What is the Story with 1 John 1:9? (Part Two)

Posted By Ken Brown on August 29, 2009

1 John 1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

In Part One we examined the contextual evidence showing that 1 John 1:9 is addressed to those not yet born-again and is regarding what they must do to be cleansed of their unrighteousness and come into partnership with God. Part Two will offer further evidence of this truth and examine more fully what the sin of 1 John 1 refers to.

The purpose of this epistle of John is consistent with the purpose of the gospel of John as stated in John 20.

John 20:30 And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book:
31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

This does not mean, however that the entire epistle is addressed only to those not yet born-again. Both groups are included as is indicated by 1 John 5:13. The King James Version is in error with its rendering of this verse because it was translated from Stephens critical Greek text. (See our posting “An Introduction to Biblical Research” for a discussion on why The New American Bible, among others, is more accurate for this verse. )

1 John 5:13 I write these things to you so that you may know that you have eternal life, you who believe in the name of the Son of God. [NAB]

Parts of 1 John are certainly for those who have already attained eternal life, but much of it is to convince others to accept God’s son.

Some have taught that 1 John 1:9 cannot be about the unbeliever’s need to get saved and thus be cleansed of his unrighteousness, because salvation is dependent on confessing Jesus Christ as lord and believing God raised him from the dead, not confessing one’s sin.

Romans 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

This argument would be convincing if the narrative ended with verse 9, but it doesn’t. Forget about the verse and chapter divisions. The epistle must be taken as a whole. Recognizing one’s separation from God and thus his need for the Savior is not all that is necessary for salvation, but it is the first step. After one recognizes his need for a savior, then he must also accept the Savior and John continues on in his writing to convince people to do so.

Consider the following from 1 John:

2:1 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:
2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

2:8 Again, a new commandment I write unto you, which thing is true in him and in you: because the darkness is past, and the true light now shineth.
9 He that saith he is in the light, and hateth his brother, is in darkness even until now.
10 He that loveth his brother abideth in the light, and there is none occasion of stumbling in him.
11 But he that hateth his brother is in darkness, and walketh in darkness, and knoweth not whither he goeth, because that darkness hath blinded his eyes.
12 I write unto you, little children, because your sins are forgiven you for his [the "brother's", Jesus Christ's] name’s sake.

2:22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.
23 Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: (but) he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also.

3:5 And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin.

3:15 Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him.
16 Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he [the "brother" of verse 15] laid down his life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren.

3:23 And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment.

4:2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:

4:9 In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him.
10 Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.

4:14 And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the world.
15 Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God.

5:1 Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and every one that loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him.

5:5 Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God?

5:9 If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: for this is the witness of God which he hath testified of his Son.
10 He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son.
11 And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.
12 He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.

Throughout this epistle, John never gets far from the topic of who Jesus is and the need to accept him. There are, of course, other topics like loving one another, but how could anyone claim that reaching out to people to accept God’s son is not a major focus of this epistle?

We should also carefully consider the word, “sin,” and how it is used in this epistle. The two verses surrounding 1 John 1:9 are illuminating regarding who this section is addressed to.

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

1 John 1:10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.

And yet, later in this epistle we read:

1 John 3: 5 And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin.
6 Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him.
7 Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous.
8
He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.
9 Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.

1 John 5: 18 We know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not; but he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not.

So which is it? Are we who are born of God unable to sin or are we deceiving ourselves and calling God a liar if we say that we don’t?

The resolution to this apparent conflict is twofold. First, as was pointed out in Part One, the “we” of 1 John 1:6-10 does not include the apostle John. It is the euphemistic “we” used when the desire is to soften the statement. The “we” of verses 6-10 refers to the same group of people as the “you” of verses 1-5. (See Part One for documentation of this. ) These people did not have koinonia with John as John had with the Father. They were not born again. 1 John 3:9 and 5:18 above clearly address the condition of those who are born again. 1 John 1:6-10 addresses the condition of people who are not born again.

Second, none of these records (1 John 1:8-10, 3:9, and 5:18) make much sense without applying the appropriate definition of “sin.” Most people think of sin as doing bad things, and certainly that is one thing the word “sin” can mean, but it isn’t the only definition. The Greek word commonly translated “sin” (and the one occurring in the above records) is the noun hamartia. The verb form is hamartano. This is the information from Strong’s lexicon:

266 a`marti,a hamartia {ham-ar-tee’-ah}

Meaning: 1) equivalent to 264 1a) to be without a share in 1b) to miss the mark 1c) to err, be mistaken 1d) to miss or wander from the path of uprightness and honour, to do or go wrong 1e) to wander from the law of God, violate God’s law, sin 2) that which is done wrong, sin, an offence, a violation of the divine law in thought or in act 3) collectively, the complex or aggregate of sins committed either by a single person or by many

Origin: from 264; TDNT – 1:267,44; n f

Usage: AV – sin 172, sinful 1, offense 1; 174

264 a`marta,nw hamartano {ham-ar-tan’-o}

Meaning: 1) to be without a share in 2) to miss the mark 3) to err, be mistaken 4) to miss or wander from the path of uprightness and honour, to do or go wrong 5) to wander from the law of God, violate God’s law, sin

Origin: perhaps from 1 (as a negative particle) and the base of 3313; TDNT – 1:267,44; v

Usage: AV – sin 38, trespass 3, offend 1, for your faults 1; 43

3313 me,roj meros {mer’-os}

Meaning: 1) a part 1a) a part due or assigned to one 1b) lot, destiny 2) one of the constituent parts of a whole 2a) in part, partly, in a measure, to some degree, as respects a part, severally, individually 2b) any particular, in regard to this, in this respect

Origin: from an obsolete but more primary form of meiromai (to get as a section or allotment);  TDNT – 4:594,585; n n

Usage:  AV – part 24, portion 3, coast 3, behalf 2, respect 2, misc 9; 43

Clearly, the definitions include the usual associations of “to miss the mark,”  ”to err, be mistaken” etc. But the FIRST definition given is too often ignored, “to be without a share in,” (not meros, not a part) and this is the only meaning that can fit each of the above records from 1 John.

Koinonia, translated “fellowship”  in the KJV, means, “to have a share in.” Hamartia, translated “sin” in the KJV, means, “to be without a share in.” These two are set in direct contrast in chapter one. People either have a share in God or they do not. Those who have not accepted the light of the world, do not. If they will acknowledge that they have no share in God and accept God’s son, then God will cleanse them of their unrighteousness.

In chapters 3 and 5 of 1 John, we see that whoever does not have a share in God is of the Devil. (This cannot be talking about born-again believers who do something bad. ) We also see that whoever is born of God can never be without a share in God because His seed will remain in him. 1 Peter calls it incorruptible seed.

1 Peter 1:23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

When one confesses Jesus as lord and believes God raised him from the dead, God gives him salvation and righteousness before Him (Romans 10:9 & 10). He becomes born of God with incorruptible seed that can never be lost; a partnership forms that can never be dissolved. Such a one can never ever again be without a share in The Almighty God.

1 John 1:9 is not addressed to people who already have this share. It is a portion of the apostle John’s discourse to bring more people into having this share in God as His sons and daughters.



------------------------------------------------

All links to external websites are for reference purposes only and do not necessarily represent the opinions or beliefs of BrownBible.com

------------------------------------------------

We invite you to participate. Please rate this article and/or its comments by clicking on the stars or thumbs. Or better yet, join the conversation by leaving a comment of your own.

Help us get the word out to the rest of the world by sharing this article with your favorite social network. It's easy too! Just click on the icons shown at the end of every article. We recommend sharing with your friends at FaceBook & Twitter. Also, please share with Digg, StumbleUpon, Del.icio.us & Propeller.

VN:F [1.7.9_1023]
Rate this article:
Rating: 5.0/5 (2 votes cast)
What is the Story with 1 John 1:9? (Part Two)5.052
  • PrintFriendly
  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • MySpace
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo Buzz
  • Diigo
  • Faves
  • Mister-Wong
  • BuddyMarks
  • Bebo
  • Propeller
  • Shoutwire
  • Jumptags
  • Mixx
  • Reddit
  • Squidoo
  • Connotea
  • Folkd
  • Blinklist
  • Ask.com MyStuff
  • Google Reader
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Windows Live Favorites
  • Windows Live Spaces
  • Gmail
  • Delicious
  • AOL Mail
  • AIM
  • Yahoo Bookmarks
  • Yahoo Messenger
  • Yahoo Mail
  • Hotmail
  • BibSonomy
  • Share/Bookmark
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Related posts

About the author

Ken Brown

Ken Brown

Ken Brown received his Bachelor of Arts degree in Mathematics in 1971 and earned his Bachelor of Theology degree in 1974. He was ordained in 1975 and served many years in full time Christian ministry. He has worked as a Biblical research editor for an internationally published Christian magazine and has served as senior faculty for a variety of college level Biblical research oriented classes.

Comments

3 Responses to “What is the Story with 1 John 1:9? (Part Two)”

  1. [...] What is the Story with 1 John 1:9? (Part Two) VN:F [1.6.3_896]Rate this article:please wait…Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)Bookmark to your favorite Social Network (hover over icon for name): [...]

  2. Danny M says:
    UN:F [1.7.9_1023]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Hi Ken. I wanted to examine your view of the way “sin” (hamartia) is used in 1 John. Your point seems to be that in this epistle it refers to not having a share in God. While “to be without a share in” is a definition for hamartia according to Strong’s , I can’t find one instance of that use elsewhere in the NT. Perhaps it is used that way in secular Greek literature – I just don’t see it in the NT. You conclude that sin doesn’t refer to bad things in 1 John 3:9. The problem is that the context disagrees. 3:4 states that all sin is lawlessness (Gk – anomia). 3:8 states that the devil has sinned from the beginning, and the verse makes it clear that it is indeed talking about the devil doing bad things, since Jesus came to destroy the sinful works of the devil. Then in 3:10-24, John narrows his focus on failure to love the brethren, which he touched on previously in 2:9-11. The topic of love continues through chapter 4 and into chapter 5 (4:7-21, especially verses 20-21, and 5:1-3). Of course 3:23-5:3 also talks about belief in the Son, so in chapters 3-5, we see John focusing on belief in the Son and love for the brethren. 3:23 shows that “keeping His commandments” refers only to 2 things – believing in the Son and loving the brethren. 3:9-10 either refers to lawlessness in general (b/c of verses 1-8) or it specifically refers to not loving the brethren, as 10-24 focuses on that topic. 5:18 is re-statement of 3:9-10 – but notice that the preceding verses 5:16-17 give advice about praying for believers committing sins that don’t lead to death, but not praying for those who commit sin leading to death. So 5:18 seems to refer to sin in the general sense, and it’s a re-statement of 3:9. Even 1 John 2:1 obviously refers to Jesus interceding for believers who sin (obviously the “not having a share in” definition won’t work here since the sinning believer does indeed have a share in God).

    Now, you also say that believers always abide in God since their sins are forgiven. For the reasons mentioned above, I still see “abiding” as having nothing to do with salvation. 1 John 3:17 is clear that the believer who shuts up his heart to another believer in need doesn’t have the love of God abiding in Him. Ken, since you take the view that abiding is a salvation issue and not a behavioral issue, what do you do with 1 John 3:17? Do you believe that all believers always love the brethren ? You would have to conclude that to be consistent with your own view. We’ve already established that John only has 2 commandments – belief in the Son and love for the brethren. Look at 3:23-24 – whoever keeps these 2 commandments abides in Him, and He in Him. We know that Christians don’t always love one another, and that’s exactly why I can’t see “abiding” as a salvation issue. I agree with you that all of our sins for all time are forgiven at the moment we believe, and I think we both agree that Christians can stop believing as well as act unlovingly. I think you can see why your view on “abiding” puts you in a tough spot. John believes that loving the brethren, as well as continued belief, is how you abide. If you say that 3:17 refers to pre-Gnostics refusing to help Christians you would still be in a tough spot. If that were true, then any believer can brush off 3:17 by saying that it only refers to those who deny that Jesus came in the flesh refusing to help Christians. Look at 4:8 – He who does not love does not know God. Do you really want to make that a salvation issue? Compare 1 John 3 to John 15 – John was obviously referring back to John 15 when he penned 1 John 3. John 15:2 introduces the idea of bearing fruit, and this is done through abiding. Read all of John 15 – notice the connection between abidng, bearing fruit, and love. Notice that 15:2-6 is clear that a “branch in Jesus” that does not abide is taken away and burned (this can’t refer to salvation). Now I have a friend who takes your view that believers always abide regardless of behavior. He says that John 15:2 only refers to the members of national Israel prior to the death and Resurection. He claims that all unbelieving Jews were “branches in Jesus” in the sense that Jesus was among them. Those who came to faith, according to my friend, were made to permanently abide after the death and Resurrection. I don’t buy it, especially since John continues to tie love for the brethren as part of abiding in his epistle, 1 John. My friend also says the loving the brethren has nothing to do with actions – that’s nonsense in light of the plain meaning of the text and 3:17. The bearing fruit in John 15:2,5,8,16 is tied to love (see 15:9-12, 17, etc.) , which is tied in with abiding. Look at John 15:10,12,17 – abiding in Jesus’ love by keeping the commandments to believe and love. And again, the context of 1 John 3:9-10 includes general lawlessness (3:1-8) and failure to love the brethren (3:10-24). 3:9-10 either refers to all sins, or just failing to love the brethren. As you can see, I haven’t fully solved what 3:9-10 is saying. The habitual sin view of these verses fails in light of Paul’s epistles – not all believers persevere. The new man vs. old-man view is unsatisfactory as well. Ken, I’d appreciate your response on all of these points.

  3. Danny M says:
    UN:F [1.7.9_1023]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Hi again Ken. Let me clarify something I said at the end of my first post. I agree with you that there aren’t two natures within us. I agree that the old man refers to me before I was saved, and that the new man refers to me after salvation. What I was saying is that I don’t buy the interpretation of 1 John 3:9 that says that “he who is born of God” only refers to the incorruptible seed within you, not your total person. That is, this interpretation says that a believer never sins as a result of the incorruptible seed within him (interpreted as one component of you called the new man), but sins as a result of the old man within him. This interpretation sees children of God and children of the devil as experiential terms – that is, it sees a sinning believer as positionally a child of God, but experientially a child of the devil. In other words, this interpretation says that believers only sin as a result of the “old nature.” The new nature within you is sinless. I think it’s clear that “He who is born of God” refers to our total person, not a part of us. 3:9b wouldn’t make sense if 3:9a doesn’t refer to the total person. 3:9b says that Jesus’ seed remains in him – this can’t mean that Jesus’ seed remains in your incorruptible seed – that would be nonsensical – there is only one seed, Jesus’ seed. It makes more sense that 3:9a refers to the total person. The compartmental view is essentially saying that “the incorruptible seed in you does not sin, for Jesus’ seed remains in your seed.” There’s only one seed, not two! But like I said in my previous comment, it’s obvious that from Paul’s epistles, and the Synoptics, that believers are eternally secure, yet can fail in the Christian life. It becomes a reward issue. Going back to my previous comment, 1 John 3 deals with sin in general in verses 1-8, and specifically failing to love the brethren in verses 10-24. Please consider my first post very carefully, especially the part about 3:17.

Leave a Reply

 

Christian Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory Web Analytics