Editor (Spiros Zodhiates, Th.D.) John
examines the question of whether the person who is born of God can commit sin.
In 1John 3:6 we are told that “No one who abides in Him sins,” but in verse 8
it says, “The one who practices sin is of the devil.” Then in verse 9 we have
the emphatic declaration that “No one who is born of God practices sin . . .
and he cannot sin.” But if it is possible for a Christian to sin, and
experience teaches that it is, does there not appear to be a direct
contradiction between these portions of Scripture? While, on the one hand, John
says that if it is not possible for those who are really born again to sin,
must it not be a fact that there can be but very few genuine Christians, if
any? One doctrine appears to be prevalent; that those who are Christ’s cannot
be eternally lost and though they may fall into sin, this does not affect their
sonship, or eternal salvation. (See note on Hebrews 6:1-6.)
In this Epistle, the Apostle is
striking a deadly blow at two erroneous doctrines which from his own time until
now have been prevalent: antinomianism and perfectionism. Antinomians (anti,
“against”, and nomos, “law”) contend that the covenant of grace, even as
the Abrahamic Covenant of the O.T., is not established on conditions;
therefore, man cannot be held accountable to any moral law. It is only required
for him to believe that he is justified. The so-called perfectionists believe
that the sin nature is eradicated from them as though surgically removed as a
cancer. The life of the believer, in spite of occasionally missing the mark and
bearing responsibility for it, is equivalent to the Sinaitic Covenant of God in
the O.T.
In 1John 2:1 the Apostle strikes a
blow at these doctrines in the command, “My little children, I am writing these
things to you that you may not sin. And if anyone (of us) sins, we have an
Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.” This is how this portion
should be rendered, but our A.V. conveys the idea of a habit of sinning, and
not a mere act of sin. If there was no other portion of Scripture to disprove
the doctrine held by some that in this life the sin nature is completely
eradicated from them, this passage alone would be sufficient to disprove it. If
any mere man since the fall attained to that high standard, then it would be
John himself, “the disciple whom Jesus loved.” And yet he speaks even of
himself, as well as those whom he addresses, as capable of committing sin‒ sin
considered, however, not as a habit, but as an uncharacteristic act. In regard
to 1John 3:9, it should be rendered, “He cannot continue in sin, because he is
born of God.” If, however, the Apostle had really said, “He cannot commit an
act of sin,” the so-called perfectionists would have been justified in using it
as a proof text in support of their favorite dogma. These two passages (1John
2:1; 3:9) form then, as it were, a two-edged sword which destroys the doctrines
of the anti-nomians on the one hand and the perfectionists on the other.
Whereas, if the present continuous tense had been implied in the former
passage, and the aorist in the latter, both doctrines would have been
established. The moods of the aorist as in 1John 2:1 (a Greek tense expressing
time of an indefinite date or character) usually express single definite
actions not contemplated as continuing; those of the present tense (as the verb
poiei, 4160, and the noun hamartian, 266, “does or practices sin
habitually”) contemplate them as continuing.
In the days of the Apostle there
were those who taught that a mere intellectual knowledge was enough to
recommend men and make them acceptable to God though they lived impure lives.
John, therefore, inculcates (3:7) that only those who did righteousness, that
is, in a continued course (ho poiōn, 4160, “the one habitually doing”),
living conformable to the Gospel, were righteous; not only making the
righteousness and holy life of Christ the object of their trust, but also the
pattern of their walk and practice. See dikaioō, (1344).
John’s idea of committing sin on a
permanent customary basis is further explained by 3John 11, “The one who does
good is of God; the one who does evil has not seen God.” There are two
participial nouns here, ho agathopoiōn (215), “the one being a doer of
good, a benevolent person,” and ho kakopoiōn (2554), “the one doing
evil, the malevolent person.” This is the same as in 1John 3:7, “the doer of or
the one practicing (ho poiōn) righteousness is righteous.” He does not
imply that an attempt at an act of goodness makes one righteous any more than
someone pounding a nail into a piece of wood makes that person a skilled carpenter.
We term a man an artisan who has acquired a skill and works at that trade as
his calling or occupation. This is really the meaning of the Greek word poieō
(4160) rendered “practices sin,” a worker or maker of sin. In other words,
he is a habitual or customary sinner; one who sins deliberately and from a
prevailing habit, not unwarily. In the same sense the Apostle uses the
expression, “practices sin,” (hamartanei, 264) in verse 6.
The expression, “he cannot sin,”
(3:9) simply means he cannot sin habitually, deliberately, easily and
maliciously as Cain (verse 12) did out of hatred of goodness. The divine nature
of man, of course, cannot sin. But while John speaks of the divine nature in
this abstract way, he does not, on the other hand, ignore the existence of the
sinful nature in the believer, who is still in a mortal and corruptible body
and living in a corrupt world. Consequently, in 1John 1:8 we find him saying,
“If we say that we have no sin (meaning the sin nature occasionally manifesting
its ugly head), we are deceiving ourselves, and the truth is not in us.”
Dreams of perfection in the flesh
would be little entertained if we kept clearly in view the distinction between
what we are in Christ and what we are in ourselves. To be in Him is to be saved
once and forever from the condemnation of sin, but not immediately from the
presence and inworking of sin, as the lives of the saints testify. We are saved
from the guilt and power of sin, but not from its presence while in this body
and world. That is a state of being that will yet come when our bodies are
redeemed when our resurrection takes place (Romans 8:23). Christ had sin upon
Him, though there was no sin in Him. Therefore, he that is in Christ has no sin
upon him (in the sense of condemnation), though he still has sin in him in the
form of the sin-nature in the mortal body. The believer is unconditionally
saved from sin and conditionally saved from the power of sin. Victory is
conditioned in proportion to the believer’s unequivocal obedience to Christ and
His command.
Let us, therefore, not be deceived
and claim to have reached a state of practical and completely realized
sanctification, merely because the Spirit addresses us as those who are
“sanctified in Christ Jesus” (1Corinthians 1:2). For while it is perfectly true
that we are in Him, and in Him is no sin, yet “if we say that we have no sin,
we are deceiving ourselves, and the truth is not in us.” While the forgiven
soul may and does occasionally sin and come under God’s fatherly displeasure and
thus needs daily renewal of the joys of salvation at the mercy seat, he can
never come again under the divine wrath and curse. His Father in heaven may
visit his transgressions with a rod of correction, “but I will not break off My
lovingkindness from him, nor deal falsely in My faithfulness.” (Psalm 89:33).
See note on Galatians 3:22
No comments:
Post a Comment