Oak Hall

So, I’m going to Greece on Wednesday to speak on an Oak Hall expedition. I’ve never been on an Oak Hall trip before – certainly not as a speaker – so it’s quite exciting and a bit scary. I’m doing 8 talks – one each evening for 8 days. I’ve never done such a substantial series before. Again quite exciting and a bit scary.

Here are my prayers and thoughts:

1. I’m expecing the holiday to get better as it progresses. On the first few nights people won’t really know each other. They won’t know me and I won’t know them very well. So I’ll be nervous which will, do doubt, affect my preaching, and people will need to get used to my style and personality which means they might not get/understand everything I’m saying. I pray that God will work through that and build good relationships quickly – and that my preaching will be clear and faithful.
2. 1-3 John are very practical books so I’m hoping that the teaching will not only help individuals but also help the holiday. When I preach, for example, on loving each other – won’t it be great to see God working that out in people’s lives there and then as they love Christians they don’t really know.

Christ and Sin are Totally Opposed

I blogged previously (here) about a parallel structure in 1 John 3:3-10. Since I spotted it it has been plaguing my mind as I struggled to work out the meaning of the passage. I think I’ve got some answers.

These verses (esp. vv6 and 9) have caused many exegetical problems regarding the presence of sin in a Xian. I’m not happy with the Perfection/Holiness/Wesleyan interpretation as that seems to contradict 1 John 1:8-10 and 2:1-2; let alone the rest of Scripture; and it creates a two-tier Christianity. So there must be some other explanation for the absoluteness of John’s phrases.

I believe the answer lies in understanding the two parallel sections: v4 // v8a and v5 // v8b.

v4 Everyone who makes a practice of sinning also practices lawlessness; sin is lawlessness.
v8b Whoever makes a practice of sinning is of the devil, for the devil has been sinning from the beginning.

v5 You know that he appeared to take away sins, and in him there is no sin.
v8b The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the works of the devil.

The first key is to understand that (contrary to the NIV) John is not talking about law as a moral code in v4, rather he is talking about this concept of ‘lawlessness’. The noun ‘law’ is not used; rather the noun ἁνομια (‘lawlessness’, from which we get out word ‘anomoly’). This concept of lawlessness is best described by Paul in 2 Thes 2:1-12. The ‘man of lawlessness’ seems to be the same character as John’s Antichrist – that is, one who is utterly opposed to Christ, and seeks power and worship for himself. John has already explained (2:18) that as well as one big-bad-Antichrist, there will are (are) lots of little mini-me anitchrists who embody the same opposition to Christ. John’s point then is this: sin = lawlessness = opposition to Christ.

The parallel thought in v8a is much clearer: sin is of the devil which, obviously, means sin is opposed to Christ.

Now, v5 explains that Christ came to take away sin. The point, I believe, is not that Christ is acting as our substitute or propitiation (he has already made that clear in 1:6, 9; 2:1-2). Rather John is simply pointing out that Christ came to take away sin; therefore by implication Christ is opposed to sin.

Similarly, the parallel thought in v8b is clear: Christ came do destroy the work of the devil; therefore Christ is opposed to the devil and Christ is opposed to sin.

Put all these four verses together and it is clear that John’s emphasis is that Sin and Christ are totally opposed. Sin is opposed to Christ. Christ is opposed to sin.

Once we understand John’s teaching about sin and Christ, we can start to understand his teaching about sin and the believer. Having demonstrated to clearly that sin and Christ are so absoltely opposed what must his application be: that Xians (those who claim fellowship with Christ) must also be totally opposed to sin. He cannot say, without diluting his point, that Xians must ‘try not to sin’. If sin and Xp are as opposed as he claims, then Xians must also be totally opposed to sin.

To sin, then, is to become both an Antichrist and a Satanist. That is what John is saying. His application, then, must be that Xians do not sin. Christians do not sin because sin is totally opposed to Christ.

To me, that makes good sense of the passage in context but avoids contradicting John and the rest of the bible.

Christians do not sin because sin is totally opposed to Christ.

The Sinless Christian

Don’t you just love it when you find little gems through diligent study. Here’s one I noticed today:

In 1 John 1:5-10 John is, well, attacking, really, his opponents and their false teaching. In v6 he tells us that they claim to ‘walk in the light’ (i.e. have fellowship with God = be a genuine Xian believer) but at the same time they are walking in darkness (i.e. living openly sinful lives without any sign of repentence).

In vv8 and 10 John tells us that the false teachers are claiming some kind of sinlessness – some kind of perfection/total holiness. John is clearly meaning to show what this is utter rubbish.

But, and this is the interesting bit: look at what John says about real Xians in v9. Real Xians don’t claim to be sinless, rather the acknowledge their sinfulness and confess it. Real Xians are trusting in God to be “faithful and just” to forgive their sin and purify them from all unrighteousness. Real Xians, then, do not claim to be sinless.

But did you notice the irony. False teachers claim to be sinless but aren’t. Real Xians don’t claim to be sinless, but because they confess their sin and God purifies them – then they are infact, sinless.

Praise God that he is Light (v5), that he is faithful and just (v9) that he forgives and purifies (v9) that he sent his son as our propitiation (2:2).

The Christian who acknowledges and confesses their sin is sinless.

1 John 3:3-10

I’m noticing some very interesting structural markers and section divisions following Malcolm Coombes theories. Here’s one:

vv3-6 and 7b-10 seem to // (=parallel) each other closely in term of syntax and structure:

Both sections start with John’s statement that Xians immiate Christ in purity (v3) and righteousness (v7b) and are then followed by the phrase, identical in each v, “καθὼς ἐκεῖνος ἁγνός ἐστιν”.

vv4-5 and v8 // each other in their discussion and explanation of the nature of sin. And, importantly, both relate sin to the coming of Christ with φανεροω and an ἱνα clause.

v6a // vv9-10b both explaining the reason for the believer not sinning (i.e. he remain in him / he is born of God).

Finally, v6b and v10b demonstrate the opposite of v6a and vv9-10a – i.e. a demonstration the ungodly/non-believer sinning.

Here’s a pdf file tableing those parallels (see the chart at the top of page 2):

Structure of 1 John 2:28-3:10

There’s loads more interesting stuff in 1 John. I’ll keep you posted…

1 John 5:7-8

I think a quote from Metzger’s Textual Commentary (p647, emphasis added) will put this issue to bed:

The passage is absent from every known Greek manuscript except eight…

Let’s stop there and think about that for a minute. How many Greek manuscripts are there? If there are only nine manuscripts then there’s a problem. But wait – there are well over 5300 Greek manuscripts. Anyway, carry on Mr. Metzger:

…and these [eight] contain the passage in what appears to be a translation from a late recension of the Latin Vulgate. Four of the eight manuscipts contain the passage as a variant reading written in the margin as a later addition to the manuscript.

Like I say – I think that puts the issue to bed once and for all!