White Horse Inn Blog

8 Comments on “WHI-1139 | The Savior of the World”

1. 
   John Doe
   February 5th, 2013 at 4:35 am

   The link is broken, cap’n!

2. 
   Harman Clark
   February 5th, 2013 at 10:16 am

   Will you please explain to me where you find in John 4 that the woman at the well was adulterous? And where does Ken find any statement that when she went back to the town she spoke first with the men? And when Jesus told her that she had had five husbands (and note, He called them husbands), she concluded that he must be a prophet and so she asked him the proper place to worship – why do you say she “changed the subject” – having determined that He was a prophet, and knowing he was a Jew, wasn’t that a logical question? And why, if this woman were of the character you surmise, did so many in the town believe what she told them?
   Frankly your depiction of this woman sounds like some of the evangelical stuff I was fed in an independent Church in my early days.

3. 
   Eric
   February 5th, 2013 at 1:08 pm

   v.18 …and the one you now have is not your husband.

4. 
   Harman Clark
   February 5th, 2013 at 2:51 pm

   Eric — you may assume adultery from that, if you wish. I practiced law for 40 years and would not have attempted to prosecute a case based on that alone, particularly where both Jesus and John knew the word adultery and neither used it here. The Woman was forthcoming and answered Jesus honestly; he did not condemn. That was not the point of the account and to emphasize that assumption is to divert attention from the primary account. Unfortunately many of the sermons I heard when growing up were about the bad lady, totally missing the point. I love the White Horse Inn crew, but I think they made some assumptions not authorized or intended by the text.
   Now, do you (or they) know how old this woman was? She had, after all, had had five husbands; did they die; was she living in circumstances of sharing tasks and expenses with an older man — as is the case with many seniors today fearing to lose pension benefits if marrying, but also too elderly to be interested in what would result in an adulterous act. There are, indeed, other explanations than assuming this Woman was an adulterous, and to make that blunt statement, particularly in the lead-in to the broadcast, is not necessarily an accurate interpretation of scripture, and is a diversion.

5. 
   Steve Sherman
   February 7th, 2013 at 5:23 am

   Whoever looks at someone with lust has already committed adultery in their heart. And she’s living with her non-husband; that’s enough good to get beyond a reasonable doubt.

6. 
   Harman Clark
   February 7th, 2013 at 5:37 am

   Come on Steve — where does it say she looked at anyone with lust? You are missing my point in any event. The emphasis here is not on the woman as a person — John doesn’t even give her a name — but on Jesus. If she were really such a notorious person it would seem everyone would have known that, and then why would she have thought Jesus a prophet for knowing her past? And why would the people (and the text says people and not men) have believed her? I don’t question that this woman was a sinner; so am I. I fall very short in telling people about the Messiah; the woman at the well not only recognized the Messiah, but became what some would call the first missionary. That is what should be emphasized; not something assumed from the account, or at best secondary to John’s purpose in writing it.

7. 
   Mark Vander Pol
   February 7th, 2013 at 8:51 am

   We are working on the discussion questions, sorry for the delay. At least that is what I assume you are talking about!

8. 
   Kathy
   February 7th, 2013 at 12:26 pm

   No, Mark. The audio link doesn’t play. I was able to “access it directly” and then “found” the discussion in a box on the right-hand side. Not sure if that’s where the direct access link is supposed to take you.

Leave a Reply