story surfaced and “floated” within the early Christian community for some time before being included in the Gospel manuscripts. This would explain why it appears in manuscripts of several different Gospels and in different places.

Interestingly, if the story was recorded by Luke, it fits very well where it appears in some manuscripts – after Luke 21:38.  But although it fits well there, it would have broken the development of Luke’s account of the Passion narrative, giving another reason why he may not have included it. 

So despite the seemingly conflicting manuscript evidence, a great many biblical scholars feel that this story represents an actual episode in the ministry of Jesus.  The late renowned textual critic Bruce Metzger, Professor of New Testament Language and Literature at Princeton University, concluded that “… the account has all the earmarks of historical veracity” (A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament. London, England: United Bible Societies [1971], 220).
​
The story of the woman caught in adultery fits well with Luke’s constant interest in the place of women in the Gospel narrative. The consistent Lukan vocabulary makes it highly likely that it was recorded by that evangelist, and the story’s acceptance by early church fathers – despite its uncertain location – all suggest the likelihood of authenticity, and that the woman caught in adultery does indeed belong in the text of our Bibles.  ​

“Do not be deceived: God is not mocked, for whatever one sows, that will he also reap. For the one who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption, but the one who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life” (Galatians 6:7-8 ESV).

This passage in Galatians is a classic example of biblical verses that we may diligently highlight in our study, but they then take on a life of their own and we tend to read and remember them out of their actual context.  As a result, we may miss their real meaning and the message they have for us.

In the case of Galatians 6:7-8 it is easy to see these verses as purely a comparison and contrast between “sinful living” and “spiritual living.”  Viewed this way, Paul’s stress on sowing and reaping seems like a simple exposition on the end results of the lifestyle of a sinful person who reaps the fruits of his or her wrongful actions as opposed to the results of righteous living.  The verses have been quoted in this way in many sermons – sometimes with colorful examples such as hypothetical  individuals who sinfully “sowed their wild oats then prayed for a crop failure,” as opposed to individuals who were blessed for righteous living.
​
But that is not really the contrast Paul is making in this passage.  The previous verse begins the thought by saying “Let the one who is taught the word share all good things with the one who teaches” (vs. 6).  This thought sets the stage for what Paul says in verses 7-8, and those verses are followed in turn by the conclusion of the thought:  “And let us not grow weary of doing good, for in due season we will reap, if we do not give up. So then, as we have opportunity, let us do good to everyone, and especially to those who are of the household of faith” (vss. 9-10).

We can see that these verses are not different thoughts because Paul continues the analogy of sowing and reaping throughout the whole passage of Galatians 6:6-10.  And when we take the whole passage in its context, we realize that Paul is not contrasting sinful living with spiritual living so much as he is contrasting selfish living with a life of unselfish giving.

That is why the thought begins in verse 6 with Paul talking about those who are taught sharing “all good things” with those who teach.  His overall thought, expanded in verses 7-8, is that if we do not share and serve outwardly, we serve only ourselves – we “sow to the flesh.” It is only as we share with and serve others (vss. 9-10) that we “sow to the Spirit” and will eventually reap a reward.

In fact, the only other two places Paul uses the analogy of sowing and reaping in his epistles regarding our behavior are in his letters to the Corinthian Church, and they make exactly the same point:  “If we have sown spiritual seed among you, is it too much if we reap a material harvest from you?” (1 Corinthians 9:11) and “Remember this: Whoever sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and whoever sows generously will also reap generously” (2 Corinthians 9:6).

In all three instances – in 1 and 2 Corinthians and in Galatians 6 – Paul uses the analogy of sowing and reaping to affirm that the seed we sow determines the harvest we receive. Certainly the Bible uses the broader application of the idea of sowing and reaping:  “The one who sows righteousness reaps a sure reward” (Proverbs 11:18b), and “whoever sows injustice reaps calamity” (Proverbs 22:8a); but Paul’s use of the sowing and reaping analogy is clearly a specific one dealing with unselfish and generous giving and living.
 
Such good deeds may have been neglected by the congregations in Galatia as they were caught up in a number of divisions and errors that were consuming their attention and energy. These errors are the focus of most of what Paul discusses in his letter to the Galatians, but we must not miss his point that such doctrinal and moral issues and concerns must not preclude our doing good in the life to which we have been called.  Paul’s point is not just regarding the responsibilities of life – that we reap what we sow; but also the opportunities of life – that if we want to reap, we must sow.

​As Christians, we must listen to both the “word” of God – the Bible (2 Timothy 3:16-17), and the “Word” of God – Jesus Christ (John 1:1).  In fact, as Jesus himself showed, the one testifies to the other: “You study the Scriptures diligently because you think that in them you have eternal life. These are the very Scriptures that testify about me” (John 5:39, emphasis added). But Jesus’ point in saying this was that we can be studying – even diligently – and still not hearing the One we should be hearing.   

So how do we most effectively listen to the Word and his word?  Find out in our new article on practical strategies for hearing the Word through Scripture – published today on our sister website, here.​