Down an Unfamiliar Road

• 

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

By Dr. Robert R. Seyda

FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN

CHAPTER TWO (Lesson III) 03/26/21

William Tyndale (1340-1396) sees the Apostle John writing this to those on one side to warn them that no one can willingly participate in the unproductive feats of spiritual darkness and have any fellowship in the Light with God. So, it only makes common sense not to continue sinning because none of God’s promises will apply. Then, he writes about those on the other side who decided to remain in darkness under the influence of the devil and evil spirits. However, once they come to their senses and their rebellion is over, God is still ready to respond to a repentant heart with love, mercy, grace, and forgiveness.^[1]

Philip Melanchthon (1497-1560), addresses the worship of the saints in the Roman Catholic Church by saying they teach that our memory of saints can serve as an example for us and follow their faith and good works.^[2] But the Scriptures do not teach appealing to the saints asking for help. We have before us the one Anointed One as our Mediator, Reconciler, High Priest, and Intercessor. He is to be prayed to and has promised that He will hear our prayer. And above all, He can be called on at any time, as John tells us here in verse one: “If any person sins, they have an Advocate with the Father – Jesus the Anointed One.”^[3]

John Calvin scolds the Vatican for modifying what Peter said about how the Anointed One carried our sins in His body on the tree by introducing the theory that we can lower all the temporal penalties of sin by baptism. In addition, they are lessened even more by using repentance with the Anointed One’s cross cooperating. The Apostle John speaks very differently here in verses one and two. Here He addresses believers while presenting the Anointed One as the remedy for sins. He shows them that there is no other way for God to be satisfied except when our offenses are paid for and forgiven, and the Anointed One is the only person who qualifies to pay that price.

He does not say: God was once reconciled to you by the Anointed One; now, seek other methods; but makes Him a perpetual advocate, who permanently, by His intercession, reinstates us in His Father’s favor — a continuous remedy to cleanse and heal the scars of sin. For what was said by John will remain true: “Behold the Lamb of God, which takes away the sins of the world.”^[4] He took them away and no other; He alone is the Lamb of God; He alone is the offering for our sins. It was He alone who paid the ransom; He alone satisfies God’s demands for the penalties of sin.

We know that all authority and power to pardon belongs to the Father. But when Jesus said God passed on all power and authority to Him,^[5] it places Him who took the punishment for our sin upon Himself, as the one who can wipe away our guilt with God’s approval.[6] So, it follows that become beneficiaries of the ransom Jesus paid. Without such power and authority, the Anointed One could not deliver forgiveness and salvation. Anyone who tries to appease God by their good works is seeking to rob the Anointed One of His rightful place as our Advocate.^[7]

Calvin goes on to say since no one is worthy to come forward in their name and appear in the presence of God, our heavenly Father, the Father gave us His Son, Jesus the Anointed One, our Lord, to be our Advocate and Mediator. Under His guidance, we may approach securely, confiding that with Him as our Intercessor, God will not withhold anything which we ask in His Son’s name, as there is nothing which the Father can deny to Him.^[8] The promise gives us the Anointed One as our Mediator, so, unless our hope of obtaining what we ask for is through Him, it deprives us of the privilege of prayer. For it is impossible to think of the revered majesty of God without being filled with reverence. And since the sense of our unworthiness keeps us far away, only when the Anointed One intervenes and a throne of judgment becomes a throne of grace, can we “come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need.”^[9]

We have a promise that God will hear those who pray, so we are encouraged to pray in the name of Jesus to receive the blessings of the Father.^[10] It follows then that those who pray to God in any other name than that of the Anointed One are stubbornly ignoring His orders and regard His will as nothing, while, all along, they have no promise God will hear and answer their prayer. For, as Paul says, “All the promises of God in Him are Yea and Amen.”^[11] That is, they are confirmed and fulfilled in Him.^[12]

Calvin blames those who tamper with the Gospel, guilty of inventing hearsay when they allege that Christ is the Mediator of redemption but that believers are mediators of intercession. It could only be possible if the Anointed One’s death on the cross were a temporary relief from the guilt of sin and left eternal mediation to His followers on earth. Sadly, this represents the treatment our Lord receives from those who want to steal even the most minor portion of honor from Him.

John is straightforward by declaring that everyone’s sin is mediated before the Father by His Son. That eliminates the idea that when Jesus was on earth, He was His follower’s advocate, but after He left for heaven, He ceased acting in that role. As a result, the ongoing need for an Advocate was left up to others far less qualified. Paul did not hold back when he wrote: “Now He is on God’s right side, appealing to God for us.”^[13] Paul also said, “There is one God and one Mediator who can reconcile God and humanity – the man, Jesus the Anointed One.^[14] Calvin points out that Augustine agrees that Christians mutually call out to God in prayer. But there is One who intercedes for all, and He is the authentic Mediator – Jesus the Anointed One, our Lord.^[15]

John Trapp (1601-1669) does not mince words commenting on what the Apostle John says in verse one about believers continuing to sin. He criticizes the established Church in his day, who presumed there was an easy and speedy pardon. The worst of those are when the church says, when we sin, we must confess, and after we confess, we will undoubtedly sin again, that we may repent once more.  In doing so, they treat confession as drunkards do vomiting, so they can drink more.

But we do not understand the teachings of the Anointed One this way. If His word dwells in us, it will teach us that ungodliness is unacceptable. We must forsake as well as confess sin. After confession, we must not return to living foolishly as a sick dog returns to its vomit. We must not follow our confession of sin by covering our sins.^{[16] [17]} Do not be like a man who spills something red on his white shirt and tries to cover it with his tie. Or a woman who notices a run in her nylons and attempts to conceal it with a clear fingernail polish. God sees through all of that.

John Owen (1616-1683) reminds us the Jesus told His disciples, “I tell you the truth. It is better for you that I go away. If I do not go, the Helper will not come to you. If I go, I will send Him to you.”^{[18] [19]} The Holy Spirit’s coming was not to replace the Anointed One’s position in heaven next to the Father as our Advocate but to take the place of the Anointed One’s ministry here on earth. As such, we can see the Holy Spirit as the Intercessor with the Advocate on our behalf.

Nathaniel Hardy (1618-1670) paraphrases what he hears the Apostle John saying here: It goes like this: “And (O beloved) that every soul in this congregation might be able to say of me, ‘My father;’ oh that I might be able to say of you, ‘My children.’ Why tell me why, do you force us to complain along with the prophet, ‘My work seems so useless! I have spent my strength for nothing and to no purpose.’”^[20] When, oh when, will you, by receiving this heavenly seed, make us joyful fathers and mothers, asks Hardy? Indeed, what Abraham said to God, “O Lord God, what will You give me? I have no child, is what we say to you, what will you give us? Reverence, caring? All this is nothing if we go childless.”[21] While we do not see these words in the parchment John used, Hardy believes they were in the Apostle’s heart.

Hardy goes on to address his congregation: “Our desire is like that of the king of Sodom, ‘Just give me back my captured people; keep for yourself the riches stolen from my city, that we may give them to God.’”^[22] As Isaiah prophesied concerning the Messiah, “He will see what the suffering of His soul brings, and will be pleased,”^[23] so this is our prayer to God, and desire of you, that you may see the grieving of our souls in the conversion of yours; then, and not till then, will we be satisfied. Oh, that you would do us this honor, afford us this relief, by your spiritual birth, and growth under our ministry, that we may be able upon solid ground to call you, as John did those to whom he wrote, “My little children.”^[24] Such passion is hard to find today in many pulpits.

---

[1] Tyndale, William, Exposition and Notes, op. cit., p. 152

[2] Cf. Hebrews 12:1-2

[3] Melanchthon, Philip: The Augsburg Confession, Article 21, pp. 17-18

[4] John 1:29

[5] Matthew 28:18

[6] Matthew 9:5

[7] Calvin, John: Institutes of the Christians Religion, op. cit., Ch. 4, p. 675

[8] 1 Timothy 2:5

[9] Hebrews 4:16

[10] John 14:13; 16:24

[11] 2 Corinthians 1:20

[12] Ibid. pp. 906-907

[13] Romans 8:34

[14] 1 Timothy 2:5

[15] Ibid. p. 909

[16] Proverbs 28:13

[17] Trapp, John: Epistles of John, op. cit., p. 725

[18] John 16:7

[19] John Owen: On Communion with God, Vol 3, Part 3, Ch. 1, p. 293-294

[20] Isaiah 49:4

[21] Genesis 15:2

[22] Ibid. 14:21

[23] Isaiah 53:11

[24] Hardy, Nathaniel: The First General Epistle of St. John the Apostle, Unfolded and Applies, Edinburgh; London; Dublin., 1865, James Nichol; James Nisbet and Co.; G. Herbert, p. 117

• 

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

By Dr. Robert R. Seyda

FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN

CHAPTER TWO (Lesson II) 03/25/21

John addresses Christians in the circle of Churches of which Ephesus, as the center, is a church he loved dearly, and calls them his little children. This Greek term teknion (“My little children”), which the Apostle Paul uses once in his Epistles;[1] and John seven times in this Epistle.[2] It goes along with affection being one of John’s most vital elements and compatible with his advanced age compared to Paul. The personal pronoun “my” is found only here in verse one and in 3:18. In presenting the contrast of “will not sin,” but had John naturally gone on to say, “but if we sin,” it would have the appearance of treating the experience of sin in believers as a matter of everyday life. He, therefore, considers it necessary to insert words that states why he’s writing to them; he doesn’t want them to sin. Because of subsequent statements, it is essential to note that he does not correspond with them as being sinless but as those who have the ideal of sinlessness before them.

Even though a person struggles not to sin, they still experience their sinful tendencies in action. It wasn’t that way with Jesus, who, in attempting to remain perfect, could say, “Can any of you prove me guilty of sin?”[3] No person since the fall of Adam can perfectly keep all God’s commandments in this life. Instead, they find themselves daily dealing with breaking God’s laws in thought, word, or deed. It applies even to those assisted by grace. Our nature is not systematically renewed, and so, as the language indicates here, there are sinful acts we must confess to God.

How, then, with the constantly recurring consciousness of sin, are we to triumph over our sinful tendencies? In the Apostle John’s answer, we must not understand that he excludes our pleas for forgiveness. He repeatedly assumes that we must earnestly pray to God. But, in bringing in the advocacy of Another, he views our advocacy as being insufficient by itself why it’s this way. It involves those things that rise that constantly become recurring acts of sin. It is one and the same disposition that leads us to shut our eyes to our needs and makes us lukewarm in seeking the remedy. We are unfit to be our own advocate, that we have insufficient knowledge of our situation.

We cannot approach our request for mercy with that thoroughness and skillfulness that a trained advocate takes in those cases. We do not know precisely the stage to which we have already come in our deliverance from sin, nor have we an adequate conception of the goal of sinlessness to which we have yet to come. Therefore, we are more or less working in the dark and pleading for ourselves in ignorance. “Should find we profit,” asks Shakespeare, “by losing of our prayers.”[4] We aren’t aware of the blessings we need. We are like children, who ask their parents for many things that are not good for them. Again, it disqualifies us from being our advocate. To be delivered from sin, from particular sins which torment us, the love of sin, is a matter essential to our well-being. We ought to plead for it as for our life and do so continuously. We should not pray as though we would prefer not to receive an answer by starts and stops but in a more earnest tone. But how can our advocacy reach the level of what advocacy should be?  We need to plead for this with the earnestness of the whole soul, and this in every successive moment of life? If then, we are to have perfect advocacy, we must look away from ourselves. We already have an Advocate. His name is Jesus, the Son of God. Let Him handle your case. The outcome will be far different from anything we can achieve by ourselves.

COMMENTARY

Early church scholar Irenaeus (130-202 A.D.) wrote about what the Apostles taught that it was the Holy Spirit that descended upon Jesus as His baptism, giving the reason for this descent. Among others, he points to Gideon, the Israelite chosen by God, that he might save Israel’s people from foreigners’ power. In requesting that the fleece put out should be dry and then wet with dew. He used that fleece to represent the people of Israel, and the Holy Spirit was the dew. This same Spirit, says Irenaeus, God conferred upon the Church, sending the Comforter from heaven throughout the world. That’s why we need the same dew of God, so the fire of persecution does not consume us, nor rendered us unfruitful, and that where we have an accuser, we may also have an Advocate, as the Apostle John says here in verse one.^[5]

Tertullian (145-220 A.D.) focuses on what John says here about having an advocate. According to these words, says Tertullian, you critics say, we must admit both that we sin and that we need pardon. What, then, will become (of your theory) when, proceeding (with the Epistle), find something different? He affirms that we do not sin at all, and to this end, he presents the fact that our sins have been once and for all deleted by the Anointed One, not subsequently to obtain pardon.^[6] I do not know what Tertullian is aiming at here, but it appears he bases his statement on John saying, “if we sin,” we have an advocate. So, we do not sin unless we want to sin. Upon our conversion and new birth, our previous sins were washed away.

Clement of Alexandria (150-216 A.D.) mentions that just like Samuel was the only one who heard the voice of God speaking; likewise, John and the other disciples heard God speak at Jesus’ baptism. So, says Clement, if God’s voice had been audible, everyone would have heard it. In both Samuel and the disciple’s cases, it was detected by those alone chosen to receive the impression.^[7] Clement says when it comes to the Anointed One being our Advocate, even such righteous men cannot deliver their children by their righteous deeds. What confidence should we have if we do not keep the purpose of our baptism pure and undefiled, to enter into the kingdom of God? Or how can we be our advocate unless we can claim holy and righteous works? There is none. Only one can be our Advocate, that is the sinless Son of God.^[8]

Early church scholar Origen (184-253 A.D.) asks us to consider whether the title “paraclete” (Advocate) means one thing when applied to the Son and another to the Spirit. Regarding our Savior as a “paraclete,” it denotes an intercessor. In Greek, it implies both a comforter and intercessor. According to the phrase in verse one, He is the atonement for our sins, it seems that it must mean “intercessor” because He intercedes with the Father for our sins. However, when used of the Spirit, the word paraclete is to be understood as a “comforter” and “teacher” because He provides comfort and wisdom for the souls to whom He opens and reveals a consciousness of spiritual knowledge. We might also consider it an additional way. The Holy Spirit intercedes on behalf of the Father to have us come to the Anointed One for salvation. Then, the Anointed One intercedes to the Father on our behalf to be called His child. Another thing to consider says, Origen, how could Jesus have become an advocate and propitiation without God’s power, which destroys our weakness, power furnished by Jesus which flows in the souls of believers.^[9]

Early church leader Pope Peter, former Bishop of Alexandria (300-311 A.D.), notes we are to sympathize with the sorrow and affliction of those who grieve and mourn. They are fighting to keep from being overcome by the ever-present influence of sin, manufactured by the devil. Whether it involves the parents, the family, or the children, we should not exclude any of them from God’s grace and mercy. Peter says we know others’ faith has helped those in need to obtain the goodness of God. That includes the remission of sins, the health of their bodies, and the resurrection to come.

Therefore, says Pope Peter the Great always keep in mind the many hardships and distress they went through, and, except for the mercy of the Anointed One, would have continued. But they repented and lamented what they did because of their habits and lusts of the body. Besides this, they tell how the life they led made them feel unwanted by others. So, let us pray together with them and for reconciliation. Through Him, who is our Advocate with the Father, yes, the One who made the atonement for our sins. That is what the Apostle John is saying about Jesus, the righteous Anointed One.^[10] Not only that but since the Spirit of the Advocate dwells in us, we too, through Him, can be advocates for others.

Bede the Venerable (672-604 A.D.) says there is no contradiction between what John is saying here and what he has just said in the first chapter: it is impossible to live without sin. He warns us with great foresight and concern for our welfare that we must be aware of our human frailty and not think that we are somehow innocent. Now here, he tells us that if we want to avoid all blame for our sinful state, we must do our utmost to live in such a way that we are not bound by it. Instead, let us distance ourselves from those sinful tendencies as firmly and conscientiously as we can. That way, we can overcome the more apparent faults we have. Remember, the Lord intercedes for us not only by words but by His dying compassion for us. He did this, says Bede because He took upon Himself the sins for which He was unwilling to condemn His elect.^[11]

Biblical writer Œcumenius (circa 700-800 A.D.) mentions that the Apostle John calls Jesus our Advocate because He prays to the Father for us. In saying this, he speaks like a human, within a human context, just as elsewhere He says: “The Son can do nothing by Himself.”^[12] He puts it this way so that the Son will not appear to be the Father’s opponent. For that, the Son has the power to forgive sins, is clear from the case of the person with paralysis,^[13] and by giving His disciples the power to forgive sins, He shows that He can also share His passion and power with others.^[14]

[1] Galatians 4:19

[2] 1 John 2:1, 12, 28; 3:7, 18; 4:4; 5:21

[3] John 8:46

[4] Menas in Antony and Cleopatra, Act 2, Scene 1

[5] Irenaeus Against Heresies, Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1, Bk. 3, Ch. 17, pp. 884-885

[6] Tertullian on Modesty, Fathers of the Church, Ch. 19, Objections from the Revelation and the First Epistle of St. John refuted.

[7] Clement of Alexandria, Comments on First Epistle of John, op. cit., p. 1162

[8] Second Epistle of Clement of Alexandria to the Corinthians, 6:9

[9] Origen, Bray, G. (Ed.), 1-3 John, p. 176

[10] Peter of Alexandria: Fathers of the Church, Canonical Epistle, Canon 11

[11] Bede the Venerable, Bray, G. (Ed.), 1-3 John, p. 177

[12] John 5:19

[13] Ibid. 20:23

[14] Œcumenius, Bray, G. (Ed.). 1-3 John, p. 177

---

• 

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

By Dr. Robert R. Seyda

FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN

CHAPTER TWO (Lesson 1) 03/24/21

2:1a My dear children, I am writing this to you so that you will stay away from sin. But if you do sin, there is an Advocate to plead your case before your Father in heaven – His name is Jesus the Anointed One who always does what’s right.

EXPOSITION

This idea of a mediator between humanity and God was not new to John’s selected readers for this letter. In Rabbi Eliezer’s book on ethics, the son of Yaakov (Jacob) is quoted as saying: “He who fulfills one mitzvah (commandment), acquires for himself one angel-advocate; he who commits one transgression, acquires against himself one angel-accuser.” Repentance and good deeds are a shield against retribution. Rabbi Yochanan, the Sandal-Maker, would say: “Every gathered that is for heaven’s sake will endure; that which is not for heaven’s sake, will not survive.”^[1]

Furthermore, one Rabbi taught that whoever ascends the scaffold to be punished [hung], if he has great advocates, he is saved, but if not, he is lost. And these are man’s advocates: repentance and good deeds. Even if nine hundred and ninety-nine argue for his guilt, God will save him while one pleads for his favor.^{[2] [3]}

The Apostle Paul seems to have had the same emotion when he wrote the Corinthians, telling them that he was not trying to make them feel ashamed but was writing to advise them as a father would his children. They may have thousands of Bible teachers, but they didn’t have many fathers. Like Paul, through the Good News, John became their father in the Anointed One Jesus.^[4]

Furthermore, John is quick to let them know that, as the Psalmist said,^[5] that he was writing them so that they would not let their sinful tendencies overcome them, so they ended up transgressing against God and His teachings. The Psalmist warned them that as they stand before the Lord in reverence, think about what they were planning to do. But John now tells his readers that there is someone who stands before the heavenly Father who will do that for them.

Perhaps John was reminded of God’s instructions to the prophet Ezekiel about warning His people not to dismiss the oncoming spirit of wickedness. God told Ezekiel that by alerting them so that they repent, he too would live and would have saved his life also.^[6] Paul had a similar message for the believers in Rome when he wrote to them that anyone who is in the Anointed One Jesus is not judged guilty. That is because, in the Anointed One Jesus, the law of the Spirit brought them life and made them free from the Law that brings sin and death. Furthermore, the Spirit they received does not make them slaves of the Law through fear, but children of God in love.^[7] It is the message John wanted those he wrote to understand.

No doubt, John was hoping and praying that his message would have the same effect as Paul’s plea for the Corinthians that they would come back to the right way of thinking and stop sinning. Perhaps some of them didn’t have a personal relationship with God, and should be ashamed of themselves.^[8] I’m certain that in the heart of every pastor, there is that same fear even those same people have heard sermon after sermon on God’s grace and forgiveness. Honestly, there was such a spirit of insubordination in Ephesus, where John would pastor, that Paul warned them not to sin by nursing their grudges against other believers. Don’t let the sun go down with you still angry – get over it quickly.^[9]

In fact, in his letter to Titus, Paul passed on this word of wisdom:  That is the way we should all live because God’s saving grace is available to everyone. It teaches us not to live against God, says Paul, and not to do the wrong things the world wants us to do. Instead, it teaches us to avoid ungodly lives filled with worldly desires so that we can pursue a self-controlled, moral, and significant lifestyle in this present world to God’s glory. We should live like that while we are waiting for the coming of our great God and Savior Jesus, the Anointed One. He is our great hope, and He will come with glory.^[10]

But Paul and John were not the only ones who preached this principle. The Apostle Peter also agreed when he wrote his constituents that they are to be sanctified in everything they did, just as God is holy. After all, He is the one who chose them to be His own. Isn’t that what the Scriptures say?^[11] Oh yes, they pray to God and call him Father, but He judges everyone by what they have done, and he doesn’t play favorites. So, during their time here on earth, they should live with respect for God. Peter tells them, you know that in the past, the way you were living under the Law was useless. You must realize that you aren’t set free from the worthless life handed down to you from your ancestors by a payment of silver or gold, which are destructible. The Anointed One bought your freedom with His precious lifeblood, a pure and perfect sacrificial Lamb.^[12]

Peter goes on to say that since the Anointed One suffered while He was in His body, strengthen yourselves with the same way of thinking the Anointed One had. Every person should have nothing to do with sin, which has experienced the consequences of sin in their body. Strengthen yourselves, so you won’t be spending the rest of your life chasing after evil desires but will be anxious to do the will of God. In the past, you wasted way too much time doing what nonbelievers enjoy.^[13] There is no doubt that John wanted his readers to understand this same message and stay on the right path toward heaven. Can’t they see no one will condemn them? The Anointed One died for us, and more importantly, God brought Him back to life. That placed Him in a privileged position – right next to God the Father on the heavenly throne. It is there that the Anointed One intercedes for us.^[14]

So, don’t go looking for someone else to represent you and plead your case with the Father in heaven. There is one God and one mediator so that human beings can reach God. That way is through the Anointed One Jesus, Himself, a human.^[15] And that means Jesus lives forever, so He will never stop serving as our priest forever. That is why He is always able to save those who come to God through Him. He can do this because He still lives and intercedes for them.^[16] That’s because the Anointed One did not go into a Holy of Holies made by human hands. He didn’t go into a replica of the real thing. Instead, He went into heaven to appear in God’s holy presence on our behalf.^[17]

John addresses his readers affectionately as his spiritual children. He views them as a family. The word “children” is an affectionate term regardless of age. It is a title God gives to all His children; it is His name for His family. The purpose of writing this epistle is that believers would have a means for addressing sin issues. It is an argument against the idea that Christians must engage in inevitable habitual sinful behavior. John does not write so that his readers justify sin but conquer sin – “so that they can keep from sinning.”

John writes with the purpose that his readers will have a safeguard against sinning. If we practice sin, we will become more proficient in it. That is how we were before we received Jesus as our Savior. Now, it is altogether different; we have Someone and something to live for. John desires that his readers not sin when confronted with temptation. Although believers are not free from sin, they can overcome their sinful tendencies with obedience to God’s Word and Spirit.

Should a Christian even think about sinning? That’s a question John wants answered, especially when the believers have everything they need to deal with sin – a Lawyer in heaven who satisfied the absolute demands of the Father. The words “we have” indicate that the advocacy of Jesus begins at the moment we commit a single sin. Jesus instantaneously and constantly is at our disposal, whether we realize it or not. This is true, regardless of whether we appreciate it or not. He will always come to our side to help us with our sin issue before an absolute God.

Jesus is more than a Savior and more than a Lord, He is our Advocate or Lawyer. He is with the Father and intercedes on our behalf to the Father. An advocate is someone called alongside to help. An advocate comes to someone’s aid. Secular Greek writers used “advocate” as a court term to denote a legal assistant, counsel for defense. Jesus, as our Advocate, pleads our cause; He is our Intercessor. The word “advocate” occurs 5 times in the Greek New Testament. Other occurrences translate it as “comforter.” All 4 of the other occurrences refer to the Holy Spirit. We have a Defense Attorney in Jesus the Anointed One and another Defense Attorney in the Holy Spirit. Jesus defends us against the accusations of the Devil because of our sin.[18] The Holy Spirit gives us the power to live a triumphant Christian life.[19] God has already made provision for any believer’s sin.

[1] Pirke Abot, “Ethics of the Fathers,” Ch. 4:11

[2] Job 33:24

[3] Babylonian Talmud: Seder Mo’ed, Shabbath, folio 32a

[4] 1 Corinthians 4:14-15; also see Galatians 4:19

[5] Psalm 4:4

[6] Ezekiel 3:21

[7] Romans 8:1-2, 15

[8]  1 Corinthians 15:34

[9]  Ephesians 4:26

[10] Titus 2:11-13

[11] See Leviticus 11:44-45; 19:2; 20; John 7

[12] 1 Peter 1:18-19

[13] Ibid. 4:1-2

[14] Romans 8:34

[15] 1 Timothy 2:5

[16] Hebrews 7:24-25

[17] Ibid. 9:24

[18] Revelation 2:10

[19] Romans 6:12-14; 8:12-13; 1 Corinthians 15:34; Titus 2:11-12; 1 Peter 1:13-16

---

• 

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

By Dr. Robert R. Seyda

FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN

CHAPTER TWO

INTRODUCTION 03/23/21

The Apostle John focuses on fellowship with God in this second chapter. In doing so, he offers five essential points in understanding fellowship. By the end of this chapter you will have a new appreciation for the role of fellowship in a Christian’s relationship with God and with their fellow believers. In fact, you cannot have fellowship with one without the other.

First, fellowship includes trusting in the Anointed One as an advocate. John does not want believers to sin, either ignorantly or intentionally. However, if and when they do, he wants them to know there is an advocate: Jesus the Anointed One who will speak to the Father on their behalf. The Messiah covered the sins of all the world. So if that includes unbelievers, it certainly covers believers, but in different ways. Those who keep His commandments are demonstrating that they truly know the Son of God. They do not only know about Him as some historical figure, but know Him on a personal and intimate basis. Those who do not keep His commands, but say they have fellowship with Him, are simply liars. Those who conduct themselves as the Anointed One conducted Himself, give evidence that they are “in union with” Him.

Second, believers are commanded to love one another. This was not a suggestion or hint, this was not a new commandment, but one given from the beginning by the Anointed One. Hate for one’s spiritual brother or sister is incompatible with fellowship with our Savior. Love is often defined as the single most important sign which the world uses to identify a Christian. Those who love their fellow brother show they have “received the Light.” John’s writing includes an important poetic section in verses 12–14.

Third, believers are not to love the world. It is interesting that John uses the Greek verb agapaō. This refers to those who welcome being entertained by those things in the world they are fond of and very pleased and contented with them. In other words, they prefer worldly, non-spiritual things to godly things. “The world” is a phrase often used to refer to the sinful, material attitudes of mankind. Those who love the world more than the Anointed One prove that the love of the Father is not in them. Such attitudes are not from the Father but the world.

Fourth, John calls the days he was living in “last hour.” Believers are warned against teachings of “antichrists,” or false teachers. These liars deny Jesus is the Anointed One. The remarkable thing is that all the things John warned his people about are still with us over 2,000 years later. That proves that if God never changes, neither does our law-breaking tendencies.

Fifth, believers are called to remember their position as children of God when they consider doing anything that might go against God’s Word or Will. They are to remain in union with Him, so they will not be ashamed when He returns. Those who do what is right, are said to be born “of Him.”

This is going to be another experience of discovery in our wonderful and exciting journey through John’s first epistle. God loves you for taking the time to study His Word. Here’s what John said about his testimony: We are from God. Whoever knows God listens to us; whoever is not from God doesn’t listen to us. This is how we distinguish the Spirit of truth from the spirit of error.[1]

---

[1] 1 John 4:6

• 

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN

SUMMARY OF CHAPTER ONE

By the time this Epistle was written, the Apostle John is well advanced in age. Writing from Ephesus, he reminded and encouraged the church to remain faithful to Christianity’s basic teachings. While the letter does not mention or introduce John, early believers who knew him ascribed this letter to him because of the clear apostolic authority he demonstrated. It also has many similarities with the Gospel of John. The Apostle writes to combat teachings that later became Gnosticism. He writes in a very black and white style with absolutes using repeated themes throughout the letter, emphasizing genuine fundamentals of faith.

First, John seems to assume that the reader is familiar with the Gospel. Rather than re-state these facts, John is concerned with building confidence in Christian believers. At the same time, his words encourage believers to examine their lives for signs of their relationship with the Anointed One. This letter also challenges false teachers and their incorrect claims about Jesus. This Epistle shares many themes with John’s Gospel.

Therefore, Chapter 1 sets the stage for the rest of John’s letter. The concepts of truth vs. falsehood, light vs. darkness, and rightness vs. self-deception are explored in more detail later on. By claiming to be an eyewitness and marking the difference between God’s truth and error, Chapter 1 gives a sense of how serious this subject is. The distinction between truth and falsehood is a primary marker used for spiritual self-reflection.

The letter opens with a speaker for multiple speakers, who start declaring all the things they know about Jesus. The speakers say that, from the beginning, they’ve been able to hear and see and touch “the Word of life.” That’s a poetic way of saying that, in addition to being God, Jesus was a flesh and blood human.

They also announce that they know about eternal life and what God revealed to the world in Jesus. Secret knowledge? Yes, but what God inspired them to proclaim. They’re saying all this so that everyone can live in harmony with them as one big happy Christian community.

The message they need to deliver is this: God is a Light. That will come in handy when the power goes out. If you live your life for God, then you won’t ever be in the dark. But don’t lose any of the Light you have now. How do you know you’re in the Light? That’s easy! You’re part of a community—precisely the same Christian community the speakers enjoy. God loves those who willingly join. And how do you know you’re not in the Light? Well, one clue is if you say you’re not a sinner. That is a myth because everyone’s a sinner.

The good news is that if you admit your sins to God, He’ll forgive you. Not for your sake, but Jesus’ sake. Hopefully, you’ll start being a better person, too. But if you keep going on about how sinless and perfect you are, you’ll never achieve union with God.

John also speaks of the relationship between God, Jesus, and man. It tells of the blessings that faithful followers receive and the joy in fellowshipping with each other, which connects to the Lord.

One of the main themes is honesty. John wrote about following the doctrine of the Anointed One and believing in Him as Lord and Savior. He spoke about being honest with yourself, too, by comparing darkness and Light. If you claim to be living in the Light, John said, you can have nothing to do with the darkness without making yourself into a liar.

John instructs his readers to reflect on their actions. It asks them to look in their hearts and minds for pure thoughts and good intentions. If those who claimed to be true Christians were genuine believers in the Anointed One, they would love one another and commit selfless acts.

No one expected Christians to be without fault. John said that if you sin, acknowledge that you were wrong and repent. John accepted that human beings are flawed and would struggle to stay on the path to righteousness. Yet, on their journey to know God, the act of seeking forgiveness was one of the most critical tasks of true believers.

It consists of three parts. First, verses 1–4 offer an introduction describing the author’s eyewitness experiences with Jesus. Jesus already existed in the beginning, emphasizing His eternality (1 John 1:1). The apostle John heard saw, and touched Jesus (1 John 1:1). John testifies about Jesus and the eternal life He brings (1 John 1:2). This message had already been accepted by this letter’s recipients (1 John 1:3). From the start, John emphasizes fellowship with both the Father and the Son. Both are “from the beginning” and are inseparable. John wrote this letter to make their mutual joy complete or full (1 John 1:4).

Secondly, the theme of light and darkness is strongly communicated. It connects both to the creation account in Genesis chapters 1 and 2 as well as to the Gospel of John chapter 1. Those who know the Anointed One “walk in the light.” Those who do not know Him “walk in darkness.” God “is light, and in Him is no darkness at all” (1 John 1:5). The believer’s goal is to “walk” in the light, as God is in the light, in order to have fellowship with Him. Those who claim to have fellowship with God must live as if that claim is valid (1 John 1:5–6).

Thirdly, Those who do are continually cleansed from sin (1 John 1:7). However, those who claim to have no sin are deceived and do not have the truth in them (1 John 1:8). Those who claim to have no sin at all are lacking in truth. Instead, such people are fooling themselves. In later chapters, John will address deception from false teachers. In this chapter, he focuses on walking with God to avoid being deceived.  According to John, confession to God brings forgiveness. And, it brings the work of God to remove that stain from our lives (1 John 1:9). God offers forgiveness to those who seek it. However, those who claim to be without sin directly contradict God and do not know Him (1 John 1:10).

• 

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN

CHAPTER ONE (Lesson LXXV) 03/19/21

F. B. Meyer (1847-1929) reports that as the aged Apostle began to write, he was living over again his first happy experiences with the Savior. He heard the voice, saw the person, touched the very body in which Deity tabernacled. It was too great a bliss to be enjoyed alone, and John tells us that we may enter into the same close partnership with the Father and the Son. But no impurity or insincerity is permissible to those who enter that fellowship. Our one aim should be to maintain such a walk with God that the union with God may be unimpaired. If there are still sins of ignorance, the blood of Jesus will continue to remove them. Sin differs from sins as the root of the fruit. God does not only forgive; He also cleanses. He is faithful to His promises and just to His Son. Notice the “ifs” of these verses;[1] they are a collection of the blessed life.^[2]

Alan E. Brooke (1863-1939) notes that the Greek verb aphiēmiin verse nine (“forgive” – KJV) is sometimes understood to mean “send away.” While it is tempting to accept, it is nevertheless unsound. He will not send “send away” without first annulling a penalty or forgiving debt. This word’s application to “sin” almost certainly suggests the remission or canceling of debts.^[3] When the blood of the Lamb cleanses, it leaves no stains behind. When God removes our sins from His view, He does not keep a memo to remind Him of them. The prophet Isaiah expressed it so brilliantly: “Come, let’s talk this over, says the Lord; no matter how deep the stain of your sins, I can take it out and make you as clean as freshly fallen snow. Even if your soul is stained as red as crimson, I can make you white as wool!”^[4]

Martyn Lloyd-Jones (1899-1981) says he finds there is a common deep-seated objection to the whole doctrine of sin, and, of course, along with that goes the view of life, which maintains that things are not quite as bad as the Bible and theologians in the past made them out to be. Their philosophy is: As long as we do our best and look to God occasionally for a bit of help, everything will be alright. We must not take these things too seriously; to be a Christian is to be as decent as possible and do good as often as possible; we can expect a certain amount of aid from God. So, we say our prayers and attend an occasional act of worship (on Easter, Christmas, and someone’s christening) is sufficient to keep going; we must not think of all this in those tragic terms of desperate sin and some overwhelming need of the grace of God. It is the same attitude John was addressing. He does not talk about resolving this problem, nor making a few adjustments here and there, but deals with it in a very radical and drastic manner. Either you are in the Light and walking in the Light, or you are still stuck in darkness.^[5]

Amos N. Wilder (1910-2000) helps us see the sequence found in verses 6, 8, &10. Verse six: “If we say that we have fellowship with Him, and walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth.” Verse eight: “If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.” Verse ten: “If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His word is not in us.” It is all taken care of when we do what John says in verse seven: “If we walk in the Light as He is in the Light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus the Anointed One His Son cleanses us from all sin.” The key is “walking in the Light.”^[6]

Rudolf Schnackenburg (1914-2000) says that John ends this first chapter speaking against the heretics and their claim to sinlessness. Their theory is: as long as my soul is clean, it does not matter what my body does. Nothing, they say, can contaminate my soul that has been washed clean by the blood of Jesus. That claim, says Schnackenburg, is so perverse and immoral that it compromises the holiness and truthfulness of God. That makes their denial of personal sinfulness a crime against God. God already spoke of humanity’s general sinfulness in the First Covenant.^[7] John hints at this in verse ten, where he substitutes “His word” for “the truth in verse eight.” As John puts it: To deny human sinfulness is to make God a liar and places a person on a par with the devil who is the father of all lies.^[8]

Donald W. Burdick (1917-1996) says that John ends this section on a negative note related to the test of confession. The claimants from verse eight onward insisted that they had no indwelling principle of corruption to practice sin. In other words, whatever they may do with their lusts and passions is a momentary infraction of God’s Law and does not make them a sinner. To them, sin had to be the dominant factor in their lives to be considered a sinner. So, they are not saying they have no sin, but they have not sinned. Both claims are contrary to God’s Word. By doing so, they make God out to be a liar, which is a huge sin. For John, anyone who does that does not have God’s Word dwelling in their heart. Burdick says such things cannot be true of a person who is in a saving relationship with God.

John Stott (1921-2011) looks at a third claim made by the secessionist and heretics. That is, if they continue to insist that they walk in darkness while having fellowship with God and while sinning on the outside are still clean on the inside, a third error is made – they are calling God a liar. It is the most unashamed of the three denials. The heretics maintained that their superior enlightenment rendered them incapable of sinning. However, John is about the outbreak of sin in our behavior and the origin of our nature. He wants everyone to know the consequences if we do not prevent rupturing our sweet fellowship with God. To say that we have not sinned is neither just to tell a deliberate lie nor to be deluded, but actually to accuse God of lying, to make Him out to be a liar, and to reveal clearly that His word has no place in our lives. It is because His Word frequently declares that sin is universal,^[9] and the word of the Gospel, which is a message of salvation, clearly assumes the sinfulness of man.[10]

Peter Pett (1966-) says that Christians can have victory over known sin through the Anointed One and His Spirit at work within them. While this is so gloriously true, there will be sins of omission, sins of falling short, which, while they may not be evident to them, will, at times, be apparent to others. Thus, says John, we must all acknowledge that if we say that we have not sinned, we prove our folly and make God a liar (One teaches falsehood.)^{[11] [12]}

Karen H. Jobes (1968-) offers a very illustrative structure of how the message the Apostle John is structured in this first chapter:

1 John 1:5-10   5a. assertion                            and – This is the message                                                                  That we – have heard from Him and announce to you: 5b. content                              God is light, and there is no darkness in Him at all.   6a. condition                                           If we say, 6b. content                                                       “We have fellowship with Him,” and 6c. condition                                                           walk in the darkness, 6d. result                                we           lie and we do not do the truth.   7a. contrast                                            if we walk     in the light                                                                               As He Himself is      in the light, 7b. result                                we have fellowship with one another and                                                the blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from all sin.   8a. contrast & condition                        If we say, 8b. content                                                    “We have no sin,” then 8c. result                                we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us.   9a. condition                                     If we confess our sins, 9b. assertion                         He is faithful and righteous, 9c. result                                    to forgive our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 10a. condition                                    If we say, 10b. content                                                  “We have not sinned,” 10c. result                             we make Him a liar and His Word is not in us.

Jobes goes on to say that there are three essential and related theological points made in this portion of John’s epistle. (1) God’s nature is defined as the ethical and moral standard for human life. (2) The atonement of Jesus’ death is central to having fellowship with God and is, therefore, at the heart of the Gospel. (3) To deny the reality of sin in general or the sin in one’s own life is, in essence, to consider God a liar and destroys any relationship with Him.[13]

The Bishop of the Pentecostal Church in Medora, Indiana, Reverend Muncia Walls, comments on verse ten. He points to one specific thing John teaches us in this passage: we must be honest with ourselves and honest with God if we want to know and enjoy the riches of His mercies. If we cannot be honest with ourselves, and acknowledge when we have sinned and need forgiveness, then we should not expect to find nor obtain the mercies of God when we do call for it. Abraham Lincoln said if a man were going to be a liar, he’d better have a good memory! Someone said that if we always tell the truth, we will not have to worry about how we said it.[14]

David Jackman says that the wording between verses eight and ten is significant. In verse eight, John elaborated on the inward principle of our lawbreaking tendencies and thought process. In verse ten, he points out the outward actions of our lawbreaking tendencies that show what we are like on the inside. It happens all the time in our culture, says Jackman, and affects our church life too. We no longer call sin “sin.” Adultery becomes “having an affair.” Theft is “helping oneself to the perks.” Selfishness is “standing up for my rights.” The last thing we human beings will admit is that we sin. And as John says in closing, “His Word is not in us.”^[15]

END OF CHAPTER ONE

[1] Also 1 John 2:1

[2] Meyer, F. B. Through the Bible Commentary, loc. Cit.

[3] Brooke, Alan E. International Critical Commentary, op. cit., p. 20

[4] Isaiah 1:18 – Living Bible

[5] Lloyd Jones- Martyn: Life in Christ, op. cit., p. 107

[6] Wilder, Amos N. The Interpreter’s Bible, op. cit., pp. 223-224

[7] Cf. Genesis 8:21; 1 Kings 8:46; Psalms 14:3; 53:2; Job 4:17; 15:14-16; Proverbs 20:9

[8] John 8:44

[9] See 1 Kings 8: 46; Psalm 14: 3; Ecclesiastes 7: 20; Isaiah 53: 6; 64: 6

[10] Stott, John. The Letters of John, loc. cit., p. 84

[11] Pett, Peter, Commentary on the Bible, op. cit., loc. cit.

[12] Schnackenburg, Rudolf: The Johannine Epistles, pp. 83-84

[13] Jobes, Karen H., 1, 2, and 3 John, op. cit., pp. 61, 73

[14] Walls, Muncia. Epistles of John & Jude, published by Muncia Walls, 1999, p. 18

[15] Jackman, David: op. cit., p. 37

---

• 

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN

CHAPTER ONE (Lesson LXXIV) 03/18/21

Aaron Gaebelein (1861-1945) ensures that the Light makes known that sinful tendencies lurk within. If the believer, the child of God, says that they have no sin, the Light contradicts them. If they say we have never sinned, they deceive themselves, and the truth is not in them. The denial of inner sin is a delusion. This evil teaching that the old Adamic nature is gone from the believer is widespread in our day among some Holiness, Pentecostal, and other sects. True spirituality is to confess daily, walking in the Light, that there dwells no good thing in our flesh. And if we commit a sin, it needs to be acknowledged and confessed. He, then, is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all wrongdoing.

Gaebelein goes on to say that the Light also manifests another evil, the claim of sinless perfection. If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His Word is not in us. Some have applied this verse to the unsaved; it has nothing to do with the sinner but relates to a true believer, who, in presumption, makes the claim that he or she lives without sinning. And the reason why children of God make such unscriptural claims are caused by inattention to His Word, for the Word makes manifest what sin is, and the Apostle says, “If we say that we have not sinned … His word is not in us.”^[1]

William E. Shepard (1862-1930) imitates John Bunyan’s “Pilgrim’s Progress” by composing a conversation between a Christian depending on the blood of the Anointed One for salvation and a self-righteous sinner who thinks they are good enough and has no need to ask forgiveness for sin through the blood, as follows:

Christian: My friend, did you know that “if we walk in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus the Anointed One His Son cleanses us from all sin?” I have proven this to be true, and if you come to Him as I did, you may prove it for yourself and receive cleansing from sin.

Self-Righteous: But I have no sin to be washed away; I do not need the blood of Jesus.

Christian: What? Do you say you have no sin? “If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.” Surely, you are wrong and self-deceived. You should repent, confess your sins, and be saved, for we read, “If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.”

Self-Righteous: But I have never sinned and do not feel that I have anything to confess or repent for. I pay my honest debts, treat my neighbors well, and support my family, and I believe I am just as good as anyone. I am not a sinner and have never done anything wrong.

Christian: Surely, in saying that, you are making God a liar, for in for it says: “If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His word is not in us.”

While this helps us get to the meaning of these last four verses, says Shepard, it does not refer whatsoever to one who has been cleansed from all sin, but those who say they have no sin to be cleansed from, even when law-breaking tendencies are active their lives. It is also just as applicable to the unsanctified Christian who denies the further need for cleansing.^[2] It’s a little like a person excusing themselves for breaking the law because they are a police officer.

Harry A. Ironside (1876-1951) points out that under the First Covenant, when anyone becomes aware that they are guilty in any of these matters, they must confess in what way they have sinned.^[3] It implies the need for confession. I’m afraid many of us never really get to God by repenting because we are so nonspecific, says Ironside. Someone may pray and say, “O Lord, if You have seen any sin, anything wrong in me, forgive me.” Hold on a minute! Is there any sin? Do you know of anything wrong? The proper way to confess is to come to God, acknowledging the wrong you know you have done.

A lady who came to Charles Wesley, notes Ironside, said, “I want you to pray with me, for I am a great sinner. I am a saint of God, but I fail so dreadfully, and I want you to pray with me.” Mr. Wesley said rather sternly, “I will pray for you, for indeed you need it. You are a great sinner.” “What do you mean?” she asked indignantly; “I have never done anything bad!” Oh, dear friends, if you want a blessing, do not be vague in your confession. Go into the presence of God and tell Him all about your sins. Tell Him about your bad temper, about your scandalous tongue, about all the things you do to grieve His Holy Spirit. Some of you say, “Pray for my husband; I would like him to be converted.” He is more likely to be converted if you will say, “O God, I confess that my bad temper is hindering my husband from being saved and is alienating my children. I am not surprised that my friends are not converted.” Then go to them and confess to them. If you have been saying it was nervousness when it really was a bad temper, acknowledge that it is temper, and stop trying to excuse your sin.[4]

David Smith (1897-1910) sees in verses eight through ten the heresy of Perfectionism. Some might not say that they were excused from any obligation to moral law. However, they maintained that sinning was no longer attractive to them, had no more sinful inclinations, and committed no more sinful acts. In opposition, the Apostle asserts two facts: (1) Inherent corruption. Distinguish “to have sin” and “to sin,” corresponding to the sinful principle and its manifestation in specific acts. Our poisoned natures carry its infection in our blood. Grace is the medicine, but recovery is a protracted process. It begins the moment we submit ourselves to the Anointed One, but all our lives, we continue under treatment as a defense against being “led astray.”^[5]  Perfectionism has two causes, notes Smith: (1) The stifling of conscience: “we make Him a liar, namely, turn a deaf ear to His inward testimony, His voice in our souls. (2) Ignorance of His Word: “is not in us.” Such a delusion is impossible if we drenched our minds in the Scriptures.^[6]

Greville P. Lewis (1891-1976) says that those who claim that after they were born again and cleansed from sin, have remained sin-free ever since are simply making excuses. They may say, “What you call sin, I call it an option.” One of the most often excuse themselves by saying, “I was not myself,” or, “I’m not like that,” “That’s not like me.” Another emergency response is, “I didn’t do it; it sort of ‘happened!’” At other times they blame it on “circumstances.” “I just lost my temper for a moment,” or, “I wasn’t feeling well.” Sometimes, like Eve in the Garden of Eden – who blamed it on the snake, they blame it on others. They don’t know, says Lewis, that they are deceiving themselves. But worst of all, they are making God out to be a liar. By that, Lewis means, if God calls it “sin,” it’s a sin.^[7]

F. F. Bruce (1910-1990) points out that three tests are laid down here in verses six, eight, and ten in the form of false claims. We begin with verse six: “So, if we say,” each of these inflected claims followed by the real thing which is its remedy and cure in verse seven. The first of these infected claims is that at the same time, they are in communion with a righteous God; they are in companionship with unrighteousness that the Apostle John denounces in his Gospel.^[8] It may well be that the infected teachers against whom John puts his readers on guard were wide open to criticism in this respect. Still, it is equally necessary for those who adhere to the apostolic teaching and fellowship to be reminded that following orthodox doctrine is no substitute for living a righteous life.

Then comes the second test in verse eight. “So, if we say,” we are sinless, we are only deceiving ourselves because we don’t know the truth even though it stares us in the face. That makes the Lamb’s death and blood on the cross of no value and is meaningless. But the problem with this infection is that a person makes this claim based on the fact that they claim to have the Holy Spirit’s indwelling. That makes them beyond the reach of evil. If people think that the moral principles, they’ve developed seem good enough to do the job, they are only deceiving themselves. The remedy for this illness is found in verse nine.

We find the third infectious claim in verse ten: “So, if we say,” we have never sinned, we make God out to be a liar. It proves that His Word is not in us. Suppose anyone is convicted of doing something wrong. In that case, that is evidence enough that lawbreaking tendencies are present within them and always find ways to evidence themselves in word, act, and deed. Again, the remedy in verse nine applies here as well. If the Holy Spirit does dwell in a believer, He is not lying when it tells them they’ve done wrong. And if a person claims that it wasn’t wrong, just a minor mistake, that as John said, in verse eight, His Word is not in them. So, when we look at what John said in his Gospel,^[9] we can see how it influenced John here in his Epistle.[10]

---

[1] Gaebelein, Arno C. The Annotated Bible, op. cit., loc. cit.

[2] Shepard, William E. Wrested Scriptures Made Plain, Ch. 1, pp. 6-7

[3] Leviticus 5:5

[4] Ironside, H. A. Addresses on the Epistles of John (Ironside Commentary Series Book 43) op. cit., p. 11

[5] Cf. Matthew 18:12

[6] Smith, David: The Expositor’s Greek Testament: The Epistles of John, Gorge H. Doran Company. New York, 1897-1910, pp. 172-173 

[7] Lewis, Greville P. The Johannine Epistles, op. cit., pp. 30-31

[8] John 3:20-21

[9] John 5:38

[10] Bruce, F. F. The Epistles of John, op. cit., (Kindle Location 708-775)

• 

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN

CHAPTER ONE (Lesson LXXIII) 03/17/21

A. B. Earle (1812-1895), an American Baptist evangelist shares a story about the time he conducted evangelistic services in San Jose, California. He relates the story of a well-known and highly respected gentleman in the city. He founded a local college and applauded for his efforts. At the request of his wife, he came to converse with Earle on the subject of religion. The man said: I will state to you my feelings, then you can give me the proper advice. You see, I believe in God, the Father Almighty, but do not, and cannot, believe in the Son, that is in Jesus. Now sir, what am I to do.

“You will be lost forever unless there can be a change,” replied Earle. He congratulated him for believing in God the Father. But there is no other name under heaven given to people to be born-again, but Jesus. So, there was no possible hope for this gentleman unless he changed his views. But the man was adamant. He never believed in the Son of God and had no plans to start now. Earle told him that settled question as long as he felt that way. Earle informed the man, “The Father has no blood to shed for you, and without the shedding of blood, there can be no remission of sin.”

That’s when Earle asked him if he would kneel and pray with him. Yes, he said, I will pray to the Father. It was a chilly prayer. Earle said to the man that his case was not hopeless. After a little further conversation, he asked him if he would agree not to grieve the Holy Spirit? The man nodded and said he pledged not to resist the Spirit on purpose. Earle prayed with him that the Spirit would reveal Jesus to him.

About three days later, the man knelt and offered this prayer: “O Lord, I promised that I would not resist the Holy Spirit, and He has melted my heart, and I have had a glimpse of Jesus.” A few days later, he stood before a great crowd and made this statement: “Ten days ago, I was nothing more than an infidel, but now I have sweetly embraced Jesus as my Savior.” While it is true that no one can find or come to the Anointed One, except by the Holy Spirit, it is equally valid that if we resist Him, we will be lost forever.[1]

William Kelly (1822-1888) points out that there is something great significance in the creation of humanity. Satan’s work is to make them feel like a lowly creature here on earth, shutting their eyes to all that is coming and thus denying God’s Word and judgment. Many no doubt are experiencing varying degrees of unfaithfulness, especially in our day. Still, we may assume that the first step is denying Scriptures as God’s Word. If it is not outright rejecting the Anointed One in the preached Gospel, then lowering themselves to the level of an animal. That way, there is no reason to love heaven or fear hell. It will remain that way throughout the ever-darkening clouds of faithlessness. But this also carries the danger of presumption, for the flesh will abuse anything and everything. Most of all, the flesh strives to pervert grace and likes to do so unless a person becomes a new creation. And even where there is that nature, the believer is only kept right by dependence upon God in the faith of the Anointed One’s work.[2]

Daniel Steele (1824-1914) notes that verse seven clarifies verse eight, showing that sins before the new birth are used in both passages and not believer’s daily sins. The Gnostics who professed to be Christians denied the fact of past sin. Hence, if they dismissed past sinful acts, they could deny that they had sin. To “have no sin” refers to a sinless state. The whole context of these verses shows that both refer to sin. It includes those committed before regeneration and those done while in a backslidden condition. As such, they’ve lost their kinship with God. In so doing, they also cease to grow into His likeness.

When it comes to how we make Him a liar, says Steele, it is clear that John does not include himself in this word “we,” but he means “anyone” or “they who.” John uses the editorial “we,” as James does,^[3] in which he does not mean that he is guilty of moral “offenses,” nor that he is a horse trainer, nor that he blesses God and at the same time curses people, nor that he should “receive the greater condemnation.” And when it comes to the accusation, “His word is not in us.” John does not include himself or faithful Christians in the word “us.” What John does mean is that God’s word is not in anyone who accuses Him of being a liar by denying that they never did sin, since God has said that “all have sinned and come short of the glory of God.”[4]

Robert Cameron (1839-1904) gives us this scenario: At the last supper, the Apostles had just bathed and were clean. As they passed from the place of bathing to the Passover feast, dust accumulated on their feet, and not until they washed were clean again. When we believe in the Anointed One, we are washed, justified, and sanctified. It does not need repeating. But when we contract defilement in our daily walk, it must be removed, for God wants us to be whiter than snow.[5] Jesus is now “girded with the towel” and present with the water to remove whatever soils the soul. This washing of the feet[6] and cleansing of the walk results from confession.

Cameron adds that there is not the remotest allusion to the modern “confessional booth” in this passage. The sin is against God, we make our confession to God, and then forgiveness will come from God through His Son, Jesus the Anointed One. Moreover, to confess is to say the same thing back to God, to echo from our hearts what He utters in His Word. He declares that we have sinned – identifies the sin – we just own the truthfulness of what He says. It is a scriptural confession.[7] Cameron seems to be a bit more poetic than practical in comparing washing the saint’s feet to removing sins committed as believers. First, believers wash the feet of other believers.[8] There is no confession involved; it is a sign of humility and service. But it does allow for us to see how washing the dust off one’s feet before entering our, or someone else’s, house and illustrate having been forgiven for all unrighteousness and cleansed by the blood of the Lamb is helpful before we enter God’s house.

Ernst Dryander (1843-1922) recalls that we have been born and bred up in an atmosphere of Christianity. We live amid Christian surroundings, and our minds are, more or less, impregnated with Christian ideas. We attend Divine services; we, no doubt, offer up our private prayers at home, and, to a certain extent, we respond to the demands of Christian morality. That, generally speaking, is the sum and substance of our religion. But we do not realize that, after all, this sample of Christian possession does not constitute more than a form of Christianity, not its essence; only the appearance, not the reality; only the husk, not the kernel.

Herein lies that terrible weakness of the Christian position, says Drylander. Those who look beneath the surface can see it on every side and at every turn. Inward truth is lacking, and, therefore, also the capacity for expressing it in action. But the lack of this discriminating quality drags with it a still more dangerous want, that of individual sincerity – genuine faith. Does the severe moral criticism in this truth point to any of us? Do we, in our religion, lack that inner genuineness and integrity without which the world can’t look with respect upon Christianity and those who profess it? Are our piety and inner life wanting in that sincerity without which it is impossible to see God?

Whatever the answers to these questions may be, John’s words point to this danger, which has constantly threatened Christians. Moreover, they urge us to carefully consider the question, whether this very danger is not present with us now. The central point of our passage is the announcement that “God is Light,” by what we have seen and heard (namely, of the manifested Word of Life) that we declare to you. It is what John wrote in the opening words of his Epistle, and now he tells us what he heard. It is a short, simple message, containing all that is needful for us in examining the mentioned danger of becoming disconnected from God.[9]

Charles Gore (1853-1932) says that the object of this stern reminder from the Apostle John is twofold. We should cease to sin and that, when we fail and commit sin, we should know where the remedy lies. We cannot redeem ourselves from sin. But we are not alone as mere individuals guilty before God. We have One near us to speak to the Father for us – Jesus the Anointed One, who, being human like us, is perfectly righteous, free from all taint of sin; and it is to Him, we belong. He, then, is the propitiation for our sins. In Him—by His mediation—we are set free from our sins to begin again. And He is the answer, not only for us, not merely for any class among humanity, but the whole world. All alike can find the same forgiveness and the same freedom in Him.

But to deal with it for the Anointed One’s sake – to be able to feel the assurance of His support – we must belong to Him, says Gore. We must know Him. It is no mechanical process. How, then, are we to “know that we know him”? There is only one ground of assurance – faithful obedience to His commandments. To profess to belong to Him or to know Him without a life of actual submission is to show ourselves liars who are alien to the truth. But the willingness to practice His Word or teaching is the fulfillment in us of the love of God. It is actually to abide in the Anointed One – share His life and know that we share it. And no one can claim to share His life who does not live as He lived.[10]

[1] A. B. Earle, Incidents Used… In His Meetings, published in 1888

[2] Kelly, William: An Exposition of the Epistles of John the Apostle, op. cit., pp. 48–49

[3] James 3:1-3, 9

[4] Steele, Daniel: op. cit., pp. 16–17

[5] Psalm 51:6-7; Isaiah 1:18

[6] John 13:4-5

[7] Cameron, Robert, The First Epistle of John, or, God Revealed in Life, Light, and Love, Philadelphia: A. J. Rowland, 1899, pp. 31–32

[8] John 13:14

[9] Dryander, Ernst. A Commentary on the First Epistle of St. John in the form of addresses, Translated by W. O. E. Österley, Ed, London: Elliot Stock, 1899, pp. 14–16

[10] Gore, C. (1920). The Epistles of St. John,, op. cit., pp. 72–73

---

• 

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN

CHAPTER ONE (Lesson LXXII) 03/16/21

Augustus Neander (1789-1862), responding to the Apostle’s message about confession, finds the answer for forgiveness starts here: “If we confess our sins.” Of course, it is not an outward confession of sin but an inward act. It cannot be acquired through rites, rituals, regulations, or ceremonies. It is grounded in truth and under our spirit’s direction through the Holy Spirit. And that which is given and received is needed for the inward spiritual nature. 

Therefore, says Neander, it is that inward confession of sin before God —the consciousness of rebellion both in general and acts committed —whereby, in a spiritual sense, God draws people closer to Himself. It is implied that the individual is deeply convicted of inherited sin’s remaining residue. They recognize that sinfulness in all its most minor forms brings a sense of remorse that begs God for forgiveness and cleansing from all lawbreaking tendencies. In all of God’s communications with humanity, God imparts Himself by process of constraint – no more or less than what is required. All as part of His gift of freedom to those who desire to be free. The acceptance of this freedom is conditioned on the individual’s voluntary acceptance, the free surrender of themselves to the Gospel’s message.[1]

Dr. Gottfried Lücke (1791-1855) says that verses 8, 9, and 10 are directed against those who, although Christians do not sense their constant need for redemption atonement in every moment of their earthly life, which is so essential in every Christian. Now, inasmuch as therein always lies a lack of moral, genuine Christian conscientiousness and uprightness, the zeal for sanctification and renunciation of the world will lose its motivation. Thus, redemption’s full effect by the Anointed One is stopped in its tracks. John draws his readers’ attention to this, that, where the perpetual consciousness of sin, ever-present in this earthly life is lacking, there also the feeling of the redemption must be weak and defective. A person must never deceive themselves. Otherwise, the Anointed One’s work seems to be without cause or object.

Hugo Grotius (1583-1645)[2] understands this passage differently, says Lücke. Supported by the words in verse ten, “we have sinned,” which he takes in the sense of a strict perfect tense, he observes in verse eight, that the words: “If we should say that we sin not,” amounts to our saying that we do not need the Anointed One because we have no knowledge of sinning. That can then be taken as our denial that we have missed the mark of God’s expectations for our lives. It does not imply that we cannot be prosecuted if we sin.^[3] And in verse nine, he observes that if we confess our sins and live according to what the Gospel says, there is no need for a remedy.

But this Arminianist explanation is false, [4] says Dr. Lücke, for the following reasons: In the first place, John is not writing to people who recently converted to Christianity. It was also not a case of misunderstanding in the manner they converted to the faith. In his epistle to the Romans, Paul dealt with the contention between the Jews and Gentiles over circumcision. Was it necessary for Jews and Gentiles to have genuine salvation? Paul wrote to those who were Christians for a long time. It was a matter of their becoming lax in their moral and spiritual commitment to holiness. They no longer had sufficient zeal and vigor to proceed in the work of sanctification, and rejection of the world, in whom the Christian principle of holy living had not yet attained any significant influence.

For Lücke, Christians, as long as they live in their human flesh, must contend against sin, confess it, and reject it by repentance and faith. – This refers to the paraclesis (seeking comfort) of the epistle in general, and this passage here in particular. The entire context from verse five shows that John, here, only has to do with his readers’ present moral condition and that he wishes to warn them against standing still, against all luck-warmness in sanctification, and in separating Light from darkness. In this respect, even John could make no difference between greater and smaller sins. It certainly goes against what Grotius taught about mortal and venial sins.[5]

Concerning “living without sin,” Puritan preacher Jonathan Edwards (1703-1758) supposes that if there are any such people in the world who have been able to keep themselves free from sinful contamination, it surely must be those raised in a Christian home under the strict guidance of devoted parents. It allowed them to stay out of worldly pleasures in keeping with the Gospel and dedicated Christian living. However, says Edwards, we need to go back to the original Christian church under the Apostles’ guidance to find them. That was the era of the church’s most excellent purity. That was the age in which the Apostle John wrote his first epistle. Then Edwards asks the qualifying question: If that was the case, and a significant number of them came to the perfect understanding of living sin-free, then why did John write his epistle at all?^[6]

Frederic D. Maurice (1805-1872) tells us that these expressions were wonderfully fitting for those terminologies John used. The Ephesians paid special worship to Artemis or Diana. They connected her with the moon, the night-ruler. Their paid adoration was in common with the other Greeks. Apollo, they connected with the sun, which rules the day. They associated them with these beautiful heavenly objects, but they were never satisfied with doing so.

Maurice explains that it was the God of Light they sought to manage states, conduct wars, and make peace. They felt that a higher Light than the light which the eyes could see must proceed from him. They needed help in choosing the right path and avoid the wrong one. Without His help, they could never stay in fellowship with each other. But that which could, they were sure, must be a Light. They could not describe it in any language so well. It must be a better, purer, diviner Light than they perceived with their eyes. It must be a more human light; the other affected men in common with animals and plants; this must have to do with how they were different from animals and plants.

So, this is how these old Greeks thought, says Maurice. And the more one reads of them; the more one perceives how much these thoughts produced all that was great in them and their deeds. Yet, they were perpetually confusing the light which came from the sun and moon—the light which they saw only through their eyes—with that Light which they could not see with their eyes at all—which came directly to them. They were continually exalting the lower light above the higher light, supposing the softer light received its brilliance from the higher.

It was their idol worship, explains Maurice. They revered the visible things from which they thought that the Light proceeded. All the time, they felt that men were better than these things; therefore, if they worshiped these things, they were worshiping the God of Light they couldn’t see. They felt they could imitate the works of nature. They could express the thoughts of their minds in pictures and statues. Why should not these be worshiped too?[7] There is in this a lesson for the Church and Christians today. You cannot pray to or honor the true God by proxy. God does not need a go-between.

Robert Candlish says that our venturing to say that we have no sin might seem to be a height of presumption scarcely reconcilable with any measure of sincerity. Any such claim put forward by a child of God the world laughs to scorn. For the world, itself makes no such profession. The children of the world are wonderfully ready to chime in with the general acknowledgment implied in the prayer: “Have mercy upon us miserable sinners.” Others may set up for saints. We are contented to be, and to be accounted, sinners.

We do not deny that we have faults, plenty of flaws, some of them perhaps rather serious at times, although none of them, such as we may not hope that a merciful God and Father will overlook and pardon. They, too, deceive themselves, these children of the world. But their self-deception is not of the same sort as that which John denounces. This last is not, like the former, a vague reliance on indulgence and impunity. It may be the error of a soul working its way, through intense mortification of lust and crucifixion of self, to an ideal of perfection all but divine.[8]

[1] Augustus Neander, The First Epistle of John, Practically Explained, op. cit., pp. 40–41[2]

[2] Dutch jurist and scholar whose masterpiece De Jure Belli ac Pacis (1625; On the Law of War and Peace) is considered one of the greatest contributions to the development of international law. 

[3] John. 9:41, 15:22, 24. James 4:17

[4] Arminianism has traditionally taught what is known as the governmental theory of atonement. Drawing primarily from the works of Jacobus Arminius and especially Hugo Grotius, the governmental theory teaches that Christ suffered for humankind so that God could forgive humans while still maintaining divine justice. Unlike the traditional Reformed perspective, this view states that Christ was not punished by God the Father in the place of sinners, for true forgiveness would not be possible if humankind’s offenses were already punished. Christ’s suffering was a real and meaningful substitutionary atonement for the punishment humans deserve, but Christ was not punished on behalf of some or all of the human race.

[6] Edwards, Jonathan: The Great Christian Doctrine of Original Sin Defended, Part 2, Ch. 2, Sec. 4, p. 469

[5] Lücke, Gottfried, A Commentary on the Epistles of St. John, Translated by T. G. Repp, Published by Thomas Clark, Edinburgh, 1837, pp. 115–118

[7] Maurice, F. D., The Epistles of St. John, op. cit., pp. 36–37

[8] Candlish, R. S., The First Epistle of John Expounded in a Series of Lectures, op. cit., p. 45

---

• 

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN

CHAPTER ONE (Lesson LXXI) 03/15/21

Alfred E. Plummer (1841-1926) sees a different way to translate what John says here: “If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His word is not in us.”  I would change one word in line with the Greek and Thayer’s Lexicon by saying, “we declare Him to be a liar,” because it is impossible to make God anything other than what He already is. Plummer goes on to say that this is not the same as “that we have no sin” in verse eight, and, therefore, we have not repeated what John said earlier but expanded and strengthened what precedes. “Have no sin” refers to a sinless state; “have not sinned” denotes the actual commission of particular acts of lawbreaking: the one is the inward principle, the other is its outward result. But the whole context shows that neither expression refers to sins committed before baptism: no Christian will continue to deny these since they are forgiven and washed away. Moreover, John does not write to the recently converted but to those who have grown lukewarm and indifferent. Both expressions refer to sin after baptism, which is a result of past action; we are in the condition of not having to sin.^[1]

Alonzo R. Cocke (1858-1901) makes the point that God’s Word represents us as being sinners, seeks to awaken a consciousness of sin, and at infinite cost, sends Jesus to save His people from their sins. Hence, any denial of this doctrine gives the lie to God and reveals that His word cannot be the spring of our inner life; the Anointed One is not in us. Our failure is a fact. We sin, and its roots are still deep in our being, but for all that, the apostle calls us, “My little children.” How sweet it sounds after the confession of sin. God does not cease to love us even when we grieve his heart. John persists in calling believers by this tender term, “little children.” God is our Father, and  we are infants, strong men, or tottering gray-haired saints, we are still, despite our sins, His “little children.” In this phrase, God’s heartthrobs for us.[2]

D. Edmond Hiebert (1928-1995) now takes up the denial of practicing sin.  He says the claim that if we say we haven’t sinned, it is a blatant rejection of any sinful acts in one’s conduct. In contrast to denying a sinful nature in verse eight, this is a disowning of sinfulness in deeds. If John was setting forth the false teachers’ claim as professed Christians, then their claim can be understood to mean “since conversion.” Hiebert notes that John Coleman Bennett (1902-1995)[3] insists that “this interpretation is required by verse eight and the general context.” But the statement is not so limited.

Hiebert points out that this verb in the perfect tense refers to the past. And by being said in the negative sense, it includes the past up to the last minute. It claims that one is now in the state of never having sinned. It is, therefore, a denial that one has ever sinned. Such an individual might acknowledge the reality of sinful human conduct but claim that they never committed such evil deeds.^[4]

Current Bible scholar Douglas Sean O’Donnell focuses on the phrase “God is light” and concludes that this is the real message of verses five through ten. If we are to walk in the light, as God called us to do, our first step is to recognize the darkness within. In a proper assessment of self and sin, we can never say, “we have no sin,” nor can we claim “we have not sinned.” Instead, we confess, “we have sinned” and “we still sin.” It should lead to a life of consistent contrite confessions whereby the Father’s forgiveness and our fellowship with God and others, through the blood of the Anointed One, is renewed. It should also lead to a life that reflects the light of God – a theme that we will see mentioned again in this epistle.[5]

Messianic Bible scholar David Stern gives us a lesson from the Jewish perspective on how we must acknowledge and respond to charges of sin in our lives. As John uses the term “sin,” it is not merely a verbal transaction but, in every respect, the full equivalent of repentance. John correctly outlines the relationship between repentance and blood sacrifice in these verses. Repentance is the sine qua non[6]of forgiveness; with this, non-Messianic Judaism agrees, as is clear from the Mishnah: A sin-offering and a trespass-offering atone for sins committed wittingly. Death, or Yom-Kippur, satisfies God, provided a person repents. Repentance is sufficient for minor transgressions against the Torah’s positive commands and any sin against its negative commands; for more severe violations, repentance suspends punishment until Yom-Kippur arrives and covers them all.

Stern goes on to point out that the Mishnah notes, “If a person says, ‘I will sin and repent,’ God will not allow him to repent! If he says, ‘I will sin, and Yom-Kippur will atone,’ then Yom-Kippur will not atone! Yom-Kippur atones for transgressions from man towards God, but for transgressions between a man and his fellowman, Yom-Kippur does not atone until he has forgiven a person. Yom-Kippur does not atone until he has reconciled with his fellowman. Rabbi Akiva said, ‘… Who cleanses you [from your transgressions]? Your Father in heaven, as it is said, “I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you will be clean.”^[7]  And it also says, “Mikveh-Israel” [which can be translated either “the hope of Israel,” referring to God, or “the ritual-bath of Israel.”^[8] Just as the ritual bath cleanses the unclean, so does the Holy One, blessed be He, cleanse Israel.”^[9] But at the same time, repentance is proclaimed as essential before God can grant forgiveness; the justice of and necessity for a blood sacrifice is clear both from the Torah^[10] and the Final Covenant.[11]

1:10b But as far as John was concerned, there was something more serious than that.  If we say we’ve never made a mistake, … we are calling God a liar and showing that His word has no place in our hearts.

EXPOSITION

Anyone with such an attitude that causes them to say I don’t need to change; everything I do is right, and so I really can’t see any mistakes in my lifestyle, is disputing what God calls sin. Later in the fifth chapter,^[12] John explains what he means here about making God out to be a liar – which is impossible because God is not a human being who tends to lie.^[13] But why try something so defeating and ridiculous when John has already told us in verse nine that if we confess our sins, God will forgive us.

Some scholars believe that John is repeating the Gnostic’s message and teachings in his day. They fancied themselves as being pure, spiritual, and perfect, despite the evidence of impurities as they lived out their aggressive lifestyles in an attempt to Judaize as many Christians as they could, and also endeavored to impress the Jews as being advocates of Torah who were perfect and without sin. No doubt, John knew about the teaching in the verbal traditions concerning those who give themselves to learning and teaching the Law as being declared pure and clean.^[14] He may have also had it in mind to point this out to the believers lest they, too, feel they can achieve purity by reading the Bible or the service of God.

COMMENTARY

John Calvin says we should let those who dream of perfection – making pardon unnecessary, find their disciples among those with itching ears.^[15] Help them understand that such followers have forsaken the Gospel of the Anointed One. It was He who instructed all to confess their guilt to God.^[16] He accepts sinners, not to soothe them, so they are encouraged to keep on sinning but to keep them from sinning. He knows that no believer can ever strip themselves of all lawbreaking tendencies, so they need not fear punishment. Instead, desire to live and do their best so that one day they stand before God pure from every stain.^[17] Yet, although God is pleased to renew His image in us gradually, there will always be a residue of corruption in our flesh.  We must by no means ever forget or neglect to accept the remedy.

But if the Anointed One, says Calvin, according to the authority given Him by His Father urges us, during the whole course of our lives, to implore pardon, who can tolerate those new teachers who endeavor to dazzle the simple, and make them believe that they can render themselves entirely free from guilt? As John declares here in verse ten, it is nothing else than calling God a liar. In like manner, those foolish men mutilate the covenant which contains our salvation. They do so by concealing one central truth, and so destroying it entirely; being guilty not only of profanity in that they separate things which ought to be inseparably connected; but also, of wickedness and cruelty in overwhelming wretched souls with despair – of treachery also to themselves and their followers, in that they encourage themselves in a carelessness opposition to God’s mercy.^[18]

[1] Plummer, Alfred E. Cambridge University Press, Epistles of John, op. cit., pp. 83-84

[2] Cocke, A. R. (1895), Studies in the Epistles of John, op. cit., pp. 23–24

[3] Bennett, John Coleman, United Church of Christ (Congregational) minister, theologian, Christian ethicist, ecumenist, and Union Theological Seminary Professor of Social Ethics.

[4] Hiebert, David E: 1 John, Bibliotheca Sacra, op. cit., p. 336

[5] O’Donnell, Douglas Sean. 1–3 John, op. cit., (Kindle Location 681-685)

[6] Sine qua non means, “something absolutely indispensable or essential”

[7] Ezekiel 36:25

[8] Jeremiah 17:13

[9] Jewish Mishnah, Yoma, Ch. 8:8-9

[10] See Leviticus especially; also, Isaiah 1:16– 17, Malachi 3:2– 4

[11] Stern, David H. Jewish New Testament Commentary (Kindle Locations 21660-21676). Jewish New Testament Publications, Inc. Kindle Edition.

[12] 1 John 5:9-12

[13] See Numbers 23:19

[14] Babylonian Talmud, Seder Kodashim, Masekhet T’murah, folio 15b

[15] 2 Timothy 4:3

[16] Matthew 6:11

[17] Colossians 1:22

[18] John Calvin: Institutes, op. cit., Bk. 3, Ch. 20, pp. 938-939

---