I want to begin a brief but entirely new series of studies of 1 John. And to begin with I want to look at the purpose for which 1 John was written. It is possible to read a book without understanding the purpose for which it was written. Indeed, much reading is done on this level by many persons. But it is not possible to study a book without dealing with this primary question.
The first is the test of practical righteousness in the believer’s life. It does not mean that the Christian must be without sin—indeed, John says that the one professing to be without sin deceives himself and makes God a liar (1:8, 10)—but it does mean that he must be progressing in righteousness so that his profession is increasingly matched by his conduct.
The second purpose that John had in writing his letter is related to the first one, but it is rightly considered a distinct purpose, in that by it John was dealing with a new and dangerous movement in his day and was warning Christians about it. The movement was what today we would call an early form of gnosticism, and John’s objective in writing against it is to stress the historical origins of Christianity.
The third purpose for the writing of 1 John is to explain or elaborate upon Christ’s new commandment: “A new commandment I give unto you, that ye love one another” (John 13:34).
What, then, are the major emphases of John’s first letter for ourselves and our contemporaries? There are five of them.
The first message of John is his insistence upon the truth and value of the old message of the Gospel as opposed to new or modern alterations of it, such as would change its character.
The most important thing that John has to say in his preface is that Christianity is Jesus Christ. Without Christ there would have been no Christianity, for Christianity began by God’s revelation of Himself in Jesus and continues by the authoritative testimony of the apostles and others to that revelation.
In yesterday’s study, we ended by drawing our attention to the phrase “the word of life” and mentioning the way this might be understood at first glance. We said that we would tend to interpret it as “the life-giving Word” or “Christ who gives life.” There are several reasons for questioning this first and easy identification of “the word of life” with Jesus, however.
The second channel through which John gained knowledge of Christ was the eye, for the apostle says that he and other apostles “have seen” Him. Of all the sense words used by John in this preface—hear, see, look upon, and touch—this one was apparently the most important to John personally, for he repeats it in each of the first three verses.
As objective and tangible as the revelation of God in Christ was, this would nevertheless have gone unnoticed by John and the others unless God had also intervened to reveal Christ to them subjectively.
At the conclusion to yesterday’s study, we saw that the first word used to describe how the Gospel is shared is martyrein, which originally denoted the bearing of testimony in a court of law.
Second, John says, we “proclaim” what we have seen and heard to you. On the surface this verb seems much like the other, involving a verbalized testimony to what has been seen and heard. But it also suggests something else. It suggests a commission from Christ, and therefore authority.
What is God? John answers: “God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.” This statement is John’s first great thesis, leading naturally into much of the material that follows. In this section of the letter John presents his thesis (both from a positive and negative perspective), deals with three related denials concerning the nature and consequences of sin, and issues a call to holiness, “without which,” as the author of Hebrews states, “no one will see the Lord.”
In biblical thought two special ideas are associated with the image of light, however. First, the image generally has ethical overtones. That is, it is a symbol of holiness or purity as well as of intelligence, vision, growth and other realities.
John’s definition of God as light is followed by a denial of three false claims in which the reader is probably right in hearing an echo of the erroneous teachings of John’s Gnostic opponents. These men claimed to have entered into a higher fellowship with God than was known by most other Christians. 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 sin, which is opposed to the nature of God, seriously.
In yesterday’s study we looked at the first result of walking in the light, which concerns fellowship with other Christians. Second, John says that the one walking in the light will find the blood of the Lord Jesus Christ available to him for continued cleansing.
The application of this section of John’s letter must be to each man or woman individually. John has contrasted the nature of God (“God is light”) with the nature of man; and he has begun to show the characteristics of those who walk in the light as opposed to those who walk in darkness. It is not enough that a man should claim to be in the light. He must actually walk in it. He must be a child of the light.
A question still remains, however. John obviously wants those to whom he is writing to keep free of sin, but how precisely do the truths about which he has been speaking lead to godliness? He has spoken of God’s faithfulness in forgiving sin. But how does the assurance of forgiveness actually lead to holiness?
This is the principle of 1 John 2:1-2: forgiveness in advance for any sin that might ever come into our lives. This is God’s promise, and it is given to us precisely that we might not sin. God is not shocked by human behavior, as we often are; for He sees it in advance, including the sins of Christians. Moreover, and in spite of this, He sent His Son to die for the sins of His people so that there might be full forgiveness.
The second term used by John of Jesus is “righteous.” Indeed, it is this word rather than either “advocate” or “propitiation” which is emphasized. In what sense is it used?
It is in the Old Testament sacrificial system that the true idea of propitiation is observed, for if anything is conveyed through the system of sacrifices (in the biblical sense of sacrifice) it is that God has Himself provided the way by which a sinful man or woman may approach Him. Sin means death. “The soul that sinneth, it shall die” (Ezek. 18:4, 20). But the sacrifices teach that there is, nevertheless, a way of escape and of approaching God.
Anyone who has worked with young Christians knows that often shortly after a person has believed in Christ doubts set in. The initial experience of the Christian is usually one of great joy. He had been lost in the darkness of his own sin and ignorance; now he has come into the light. Formerly he had not found God; now he has found Him. But then, as time goes by, it is also frequently the case that the new Christian begins to wonder if, in fact, anything has really changed. He thought he was a new creature in Christ, but, to speak frankly, he is really much as he was. The same temptations are present; they may even be worse. There are the same flaws of character. Even the joy, which he once knew, seems to be evaporating. At such a time the new Christian often asks how it is possible to be certain that he is saved by God. He may ask, “How can I truly know that I know God?”
In contrast to either of these two Greek ideas, John’s understanding of the knowledge of God is essentially personal and practical. So it is satisfying. It is satisfying because it is knowledge, not of an idea or thing, but of a person, and because it issues in a profound change of conduct.
Why is the righteous life a proof that we know God? Because it is not natural to sinful man. Consequently, it is proof of a divine and supernatural working in our lives if we obey Him. Paul makes the same point when he follows his admonition to the Philippians to “work out” their salvation with the profound observation, “For it is God who worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure” (Phil. 2:13).
Yesterday, we pointed out that there are two kinds of men, and considered the first category. This is the man who claims to know God but who does not keep His commandments. Today we continue with a description of the second category of men.
This conclusion also comes to Christians living in our own time. Do we say we are Christians? Then “he that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.” Clearly, in this verse the first “he” is the Christian; the second “he” or “him” is Jesus. The call is to emulate Jesus in our conduct.
In an appendix to his very excellent book, The Church at the End of the 20th Century, Francis Schaeffer speaks of love as “the mark of the Christian.” His study is based upon John 13:33-35, in which Christ is recorded as having imparted a new commandment to His disciples: “A new commandment I give unto you, that ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another. By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.” Schaeffer’s point is that “only with this mark may the world know that Christians are indeed Christians and that Jesus was sent by the Father.” He is quite right. It may be added to this, however, that it is also by love that Christians may know that they are Christians.
The command to love is old in that it existed and was known before Christ’s coming. In its simplest form it is found in Leviticus 19:18, which says: “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself: I am the LORD.” This is the verse to which Jesus referred when He was asked His opinion regarding the first and greatest commandment. He said that the greatest commandment was that recorded in Deuteronomy 6:5: “Thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might.” But the second, he said, was Leviticus 19:18. In what sense, then, is the command to love a new commandment? It is new in that it was raised to an entirely new emphasis and level by the teaching and example of Jesus.
John has stated that the darkness is passing away and that the true light is shining; but, nevertheless, the darkness is not completely gone yet, nor is the light seen everywhere or in everybody. Therefore, he brings forward three examples of those to whom the test of love may be applied. There are two negative examples and one positive one.
This last verse introduces a term which may also in conclusion be applied to the life of love. It is the term “walk,” which suggests practical steps. What is love after all? It is not just a certain benign feeling. It is not a smile. It is an attitude which determines what one does.
What does love mean? What will happen if those who profess the life of Christ actually love one another? Francis Schaeffer, who was referred to at the beginning of this study, has several suggestions.
In these references John writes to the newborn in Christ to assure them that he is writing, not because they are not saved (which some of his remarks might lead them to question), but because they are and because he wants them to progress in their Christianity.
John’s two statements to the spiritually mature of his congregations, the fathers, are identical; what is more, they are also quite similar to the second of his statements to children. There is one difference, however, and in this difference lies the distinct nature of John’s reference.
The first part of John’s long parenthesis, verses 12-17, was written to reassure his readers; for John did not want them to think that he was questioning their salvation. Rather, he has written to them because their sins have been forgiven and because they do know the Father. If they miss this truth, they have misunderstood him. On the other hand, John does not want them to think that what he has written regarding the tests of life has no relevance for Christians, for this would be a misunderstanding too. Thus he now goes on to show how what he has said should be applied to their lives.
In the first sense, Christians are to receive and be thankful for the world, for it is God’s gift. Jesus Himself was appreciative of the world in this sense. In the second sense, Christians are to love the world and seek to evangelize it, for God also loves the world. In the third sense, however, the sense we have here, Christians are to reject the world and conduct their lives according to an entirely different set of values.
But does nothing at all abide? Yes, says John. The one who does God’s will abides forever. The object of his love, even the Father, abides forever. His love itself, having its source in God, abides forever. His works, being an aspect of the work of God, abide forever, for he is the possessor of eternal life and heir to all God’s riches in Christ Jesus. The conclusion is that Christians should therefore love God and serve Him fervently.
It is a characteristic of our time, often pointed out by contemporary Christian apologists, that men and women no longer strictly believe in truth. To be sure, they do use the term in a certain colloquial sense, referring to that which is the opposite of false; nevertheless, most twentieth-century men do not mean that when a thing is said to be true it is therefore true absolutely and forever.
Being faced with a major defection in their ranks, the Christians of Asia Minor might be tempted to be discouraged, but now John adds that the defection has a good purpose. These “went out” from us, he says, “that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.” In other words, the defection has the effect of purifying the church and revealing both truth and error in true colors.
Over against the antichrists who have left the church John sets God’s true children. These are distinguished by two essential characteristics: first, they have been anointed by the Holy One and second, they all know the truth centered in the Lord Jesus Christ.
The mention of lies versus truth in verse 21 leads John quite naturally to an analysis of the Gnostics’ errors. But it is not their errors in general that he seizes upon but rather the fundamental error which is their denial that Jesus is the Christ. Indeed, as he states it, this is not only the Gnostics’ error but also the most fundamental error that can be made by anyone. Therefore, it also has the most serious consequences. In writing about this denial of Jesus as the Christ John calls it the lie and the one who embraces it the liar.
The other element—the second weapon—which his readers have and the false teachers do not have, is the Holy Spirit who indeed teaches the Christian by making the Word come alive for him and who abides in him.
John has already spoken of righteousness and the need to be obedient to Christ earlier in chapter 2, and of the need to abide in Him just one verse before this. But although he repeats these ideas here, he nevertheless does so in a new context which is that of Christ’s return. John’s point is that those who are Christ’s ought to abide in Him and live righteous lives in order that they might have confidence and not be put to shame at Jesus’ return.
All these texts testify to the prominence of the doctrine of the Lord’s return throughout the New Testament. But the unique aspect of the reference before us is that John refers to it here, not as a mere point of doctrine considered in itself, but rather as an incentive for living a righteous life. Righteousness, like purity of doctrine, is to come only by abiding in Christ. But we are encouraged to do that by knowledge of the fact that one day we will have to give an account before Him. This, then, is a very practical doctrine.
In the last words of chapter 2, John says that it is by doing righteousness that the one who is really born of God demonstrates that he is born of Him. The idea here is of inherited family traits. God is righteous. Consequently, everyone who is born of God must show traits of that righteousness.
God did not bring children into spiritual life to thereafter abandon them and let them go to hell, however. He brought them into life in order to make them completely like Jesus and take them with Him into heaven. Therefore, John cannot stop his rhapsody with the mere thought of what we are, but rather goes on to reflect on what we shall be when Christ shall appear and we shall be made like Him.
The Christ we are to imitate is the Christ of history. It is the Christ of the opening pages of the epistle, the Christ who was seen and heard and touched and indeed proclaimed from the beginning as the heart of the apostolic Gospel. That is the Christ who is coming back and to whom we must answer for how we have lived. He who truly hopes in Him will live for Him. He who has truly known Him will seek to be like Him.
To separate truth from error is one of the goals of 1 John, of course, as we have seen. Consequently, it is frequently the case that the letter’s affirmations and teachings are accompanied by strong repudiations and denials.
As we read this section we detect what must be a further reference to the tendency of the Gnostic teachers to underestimate sin or excuse it. Perhaps the Gnostics excused sin as being essentially negative in nature; that is, as being connected with what is finite. Again, they may have related it only to their bodies and not to their minds, which they may well have said were above any dispositions to sin. But John will not have this. Sin is not merely negative. It is willful rebellion. Moreover, it involves the mind as that in which rebellion originates. It is only when we see this that we begin to abhor sin and turn from it to seek a Savior.
John has reminded his readers that it is characteristic of the devil to sin. Now he also reminds them that it is a characteristic of Christ to work to take away sin. He states this in two forms, corresponding to the parallel structure of these verses. First, Jesus appeared to take away the sins of His people; second, Jesus appeared to destroy the works of the devil.
At the conclusion of yesterday’s study, we looked at the first suggestion for understanding the presence of sin in the Christian life. Today, we look at the other six ideas.
Herein lies the explanation of John’s initial test and the reason behind it. If a person has truly been born of God, then something quite radical has happened to him. He has received a new nature and is therefore and for that very reason launched on a new course. The course is a course in holiness. If he does not go on in holiness, this indicates that he has never in plain fact been born again. On the other hand, if he does go on, he can be encouraged by this and take confidence.
At no point is the contrast between one of John’s tests and its opposite more important for contemporary men and women than the contrast between love and hate. This is so simply because the meaning of love has become so debased in modern culture that practically anyone will claim to have love according to his own definition.
Just as jealousy and hatred in a life indicate that the person involved is of the world and not of the family of God, so also do love and self-sacrifice indicate that such a one has passed out of the world and into God’s family. John therefore turns to an analysis of Christian love, elaborating his statements over against the background of the world’s hatred and murderous designs. In this section he restates and elaborates upon the social test itself, digs deeper into love’s essential nature, and finally suggests two ways in which Christians may show love practically.
Here the continuing contrast between Cain the murderer and Christ the Savior is seen in sharpest focus. Life is the most precious possession anyone has. Cain showed his hate by killing righteous Abel. Jesus revealed His love by sacrificing His own life for those foul creatures of sin He chose to make His brethren.
A second area in which self-sacrifice must be practiced is in the Christian home, particularly in love between a husband and wife. Today’s culture glorifies self-satisfaction. It teaches that if one is not personally and fully gratified in marriage, one has a right to break it off, whatever the cost to the other spouse or to the children. But this is not God’s teaching. God teaches that we must die to self in order that the other person might be fulfilled, for it is only as that happens that we will find the fullness of God’s blessing and personal satisfaction.
How does a Christian deal with doubt? Although there are many causes for it, there is only one answer. It is by knowledge. The Christian must simply take himself in hand and confront himself with what he knows to be true concerning God and God’s work in his life. In other words, faith (which is the opposite of doubt), being based on knowledge, must be fed by it. This is the point that John develops at the close of this third chapter.
Yesterday, we looked at the most common meaning of peithein, which is “to convince” or “to persuade.” Today we begin by looking at another meaning.
There is a second truth which we may also use to reassure our hearts. The first by its very nature was related to ourselves specifically; it had to do with God’s specific work in our own individual life. The second is more general in that it refers in equal measure to all who are God’s children. It is simply that whatever our hearts may say, God knows us better than even we ourselves do and nevertheless has acquitted us. Therefore, we should reassure ourselves by His judgment, which alone is trustworthy, and refuse to trust our own.
The first advantage of an uncondemning heart is what John calls “confidence before God.” This must be understood, not in the sense of confidence of things in general, but in the sense of confidence of one’s standing before God and therefore of access to Him. The Greek phrase literally says, “confidence toward God,” meaning that confidence by which we turn toward Him trustingly. It is one fruit of justification in the Christian life (Rom. 5:2).
In the last verse of chapter three, John introduces two new ideas into the letter, neither of which has even been suggested up to this time. He mentions the idea of a mutual abiding, of Christ in the Christian and of the Christian in Christ; and he mentions the Holy Spirit, through whom the abiding is effected. Because of the development to come in chapter five, the idea of the witness of the Holy Spirit is the more important of the two new concepts.
We do not know precisely what was happening to the churches to whom John was writing, of course. We know that at the very least there was a schism in which those who professed to have greater knowledge in spiritual matters withdrew from the original Christian assembly.
In these verses John deals with this problem of the need to discern teaching in the church and, therefore, also with our own need to exercise such discernment. His reply has three parts. First, there is the command to test those who claim to be inspired. Second, there is a standard to be used in testing them. Third, there is an application of these ideas to the problem of distinguishing between true and merely professing Christians. In this last section John deals once more with the radical distinction between the church and the world and shows the relation of each to the apostolic doctrine.
John has already indicated that behind every prophet stands a spirit, either the Spirit of God or the demonic spirit of antichrist (v. 3). He has spoken of the need to test the spirits by their origin. But how are they to be tested? How can a normal Christian know whether the spirit is of God or of antichrist? Here John applies precisely the test given in Deuteronomy 13, though in terms appropriate to the situation occasioned by the Gnostic challenge. “What do they say about Christ?” is John’s question. Do they acknowledge that Jesus is the Christ come in the flesh or do they deny this? If they deny Christ, they are not of God no matter how marvelous their activity.
At this point we may feel that the discussion has become somewhat theoretical and even unreal, for we are not often confronted today by those who claim to be prophets. Our difficulty is rather of knowing on the purely human level whether or not a teacher speaks truly. Can we test those who speak on this level? Can truth be distinguished from error here? The objection is valid, of course, and the questions are good ones. Consequently, we are not surprised to find John turning to deal with this matter in the remaining verses.
The tragedy of our time is that we have not enough men and women to proclaim and defend that doctrine. So the truth is not clearly defined, and the way is not clearly illuminated. The doctrine of the apostles, the only true doctrine of the church, illuminates it; and the incarnation of God’s Christ defines and gives a focal point to that doctrine. It is for us to determine whether or not we believe that doctrine and, if we do, to respond to it. There are not three ways, according to the apostle. There are not four, or five, or more. There are only two ways: the way of truth and the way of error, the way of Christ and the way of antichrist. We are called to serve Christ, and those who are truly of God will do so.
To this point much of John’s letter has been given over to developing the three tests by which a person who has become a child of God may know that he truly is a child of God. They are: the moral test, which is righteousness; the social test, which is love; and the doctrinal test, which is the test of truth or of belief in the Lord Jesus Christ as God incarnate. The tests have been developed one by one, but it has been obvious even as John talks about them that they belong together and that each is important.
John begins with a passionate exhortation to his readers to “love one another,” a phrase which is repeated three times in verses 7, 11, and 12. This is his great concern, and the reasons for that concern are given in connection with this threefold repetition. The first reason is that love is of God’s own nature; therefore, Christians are to “love one another.” The second reason concerns God’s gift in Christ; therefore, Christians are to “love one another.” The third reason is God’s present activity in and through His people; for this reason, too, Christians are to “love one another.”
The fact that the Trinity is involved in these statements leads naturally to the second of John’s reasons why Christians must love other Christians. The second reason is God’s gift of Jesus Christ His Son for our salvation.
Yesterday, we concluded by speaking of the first two factors that enable us to measure God’s great love for us in Christ. The final factor is that God gave His Son to die for sinners. As John says, “Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins” (v. 10).
There are three reasons why Christians are to love one another: first, because God is love and we are of God; second, because God loved us in Christ and so revealed His love to us; and third, because God is at work in us by His Spirit to bring that love to completion.
In the last verse of the preceding section John has concluded that if we love one another, two things may be said to follow: first, that God abides in us, and second, that God’s love is perfected in us. These two conclusions give the outline for the next two sections of this chapter. In the first section (vv. 13-16) God’s indwelling of the Christian is discussed in greater detail; in the second (vv. 17-21) the perfection of love is analyzed.
The confession of Christ is mentioned as the first evidence of the Spirit’s activity because it is at the point of confession that the Christian life may properly be said to begin. “And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the world. Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God” (vv. 14-15). Once again, as in numerous spots throughout the letter, John phrases his confession of Christ in words which would be especially challenging to those faced with the Gnostic heresies. He emphasizes that God the Father sent the eternal Son to be the Savior and that the historical Jesus is that eternal Son.
In verses 13-16 John has developed the first of two ideas introduced for the first time in verse 12, the indwelling of the Christian by God. Now he returns to the second of those two ideas, the perfection of love, and explains what he means practically.
The sinner must begin by fearing the God against whom he has sinned; but, having believed in Christ who has atoned for sin, he may put away fear and grow in confidence before Him.
The second area in which love finds perfection is in reference to our love for the brethren; for it is there, according to John, that real love is to be seen and measured.
At the end of the preceding chapter John has spoken quite sharply about the need to love, saying, “If a man says, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar; for he that loveth not his brother, whom he hath seen, how can he love God, whom he hath not seen?” But it is entirely possible that a person might try to escape this demand by asking, “And who is my brother? Just whom precisely am I to love?”
In John’s understanding, the potential child of God is first made alive by God, as a result of which he comes to believe on Christ, pursue righteousness, and love the brethren.
When a birth takes place the individual involved is not born into isolation, nor is he a totally unique individual in the sense that his characteristics and attributes have no connection with those who have gone before. For one thing, he is born into a family and into family relations. For another, he possesses at least some of the characteristics of the one who has engendered him. Spiritually, this means that the child of God exhibits those characteristics about which the letter has been teaching.
The second thing that John is probably thinking of is suggested by this passage. Here he is writing of the new life which Christians have from God and of the resulting love which they bear to Him. Without this life and love the commands of God, even in the form in which Christ gave them, could be burdensome. But now, the life of God within makes obedience to the commands possible, and the love which the Christian has for God and for other Christians makes this obedience desirable.
The third of John’s tests is expressed in these verses as belief. Indeed, it is with this concept that the section both begins and ends (vv. 1, 5); between belief that “Jesus is the Christ” and belief that “Jesus is the Son of God” is found John’s discussion of both love and obedience. The implication is that, just as it is impossible to have love without obedience or obedience without love, so also is it impossible to have either love or obedience without belief in Jesus as the Christ and the Son of God.
John does three things in this passage. First, he marshals witnesses to Jesus in which the testimony of the Father is found. Second, he contrasts the testimony of men with God’s testimony, stressing that God’s testimony is to be believed and trusted. Third, he sums up God’s testimony and joins it to a final statement of his purpose in writing the letter.
At the time of the late Renaissance and Reformation, when classical texts were first being edited critically, Erasmus of Rotterdam produced a Greek text in which the words “in earth” were missing. At this time most of Europe was using the Latin Vulgate as its Bible version, so Erasmus was quickly criticized for omitting the passage. He replied that the words were not in any of the Greek manuscripts.
In yesterday’s study, we looked at the first interpretation of the expression “water and blood” as a reference to that which flowed from Christ’s side at His crucifixion. We noted a couple of important similarities. Unfortunately, the similarities are not as great under examination as they seem to be on the surface.
If a person does believe God, he has an internal assurance that what he has believed is trustworthy. This is the work of God’s Spirit, the testimonium Spiritus Sancti internum, as the Reformers termed it. It is in addition to the assurance provided on other grounds.
Canadian Committee of The Bible Study Hour
PO Box 24087, RPO Josephine
North Bay, ON, P1B 0C7