The other day I wrote about Sinless Perfection from the standpoint of 1 John 3. It was more of a question, actually. The question was this: Is 1 John 3 demanding that all who are born of God be completely without sin? That's the way it appears to stand, and I'm not one who is willing to have my version of reality define Scripture, so if that's what it says, that's what I'll believe. On the other hand, if there is reason to believe otherwise, then it is only wise to look for it.
The only reason that I can think of to say that Scripture does not mean what it appears to say is if it defies Scripture. Most people will be glad to mitigate a passage if it defies science or personal experience or personal opinion. I'm not willing to do that. Context determines meaning. All of Scripture is within the context of all of Scripture. So without too much rigamarole, I prefer to take it at what it seems to be saying rather than what I'd prefer it to say. Of course there's room for figures of speech. Scripture makes exaggerations to make a point, sure. There is poetic language to take into account. You need to see the difference between a proverbial truth (true most of the time) and an absolute truth. There is phenomenological language, language that expresses something as it appears, such as "sunrise" even though we know the sun doesn't actually rise. A narrative is a narrative, not a myth. Wisdom writings tell us how to live, not necessarily direct doctrine. That sort of thing. So what about 1 John 3?
This epistle isn't written as a poem or a narrative. John appears to be expressing absolute truth. So there aren't any mitigating factors there. What I do see is a problem of contradiction. As an example, within the epistle itself, John writes, "If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness" (1 John 1:8-9). It would appear from this that John is saying that we do sin and denial of that fact is a lie. Further, he says, "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; and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world" (1 John 2:1-2). "If anyone sins, we have an Advocate." If 1 John 3 was intended to say that it is impossible for those who are born of God to sin, then it is a direct contradiction here. And at the end of the letter, John writes, "If anyone sees his brother committing a sin not leading to death, he shall ask and God will for him give life to those who commit sin not leading to death" (1 John 5:16). As Ruth pointed out, the reference isn't to just anyone; it's to a "brother" ... a believer. Factor in the fact that no biblical character except Christ ever achieved sinless perfection. Paul says quite clearly in multiple places that he struggled with sin. And remember when Peter fell into the trap of pride, siding with the legalists rather than with the truth that we are saved apart from works? No, there is not one single example of a sinless person with the exception of Christ.
Assuming, then, that Scripture is God's Word and cannot contradict itself, how can we correlate 1 John 3 with the rest of 1 John and the rest of Scripture? Well, the King James doesn't help much at this, but more modern, literal translations all pick up on the fact that the verb in every verse regarding the topic uses a tense that we don't actually have in English, a present, ongoing verb tense. Thus, while the King James says "committeth sin" and things like that, more careful modern translations say things like "practices sin". This makes all the difference. If we accept that other portions of 1 John agree that genuine believers can sin, then this must be saying that the distinction is in the ongoing practice of sin. True believers, John is saying, are incapable of sinning with impunity. They don't like sin. When they commit it, they hate it and repent. They don't defend it, but try to find ways to stop. Sin in the true believer's life is troubling, not casual.
This interpretation takes into account the language and the context. It eliminates contradictions without falling back on personal opinion, preference, or even experience. Are you comfortable with your sin? That, John is saying, is cause for worry. It is impossible for those born of God to be comfortable sinning. Do you find that you're happy explaining why sin is not sin? You need to check yourself. This is a biblical test from John. Are you capable of maintaining ongoing sin without a personal problem? You need to be concerned. This is a biblical test from John. Something to think about.
1 comment:
Excellent post. It conjures discussions over the practice of homosexual behavior. There is a great drive within the body of Christ to convince the rest that this behavior is benign as long as it's done in a particular way. Others support abortion, which to me suggests in reality a non-Biblical understanding of proper sexual behavior, as well as the obvious taking of an innocent life. And of course there was the recent story of a British pastor proclaiming that the poor could go ahead and steal.
The hard part is when others, particularly Christians, ARE comfortable in their sin and cannot be persuaded of their mistake. Quite sad.
Post a Comment