Down an Unfamiliar Road

• 

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN

CHAPTER ONE (Lesson LX) 02/26/21

Albert Barnes (1798-1870) takes “fellowship” with God as “employment.” There is a sphere in which God works alone and in which we can have no cooperation, no collaboration with Him. In the work of creation; in upholding all things; in the government of the universe; in the transmission of light from world to world; in the return of the seasons, the rising and setting of the sun, the storms, the tides, the flight of the comet, we can have no joint agency, no co-operation with Him. There God works alone. But there is also a large sphere in which He admits us graciously into unity with Him, and in which, unless we obey His Word and His Will, He will not be involved.

We see this when the farmer sows his grain, says Barnes; when the surgeon binds up a wound; when we take the medicine which God has appointed as a means of restoration to health. In our efforts to save our souls and the souls of others, God graciously works with us; and unless we do our work, nothing is accomplished. This co-operation is referred to in such passages as these: “We are laborers together (Greek Sunergoi) “with God.”)^[1] “The Lord working with them,”^[2] “We are then workers together with Him,”^[3] “that we might be fellow-helpers to the truth.” Simultaneously, the inspiration is God’s – alike in motivating us to be active and crowning the effort with success – but if we don’t do our part, then the work will not get done. Under these circumstances, God will not get us off the hook with a miracle.^[4]

Richard Rothe (1799-1867) says that some assume that even Christians still need cleansing from time to time from their sins. The Apostle justifies that by the assertion of the inadmissibility of saying we are already wholly sanctified. He speaks of his readers’ present condition, not of sins committed by them before their conversion to Christianity. Notwithstanding the forgiveness of sin, the Christian still has lawbreaking tendencies; it is sad that they must still be reminded of that fact. Faith in the Anointed One must, from its very nature, continually awaken the consciousness of sin. We see this in those who live a passive Christian life. By being in fellowship with the Anointed One, our eyes become ever keener and sharper for sin, and most especially, our sins.

Although you may not have been as aware of sin as a sinner, says Rothe, you are more conscious than ever as a Christian. If that is not so, then the truth is not in you. Here, being real is the sense of truth, says Rothe, the accuracy resulting from self-examination and self-knowledge. The condition of inner truthfulness, not only for each Christian but for all people, is the knowledge of sin. The recognition and acknowledgment of it is the fundamental knowledge that depends on us by being objective and subjective to the truth. If a person really understands themselves, they must be sensible that their actual condition is a sinful one. In consequence of this sin, they stand in contradiction with themselves and the whole system of things around them.^[5] If, as they say, hindsight provides 20/20 vision. It is no truer than how people viewed themselves as sinners before their conversion and how they see it now as born-again believers.

Henry A. Sawtelle (1832-1913) agrees with John’s method of obtaining the cleansing blood’s full effect. It is by confessing our sins (not our mere sinfulness), voluntarily uncovering them before the eyes of God, which is essentially repentance.^[6] Such repentance is not without an element of faith, and the result follows – full salvation. He is faithful and just. He – namely, God, is faithful to His promise of forgiveness upon the condition of repentance since the Anointed One died for our sins.^[7] To forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. “He is faithful and just” – righteous – for this very purpose, to this precise end, that He not only forgives the confessed sins but also takes away the guilt. It frees us from sin so that we stand as innocent before Him.[8]

Rev. Aaron M. Hills (1848-1931), Minister and Evangelist in the Congregational Church, comments on what John says in verse eight. If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves the truth is not in us. Along with what Paul says to the Romans, this verse advocates the doctrine of continuous sin. Many use this text to keep themselves and drive others away from the hope of holiness. On its face, it does seem to declare that all Christians do sin continually, and if any say they do not, they deceive themselves, and the truth is not in them. But there are fatal consequences to such an interpretation.

It is now plain to see why the holy Apostle John wrote as he did, says Hills. It is irresponsible to take these words and use them against the bride – the Church of the Anointed One – as divine revelation. It forces them to teach that the bride with all the Heavenly Groom’s sanctifying indwelling, and the “cleansing” of the Holy Spirit, cannot stay pure and unblemished. That is why the Apostle Paul told the Philippians to remain committed in their walk toward perfection.^{[9] [10]}

Mr. Beverly Carradine notes what Paul the Apostle said to the Romans, that all have sinned and fallen short of God’s glory available to them.^[11] It is true – no one is prepared to deny it. We believe that every person has sinned in the past. The statement of the verse is regarding the past. We have all sinned in years passed. But that is no reason why we should sin in the days and years ahead. We once transgressed through ignorance and unbelief, but through belief and knowledge of the truth, which makes us clean and free, we can, according to God’s Word, live thoughtfully, righteously, and godly in this present world.

But there is another formidable-looking verse that at first glance seems to call for surrender on the part of the holiness people, adds Carradine. With fixed attention and reading the context, the whole passage becomes clear. In the first place, let the reader remember that John is writing to Christians and that he has said to them in this same Epistle that “whosoever is born of God, does not sin.”^[12] He urges this upon them again in these words: “I write these things to you so that you do not sin.” We ask now: How can Christians find excuses for sin in the face of such statements? How can the reader reconcile these verses with a life of sin? The passage advanced by the objectors must refer to something else, or we have established the startling fact that the Word of God contradicts itself. Here we read that we must not sin, yet if we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves. What is the explanation? There is one, and one that should commend itself to any unprejudiced mind.^[13] John is not advocating that we have no sin, but we must be aware that it is always possible. When we deny this truth, we make fools out of ourselves.

Alonzo Rice Cocke (1858-1901) notes that even while walking in the light, the dark and sinful of this world still mingle their evil influence in the believer’s life. Some of the roots and effects of sin remain. Hence, there is a continuous conflict between the Light and the darkness. The Light has come in, and the Light transforms our whole life. Nevertheless, sinfulness still hides in the believer and makes the great sin-remedy a necessary continuous application in some form. Hence, the Apostle points to “the blood of Jesus the Anointed One,” which “cleanses from all sin.” The blood of Jesus is, in a word, the sacrifice made by Jesus in its entirety, sweeping away, due to its infinite effectiveness, the sins of humanity.

Here, Cocke’s critical point is how to sustain fellowship between a sinner and the holy one. This blood is so sufficient that our law-breaking tendencies that yet remain no longer form a hindrance to fellowship with God. These tendencies do not instantly vanish. These still operating sinful elements are disappearing as the days pass by. The Light grows more and more to the dawning of a perfect day. The beautiful rays of dawn, painted by God with His finger, announce the glories of the coming day and give promises of heavenly splendors throughout eternity.[14]

William E. Shepard (1862-1930) laments that the quotation of this text is used so often in an attempt to refute the doctrine of holiness. It is generally quoted: “Those who say they have never sinned are liars, and the truth is not in them.” When quoted very rapidly, one can scarcely catch the words. Perhaps this rapidity is due to its frequent use. “Practice makes perfect,” and repeating such texts adapts quickly in denouncing Christian perfection. What, then, does our text teach?

Shepard goes on to mention 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. Suppose a garment was spotted with ink and put through a process that eliminates ink spots; how much ink would remain? Now, if a guarantee was given that no ink would remain, would there be any self-deception in that? On the same principle, then, if “the blood of Jesus the Anointed One cleanses us from all sin,” how much sin is left? If all sin is washed away, where is the self-deception? Of course, we could not advocate self-righteousness nor self-exaltation, but on the contrary. We must always put Jesus first and let everybody know that all we are is through the Anointed One Jesus. Instead of saying, “I am saved” and “I am sanctified,” putting “I” first, we say, “Jesus saves” and “Jesus sanctifies.” Let the people see Jesus and not ourselves. We should not be the main focus but magnify what the Lord has done for us. Give Him all the glory.[15]

[1] 2 Corinthians 6:1

[2] Mark 16:20

[3] 2 Corinthians 6:1

[4] Albert Barnes: New Testament Notes, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1949, p. 4797

[5] Rothe, Richard: The Expository Times, op. cit., April 1890, p.159

[6] See Psalm 32:5, 6

[7] Romans 3:26

[8] Sawtelle, Henry A., Commentary on the Epistles of John, Alvah Hovey, Ed., American Baptist Publication Society, Philadelphia: 1888, p. 12

[9] Philippians 3:12-14

[10] A M Hills: Holiness and Power, Ch. 10, pp. 141, 143

[11] Romans 2:23

[12] 1 John 3:9

[13] Carradine, Beverly: The Old Man, Ch. 19, pp. 110-111

[14] Cocke, A. R., Studies in the Epistles of John; or, The Manifested Life, Presbyterian Committee of Publication, Richmond, VA, 1895, pp. 20-21

[15] Shepard, William E., Wrested Scriptures Made Plain, Ch. 1, pp. 5-6

---

• 

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN

CHAPTER ONE (Lesson LIX) 02/25/21

James Arminius (1560-1609) emphasizes it is not an attribute of a regenerated person to be placed in captivity under the law of sin. Instead, Paul ascribes to them, “Because you belong to Him, the power of the life-giving Spirit freed you from the power of sin that leads to death.”^[1] When he formerly lived under the law, Paul was in captivity under sin’s strength and power. One negative response to Paul’s doctrine is that since “the law of the mind” and “the law of the Spirit” is one, they are unskillfully distinguished. Nothing fights against the members’ lawbreaking tendencies except the obedient inclinations and power of the Spirit; therefore, the law of the mind is the law of the Spirit.”

Arminius replies, it has already been proven that the rule of mind, and supremacy of the Spirit, are not the same.  The conscience also wages war against the bodily members’ intentions in those under the Law. Even the regenerated themselves are offended in many things.^[2] But it is no secret that not one soul is sinless on earth.^[3] The born-again cannot say truthfully “that they have no lawbreaking tendencies.”^[4] In many things, the redeemed offends, and the child of God generally gains the victory in the contest against sin. That is when they use the gifts and fruit furnished them by the Holy Spirit. ^[5]

William Burkitt (1650-1703) remarks what John says here in verse eight about no one being without sin tendencies. He has John stating that if he and the Apostles cannot say they are free from such inclinations, how much less can the proud Gnostics say so, who suppose and assert themselves to be in a state of perfection. If we say we are without lawbreaking tendencies, we deceive ourselves. Still, if we say we’ve never had lawbreaking tendencies, insinuating that Christians were sin-free before as well as after conversion, that would allow people to continue living the way they were before conversion. Perfect freedom from all lawbreaking tendencies is unattainable in this life, not only by ordinary Christians but also by the most eminent saints.

Burkitt goes on to say that the Church of Rome would have us believe this is more about humility. But they say this with false modesty. The Apostle does not say humility is not in us, but the truth is not in us. He does not say we commend ourselves, and there is no humbleness in us; but we deceive ourselves, and there is no truth in us, no truth of knowledge in our understandings, no real holiness in our hearts. Who can say of themselves they made their heart clean? Neither can we ascribe any purity to our efforts. Any desired personal perfection related to purity should make us yearn for the day of final redemption when neither sin, sorrow, nor sickness afflicts us; when we will be robed with unspotted purity and perfect joy for all eternity.^[6]

John Flavel (1628-1691) talks about a believer’s communion with the Anointed One, as John writes about in verse eight. The Apostle cries out: How contented and well pleased should you be with your situation. No matter how circumstances have influenced your place in this world, do not complain. God has dealt bountifully with you: He may have granted good things on the people of this world, but on you, He conferred Himself through the Anointed One.  Now, Flavel offers the following points to consider:

How humble and lowly in spirit should you be under your significant advancement. It is true, God has magnified you greatly by this union, but yet do not boast. You are not the root’s support, but the root supports you.^[7] You shine but as a reflection of the Light.

How zealous should you be to honor the Anointed One, who put so much honor on you? Be willing to give glory to the Anointed One, though His glory should rise out of your shame. Never reckon that glory which goes to the Anointed One to be yours: when you kneel at His feet, in the most particular heart-breaking confessions of sin, let this please you, that therein you have given Him glory.

How circumspect (“observant”)should you be in all your ways, remembering whose you are and whom you represent? Can it be said that a member of the Anointed One was convicted of unrighteous and unholy actions? God forbid that we should say we have fellowship with Him and live in darkness; we are lying. The person who says they are in union with Him should walk even as Jesus walked.”^[8]

How studious(“serious”)should you be about peace among yourselves which binds us together and thereby made fellow-members of the same body. The heathen world was never acquainted with such an argument as the apostle urges for unity.^[9]

How joyfuland comfortable should you be, to whom the Anointed One, with all His treasures and benefits, which He applied so effectively in this blessed union of your souls with Him? It brings Him even closer to you: O how great, how glorious a person who does these weak little arms of your faith embrace!^[10]

German Protestant theologian Christoph Starke (1684-1744) points out that the Anointed One’s betrayer was one of His most intimate Apostles, so antichrist did not arise among Jews or Turks, but in the very midst of Christendom. The Church does not remain without offenses, not the least of which is among her fold. Teachers arise who hold to false doctrines and backslide from the known truth; the weeds do not grow by themselves but in the middle of the wheat.^[11]

Samuel E Pierce (1746-1829) says that according to what the Apostle John has said, we should never lean to our understandings: these are matters of too great importance. To the law and the testimony, we should restore it. We are all prone to self-deception: we should, therefore, give up our judgments to the Word of God to be guided and influenced by the same. To have correct scriptural views of sin, of the law-breaking tendencies to sin still in us, is of vast importance. In God’s way, we fight against and overcome these inclinations, as stated in the everlasting Gospel. It teaches that our spiritual wellness and salvation should be of uttermost importance in our minds. To know this by the Holy Spirit’s inward teachings makes it efficient for us: and by it, we are saved from sinful, guilty fears and innumerable errors.[12]

Catholic scholar George Leo Haydock (1774-1849) shows how, just like the Rabbis in Judaism, they added their thinking to the Apostles’ thoughts. In responding to what John says here in verse eight, we are not to say or pretend we have no sin. In such a case, the truth would not be in us, and we should even make God out to a liar, who declared all humanity guilty of sin. We were all born guilty of original sin; we have fallen, and still, frequently fall into lesser sins and failings.

The only one we can exempt from this number is our Savior, the Anointed One, says Haydock. Even as a man, He never sinned, and His blessed Virgin Mother, by a special privilege, was preserved from all kinds of sin. Augustine says, “that for the honor of our Lord when we speak of the Holy Virgin Mary, He will not have us to mention the word “sin.”[13] Unfortunately, Haydock quotes Augustine out of context. These comments were made despite the fact that the Apostle John makes no mention of the Virgin Mary’s sinlessness. This is no attempt to denigrate the blessed Virgin Mary. As the angel said, she was blessed more than any other woman. But we cannot dismiss that throughout the First and Final Covenants, we are reminded that “all have sinned and come short of God’s expectations.”[14]

Charles Finney (1792-1875) comments on what John says about “If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.” Finney remarks that those who cite this passage in opposition to the sanctification doctrine assume that the Apostle is speaking of sanctification, not justification. An honest examination of the text makes it evident that the Apostle makes no allusion here to sanctification but speaks solely of justification. In other words, all previous sin is taken care of before Justification. Any sins after that are dealt with in Sanctification.

A little attention to the connection in which this verse stands will, I think, render this evident, says Finney. But before I proceed to state what I understand to be the meaning of this passage, let us consider it in the connection in which it stands, in the sense in which they understand it who quote it to oppose the sentiment advocated in these lectures. They understand the Apostle as affirming that if we say we are in a state of entire sanctification and do not sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If this were the Apostle’s meaning, he involves himself, in this connection, in two flat contradictions.^[15]

---

[1] Romans 8:2

[2] James 3:2

[3] 1 Kings 8:46

[4] 1 John 1:8

[5] Works of James Arminius: Vol. 2, op. cit., The Ancient Fathers, pp.306-307

[6] William Burkitt: On First Epistle of John, op. cit., p. 756

[7] Romans 11:18

[8] 1 John 2:6

[9] Ephesians 4:3, 4

[10] John Flavel: The Method of Grace: How the Spirit Works, the Believer’s Union with Christ, Ch. 2, pp. 45-46

[11] Christoph Starke: Homiletics in Karl. G. Braune’s First Epistle of John, op. cit.

[12] Pierce, S. E., An Exposition of the First Epistle General on John, The First Epistle General of John, op. cit., Vol. 1, p. 75

[13] George Leo Haydock: Haydock Catholic Bible Commentary, Haydock’s Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, printed by Edward Dunigan and Brother, New York, New York, 1859

[14] Cf. Psalm 143:2; Ecclesiastes 7:20; Isaiah 64:6; Romans 3:23; 5:12; 1 John 1:8

[15] Charles Finney: Systematic Theology, 1878 Edition, Lecture 40, Sanctification, p. 550

• 

 NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN

CHAPTER ONE (Lesson LVIII) 02/24/21

We all know how destructive little white lies can be. Consequently, we should all sincerely consider how self-deception will make our perspectives almost irrelevant.  Most often, our self-deception arises from the fact that we are covering up some irrational fear that we’ve afraid to face. John says that if we keep saying I’ve done nothing wrong; we will fall into our own trap.  Such actions will prevent a person from taking the time and effort needed to build a solid foundation to construct a secure and reliable life. As a Christian, that foundation is the Anointed One and His teachings.  Spiritually speaking, we will never be able to reach our highest potential or take advantage of our opportunities for spiritual growth unless we surrender to God’s will instead of our own.  Failure to listen to God will bring more problems on top of those we are already dealing with. 

As such, it becomes a cycle of repetitious behavior. Out of all of this comes a pearl of wisdom. If you do not know what is right, how can you know what is wrong? People, circumstances, news, and claims are often determined to be untrue by those who do not know what is true. How can God’s children decide what are false spirits if they do not know the true Spirit? That’s why God predetermined to send His Spirit to dwell in the believer’s heart. If the true Spirit is not in you, you only guess when you point to other spirits as false.

COMMENTARY

Didymus the Blind (313-398), despite his handicap, exposes the ridiculousness of those who say they are walking in the Light of knowing God while still enveloped in the dark ignorance of sin. Since God is Light and, therefore, darkness cannot be found in Him, He has no fellowship with those in the dark. That’s why for those who live in God’s Light, darkness has no hold over them. Therefore, those who are still in sin’s darkness who claim that they live in God’s Light are lying to themselves and others.[1]

Augustine of Hippo (354-430) knew from personal experience that although we are children of God, we are in a war with death as long as we are bound to this mortal life. And what John says here in verse eight is honestly said of us, “Those that the Spirit of God leads are truly the children of God.” Yet, even as the Spirit of God guides us, and as children of God, we advance toward God, we are also struggling with our human spirit. That’s because we are weighed down by our corruptible bodies and influenced by certain human feelings. That’s why some fall away with their lawbreaking tendencies to sin. But it matters to what degree. Although every crime is a sin, not every sin is a crime. That’s why we can say of the lives of holy men, even while they live in this mortality, that they are not guilty of any crime. “But if we say that we have no sin,” as John says here, “we deceive even ourselves, and the truth is not in us.”^[2] That means being holy in our eyes or other people’s eyes is not holiness in God’s eyes.

In another place, Augustine makes an interesting point that even while God’s heavily burdened children groan under persecution, they do not wish that He remove their struggles but that they receive the gift that swallows up death in eternal life. In other words, while God’s people know that hardships and sufferings are part of living for the Lord, they don’t beg for Him to take everything away. Nor are they anxious for Him to accelerate their dying to get out of their misery, but extending their life so they can show others mercy. Yes, they do have the first-fruit of the reborn spirit groaning within them as they wait for the redemption of their body. But they know that they are in a battle with lawbreaking tendencies that never seem to let up. And here, the Apostle John says, “If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.”^[3]

Augustine then raises a critical point when it comes to the Virgin Mary. He writes that he does not wish to raise any questions regarding the holy Virgin Mary on the subject of sins, out of honor to the Lord. If we could assemble all the holy men and women that Christian historian Pelagius lists who lived their lives without sin, except for the Virgin Mary, and asked them whether they lived without sin while they were in this life, what could we expect would be their answer? Would it be according to Pelagius or in the Apostle John’s words? Let’s put it this way, on having such a question submitted to them, no matter how excellent might have been their sanctity in this body, they would exclaim with one voice: “If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us?”

But let us imagine that their answers were more humble than honest! What we call sin may well not have been their idea of sin. Well, Pelagius has already determined, and rightly decided, “not to place the praise of humility on the side of falsehood.” If, therefore, they spoke the truth in giving such an answer, they would have all sinned. Since they humbly acknowledged it, the truth would be in them. However, if they lied in their response, they would still have sinned because the truth would not be in them.^[4]

That leaves us with this question: When John, who knew the Virgin Mary better than any of the other disciples, was willing to say that anyone who says they did not sin, they are deceiving themselves, and the truth is not in them, did he include Mary? If he didn’t, he should have said so; otherwise, he wouldn’t be telling the truth. Unfortunately, the medieval church did not explore Augustine’s idea about Mary. They declared her sinless. It seems to contradict what we find in the Book of Acts, where Mary joined the other disciples in praying to receive the baptism of the Holy Spirit.[5]

Pope Gregory the Great (540-604 AD) says that we all must one day explain how we lived to the coming Judge. So, it’s best to strengthen our cause before Him with tears and good works, that we may be worthy to have blessed assurance given us concerning the things that we have done. Even in the secular world, notes Gregory, a kind judge frequently grants a reprieve for this purpose, that one who did not receive counsel may come prepared to the trial. And what a mistake it would be were we to neglect for the salvation of the soul what we carefully attend to in matters of earthly concern!

According to the Apostle John’s words, no one is without sin. So, says Gregory, let us remind ourselves of things that influenced our thinking. We should not forget the harm we caused by our unbridled tongue and our wrongdoings. Never stop trying to get those stains on our character washed away so that our just and loving Redeemer may not need to give us the punishment we deserve. Instead, according to His mercy, allow us to experience the joy of forgiveness and pardon.^[6]

It is here that Bede the Venerable (672-735) shows some real confidence in his understanding of Scripture. He tells us that with this verse eight, the Apostle John refutes Pelagian’s teachings, who say that babies are born without sin and that the elect can make such progress in this life that it becomes possible for them to attain perfection. The Apostle John disagrees. We cannot be born without lawbreaking tendencies since we brought them with us when we came into the world.^[7]

Nevertheless, the blood of Jesus can cleanse us from all sin so that our guilt does not leave us in the power of the enemy of our soul – Satan. That’s because the man Jesus the Anointed One, the Mediator between God and man, freely paid the price for redemption on our behalf. He did so even though He owed nothing Himself. He surrendered to die in the flesh, which He did not deserve, to deliver us from the richly deserved death of our souls.^[8]

Bible scholar Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) answers whether sorrow is compatible with our moral virtues? Some say that it would seem that sorrow is incompatible with integrity because the virtues are effects of wisdom. A young Jewish writer explains, “If a man loves justice: her labors have great virtues; for she teaches temperance, and prudence, and justice, and fortitude, which are such things as men can have nothing more profitable in life.” Solomon goes on to say, “When I go into my house, I shall repose myself with her: for her conversation hath no bitterness, nor her company any tediousness, but joy and gladness.”[9] Therefore, the questioner says, sorrow is incompatible with virtue. On the contrary, says Aquinas, the Anointed One was perfect in virtue. But there was sorrow in Him, for He said, “My soul is sorrowful even unto death.”^[10] Therefore, grief is compatible with goodness.  I answer that, says Aquinas as Augustine says the Stoics held that in the mind of the wise man there are three eupatheiai (feelings of well-being), for example, “three good passions,” in place of the three hurting disturbances: namely, instead of covetousness, “desire”; instead of laughter, “joy”; instead of fear, “caution.”^[11] But they denied that anything corresponding to sorrow could be in the mind of a wise man.^[12]

---

[1] Didymus the Blind: Bray, G. (Ed.). op. cit., p. 172

[2] Augustine: Enchiridion: On Faith, Hope, and Love, Ch. 17, p. 56

[3] Ibid. The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series, Vol. 2, City of God, Bk. 20, Ch. 17, pp. 922-923

[4] Ibid. A Treatise on Nature and Grace, Against Pelagius, Addressed to Timasius and Jocobus, The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series, Vol. 5, Ch. 42, pp.405-406

[5] Acts of the Apostles 1:14

[6] Gregory the Great (Part II), The Nicene and the Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, Second Series, Vol. 13, Bk. 12, Epistle 1, to Dominicus, Bishop of Carthage, p.192

[7] Psalm 51:5

[8] Bede: On 1 John, Bray, G. (Ed.), op. cit., p. 172

[9] Wisdom of Solomon 8:7, 16

[10] Matthew 26:38

[11] Augustine: City of God, Bk XIV, Chap. 8

[12] Aquinas, Thomas: Summa Theologica, Vol. 2, The First Part of the Second Part, pp. 632-633

• 

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN

CHAPTER ONE (Lesson LVII) 02/23/21

Although the following hymn was written in 1876 and is still sung today in many evangelical churches, every time I hear it, I still get tears in my eyes,

“What can wash away my sin?
Nothing but the blood of Jesus;
What can make me whole again?
Nothing but the blood of Jesus.

Refrain

Oh! precious is the flow
That makes me white as snow;
No other fount I know,
Nothing but the blood of Jesus.

Most people know the first three verses, but few have sung the fourth stanza, which goes like this:

“Now by this, I’ll overcome –

Nothing but the blood of Jesus,

Now by this, I’ll reach my home-

Nothing but the blood of Jesus.”

Refrain

Oh! precious is the flow
That makes me white as snow;
No other fount I know,
Nothing but the blood of Jesus.

There’s only one way to get there, that is through the blood and with the Light of Jesus the Anointed One, our Lord and Savior.  

1:8a If we claim we have never committed an error against God’s will, we are fooling ourselves and rejecting the real truth.

EXPOSITION

Was the idea of believer’s still having law-breaking tendencies new with the Apostle John? Wise man Job was aware of this built-in tendency to sin and asked why God would expect any person to be pure when they are born impure?^[1] And King Solomon introduced this truth in his prayer at the New Temple’s dedication. He asked God to listen to their prayers from His home in heaven and help them. Your people will sin against you. I know this because no person is sinless.^[2] King David came to the same conclusion.^[3] Later, Solomon included this in his Proverbs, where he asks, can anyone say their heart is pure? Who can say, “I am free from sin?”^[4] In fact, Solomon was so convinced of this that he included it in one of his homilies by saying that not a single person on earth is always right and never sins, if they are not doing what God’s word says.^[5]

By the time we come to the prophet Isaiah, it was still the same. Said Isaiah, we have all wandered away like sheep. We have all gone our own way. And yet the Lord put all our guilt on Him.^[6] And the prophet Jeremiah saw people trying to clean themselves in the baths, so he told them that even if you wash with lye soap, even if you use all the soap you can get your hands on, God can still see that you still have guilty stains.^[7] The Apostle Paul agreed with John that all were sinners and are not good enough to share God’s divine greatness.^[8] In fact, the Apostle James went a little further and told his readers that while all of us are capable of making many mistakes, a good place to start in seeing that they don’t increase is to learn how to control our tongues.^[9]

The real problem here, says John, isn’t that we try to keep others in the dark, but that we end up in the dark ourselves. It is what happened to many false teachers in Paul’s day. They tried to deceive others but ended up deceiving themselves.^[10] A lot of it starts, says the Apostle James, when we listen to the Word of God preached, we know what the preacher is saying to us from God’s Word, but is it all listening and no action?^[11] So no matter how holy we may try to act, says John, everyone can see that we’re not telling the truth about our real spiritual condition.

John now opens the door to a subject that has been part of Jewish theology for a long time.  But we must understand that it is said to make it possible if the person involved is willing to allow sin, as some have done. To misinterpret this scripture results in the creation of a paradoxical doctrine. When John says, “If WE claim WE have no errors…” he uses the first-person plural pronoun to indicate all humanity, but in particular, believers.  The reason God gave the Law was to identify sin for what it was, disobedience to Him and His Word and will.  Another thing that may help us see why John targeted his Christian readers is that the word used here for “sin” means: “to miss the mark, to come up short, to err, to be mistaken, to take a wrong turn.” 

People who claim such perfection are victims of what I would call “holiness pride.”  There is no reason to be afraid to admit a mistake.  People who refuse to acknowledge their mistakes become experts in finding alibis and excuses for their alleged faults.  When that doesn’t work, they go to Plan B, which is to blame everyone else.  It becomes a case of giving more value and prominence to pride and ego than humility and repentance.  But there is more to look at than this.  In his 1839 Bible Commentary, Joseph Benson said, “There is no one in more danger of falling into the deepest sin than the one God leaves alone to themselves.”

When we take this back into the First Covenant, we find that the earliest patriarch, Job, stated, “No one can make something clean from something dirty.”^[12] It was shared by his friends who came to comfort him. Eliphaz says to Job: “People cannot really be pure. They cannot exceed God in being righteous!”^[13] And Job’s other friend Bildad questioned, “How can anyone claim to be right before God? No human being can actually be pure.  In God’s eyes, even the moon is not pure and bright; even the stars are not pure. People are much less pure.”^[14]  By the time David took the throne, this was a well-established belief.  That’s why David says to God, “Don’t judge me, your servant. No one alive could be judged innocent by your standards.”^[15]

So, when David’s son Solomon moved the Ark of the Covenant into the new Temple, Solomon confessed, “Your people will sin against You. I know this because everyone sins.”^[16] It led Solomon to state: “Can anyone say their heart is pure? Who can say, ‘I am free from sin?’”^[17] He continues in another place to say: “Surely there is no one on earth who always does good and never sins.”^[18] No wonder then that the prophet Isaiah continued preaching this same truth, “We are all dirty with sin. Even our good works are not pure. They are like bloodstained rags.  We are all like dead leaves in our sins, which causes us to be blown away by the wind.”^[19] God confirms this in His word to Jeremiah, “Even if you wash yourself with lye, even if you use much soap, I can still see your guilt.”^[20] 

A person may become angry when they are fooled and misled by others, which then causes them to commit other errors or foolish mistakes.  But when people fool themselves, they have no one to blame but themselves. It is also called “self-deception.” One psychologist referred to it as having a “splintered mind.”  People who fall into this trap seldom look at how their actions or mindset fits into the big picture of their future. In many cases, they react to situations from a position of vulnerability without thinking it through.  One way to temper this is to ask oneself what the person I respect most thinks of this.  Perhaps I should talk this over with others. I have confidence in them telling me the truth.  If you do that and their opinions make you angry, upset, or defensive, you are a prime candidate for self-deception.  That’s why John is challenging his readers to check everything out with the giver of truth.

---

[1] Job 14:4; See 15:14

[2] 2 Chronicles 6:36

[3] Psalm 14:3

[4] Proverbs 20:9

[5] Ecclesiastes 7:20

[6] Isaiah 53:6

[7] Jeremiah 2:22

[8] Romans 3:23

[9] James 3:2

[10] 2 Timothy 3:13

[11] James 1:22

[12] Job 14:4

[13] Ibid. 15:14

[14] Ibid. 25:4-5

[15] Psalm 143:2

[16] 2 Chronicles 6:36

[17] Proverbs 20:9

[18] Ecclesiastes 7:20

[19] Isaiah 64:6

[20] Jeremiah 2:22-23

• 

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN

CHAPTER ONE (Lesson LVI) 02/22/21

William Loader (1944) points out that some readers probably recall the vital link between Light and Glory ideas. They picture God as dwelling in dazzling splendor and unapproachable brilliance.^[1] There has always been much speculation about the shapes of that glorious light, from flames enveloping a heavenly throne to a celestial temple built from walls of fire.^[2] Visions of the last day included descriptions of resurrected bodies shining like stars in the heavens^[3] and a new Jerusalem whose sold radiance was to be God Himself.^[4] Perhaps John entertained such hopes, but his notions of light and darkness are also firmly grounded in a human relationship’s concrete reality.^[5]

Judith Lieu (1951) says that John uses the Greek verb peripateó for “walk” in the Final Covenant elsewhere. However, when the Seventy Jewish scholars translated the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek (the “Septuagint” [LXX]), they used the Greek verb poreuomai. It means to “to traverse, travel (literally or figuratively; specially to move from one place to another. Also, it implies to depart, go away, make or take a journey or walk.”) In other words, “proceeding.”^[6] More specifically, says Lieu, in Jewish literature during the Apostle John’s day, the idea emerged that human beings must choose between two ways to proceed: the path of Light or the trail of darkness.^[7]

The Talmud’s version is quite complicated; Lieu used Armand Kaminka of Vienna’s (1866-1950)[8] modern version. It is about King Solomon, who ruled not only over people but also over demons. He was desirous of obtaining the mythical Shamir^[9] that, with its help, cut the stones for the building the Temple without using iron tools. So, he ordered Ashmedai, the king of demons, to appear before him. Ashmedai instructed Solomon that it could be done by using the Shamir. The rest of the story is about how they proceeded to find the Shamir. Similarly, says Lieu, is John’s introduction of those same two ways for a Christian to choose from – Light or Darkness. The search is for how to proceed to the point where the blood of Jesus removes any stains of sin on a believer’s heart, soul, or mind.^[10]

Another current scholar, Colin G. Kruse, commentator and senior lecturer in New Testament at the Melbourne, Australia School of Theology, gives us an enlightening note on the terms “Light” and “Darkness.” He tells us that “light” and “darkness” are used extensively in metaphorical ways in the Final Covenant, far more often in fact than used literally. The light and darkness metaphors are employed with the following meanings: (i) life and death;^[11] (ii) the light of witness;^[12] (iii) Jesus, the light of revelation to the world;^[13] (iv) good and evil behavior;^[14] (v) openness and secrecy;^[15] (vi) truth and falsehood;^[16] (vii) God’s kingdom and the devil’s kingdom;^[17] (viii) the darkness of eternal punishment;^[18] and (ix) the Light of the glory of God.^[19]

Kruse goes on to say that as German scholar Georg Strecker (1929-1994)^[20] notes, God is compared with light in the First Covenant^[21] and is the creator of light.^[22] In the Dead Sea Scrolls, the children of light and the children of darkness are contrasted,^[23] and the opposition of light and darkness is found in Gnostic writings as well.^[24] The light and darkness motif in 1 John is dependent on the Fourth Gospel,^[25] which in turn owes most to the Final Covenant. In John’s Gospel, we find that the Anointed One, not the Father, is the Light. No doubt because of the emphasis John’s places on the Person of the Anointed One in his Gospel. Over and over again, what the First Covenant assigns to God is accredited to Jesus in the Fourth Gospel. It is there Jesus says, “I am the Light of the world;” “I am the good Shepherd;” before Abraham was born, I AM;” and “I am the resurrection and the life.”[26]

It is vital to notice here in verse seven that the word “but” is not meaningless; it introduces an antithesis to what has been said before. It presents several conditional statements that must be kept in mind when trying to achieve the goal of fellowship with God and His community.^[27] Again, it is much like the parallelisms in the Psalms. It provides a progression of thought from one statement to its enhanced meaning with a slight variation to amplify it. The main point is exact: If the first part of the parallelism is not done, then the second will not follow.[28]

Ken Johnson felt that the Apostle John held back any criticism of those who call themselves Christians but neither live nor act like a child of God. That means, if you say you are a Christian but ignore Scripture, you are just lying to yourself. There is no way you could truly be a follower of Jesus the Anointed One if you don’t even know what He teaches because you don’t care enough to make a practice of studying the Bible. It is committing the sin of ungodliness. But if you put into practice His teachings (walk in the Light as He did), you will instantly feel a kinship with other Bible-believing Christians and will automatically be forgiven of sin. The Apostle Paul calls this the “righteousness of faith.”[29]

F. Wayne MacLeod gives us something to consider. As sinners, we can be cleansed by the blood of our Lord Jesus. Notice here, however, that in order to be cleansed, we need to confess our sins. Those who live in darkness are those who have chosen not to recognize and acknowledge their sin. Constant fellowship with God and His children is possible only if we are washed and made clean in the blood of the Anointed One. Only by His blood can all the guilt of our sin be removed. Genuine believers live in an attitude of repentance for their acts of rebellion against God’s holy laws. They are also aware of their forgiveness through the Lord Jesus’s sacrificial death on their behalf.[30] Although he does not use the word, MacLeod seems to be referring to the constant work needed to maintain one’s sanctified life.

In light of John’s statement of how the blood of Jesus can cleanse us from all our sins, John Phillips goes to all the trouble of describing the marvelous substance and incredible complexity of blood. Our body’s oxygen is carried in the bloodstream, chemically combined with hemoglobin to form a solid substance. Human hemoglobin, the red coloring in the blood cells, is an extremely complex molecule, made up of 3,032 atoms of carbon, 812 atoms of hydrogen, 780 atoms of nitrogen, four atoms of iron, 880 atoms of oxygen and 12 atoms of sulfur. Each of these 9520 atoms must be hooked to each other in exactly the right way, or hemoglobin does not result. Antibodies in the blood fight and prevent infection, giving us immunity, and, further, if blood fails to reach the various cells of the body, death takes place in those cells. When the blood ceases to circulate, the body dies.^[31] Jesus may not have had blood in mind when He spoke to His disciples about the need for Him to be in them,^[32] but the results are the same.

Marianne M. Thompson focuses on John’s statement that walking in the Light makes fellowship with God and each other possible. However, she says we cannot merely mark these things off on a checklist. There is a unifying thread of expectations woven through the pattern of “walking in the Light.” One of those is that it unifies us in understanding God’s character and activity in the Anointed One. It begins with the fact that God is Light. Everything else in the fellowship with Him and each other flows from this statement.^[33]

---

[1] See 1 Timothy 6:16

[2] 1 Enoch 14:10

[3] Daniel 12:3; Matthew 13:43

[4] Revelation 21

[5] Loader, William R. op. cit., p. 10

[6] Cf. Acts of the Apostles 9:31; 2 Peter 3:3; Jude 1:16

[7] Babylonian Talmud, Seder Nashim, Masechet Gittin, folio 68a-b

[8] Kaminka, was born in Berdichev, Russia, studied at the universities of Berlin and Paris as well as at the orthodox Rabbinerseminar in Berlin and the Lehranstalt fuer die Wissenschaft des Judentums in Berlin. 

[9] Shamir is a worm or a substance that had the power to cut through or disintegrate stone, iron and diamond.

[10] Lieu, Judith, op. cit., pp. 53-54

[11] Matthew 4:16; Luke 1:79; John 1:4

[12] Matthew 5:14,16; Luke 8:16; 11:33; John 5:35; Acts of the Apostles 13:47

[13] Luke 2:32; John 1:7-8; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46

[14] Matthew 6:23; Luke 11:35; 22:53; John 1:5; 3:19-21; Romans 13:12; 2 Corinthians 6:14; Ephesians 5:8-14; 1 John 1:5-7; 2:8-11

[15] Matthew 10:27; Luke 12:3; 1 Corinthians 4:5

[16] John 1:9; 8:12; 2 Corinthians 11:14; James 1:17

[17] Luke 16:8; Acts of the Apostles 26:18, 23; Ephesians 6:12; Colossians 1:12-13; 1 Thessalonians 5:4-5; 1 Pet 2:17

[18] Matthew 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; Jude 13

[19] 1 Timothy 6:16; Revelations 21:23-34; 22:5

[20] Strecker, Georg, The Johannine Letters, Hermeneia, Philadelphia, Fortress, 1996, pp. 26-28

[21] See Psalms 27:1; 36:9

[22] Genesis 1:3-5; Isaiah 45:5-7

[23] See Dead Sea Scrolls 1QS 1:9-10

[24] See Poimandres 1.1-6; Pistis Sophia 1.32, 2-3, 21

[25] John 1:4-5; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35- 36, 46

[26] Kruse, Colin G: The Letters of John, The Pillar New Testament Commentary (PNTC) Kindle Location 1385-1399. Eerdmans Publishing Co – A. Kindle Edition

[27] See 1 John 1:9; 2:1

[28] Witherington, Ben, Letters and Homilies for Hellenized Christians: op. cit., Kindle Location 6030

[29] Johnson, Ken. Ancient Epistles of John and Jude, op. cit., p. 55

[30] MacLeod, F. Wayne. The Epistles of John and Jude, op. cit., (Kindle Locations 154-158)

[31] Phillips, John, op. cit., p. 36

[32] John 15:1-8; See Romans 5:9; Ephesians 2:13; Hebrews 9:14, 22; 13:12

[33] Thompson, Marianne M. The IVP New Testament Commentary Series, 1-3 John, InverVarsity Press, Downers Grove, IL, 1992, p. 40

• 

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN

CHAPTER ONE (Lesson LV) 02/19/21

Alan E. Brooke (1863-1939) says that the Greek noun koinōnia (“fellowship”) is the strict antithesis to verse six, “If we claim fellowship with God, while our conduct does not correspond to the claim, we lie,” would read better as, “If we walk in Light, we can claim fellowship with God.” It has led to adding the phrase “with others” to “with God” in some manuscripts. These readings are attempting simplification. The Apostle John follows his custom. Instead of contenting himself with an exact antithesis, he carries the thought a step further. As Brooke Westcott says, “We are in Him” is true, even in His Son, Jesus the Anointed One. The latter clause defines and confirms the reality of divine fellowship. So far as Christians remain united with the Anointed One, they are in union with God

The basis is fellowship with God, says Brooke, and is the active realization of that fellowship. As Christians enter into fuller harmony with each other, the more fully they come to live the life “in union with God” into which they have been born again. It cannot mean “we with God, and God with us,” nor can it mean that we share the Divine indwelling. All mutual and reciprocal fellowship is the first step on the path leading to that.^[1]

John Stott (1921-2011) makes a salient point here by noting the false claim the Apostle John is pointing out about a person asserting that they have fellowship with the Light while at the same time they walk in darkness.^[2] It makes no sense because wherever light goes, it eliminates darkness.^[3] That’s like saying you are righteous and unrighteous at the same time or that you are sanctified and unsanctified simultaneously. This type of fusion does not exist in union with the Anointed One. What fellowship can light have with darkness?^[4]  As far as John is concerned, anyone who makes such a claim is telling a lie. But at the same time, we can have His Word as a light shining on our pathway while we walk in the darkness around us. When seen that way, then the word “fellowship” does not come into play.

Daniel Steele (1947) comments that this choice of light as the sphere of life is a state of justification. Those in this state and only they are candidates for perfect cleansing from all sin. To say that this cleansing is a judicial clearance from the guilt of sin is to deny that God “justifies the ungodly” and then to require good deeds as a condition for pardoning, as the Roman Catholic Church teaches, is a gross error. On this ground, no sinners can be forgiven. Voluntary acts of goodwill instead of trust in the Anointed One cannot save, but compassionate deeds as the fruit of faith are well-pleasing to God. The present tense “cleanses” here denotes continuousness, not on one individual, but the human family one after another.^{[5] [6]} Steele notes that German Lutheran theologian Eric Haupt (1841-1910) says that cleansing must not be understood as forgiveness of past sins but of sanctification.” In other words, initial sanctification in the new birth.^[7]

F. B. Meyer (1847-1929) states that some are apt to say that they have fellowship with the Anointed One and yet continue to walk in darkness. It sometimes arises from their desire to stand well with their fellow believers or because they do not realize how much darkness is still in their lives. But whichever be the case, they lie and “do not the truth.” It is better by far to walk quietly in the Light, so far as we have it. Thus, we will secure His blessed fellowship, and His blood will be continually cleansing us from sin, removing all hindrance to the Anointed One’s desire to having free communication with His choicest gifts.^[8]

James Morgan (1859-1942) says we need to keep in mind that a priest must sprinkle the sacrifice’s blood before it is effective. Under the law, the blood purged all things. The book, the people, the tabernacle, and the ministry vessels were sprinkled with blood. So must it be with our souls. It will not suffice that the Anointed One’s blood has been shed. It is not enough that it is of infinite value. It will not save us that it is sufficient to cleanse from all sin. It must be applied to the conscience. It was not enough that the helpless sufferers lay at the pool of Bethesda mourning over their diseases; they must go into the healing waters when troubled by the descending angel. Whoever did so was made whole of whatever diseases they had. We must go into the fountain opened for sin and uncleanness in like manner. We must go at first with all our sins, original and actual. We must continue to go as long as we live and are in danger of defilement. Let us not neglect to do so. Our salvation is dependent upon it. Wash and be clean, as did the leprous Syrian General Naaman.[9] You will prove by experience that “the blood of Jesus the Anointed One cleanses us from all wrong doing.”[10]

Raymond E. Brown (1928-1998) agrees with other commentators who say that John was not worried about initial justification but about forgiving sins committed after being justified. When a person first believes and comes into the Light, their sins are forgiven. That forgiveness comes with a guarantee. If they failed because of inattention or purposely violated God’s Word or Will, it does not cancel their justification. If they are trying to walk in the Light, the blood of Jesus will cleanse them of sinfulness as long as they genuinely repent and resolve never to do it again.^[12] Of course, it does not advocate that believers take this guarantee as a license to sin when they want to and then get forgiveness after the fact. This forgiveness is contingent on a believer’s full intention to walk in the Light (“conduct themselves”). One slip won’t send you over the cliff. But when you flirt with the edge, your fall may prohibit your ability to get back to the Light. If this happens, you’ll end up in darkness for the rest of eternity.

Bible commentators Philip W. Comfort and Wendell C. Hawley explain that the purpose of “living in the Light” is not to produce individual mystics but to encourage believers’ genuine fellowship. True spirituality is manifest in community fellowship. One cannot say that they commune with God but then refuse to connect with God’s people.^[13] While I was ministering in Germany, I heard that a woman said she did not go to church to worship with other believers because she didn’t need church fellowship. She had God and His Word, so she was content with her relationship with God. Obviously, this gesegnete Frau did not read John’s first epistle, especially verse three of chapter one.

Stephen S. Smalley (1931-2018) points out that talking about a believer’s walk with God in the present tense, it denotes a continuous attitude of mind and behavior. In other words, we are not just going through the motions. It includes praise and worship, words and deeds, acts and actions, ministries, and motives. Living in the Light implies a conscious and sustained endeavor to live a life in conformity with the revelation of God.^[14] We do not live for what we can get out of God, but what God can get out of us.

James Montgomery Boice (1938-2000) observes that John’s definition of God as “Light” is followed by denying the false claims and the erroneous teaching of the Gnostics. These people claimed to have entered into a higher fellowship with God than that of most believers, possibly even the Apostles. They professed great things, but there was a flaw in their profession. They claimed to know God, but even as they made their claims, they showed by their actions that they failed to take sinning, which is opposed to God’s nature, seriously. Their religion, says Boice, consisted of ethics, which German pastor and theologian Dietrich Bonhöffer called “cheap grace.”^{[15] [16]}

---

[1] Brooke, Alan E. International Critical Commentary, op. cit., p. 15

[2] Stott, John. The Letters of John, op. cit., p. 78

[3] Cf. Isaiah 9;2; John 8:12; Romans 2:19

[4] 2 Corinthians 6:14

[5] See Romans 3:24

[6] Steele, Daniel: Half-Hours with John, op. cit., p. 12

[7] Haupt, Eric, First Epistle of John, Clarke’s Foreign Theological Library, Vol. LXIV, T &T. Clarke, Edinburgh,1879, p. 42

[8] Meyer, F. B., Our Daily Homily, Vol. 5, Fleming H. Revell Co., New York, 1899, p. 231

[9] 2 Kings 5:14

[10] Morgan, James: An Exposition of the First Epistle of John, op. cit., p. 50

[11] Brooke, Alan E. International Critical Commentary, op. cit., p. 15

[12] Brown, Raymond E., The Epistles of John, op. cit., p. 202

[13] Hawley, Wendell C., Comfort, Philip W., Cornerstone Biblical Commentary, op. cit., p. 334

[14] Smalley, Stephen S., 1, 2, 3 John, op. cit., p. 23

[15] Bonhoeffer, Dietrich: The Cost of Discipleship, Revised Ed., Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc. New York, 1963, pp. 45-60

[16] Boice, James Montgomery: Expository Commentary, op. cit., p. 30

• 

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN

CHAPTER ONE (Lesson LIV) 02/18/21

Rabbi Judah ha-Nasi gives us this insight: “For uncleanness that affects the Temple and its Holy Things through immorality, atonement is made by the goat whose blood is sprinkled within [the Holy of Holies] and by the Day of Atonement; for all other transgressions spoken of in the Law, venial or grave, immoral or unwitting, conscious or unconscious, sins of omission or commission, sins punishable by ex-communication or by death at the hands of the court, the scapegoat makes atonement.”^[1] In like manner, John says that the blood of the sacrificial Lamb of God covers all sins regardless of their nature or seriousness.

Then, in response to what the Apostle John says here, Augustus Neander (1789-1850) writes that if every believer John addressed in this letter were already perfect and their fellowship with God unbreakable, and if their life’s course led them to walk in the Light free from the darkness of any kind, then John would have no reason to add anything more to what he’s already said at this point.

But John was well aware that even in believers, notes Neander, although their life is in its determining tendency a walking in the Light, yet the dark, the sinful, still mingle with it their disturbing influence. Their former stand-point of darkness and sin, from which redemption has set them free, remains in effect. Hence, this “walking in the light” must be developed in a continuous conflict with the former darkness; the whole life must be gradually transformed into the light from the Light already received. And hence, in reference to that sinfulness which still cleaves to the believer and opposes itself to the light, he says, that where that walking in the light exists as the determining tendency, the mark of fellowship with God, there the blood of Jesus the Anointed One will make known its purifying efficacy, its power to cleanse from all still struggling with sin.[2]

William Lincoln (1825-1888) emphasizes that light and darkness cannot coexist uniquely. He says, but now it is seen that fellowship must be in perfect light if God has a friendship with us. God cannot love our murky circumstances. I do not say He cannot come into our darkness. He has done that, but if He comes into our unlit condition, it is not that He may stay there, nor will He be content in going back to His Light by Himself. He wants to bring us to His light.[3] He tells us, for instance, that “God has called us to His eternal glory by the Anointed One Jesus.” First, God came to humanity’s home; but now He will bring humankind to His house. God visited Adam and Eve in paradise, but now the Anointed One promises, “Those that overcome will eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God.”[4]

Andrew Maclaren (1826-1910) sees John as the Apostle of love, but he was also a “son of thunder.” His intense moral earnestness and very love made him hate evil, sternly condemn it, and his words flash and roll like no other words in Scripture, except the words of the Lord of love. In the immediate context, he has been laying down what is to him the very heart of his message, that ‘God is Light, and in Him is no darkness at all.’ There are spots in the sun, great tracts of blackness on its radiant disc, but in God is unmingled, perfect purity. That being so, it is clear that no man can be in sympathy or hold communion with Him unless he, too, in his measure, is light.^[5]

Marvin Vincent (1834-1921) points out an essential factor in verse seven by explaining that the phrase, the blood of Jesus His Son, is chosen with profound insight. Though Ignatius uses the phrase blood, yet the word blood is inappropriate to the Son as God conceived in His divine nature. The word Jesus brings out His human nature, in which He assumed a real body of flesh and blood, which blood was shed for us.^[6] The human name, Jesus, shows that His blood is available for man. The divine name, His Son, shows that it is incredibly effective.

Augustus H. Strong (1836-1921) tells us about a meeting years ago at the Parliament of Religions in Chicago. The delegates advocated their various ideas about human life. Still, no religion except Christianity attempted to show that there “was any intellect given to humans to make sense of these ideals.” When Joseph Cook challenged ancient religious priests to answer Lady Macbeth’s question: “How do I cleanse this bloody right hand?” the priests were silent. But Christianity declares that “the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin.” Says Ezekiel Gilman Robinson (1815-1893): Christianity differs from all other religions in being:

            (1) A historical religion;

            (2) in turning abstract law into a person to be loved;

            (3) in furnishing a demonstration of God’s love in the Anointed One;

            (4) in providing atonement for sin and forgiveness for the sinner;

            (5) in giving the power to fulfill the law and sanctify life.^[7]

Ernst Drylander (1843-1922) makes a point that the thought that ‘God is Light’ was not in itself new or never heard before. Dr. Drylander says that when Ezekiel saw the glory of God, it appeared to him as “a great storm coming from the north, driving before it a huge cloud that flashed with lightning and shone with brilliant light. There was a fire inside the cloud, and in the middle of the fire glowed something like gleaming amber.”^[8] The Psalmist also recognized God’s power and glory in Nature by exclaiming, “You wear Light like a robe. You stretch out heaven like a starry curtain.”^[9] Therefore, God in His essential being is Light free from the darkness, which overshadows us. He is without the cloud of error’s gloom, untouched by the blemishes of sin, and He, Himself, is Truth, Holiness, and Salvation. It is what the prophets of the First Covenant realized.[10]

Furthermore, Drylander asks, what does walk in the Light, as He is in the Light, mean? How can it be done? Foremost, let us remember that the Apostle John makes no impossible demand when he speaks of our “walking in the light.” He does not require that we be perfect in the sense in which God is perfect, but he does demand that we should, in all sincerity, place ourselves under the influence of the Light which is in God and streams forth from Him. He does not ask for perfected holiness, as God is holy, but he demands focused zeal. Nothing should hinder the Light of truth and holiness from permeating our life. When John bids us “walk in the Light,” he means that our whole lives should be influenced by sanctifying and transfiguring Light, which comes from God and which illuminates us in the Anointed One Jesus. That way, our thoughts and acts, the outer as well as the inner person, our lives are to be enlightened.[11]

F. B. Meyer (1847-1929) states that some are apt to say that they have fellowship with the Anointed One and yet continue to walk in darkness. —It sometimes arises from their desire to stand well with their fellows or because they do not realize how much darkness is still in their lives. But whichever be the case, they lie and “do not the truth.” It is better by far to walk quietly in the Light, so far as we have it. Thus, we shall secure His blessed fellowship, and His blood will be continually cleansing us from sin, removing all hindrance to the Anointed One’s desire to having free communication with His choicest gifts.^[12]

James Morgan (1859-1942) says, let us consider the seasonable and encouraging direction the Apostle John gives to those who would enjoy real fellowship. We find it in the seventh verse. The Apostle’s approach corresponds precisely with the prophet Isaiah’s invitation, “Come, people of Jacob. Let us walk in the Light of the Lord.”^[13] The encouragement of another prophet proceeds on the same principle, “Oh that we might know the Lord! Let us press on to know Him. He will respond to us as surely as the arrival of dawn or the coming of rains in early spring.”^[14] The Apostle Paul expresses the same sentiment, in the form of an appeal and a counsel, “At one time you lived in darkness. Now you are living in the Light that comes from the Lord. Live as children who have the Light of the Lord in them.”^[15] Keeping these Scriptural passages as guidelines will make it worthwhile to investigate what is implied by “walking in the Light” to attain the enjoyment of fellowship? That leaves us with this question: What should we do that we may have so high a privilege?[16] The answer is clear: we should attempt nothing through the Holy Spirit on our own but let the Holy Spirit do it all in and through us.

Morgan continues by saying it is essential that we keep in mind that a priest must sprinkle the sacrifice’s blood before it is effective. Under the law, the blood removed all things. The book, the people, the tabernacle, and the ministry vessels were sprinkled with blood. It must be the same with our souls. It will not suffice that the Anointed One’s blood is available. It is not enough that it is of infinite value. It is not enough that it is sufficient to cleanse from all sin. It must be applied. It was not enough that the helpless sufferers lay at the pool of Bethesda mourning over their diseases; they must go into the healing waters when troubled by the descending angel. Whoever did so was made whole of whatever diseases they had. We must go into the fountain opened for sin and uncleanness in like manner. We must go at first with all our sins, original and actual. We must continue to go as long as we live and contract fresh defilement. Let us not neglect to do so. Our salvation is dependent upon it. Wash and be clean, as did the leprous Naaman. You shall then prove by experience that “the blood of Jesus the Anointed One cleanses us from all sin.”[17]

---

[1] Mishnah, Fourth Division: Nezikin, Tractate Shabuoth, 1:6, p. 410

[2] Neander, Augustus: The First Epistle of John, Practically Explained, op. cit., pp. 33–34

[3] See 1 Peter 2:9

[4] Lincoln, William: Lectures on the Epistles of St. John, op. cit., pp. 26–27

[5] MacLaren, Alexander. Commentary (Expositions of Holy Scripture), op. cit., (Kindle Location 167555-167559)

[6] Vincent, Marvin: Word Studies on the NT, op. cit., pp. 315, 317

[7] Strong, Augustus A: Systematic Theology, op. cit., Vol. 1, pp.328-329

[8] Ezekiel 1:4

[9] Psalm 104:2

[10] Drylander, E. A Commentary on the First Epistle of St. John in the Form of Addresses, op. cit., pp. 16–17

[11] Ibid. pp. 23–24

[12] Meyer, F. B., Our Daily Homily, op. cit., Vol. 5, Fleming H. Revell Co., New York, 1899, p. 231

[13] Isaiah 2:5

[14] Hosea 6:3

[15] Ephesians 5:8

[16] Morgan, James, An Exposition of the First Epistle of John, op. cit., pp. 38–39

[17] Ibid., p. 50

• 

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN

CHAPTER ONE (Lesson LIII) 02/17/21

What kind of Gospel are we preaching? asks Octavius Winslow (1808-1878) rhetorically. Isn’t it for poor sinners? “There is not an ill word in it against a poor sinner stripped of his self-righteousness,” says a respected preacher from years ago, It speaks of pardon, acceptance, peace, full redemption here, and unspeakable glory hereafter. Furthermore, the Gospel proclaims a Savior to those drowning in sin, a Redeemer to sin’s captives, a Restorer to ruined lives, a Physician to the sick, a Friend to the needy, and an Advocate for those accused of corruption. It is everything to a self-ruined, sin-accused, law-condemned, justice-threatened, and broken-hearted sinner. It is the “glorious Gospel” our blessed God provides.

Winslow goes on to say that it reveals to the self-ruined sinner the One in whom there is help.^[1] And to the sin-accused the One who can wash away all sin.^[2] And to the law-condemned the One who saves from all condemnation.^[3] To the justice-threatened the One who is a shelter from the wind during the storm.^[4] To the broken-hearted, the One who binds and heals.^[5] That One is Jesus. O name ever dear, ever sweet, ever precious, ever fragrant, ever-healing to the “poor in spirit!”^[6]

Alexander Maclaren (1826-1910) discusses the necessity of walking in the light. He says there are three things we must consider. First, to walk (live) in the Light. In many languages, says Maclaren, “light” is the natural symbol for knowledge, joy, and purity. Besides, even light is broken down into various hues and colors in its spectrum, from infrared to ultraviolet. John’s intense moral earnestness leads him to focus on the symbolism, which makes light an expression, not so much our knowledge about joy, but of spiritual-moral purity.

Second, the companions of those who walk in the Light. John points out that if we walk in the Light, we have communion with God. But before that, he said that we have fellowship with one another. The critical factor here for John is the glue that holds believers together, and that is their mutual possession and appreciation for the Light. Even though many other things bond us together in fellowship, nothing strengthens more than the deep affections in the kinship of our souls as we move together into the realm of Light and purity. Sin separates people; sanctification bonds them together in their union with the Anointed One.

Third, the progressive cleansing of those who dwell in the Light. John wants to point out that the blood of the Anointed One not only erases sin from our record, but it also goes on cleansing when any marks of sin appear. We see that clearly expressed in verse nine. In other words, says John, the first is for justification and the second for sanctification. God attempted to impress upon the Hebrews when they came out of Egypt.^[7] Besides, says the Apostle, this is not a reference to the blood the Anointed One shed on the cross, but the life-blood transfused into our veins by which we were given a new life. We must have the life of the Anointed One as the animating principle of our lives and the life-force of Jesus keeping us free from the power of sin and death.[8]

Kenneth Wuest (1863-1961) interprets John’s declaration of that which we have seen with discernment in our mind’s eye, and which we heard and presently rings in our ears, we are also reporting to you. This way, you may participate jointly in common with us [in our first-hand knowledge of the life of our Lord]. And the fellowship indeed, which is ours, is with the Father and His Son, Jesus the Anointed One. And these things we are writing so that our joy, having been filled in times past, may persist in that state of fullness through the present time.

This message we bring is good tidings to you that God as to His nature is Light, writes Wuest, and darkness in Him does not exist, not one particle. Suppose we say that the things we have in common with Him are fellowship, but the sphere of darkness is habitually controlling our behavior; we would be lying and not doing the truth. But suppose within Light’s compass, we are habitually ordering our action as He is in the Light. In that case, these things we have in common. Therefore, we [the believer and God] are having fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus, His Son, keeps continually cleansing us from every sin.[9]

Simon Kistemaker (1930-2017) believes that the words here in verses six and seven were not necessarily meant for the Apostle John’s readers but those spreading false doctrine about the Anointed One’s reality. Apparently, they were not expressing these teachings from some remote location, but were already a part of the church community. That made them doubly dangerous. They were, in fact, wolves in sheep clothing.^[10] The main characteristic of true believers is that they live in the Light of God’s truth. They walk in the Light because they walk in union with Him, who is the Light. His radiance reflects on their pathway to show them where to step and what to avoid. And how do they prove that they are walking with and in the Light? Because they have holy fellowship with God and harmonious fellowship with their spiritual brothers and sisters.^[11]

As that blessed old hymn written by William Cowper in 1772 so aptly states:

There is a fountain filled with blood,
Drawn from Immanuel’s veins,
And sinners plunged beneath that flood
Lose all their guilty stains:
Lose all their guilty stains,
Lose all their guilty stains;
And sinners plunged beneath that flood
Lose all their guilty stains.

And John knew who this fountain was because he recorded that John the Baptizer was the first to recognize Him the day Jesus went to the Jordan River to be baptized. As he saw Jesus approaching, John the Baptizer lifted his eyes and voice and exclaimed: “Behold the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world.”^[12] And later in life, in his revelation, John informed the seven assemblies of believers in Asia that this same Jesus would be coming again. Yes, the same Jesus the Anointed One who is the faithful witness to all that John wrote and the first among those raised from death. He is the Leader of the kings of the earth. He is the One that loved us and washed us clean from sin by His blood.^[13]

We must remember that when John wrote this epistle, there was no doubt still many messianic Jews and proselyte non-Jews who were part of the church. They were familiar with the Jewish form of sacrificial atonement for sin. In the Jewish Mishnah, we read where the Rabbis discussed the various forms of sacrifice to cover their transgressions. So, someone asked if a sacrifice for one type of sin could be offered at a time appointed for another? When their teacher said, “Yes,” they then said to him, “If so, then those on the Day of Atonement could be offered at the New Moons, but how can those of the New Moons be offered on the Day of Atonement to make atonement which does not pertain to it?” He answered that they were all brought to make atonement for uncleanness that affects the Temple and its Holy things.^[14]

It is also evident that John was acquainted with the Hebrew form of poetic structure, such as what we find in the Psalms. They are called “Parallelisms.” One type of such parallelisms was the ABBA called the chiasmus. It is also referred to as a “sandwich” parallelism where the first and last lines are synonymous, and the middles lines are also interchangeable. In this case, the first and last lines are about light, while the middle lines are about darkness. Rewriting these verses makes its organization evident:

                                    A God is Light

                                                B No Darkness in God

                                                B Walking in the Darkness

                                    A Walking in the Light

It is immediately apparent that John’s interest involves determining the meaning of the light/darkness metaphor and applying it ethically to Christian living.^[15]

---

[1] Hosea 13:9

[2] 1 John 1:7

[3] Romans 8:1

[4] Isaiah 32:2

[5] Isaiah 61:1

[6] Winslow, Octavius, The Works of: (Kindle Locations 38056-38063). Monergism Books.

[7] See Leviticus 11:44, 45; 19:2; 20:28

[8] MacLaren, John: Commentary (Expositions of Holy Scripture) 32 Books In 1 Volume: An Expositor’s Bible Commentary (Kindle Location 167553-167651). http://www.DelmarvaPublications.com. Kindle Edition.

[9] Wuest, Kenneth S., The New Testament: An Expanded Translated, (1 Jn 1:3–7). Eerdmans. Grand Rapids, MI: 1961

[10] Matthew 7:15

[11] Simon J. Kistemaker, op. cit., pp. 243-244

[12] John 1:29

[13] Revelation 1:5

[14] Mishnah, Fourth Division: Nezikin, Tractate Shabuoth, Ch. 1:5, p. 410

[15] Burge, Gary M. The Letters of John, op. cit., p. 65

• 

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN

CHAPTER ONE (Lesson LII) 02/16/21

Spurgeon then goes on to say, I cannot tell you the exceeding sweetness of this word “all,” but I pray for God’s Holy Spirit to give you a taste of it. Manifold are our sins against God. Whether the bill is little or large, the same payment can release one as the other. The blood of Jesus the Anointed One is as blessed and divine a payment for the transgression of Peter’s blaspheming as for the shortcomings of John. Our iniquity is gone, all gone at once, and all gone forever. Blessed completeness! What a sweet theme to dwell upon as we lay ourselves down to sleep.^[1]

John Lias (1834-1923) says that while we struggle to do God’s will for our lives, to free ourselves from the defilements of “negligence” and “nonsense” in our present imperfect condition, we risk falling into transgressions, which are sins of spiritual weakness rather than of deliberate rebellion. If our purpose is to be right with God, our will is to move towards purification; God is ready to forgive our stumbling. If we do not seek forgiveness, then we have resolved to “walk in darkness.” Sanctification from sin is a gradual process. But it rests on the life-giving properties of the blood of the Anointed One. When this is communicated to the soul, it frees it from the curse of condemnation in God’s sight and cleanses the will from the desire to sin. It inspires it with a yearning for holiness. It helps overcome the believer’s lawbreaking tendencies by confirming the purpose in its submission to God’s will.[2]

Reverend A M Hills (1848-1931) compliments the Salvation Army’s commitment to preaching and teaching holiness and sanctification in his day. Therefore, no church in the land would not be blessed and spiritually improved by sitting at General Booth’s feet. It is what he teaches concerning the relation of faith to sanctification by the Holy Spirit: “What is the faith that sanctifies? It is the act of simple trust that, on the authority of, “The blood of Jesus the Anointed One does NOW cleanse me from all inward sin and make me pure in heart before Him.” Thus, a believer can say with confidence, “I do here and now commit myself to Him, believing that He receives me and that He will evermore keep me holy while I trust Him.”

When a soul thus trusts God, says Hills, will they be made clean in every case? Yes, if that soul has the assurance that they entirely renounce all known and doubtful wrongdoing and give themselves up to doing the will of God in all things. It implies trusting God for full cleansing according to God’s Word for believing that the work is done, no matter how they feel. They must hold on to this faith until the feeling comes. If we confess our sins, He is faithful (to His promise) and (to the suffering and agony of His Son, which purchased the blessing) to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.^{[3] [4]}

Hills goes on to say that God will continually throw new light upon His guidelines, which He justly expects us to follow. Hill then offers this quote from Dr. Dale M. Yocum (1919-1987), a minister, scholar, and writer in the Church of God (Holiness), founded in 1883, who says, “To retain sanctification or cleansing, we must walk in the Light. As we keep this up, the blood is applied by the Holy Spirit. Refusing to walk in received and acknowledged Light brings condemnation. Knowing the way of holiness and refusing to walk in it is unjustified.”[5] ^[6]

William Shepard (1862-1930) speaks about how we must read each scripture in context and points out that reading the Apostle John’s epistle is especially true. For instance, in one place, he says that we have no sin, and in another that if anyone says they have no sin, they are liars. The same is true of teaching on holiness. There are some, says Shepard, that instead of teaching what opposers of holiness claim they do, they convey quite a different thought, and sometimes the very opposite. What, then, does our text in verse eight teach? Read verse seven above. Suppose a garment spotted with ink is put through a process that removes ink. When finished, how much ink would remain? If the cleaner added a note: “All ink removed,” would there be any reason to doubt?

On the same principle, says Shepard, then, if “the blood of Jesus the Anointed One cleanses us from all sin,” how much sin is left? If all the stains of sin are removed, is there any self-deception if a believer testifies to that effect? Of course, we would not advocate self-righteousness nor self-exaltation, but on the contrary, always put Jesus first and let everybody know that all we have and are is through the Anointed One, Jesus. Instead of saying, “I am saved” and “I am sanctified,” putting “I” first, say, “Jesus saved me” and “Jesus sanctified me.” Let the people see Jesus and not ourselves. We should not remain silent, but at the same time, magnify what the Lord has done for us. Give Him all the glory.^[7]

Henry E. Brockett (1936-1994) writes concerning the blessing of the fresh revelation of the power of the blood of the Anointed One. He points to Christians like English religious poet and hymn-writer Frances Ridley Havergal (1836-1879), writer on New Testament Holiness Thomas Cook (1808-1892), and Samuel Logan Brengle (1860-1936), teacher of Sanctified sanity, and many others have been led into the secret of the fullness of this blessing through faith.^[8] In his own case, says Brockett, it was not the same. He entered in by faith on a different line of truth, namely, faith in the Spirit of God’s sanctifying work based on the crucifixion of the “old nature.”^[9] People do not always immediately see the underlying unity between different but related truths of divine revelation.

As regards the truth of the blood of the Anointed One, however, Brockett felt hindered by the theory that the “cleansing from sin”^[10] related only to his “standing” before God as completely justified in His sight and not to any actual inner cleansing of the heart. As Brockett understands it; this theory does not teach that the Anointed One’s blood is applied to the believer’s heart at justification. As such, he was not able to see the glory of the fullness and depth hidden in that precious phrase, “the blood of Jesus the Anointed One His Son cleanses us from all sin.” He confesses that he is not the only one hindered in their spiritual experience by the limited interpretation of John’s words in verse seven.^[11] Brockett’s confusion may be in his understanding of “justification.” We are only justified because we accept what Jesus did on the cross on our behalf to pay the penalty for sin. It is that faith in Jesus’ work upon which we ask forgiveness and cleansing of our sins. It certainly cannot happen earlier.

Reverend Mr. Beverly Carradine (1849-1910) says two meanings are buried here in this latter part of verse seven. To the regenerated person, it represents one thing; but O how much more it means to the Sanctified believer! First, it is the cleansing away of all sins, guilt, and immorality that is personal and pertains to the individual; to the second, it means all this and the utter removal besides inherited or inbred sin. The soul is made to rejoice continually in the delightful and blessed possession of the experience of a positive indwelling purity! Two meanings, both blessed, but one so much deeper than the other!^[12]

Arno Gaebelein (1861-1945) asks, “What is this walk in the Light?” It is not the same thing as walking according to the Light. It does not mean to live a perfect and sinless life. Walking in the Light is not the question of how we walk but where we walk, and the place where the believer walks is in the Light. It means to walk daily in His presence, with our will and conscience in the Light and existence of God, judging everything that does not respond to that Light. Whatever is not right is brought at once in His presence, exposed to the Light, confessed, judged, and put away. Such is the walk in the Light, which fellowship with God demands.

The result of such walking in the Light, says Gaebelein, is the mutual fellowship it brings among believers. Each one possesses the same nature and Spirit of God. The Anointed One is also the object of each heart before the same Father. It cannot be otherwise. Then, another thing is stated, “The blood of Jesus the Anointed One His Son cleanses us from all sin.” Walking in the Light shows us what we are, and we cannot say that we have no sin. Yet, because of the cleansing blood of the Anointed One it is possible to stand before a holy God with no consciousness of immorality troubling us. Nevertheless, we know that lawbreaking tendencies are still in us. Still, we have the assurance of being cleansed from any sin by His precious blood. The blessed position of a true Christian is fellowship with the Father and His Son. Therefore, walking in the Light, since He is the Light, and fellowship with one another comes through the cleansing power of the blood of the Lamb.^[13]

---

[1] Charles H. Spurgeon: Morning and Evening Daily Readings, op. cit., July 23 PM, p. 412

[2] Lias, J. J. First Epistle of John Homiletics, op. cit., pp. 47-49

[3] John 1:7

[4] Aaron M. Hills, Holiness and Power, op. cit., Part. 1, Ch. 15, p. 208, 

[5] Yocum, Dale M., The Holy Way, Schmul Publishing, 1984, p. 46

[6] Aaron M. Hills, ibid., Ch. 19, p. 262

[7] Shepard, William: Wrested Scriptures Made Plain, Ch. 1, p. 6

[8] 1 John 1:7

[9] Romans 6:6

[10] 1 John 1:7

[11] Brockett, Henry E. The Riches of Holiness, op. cit., Holiness and the Blood of Christ, p. 56

[12] Carradine, Mr. Beverly. Sanctification op. cit., pp. 83-84

[13] Gaebelein, Arno C. The Annotated Bible, The First Epistle of John, loc. cit. 

• 

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN

CHAPTER ONE (Lesson LI) 02/15/21

Charles Hodge (1797-1878) argues that the consequences attributed to justification are inconsistent with the assumption that it consists either in pardon or in the impartation of righteousness. Those consequences are peace, reconciliation, and eternal life. As the Apostle Paul said, “Being justified by faith, we have peace with God.”[1] Pardon does not produce peace. In fact, it leaves the conscience unsatisfied. A pardon may remove the penalty for a person’s crime, but it does not take away the fact that they are still criminals. There can be no satisfaction of justice until they are cleared of having committed a crime. What satisfies the justice of God and the conscience of the sinner is the blood of Jesus, the Anointed One, the Lamb of God that cleanses from all unrighteousness. It is done by removing the guilt, thereby producing a peace beyond comprehension.[2] Hodge goes on to say; our sanctification is due to His death since His blood cleanses us from all sin. It cleanses from the guilt of sin by paying the price and secures inward purification by securing the Holy Spirit’s gift.[3]

Daniel D. Whedon (1808-1885) says that we must be aware of the significant error of making this wonderful image of being washed and cleansed in Jesus’ blood a literal ceremony. There is no container of actual blood into which our bodies or souls are plunged. This glowing imagery reigns in parts of the Final Covenant, especially in John’s writings, as well as in our sermons and hymns. Unfortunately, many Christians pass their lives without looking through the word pictures in the text to the literal wording, thereby becoming liable to deception and arguments based on a figure-of-speech with no bases in the literal interpretation.

This figurative speech means, says Whedon, that our sins are first, upon our faith, forgiven us on account of the death of the Anointed One; and, second, that the Holy Spirit given as a consequence of that death, does, in the completeness of that work, so strengthen and energize our moral and spiritual powers that we are able to reject temptation and avoid sin; and just in the measure and fulness of that power in exercise is the entireness of our sanctification. When that divinely-bestowed power is complete, the sanctification is thorough. But it is to be noted that while our pardon is immediate from the Anointed One’s blood, our sanctification is mediated through the Spirit purchased by the Anointed One’s blood. We are justified by the Anointed One; we are sanctified by the Holy Spirit.^[4]

William Graham (1810-1883) addresses the subject of fellowship with Jesus and our Father in heaven. He notes that the Apostle John, in one passage, says that it dispels the darkness of ignorance so that it is impossible to enjoy sinning while we walk in darkness. If then, you wish a quiet and peaceful walk with God, you must treasure communion with Him: if you desire the Light of truth to shine on your path, you must walk in union with Him who is the Light. There is no way of dispelling this moral darkness except by fellowship with God. In Him, you find light and life and joy. You can have no communication with Him except in the truth, and all those who seek fellowship with God in systems of falsehood and superstition deceive themselves, and the truth is not in them.[5]

Johannes H. A. Ebrard (1819-1893) notes that to have fellowship with God means to have communion with Him who is Light. Such companionship cannot be understood other than a close relationship in life, which John mentioned in verse three, and as his Gospel defines it.^[6] Now he says that he stands in such union with God, the Light, as a bodily member with the head. The Greek verb peripateó means “to walk.” But, notes Ebrard, this walk is better understood in the context of the Apostle Paul’s illustration to the Romans[7] and what John says here in his epistle.[8] It supplies the confirmation and external assurance that a person carries in themselves as part of their nature – their moral behavior, so far as it manifests itself before human eyes, and is discernible by others.

From the extent to which a person chooses to let their inner nature be seen, says Ebrard, we may draw a sure conclusion about the character of that internal nature itself. Anyone with the tendency to outwardly serve darkness and claim to have an internal secret nature in fellowship with God is a liar. Such harmony between their inner and outer attitude cannot possibly exist. An internal union with God reveals itself externally to believers through the fruit of sanctification. Yes, the Light which shines inwardly must of necessity have a glow of holy consecration over the whole life that other people’s eyes can see it. Those born of the Light and live in solidarity with God cannot hide the source for their behavior.[9] It would be like setting an oil lamp on the table for everyone to see where the flame gets its fuel.[10]

William Alexander (1824-1911) is struck by how the Apostle John talks about having an Advocate with the Father, Jesus the righteous Anointed One. He is the atonement for the whole world. God loved us and sent His Son to pay the ransom price for our sins. Where the Apostle passes on to deal with the spiritual life, he once more deals with beliefs. He speaks of eternal self-evidence as if in a speech. He waxes elegant when talking about “down from heaven.”^[11] Identical propositions, all-inclusive, teachings on the moral and spiritual life, the Trinity, the Incarnation, Atonement, are all strict theological truths.

As a sacred writer in his Epistle, John’s other characteristic, says Alexander, is that he appears to indicate throughout the moral and spiritual conditions necessary for receiving the Gospel God endowed to the Church as the essence of their life. These conditions are three. The first is spirituality. Second, submission to the Spirit’s teaching, that they may know by it the meaning of the words of Jesus. Thirdly, the “anointing” of the Holy Spirit is “teaching all things” that Jesus said.^[12]

For Brooke F. Westcott (1825-1901), the Anointed One’s blood conception as an energetic power, as a fountain of life, opened by death and still flowing, is clearly marked. It explains John’s stress on the blood and the water from our Lord’s side at the Crucifixion.[13] That which was outwardly, physically, death, was yet reconcilable with life. The Anointed One’s spirit lived even in Death and through Death.^[14]

Alexander Maclaren (1826-1910) tells us that John was the Apostle of love, but he was also a “son of thunder.”[15] His intense moral earnestness and love made him hate evil, sternly condemn it, and his words flash and roll like no other words in Scripture, except the words of the Lord of love. In the immediate context, he has been laying down what is to him the very heart of his message, that “God is Light, and in Him is no darkness at all.” There are spots in the sun, great tracts of blackness on its radiant disc; but God is unmingled, perfect purity. That being so, it is clear that no person can be in harmony or hold communion with Him unless they, too, are in the Light.

So, with fiery indignation, says Maclaren, John turns to the people, of whom there were some, even in the primitive Church, who laid claims to a lofty spirituality and communion with God, all the while were visibly living in the darkness of sin. He will not mince matters with them. He roundly says that they are lying, and the worst sort of lie — an acted lie: “They do not the truth.” Then, with a quick turn, he offers to these pretenders examples: the people who are in fellowship with God. He does this by laying down the principle that walking in the Light is essential to having an alliance with God. In John’s usual fashion, he turns the opposite into a somewhat different form to suggest another aspect of the truth. Instead of saying, as we might expect, “If we walk in the Light, as He is in the Light, we have fellowship with God,” he says, “we have fellowship with one another.” Then he adds a still further result of that walk, “the blood of Jesus cleanses from all sin.”^[16]

In one of his evening devotions, Charles Spurgeon (1834-1892) points to the word “cleanses” in the text of verse eight. “Cleanses,” says the text – not “will cleanse.” Some people think they may look forward to being pardoned as a dying wish. Oh! How infinitely better to have cleansing now than to depend on the rare possibility of forgiveness at the moment of death. Some imagine that a sense of pardon is attainable after many years as a Christian. But forgiveness of sin is a present thing – a privilege for here and now, a joy for this very hour. The moment a sinner trusts Jesus, they are fully forgiven.

The text, says Spurgeon, being written in the present tense, indicates continuance. It was “cleanses” yesterday; it is “cleanses” today, it will be “cleanses” tomorrow: it will always be with you, until you cross the river; every hour you may come to this fountain, for it still cleanses. Notice, likewise, the completeness of the cleansing, “The blood of Jesus the Anointed One His Son cleanses us from allsin” – not only from sin but “from all sin.”

---

[1] Romans 5:1

[2] Philippians 4:7

[3] Hodge, Charles. Systematic Theology: op. cit., The Complete Three Volumes (Kindle Location 27391-27692). GLH Publishing. Kindle Edition

[4] Daniel D. Whedon: on First Epistle of John, op. cit., p. 255

[5] Graham, W., The Spirit of Love, op. cit., p. 38

[6] John 15:1; 17:21

[7] See Romans 6:4; 8:4

[8] 1 John 2:6

[9] Ebrard, John H. A., Biblical Commentary on the Epistles of St. John, in Continuation of the Work of Hermann Olshausen, translated by William Burt Pope, Published by T. & T. Clark, Edinburgh, 1860, pp. 88-89

[10] Cf. Matthew 5:15; Luke 11:33

[11] See John 3:13; 6:33, 38, 41-42, 50-51, 58

[12] William Alexander: The Expositor’s Bible, W. Robertson Nicoll, Ed., op. cit., The Epistles of St. John, p. 59

[13] See John 19:34

[14] Brooke F. Westcott: op. cit., p. 36

[15] Mark 3:17

[16] Alexander Maclaren: Sermons on First Epistle of John, op. cit., Walking in the Light.