“a permanent, perpetual state of forgiveness”
Download discussion questions: 1 John 1:5-2:6
Download selected verb parsing: 1 John 1:5-2:6
Jump to beginning of 1 John Discussion Group Blog
Jump to Introduction to 1,2,3 John
This passage in 1 John (which we discussed earlier) contains pointers to several issues that can raise questions. As we have seen in numerous other passages (in Hebrews, in James, in the letters of Peter and of Jude), verses or phrases or even words taken out of context can be misunderstood or honestly misinterpreted or even intentionally misrepresented.
As part of “a defense for the hope that is in us” (1 Peter 3:15), it is important to consider questions in the trusting and safe atmosphere of a group of believers. That kind of discussion will make us more prepared and less alarmed when faced with such questions or critiques by skeptics.
Some of the possible questions from this passage (1 John 1:5-2:6) could include the following:
1 John 1:7 Our Walk
-
- John describes aspects of the Christian life as “walk…fellowship…cleanses.” How are those three actions related? Is John indicating a sequence? Could that be interpreted that the cleansing by the blood of Jesus depends on our “walk”?
In response to this question, one member of our group responded with additional questions. Who would say this? Who would claim to know God (1:6) and to be sinless (1:8, 10)? What genuine believer would have that attitude? Who is John writing to with these descriptions?
Some in the early church came out of a pagan background and were influenced by various philosophies of their culture. Some thought that the physical material world was evil and only the “spiritual” things mattered. If that were true, then physical acts (part of the material world) were unimportant as long as one had the knowledge (Gk. gnosis), the secret insights into the mysteries of the otherworldly realm. These early “Gnostics” could then claim to be “sinless” since their bodily behavior, no matter what, was irrelevant.
In addition, the “special knowledge” could breed rivalry over who had the deepest insight. Competition was more likely than community.
And if the physical world was inherently evil (or at best irrelevant), then Jesus could not really have been a man with a body of flesh. And He could not really have died on a cross. He just “seemed” to have a body and to die, according to another strain of heresy, Docetism (Gk. dokeo, “to seem”).
John is not describing a sequence or an order that begins with a “walk” in order to experience Christ’s cleansing. He is showing the parallel realities of the genuine Christian life: walking in the light, being in fellowship with each other, and being constantly cleansed (all present tense verbs describing continuous actions). As a group member pointed out, “walking in the light” exposes sin. Genuine believers know that fellowship with other believers is part of overcoming that sin. And when sin is exposed, we recognize and appreciate the cleansing by Jesus’ blood.
In direct contradiction to the philosophic distortions, John is emphasizing the real, material blood of a real human being. That understanding explains why John spent so much effort at the beginning of his letter on “which we heard…we saw…we looked at…we touched” (1 John 1:1).
“Walk…fellowship…cleanse” is not a criterion for living the Christian life. That description is the evidence of a Christian life.
1 John 1:9 Our Confession
-
- This familiar verse describes cleansing following confession. How is our cleansing dependent on our confession? Or is it?
Someone described their experience as “confessing, knowing that I am forgiven.” Someone else commented on a “permanent, perpetual state of forgiveness.” That description expresses John’s change of the verb tense he uses in verse 9 for “forgive” and “cleanse.” As we are continuously confessing (present tense), His faithfulness and righteousness are expressed in forgiveness and cleansing. Here, John changes to a tense that views an action as a whole (Greek aorist).
A simple illustration by a Greek scholar[1] is helpful. Think of two perspectives at a parade. You are standing on the curb, watching each band or float go by. You “watch” the parade using the present tense. But if you are in a helicopter above, you see the entire parade in one look. You see the whole parade as an entity, in total. You “watch” the parade in the aorist tense.
Without over-interpreting or eisegesis (reading into the text), it seems significant that John uses both tenses in verse 9. We see and confess our sins as a parade passing by (an unfortunately long parade!). God sees our sins from a much higher vantage point and forgives and cleanses.[2]
1 John 1:9 Forgiveness
-
- This verse also mentions “forgiveness of sins” and “cleansing from unrighteousness.” Are these the same thing? Or how are they different? Is John saying the same thing two different ways, or is he making a distinction?
Our discussion suggested that the two actions, forgiveness and cleansing, are two perspectives on God’s gracious action toward the believer. To forgive (ἀφίημι, aphiēmi) is most literally to dismiss, to let go, to send away.[3] That definition is reminiscent of David’s description.
As far as the east is from the west,
So far has He removed our transgressions from us.
Psalm 103:12
Cleansing has a straightforward meaning: to remove dirt. Cleansing removes the lingering evidence of past actions, like washing hands after a messy task. That practical cleansing makes us ready to greet a friend with a warm handshake.
Someone commented that God doesn’t hold a grudge, that in fact the omniscient God “remembers their sins no more” (Hebrews 8:12, quoting Jeremiah 31:34). God, “whose eyes are too pure to look at evil” (Habakkuk 1:13, NASB), provides cleansing for His people, the “purification from all that separates them from the presence and purposes of God.”[4]
One person suggested that the relation between forgiveness and cleansing sounds a bit like the previous discussion on expiation and propitiation. God forgives our sins, putting them away (expiation), and He cleanses our unrighteousness, eliminating any effect on our relationship with Him (propitiation).
God will both forgive us our sins and … cleanse us from all unrighteousness. In the first phase sin is a debt which He remits and in the second a stain which He removes.[5]
1 John 2:1 Sin
-
- John says that he is writing “these things that you may not sin.” How does the beginning of the letter (our chapter one) help us not to sin?
This question turned our attention back to the people saying they did not sin (1:8, 10). The first part of the letter is focused on discrediting their false claims so others would not be deceived by them. John contradicts “the heretical affirmation about the unimportance of sin.”[6]
John’s core message draws an unmistakable “line in the sand:”
This is the message we have heard from him and proclaim to you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.
1 John 1:5
That absolute dichotomy makes the importance of sin unmistakable.
John follows that foundation with repeated reminders of the absolute distinction between light and dark. He wants that contrast clearly embedded in the minds of his audience. Contrary to the false teachers (Gnostics, Docetists, and anyone else), how we walk as Christians matters. His reminders should help us toward his reason for writing, “that you may not sin.”
1 John 2:2 Propitiation
-
- This verse says that Christ’s propitiation is for the sins of “the whole world.” We discussed that John used “world” to describe people of every social status, race, ethnic group, etc. How do we know that?
There are various theological approaches to this question. Those are helpful, but a thorough study was beyond the scope of our inductive study. Another suggestion was to examine all the ways John used “world” in his writings (Revelation, the Gospel according to John, and his three letters). While that, too, would be profitable, it was not part of our discussion.[7]
One interesting item came from further study. When John says that propitiation was for “the whole world,” there are two words he could use, both with familiar English derivatives.
-
- πᾶς (pas) is the root of the English prefix “pan” as in panacea (a cure for all problems) or pandemic (an epidemic that affects all the people) or panorama (a view of all things).
- ὅλος (holos) the root of the English word “whole.”
John chooses to use the word holos (less common in the New Testament; 109 times compared with 1,243 occurrences of pas)[8]. The apparent synonyms do have distinctive nuances.
-
- pas (English “pan”), the more widely used of the two words, is “all, every,”[9] or “totality, with focus on its individual components, each, every, any.”[10]
- holos (English “whole”) is “entire, throughout”[11] or “being complete in extent, whole, entire, complete.”[12] Examples in secular usage include “seven whole days” or “during the whole winter.”[13]
John (inspired by the Holy Spirit) chose the less frequently used word to describe the extent of Jesus’ work of propitiation. He is not saying that propitiation was for every individual or each person (pas). In the context of his immediate audience, John is emphasizing that propitiation extends throughout the entire world and is not limited only to certain groups, neither Jews nor Greeks, and not even to those with special, secret knowledge of spiritual mysteries.
1 John 2:3-4 His Commandments
-
- The standard for genuinely knowing God is keeping His commandments. Is this an absolute? What if we don’t keep His commandments perfectly? What commandments?
John’s desire and his motive for writing was “that you may not sin” (2:1a). At the same time (in the next sentence still in verse 1) he reassures believers of their security based on the advocacy by Christ and the propitiation purchased by His sacrifice. That assurance is a summary of what he has been writing repeatedly about cleansing and forgiveness (1:7, 9).
John also clarifies the motivation for keeping God’s commandments and His Word.
whoever keeps His word, in him the love of God has truly been perfected (1 John 2:5)
Obedience, keeping His commandments, is not the source of our salvation but the sign of our salvation, walking “in the same manner as He walked” (v. 6). Keeping God’s Word in our “walk” (behavior, thoughts, relationships, etc.) is an expression of our love and gratitude for what He has already done for us.
A member of our discussion pursued the question, “What commandments?” The summary provided by Jesus Himself.
‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the great and foremost commandment. The second is like it, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets.
(Matthew 22:37-40; cf. Mark 12:30-31; Luke 10:25)
In other words, “Love God, love others.” That relational filter is the foundation for the fellowship John describes, knowing God and one another.
1 John 2:3 Knowing We Know
-
- John describes “knowing we know” Him. How does this relate to our doubts?
John’s criterion is quite clear and simple.
By this we know that we have come to know Him, if we keep His commandments.
(1 John 2:3)
He even adds an emphatic touch about what we know, “that we have come to know Him” (emphasis added). He uses a form that means we knew Him in the past, and that the relationship continues to have a present effect (Greek perfect tense). Our behavior indicates our ongoing fellowship with Him.
Not that John assumes our behavior will be perfect, since he emphasizes cleansing, forgiveness, and Jesus as our Advocate. His stress on confession as a continuous practice (a “lifestyle of confession” as one person expressed it) indicates an awareness of when we do sin and an eagerness to deal immediately with that obstacle to fellowship.
We discussed the meaning of the word “confession” (ὁμολογέω, homologeō). The basic meaning of the combination of the prefix homo (same) and legō (to say) results in “to say the same.” A more formal definition is “to share a common view or be of common mind about a matter, agree.”[14]
Depending on the context, that root meaning can communicate different emphases.
to confess, acknowledge, agree, admit, declare; this can be a profession of allegiance, an admission of bad behavior, or an emphatic declaration of a truth[15]
The contrast could hardly be sharper. Those who claim (or even boast?) about their knowledge (gnosis) of God deny sin or sinfulness (1:8, 10), and their behavior makes their deceit obvious.
On the other extreme, “keeping His commandments” (2:3) includes confession, recognizing when we have failed. Using the extended definition above, we “acknowledge, admit, and declare” the sinfulness of our sin. We agree with God, “saying the same” about the sin.
Keeping His commandments and agreeing with God’s perspective when we fail is evidence that we “have come to know Him.” But unlike those who deny their sin (the exact opposite of confession), we can have doubts.
John doesn’t mention doubts in his letter, but he repeatedly discusses the centrality of fellowship and especially love for God and love for one another. That community and loving trust among believers is essential for combatting our doubts. We need each other’s perspective to remind us first of God’s promises of forgiveness, cleansing, propitiation. Second, we need that community to remind us of the progress they see in our growth in Christ. Third, the community is critical to help us explore our failures, not just the “what” we do, but more importantly the “why.” What drives my failures? What self-obsession, what self-protective shield do I need to recognize and confess? Isolation can only increase doubts, or, at best, bury them temporarily until my next failure. John’s letter intertwines our fellowship with God and our fellowship with one another.
1 John 1:6, 2:3, etc., etc.
-
- John uses several phrases to describe a relationship with God: fellowship with Him (1:6), know Him (2:3), love of God (2:5), in Him (2:5), abides in Him (2:6). How do these combine to give us a deeper and richer understanding of what that relationship is intended to be?
One of the first comments from our group pointed out what that relationship is not. John is not describing an impersonal, academic interest in theology. The goal is not to learn words like “propitiation” or the nuances of Greek tenses to make us “sound smart” as another member said. Theology and Biblical doctrine can be fascinating and intellectually stimulating. May God protect us from being sidetracked by those legitimate attractions.
Everything John says in these first two chapters is relational. He points to behavior (walking, keeping commandments) not as his main emphasis. Those are simply secondary symptoms. The behavior of believers either confirms or contradicts knowing God, loving Him, and abiding in Him. Obedience does not determine the relationship; walking as He walked displays the reality of the relationship. Knowing the God of the universe produces practical actions visible to others. (John will have much more to say about this in his letter.)
The variety of ways John describes that relationship illustrates the authenticity of his description. No single word or one metaphor can really describe, much less define, even a human relationship. Add in the fact that this relationship is with an infinite, eternal, Triune God, and John needed the variety of images (fellowship, know, abide) even to begin communicating what he had heard and seen and looked at and touched. John’s diversity of descriptions of that relationship can stimulate our desire to grow in the joy of fellowship with Him, knowing Him, and abiding in Him. May the richness of that relationship overflow from us into the lives of others.
[1] https://www.billmounce.com/monday-with-mounce/the-aorist-so-much-more-past-tense
[2] Although, as Mounce points out, the aorist primarily indicates past time, these occurrences are in the subjunctive mood required by the use of ἵνα. Outside of the indicative mood no time element can be inferred, only the aspect of the actions of forgiveness and cleansing, as indicated in the comments by Mounce.
[3] W. Bauer, F.W. Danker, W.F. Arndt, and F.W. Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 156.
[4] Karen H. Jobes, 1, 2, and 3 John, Zondervan Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Academic, 2014), 70.
[5] John Stott, The Epistles of John, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1975), 77, italics in the original.
[6] Stephen S. Smalley, 1,2,3 John, Word Biblical Commentary (Waco, Texas: Word Books, Publisher, 1984), 32, emphasis added.
[7] Note also that English translations may use “world” to render at least three different Greek words!
κόσμος 1 John 2:2, etc.; οἰκουμένη Revelation 3:10, etc.; γῆ Revelation 13:3.
[8] John R. Kohlenberger III, Edward W. Goodrick, James A Swanson, The Greek-English Concordance to the New Testament With The New International Version (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1997) 539, 589.
[9] https://www.billmounce.com/greek-dictionary/pas
[10] W. Bauer, F.W. Danker, W.F. Arndt, and F.W. Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 782.
[11] https://www.billmounce.com/greek-dictionary/holos
[12] W. Bauer, F.W. Danker, W.F. Arndt, and F.W. Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 704.
[13] James Hope Moulton and George Milligan, The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1976), 446.
[14] W. Bauer, F.W. Danker, W.F. Arndt, and F.W. Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 708.