“The believer may fall into sin, but he will not walk in it.”

Download discussion questions:  1 John 2:28-3:12
Jump to beginning of 1 John Discussion Group Blog
Jump to Introduction to 1,2,3 John

More than one person in our group shared the experience (either in the past or in the present) of avoiding this first letter of John, especially the present passage in 1 John 3.  The message was described as “scary” and “unyielding.”  Reading John’s inflexible pronouncements about sin in terms of “everyone” and “anyone” and “no one” can stimulate uncomfortable doubts about salvation.

Christ’s Person, Christ’s Purpose

After one person read the passage aloud, our discussion started with a few observations about the text.  John repeatedly describes Jesus and His character.  John highlights that Christ is:

• • Righteous (2:29a)
  • Pure (3:3b)
  • Without sin (3:5)
  • Righteous (3:7c)

Each of these descriptions forms the basis of an immediate inference:  genuine believers follow His model (2:29b, 3:3a, 3:6, 3:7b).  This is a theme John has stated before.

By this we know that we are in Him:  the one who says he abides in Him ought himself to walk in the same manner as He walked.
(1 John 2:5b-6)

That theme is supported further by another point repeated by John in this passage.  Twice he reminds his readers of the purpose of the Incarnation.

You know that He appeared in order to take away sins; and in Him there is no sin.
(1 John 3:5, emphasis added)

The Son of God appeared for this purpose, to destroy the works of the devil.
(1 John 3:8b, emphasis added)

Take Away Sins

The first reason that “He appeared” echoes the words of John the Baptist at the beginning of the ministry of Jesus.

Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!
(John 1:29, emphasis added)

“Take away” (αἴρω, airō) used figuratively by the Baptist is used more literally a short time later by Jesus confronting the entrepreneurs in the temple.

and to those who were selling the doves He said, “Take these things away; stop making My Father’s house a place of business.
(John 2:29, emphasis added)

Numerous other uses in the gospel according to John express the idea of displacing or clearing out, such as the healed man carrying away his mat (John 5:8-12) or Jesus’ command to remove the stone from the tomb of Lazarus (John 11:39-41).

Although we did not discuss the meaning of “take away sins” in detail, that phrase is worth further consideration.  Probably the first meaning that comes to mind is the forgiveness of sins that Jesus accomplished.  However, John has already described that forgiveness (1:9, 2:12) and cleansing (1:7, 9) and propitiation (2:2) earlier in his letter.  Perhaps he intends an additional sense here, “to atone for sins of the past and prevent sins in the future.”[1]

John has already spoken of Jesus’s propitiatory work…through his death and intercession.  Now he points to an application of it.  The presumed sins of some (3:4,6) stand in contrast to the central purpose of Christ’s coming: to remove sin, both in terms of forgiveness of sins past and elimination of sin (esp. in the sense of ἀνομία, anomia) in daily life.[2]

Another writer even translates airō as “abolish.”

…the thought is not simply that of the self-sacrifice of Jesus, but of the opposition to sin which he expressed on the cross.  He came to “abolish” sins, and not only to “bear” them.[3]

One aspect of the purpose for which “he appeared” was taking away sin.  That purpose ultimately will be accomplished in the new heaven and the new earth (Revelation 21) when

He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.  He who was seated on the throne said, “I am making everything new!”
(vv. 4-5)..

John makes it clear that the work of renewal has already started with “His appearance,” the incarnation.

Undo the Works of the Devil

The second image John offers is that Jesus came to “destroy the works of the devil.”  The word used here (λύω, luō) has even a wider range of meaning.[4]  Consider two examples from John’s writings.

It is He who comes after me, the thong of whose sandal I am not worthy to untie.
(John 1:27, emphasis added)

Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.
(John 2:19)

Which image does John have in mind about the “works of the devil:”  loosening a shoelace or demolishing a massive stone building?

We looked for an area of overlap between those two English definitions, “destroy” and “loosen.” One person in our group suggested that the word “undo” would fit both contexts as well as our immediate passage.  “The Son of God appeared for this purpose, to undo the works of the devil.”

That translation, “undo,” is used in two English versions, including the Wycliffe Bible of 1382[5] and the more modern Amplified Bible.[6]  The Geneva Bible (1599) translates the word as “loose”[7] as in releasing the devil’s grip.

Someone also asked the question, “What are ‘the works of the devil’”?  Rather than spending the rest of the day enumerating a very long list, someone summarized well. “Works of the devil” are anything that opposes God, everything that is not righteous, everything that is not in keeping with God’s perfect character.  A person reminded us of John’s early summary of his message,

This is the message we have heard from Him and announce to you, that God is Light, and in Him there is no darkness at all.
(1 John 1:5)

The works of the devil are any expression of ungodliness, any darkness that obscures God’s light..

Another person brought back an important distinction we have discussed in the past:  self obsession versus God obsession.  Taking away sin and undoing the works of the devil would certainly include replacing self obsession (“Nothing matters more than my comfort at any cost to others”) with God obsession (“nothing matters more than God’s glory at any cost to myself”).

That clear distinction provides practical and personal images to the Biblical language of flesh and Spirit.

Everyone and Anyone

John emphasizes Christ’s purity and purpose.  Because there is no sin in Him (v. 5b), abolishing sin and undoing the works of the devil are natural consequences of His appearing.  Then John goes into more detail about the implications of those truths.

John uses a combination of positive and negative assertions. He may be addressing possible “loopholes” used by “those trying to deceive” the believers.  To emphasize that there are no exceptions, he frames his statements in the broadest possible terms.

• • Everyone who has this hope fixedon Him purifies himself (v. 3)
  • Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness (v. 4a)
  • No one who abides in Him sins (v.6a)
  • No one who sins has seen Him or knows Him (v. 6b)
  • The one who practices righteousness is righteous (v. 7b)
  • The one who practices sin is of the devil (v. 8a)
  • No one who is born of God practices sin (v. 9a)
  • Anyone who does not practice righteousness is not of God (v. 10b)

No wonder many people find 1 John to be “scary” reading.

As seen earlier in this letter, John uses literary structure very deliberately for emphasis (e.g., 1 John 1:1-4,[8] 2:12-14,[9] 2:24a[10]).  His style helps his audience remember his message.  That factor in John’s writing became noticeable when I put together the bullet points above.  Consider how those eight statements group together into pairs of similar styles.

Parallel statements
.     A indicates B
.     A indicates B

• • Everyone who has this hopefixed on Him purifies himself (v. 3)
  • Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness (v. 4a)

Alternating (chiastic) statements
.     A indicates B
.     B indicates A

• • No one who abides in Him sins (v.6a)
  • No one who sins has seen Him or knows Him (v. 6b)

Parallel statements

• • The one who practices righteousness is righteous (v. 7b)
  • The one who practices sin is of the devil (v. 8a)

Alternating (chiastic) statements

• • No one who is born of God practices sin (v. 9a)
  • Anyone who does not practice righteousness is not of God (v. 10b)

This structure may well not have been in John’s mind as he wrote, and, admittedly, some of these “pairs” of statements are separated by several other words or phrases in the original language (twenty-eight words between vv. 9a and 10b).  But certainly, the parallel and contrasting concepts are there to make an impression on the minds of the recipients.[11]

The reflexive response to those emphatic and memorable statements can be devastating when taken out of context.  The logic is simple and certain.

1. 1. No one who sins is in Christ.
   2. I sin.
   3. Therefore, I must not be in Christ.

However, John has already dealt with the reality of Christians, those genuinely “in Christ,” those who truly know Him:

• • If we walk in the Light as He Himself is in the Light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from all sin. (1:7)
  • If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. (1:9)
  • My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous; (2:1)
  • He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those ofthe whole world. (2:2)

Early in his letter, John establishes the secure standing of saved sinners.  In between those first two promises of cleansing (v. 7) and forgiveness (v. 9), the apostle contradicts claims to perfection.

If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us.
(1 John 1:8)

As one member of our group pointed out, there are two possible explanations.  Did John change his mind between the beginning of the letter and this present passage?  Or are these several statements completely consistent in John’s thinking (if not immediately in our thinking)?

Rejecting the first alternative we explored the second.  It is possible for authentic believers to sin (a possibility that is proved daily for each of us!).

Sin is Lawlessness

John introduces this “scary” section with an opening statement that is easy to overlook.

Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness.
(1 John 3:4)

When attention is fixed on phrases like “no one abiding in Him sins,” we can tend to ignore details about definitions.  We already know all too well what sin is.  If “lawlessness” (ἀνομία, anomia) is different, what is the difference?

John makes a point.  Someone suggested that he is equating the two, that sin is exactly the same as lawlessness.  But another person commented that this would amount to a truism or a pointless platitude:  “Sin is sin.”  While that might be profound in another context, it doesn’t fit the flow of John’s argument.  Instead, he is making a distinction that is critical to correctly interpreting what follows.  He is emphasizing a particular aspect of sin that he categorizes as “lawlessness.”

John is building a case against the person who wishes to be known as a Christian and yet who defends those practices and attitudes that God has defined as sin. To do such a thing is to be lawless and reject God’s authority.[12]

That category of sin is his focus in these “scary” verses (3:3-10).

… that anomia is the key to understanding these difficult statements.” When “sin” (ἁμαρτία) is first mentioned in this passage in 3:4, it is identified there with anomia, …* to designate a category of sin that is identified with lawlessness (“and sin is lawlessness,” ἡ ἁμαρτία ἐστὶν ἡ ἀνομία). This suggests that John is not referring to every sin as anomia, but is concerned with the sin that leads to eschatological judgment (i.e., apostasy). John will later say in 5:16-17 that there is sin that does not lead to death.[13]

Our group discussed what “lawlessness” might mean.  The word itself is expressive, “law-less,” without law (or a-nomia, “no law”). Other suggestions included “acting opposite from the law,” or “a law to yourself.”  These ideas suggested more, “ungoverned” and “disregard for authority.”

“Lawlessness” (anomia) is used in the Greek translation of the Old Testament (LXX).

A variation of ποιῶν τὴν ἀνομίαν [doing lawlessness] in the LXX is (ergazomenos ten anomian, performing sin), a phrase that occurs sixteen times in the Psalms and always refers to those who have resolutely turned away from God, to the point that they can no longer be regarded as his people but are in fact now his enemies.[14]

For example,

For thou art not a God that desires iniquity [anomian]
Neither shall the working of wickedness dwell with thee.
Neither shall the transgressors continue in thy sight:
Thou hatest, O Lord, all them that work iniquity [anomian].
(Psalm 5:4,5, LXX)[15]

The idea of lawlessness and the examples from Scripture indicate more than the sin in a moment.  John is describing the “practice” or “doing” (ποιῶν, poiōn, vv. 3:4, 8, 9) sin, what one person called a “perpetual state” of sin.  Another comment from our discussion described the condition as a “calloused conscience.”  John is defining the character of “those who are trying to deceive you.” He is also highlighting the seriousness of sin and the danger of ignoring the significance of sin.

To commit sinful acts (many of which John has alluded to in the epistle thus far) is to flirt with apostate behavior and consequences (3:4a); this is so because, quite simply, chronic sin (which bedevils all humans [1:8, 10] but can be forgiven if repented of [1:9; 2:1]) can progress to the level of ἀνομία, at which point it saddles one with a guilt from which there is no remission because it is not inadvertent but rather heinous rebellion that reflects one’s confirmed inner character, not just incidental (though serious) misdeeds.[16]

John’s intended perspective is not to make the “scary” verses bland or “safe.”  His warnings remind his readers to consider their attitude toward sin.  As someone suggested in our discussion, an appropriate response is to ask, “Do I practice lawlessness?”  At the same time we avoid hopelessness by remembering, as was said in our group, “Failure is not lawlessness.  Indifference is lawlessness.”  Or in the words of a writer in a past century,

The believer may fall into sin, but he will not walk in it.[17]

Do I Practice Lawlessness?

We considered what “practicing lawlessness” looks like.  The essence of lawlessness is an indifference to sin, and in particular, a life characterized by self-obsession and without true repentance.  We briefly reviewed previous discussions about the cycle of spiritual formation that can move us from self obsession to God obsession.

A common problem that many of us share is a distortion at the very beginning of that cycle.  True repentance begins with brokenness, recognizing our self obsession.  But our response to our sin is often despair or shame.  Embarrassment substitutes for sorrow over sin.  Our pride is wounded because of our weakness, but there is no genuine sorrow before a holy God.  And embarrassment eventually fades away – the potential for growing anomia, lawlessness.

Someone suggested that the sense of shame has a deterrent value that can help us avoid similar sin in the future, and several people agreed.  Another suggestion was to use the experience of our sin to explore more of our inner world.  Avoiding sin in the future is certainly a good thing.  But understanding the self-protective or self-obsessive energy that drives that sin can help.  Curiosity can help us understand why we repeatedly fail in certain areas – anger, or lust, or boasting, or envy, or sarcasm, or any of a dozen other destructive behaviors.

Being curious means asking ourselves (and even more importantly, inviting others to ask us), “What goes on inside that leads to a self-obsessed reaction?”

• • What drives my negative response in specific circumstances?
  • How is self-protection part of my reaction?
  • What is being threatened that I have to defend – my reputation, my security, my comfort?

Those kinds of questions are the heart of soul-care – in a small-group setting or in one-on-one conversations.

That discussion produced a helpful distinction.  Our response to our own sinful acts or attitudes or words can be curiosity rather than shame.  Can we (along with other believers) explore our self obsession?  Can understanding our inner motivations help us overcome sinful responses to difficult circumstances?

Too often, “sharing” in small groups is only about being heard but not about spiritual formation.  Helping each other explore the roots of self-obsession (or even the existence of some self-obsessed behavior) dramatically changes the power of that community in one another’s life.  We can help each other recognize and combat sin before it becomes lawlessness.

Hills and Valleys

John’s stark contrasts must be considered together to understand his letter.  Sin is a reality in the Christian life.  Fellowship with the Triune God is available through gracious forgiveness and cleansing.  At the same time, sin as lawlessness is utterly inconsistent with genuine belief and trust in Christ.  As a group member observed, the Christian life consists of many hills and valleys and, as another person added, occasional U-turns and even cliffs.  We need each other to help us understand and navigate through our own self obsession into greater growing God obsession.

John offers a strong indication of his intended emphasis in his summary statement.

By this the children of God and the children of the devil are obvious: anyone who does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor the one who does not love his brother.
(1 John 3:10)

The apostle’s best illustration of “practicing righteousness” is expressed as “loving his brother.”  The key indicator of spiritual parentage is relational holiness, how we relate to others.

The ἀγάπη [love] is not a part of the δικαιοσύνη [righteousness], still less something different from the δικαιοσύνη, which must be connected with it, or even forms an antithesis to it; but it is the essence and nature of the δικαιοσύνη.[18]

John will continue to repeat and to develop this topic through the rest of his letter.  May we continue to learn from him in order to love one another.

---

[1] David Smith, The Epistles of John, The Expositor’s Greek Testament, Volume Five (Grand Rapids, Michigan:  Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1976), 184; emphasis added.

[2] Robert W. Yarbrough, 1-3 John, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan:  Baker Academic, 2008), 185-186.

[3] Stephen S. Smalley, 1,2,3 John, Word Biblical Commentary (Waco, Texas: Word Books, Publisher, 1984), 156; emphasis in the original (alluding to Westcott, Epistles of John, 103).

[4] https://www.billmounce.com/greek-dictionary/lyo

[5] https://www.textusreceptusbibles.com/Wycliffe/62/3

[6] https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20John%203%3A8&version=AMPC

[7] https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20John%203%3A7-9&version=GNV

[8] https://www.goodnotsafe.com/relational-joy/#:~:text=style%20and%20structure

[9] https://www.goodnotsafe.com/strong-words/#:~:text=dramatic%20shift%20in%20tone

[10] https://www.goodnotsafe.com/remember-to-remain/#:~:text=almost%20poetic%20form

[11] It is noteworthy that the parallel and chiastic structures appear even more prominent in the original.  For example, all the statements begin with either πᾶς ὁ (“every one”) or ὁ ποιῶν (“the one doing”):

πᾶς ὁ ἔχων τὴν ἐλπίδα ταύτην ἐπ’ αὐτῷ ἁγνίζει ἑαυτὸν (v. 3)
πᾶς ὁ ποιῶν τὴν ἁμαρτίαν καὶ τὴν ἀνομίαν ποιεῖ, (v. 4a)
.
πᾶς ὁ ἐν αὐτῷ μένων οὐχ ἁμαρτάνει (v. 6a)
πᾶς ὁ ἁμαρτάνων οὐχ ἑώρακεν αὐτὸν οὐδὲ ἔγνωκεν αὐτόν (v. 6b)
.
ὁ ποιῶν τὴν δικαιοσύνην δίκαιός ἐστιν (v. 7b)
ὁ ποιῶν τὴν ἁμαρτίαν ἐκ τοῦ διαβόλου ἐστίν (v. 8a)
.
πᾶς ὁ γεγεννημένος ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ ἁμαρτίαν οὐ ποιεῖ (v. 9a)
πᾶς ὁ μὴ ποιῶν δικαιοσύνην οὐκ ἔστιν ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ (v. 10b)

[12] Karen H. Jobes, 1, 2, and 3 John, Zondervan Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Academic, 2014), 144.

[13] Karen H. Jobes, 1, 2, and 3 John, Zondervan Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Academic, 2014), 147-148;
* The more technical grammatical part of the explanation omitted in the ellipsis is:
“…and both Greek words have the definite article. Because neither article is anaphoric, referring back to a specific previously mentioned sin in the immediate context, the article functions to designate…”

[14] Robert W. Yarbrough, 1-3 John, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan:  Baker Academic, 2008), 181-182, emphasis added.

[15] Sir Lancelot C. L. Brenton, trans., The Septuagint with Apocrypha: Greek and English (Carol Stream, Illinois: Hendrickson Publishers, 2007), 700.

[16] Robert W. Yarbrough, 1-3 John, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan:  Baker Academic, 2008), 182.

[17] David Smith, The Epistles of John, The Expositor’s Greek Testament, Volume Five (Grand Rapids, Michigan:  Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1976), 184; first published 1897).

[18] Meyer’s NT Commentary, https://biblehub.com/commentaries/1_john/3-10.htm