Clear as Mud

I've come across this verse many times.

No one who is born of God practices sin, because His seed abides in him; and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. (1 John 3:9)

On one hand, it seems abundantly clear. On the other, it seems extremely vague. Part of the confusion arises in that first claim: "No one who is born of God practices sin." It's problematic because some translations say something like "The one born of God does not sin." "Well," we counter, "that can't be right." Why? "Because we all sin."

Let me just say that that's the wrong answer. "My experience" doesn't trump God's Word. We do that often and it's not reasonable to conclude that God must be wrong because it's not our experience. Before you complain too much, though, it is still true that the "does not sin" version is not correct. Why? Because it violates God's Word. Ah, now, that is a good reason. You see, John wrote, "If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us." (1 John 1:8) So we must not say we don't ever sin. Instead, John wrote, "Beloved, now we are children of God, and it has not appeared as yet what we will be. We know that when He appears, we will be like Him, because we will see Him just as He is." (1 John 3:2) So it isn't until He appears that we will be completely without sin and not before. So the text has to mean something else.

That's why newer translations take the verb tense into account. That verb for "sin" in Greek is a present active participle -- an ongoing present tense. It's not past tense or even present, but present active. So the NASB and the ESV and others translate it in a present active tense with "make a practice of." It's not referring to an event; it's referring to a practice, a habit, a continuous direction. The one who is born of God has the Spirit of God in them and cannot make peace with sin, make sin a friend, be perfectly fine with sinning, just go on sinning as though no war needs to be made against it and nothing will come of it if we do. It's not referring to the "If we confess our sins" (1 John 1:9) category of sinning, but the one who indulges and enjoys and even defends sin.

Well, that clears that up. Or, does it? Not in my experience. Despite the clarity of the text, I cannot tell you the number of genuine, Bible-believing Christians who tell me that verse doesn't mean what it says. That verse specifies "cannot" when speaking in terms of the one born of God maintaining a practice of sin. No ability to do so. Doesn't happen. That's the word. They still tell me "Well, that can't be right." Why? At this point it is no longer a question of Scripture aligning with Scripture. It is not a contradiction of God's Word. So why do they still reject it?

Some do so out of ignorance. They never saw it before. It's a bit of a shock if it means what it says. Others do it for the same reason I rejected earlier -- experience. "I've known lots of Christians" (and often we're speaking of family members or dear friends) "who have been saved and lived in a practice of sin." Experience.

So we're at a crossroad here. We can say that this text does not mean what it seems to clearly and blatantly say that one who is born of God doesn't maintain an uninterrupted habit of sin because they cannot, or we can say that the text is wrong or, at least, means something else completely different. Of course, if we say it means something different, we pretty much strip off any hope of understanding most of God's Word since it is so clear and unequivocal and we're rejecting it. But, you understand, there is something important at stake. On one hand, if this text means exactly what it says, then we all know people we considered Christians who ended up in a lifestyle of habitual and even defended sin and we would have to consider the possibility that they were not born of God. On the other hand, if this text is considered obscure and unclear, I don't see how any other texts would be clearer so the entire concept of having an understandable and reliable Bible is in peril.

In the case of the former, I would caution against concluding anything about their final condition based on this text. It isn't written for you to examine others. It's for you to examine yourself. "Am I just fine with sinning? Do I make a practice of sin? Is that me?" Self-examination. Further, we don't know the final outcome until it's final. We don't know their heart, either. They may appear to be fine with sin while they're actually struggling with it. So let's not point fingers. In the case of the latter, I think we should let God speak and make adjustments to our perceptions rather than adjusting what God has to say to suit our preconceptions.

What baffles me, I have to say, is the number of genuine, Bible-believing, even long-time Christians who appear to have never seen this verse or ever struggled with it, who happily or defiantly reject it out of hand when it arises. Why is that?