Week 27: \u00a0Apr 22, 2012<\/p>\n
John continues building on the ideal that we are children of God, contrasting sin with abiding in him.<\/p>\n
Study<\/em><\/p>\n 2 \u2013 Dear friends, we are now God\u2019s children, but what we will be like has not been revealed yet. We know that when the Messiah[1] is revealed, we will be like him, because we will see him as he is.<\/strong><\/p>\n –\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 John again emphasizes that we are God\u2019s children now, itis not just some future hope.\u00a0 But while we are God\u2019s children now, God is not done with us and there is a future component to this, even if we do not know what it will be.\u00a0 This is very similar to Paul\u2019s statement in 1 Cor 2:9 \u201cNo eye has seen, no ear has heard, and no mind has imagined the things that God has prepared for those who love him.\u201d<\/em><\/strong> Yet while we do not know what we will be like, we do know we will be like Jesus.<\/p>\n because we will see him as he is.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n –\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The Greek here is somewhat ambiguous. It could be that we Know\u2026 because we see or it could be, we will be like because we see. I think that the latter fits the context best.\u00a0 Much of John\u2019s message has been to see God has he truly is, is to obey him, to be like him.\u00a0\u00a0 This is similar to faith, the more faith we have the more we follow him.<\/p>\n 3 \u2013 And everyone who has this hope based on him keeps himself pure, just as the Messiah[2] is pure.<\/strong><\/p>\n –\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 If we have this hope, we will strive to follow him now. How could it be otherwise?\u00a0 Think about something in your life you really hoped for, and how much you did to make that hope a reality.\u00a0\u00a0 If we really have this hope in Christ, we will keep ourselves pure.\u00a0 This also implies that those who do not have this hope don\u2019t follow him, and after all why should they?<\/p>\n –\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 pure (\u1f01\u03b3\u03bd\u03cc\u03c2)<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n –\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The Greek work here means without defect or blemish.\u00a0 It originally meant to withdraw from world to dedicate oneself to God, but overtime came to be seen in ethical terms, which is what it meant at the time John wrote.\u00a0 As in all things, Jesus is to be our example.\u00a0 We should strive to be like him.<\/p>\n \n 4 \u2013 Everyone who keeps living in sin also practices disobedience. In fact, sin is disobedience<\/strong>.<\/p>\n –\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 While a reference to those who left, this is stated as a universal principle.\u00a0 How can you be a follower of Christ and disobey Christ at the same time?<\/p>\n –\u00a0 Disobedience\u00a0 (\u1f00\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03b1)<\/strong><\/p>\n –\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The word means to disregard the law, Lawless.\u00a0 For some this is simply breaking the rules set down by God. \u00a0Others see this as working in opposition to God.\u00a0 The difference will depend on how one views God\u2019s Law. This is a very complex question and one that has long been debated.\u00a0\u00a0 In fact it is at the heart of\u00a0 Plato\u2019s\u00a0 Euthyphro<\/a> and which asks the related question: What is Holiness?\u00a0 \u00a0Is something holy simply because God says it is? Or does God say it is holy because that is what it is? \u00a0Or, more to the point here, why did God establish any particular law such as the prohibition on murder?<\/p>\n In a very brief fashion,\u00a0 is murder wrong just because God said it is wrong?\u00a0 If so could He have said it was right?\u00a0 On the other hand if you say murder is wrong independent of God, then it does not come from God, and God is not supreme.<\/p>\n While in Euthypro<\/a> this seems to be an insoluble problem, there is a third option, \u00a0that what is holy, what is good, and thus the basis for God\u2019s law is tied to the very nature and character of God.\u00a0 Murder is wrong not just because said it is wrong, but because of who God is, because of his very nature.<\/p>\n If this view is correct, it has some pretty significant ramifications, for to sin is to go against the very nature and character of God.\u00a0 It is to be in conflict with the very nature and essence behind the universe, and this begins to give us some understanding of the impact of sin on nature.<\/p>\n In this light it become easier to see why to know him, is to follow and obey him for to sin is to rebel against the very nature and character of God.<\/p>\n 5\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 \u2013 You know that the Messiah[3] was revealed to take away sins,[4] and there is not any sin in him.<\/strong><\/p>\n –\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 John follows this stark statement of sin with statement of comfort which is stated as a statement of common ground \u2013 a premise. \u00a0\u00a0Jesus came to take away sins<\/em><\/strong>. Again John use take away rather than atone. The emphasis here is more on the removal than the process and follows this with there is not any sin in him<\/em><\/strong> which again is an emphasis on the absence of sin. This verse harkens back to the starting premise of this letter in 1:5 God is light, and in him there is no darkness\u2014none at all!<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n 6 \u2013 No one who remains in union with him keeps on sinning. The one who keeps on sinning hasn\u2019t seen him or known him. <\/strong><\/p>\n –\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 John finished this section with a forceful statement against sinning.\u00a0 To drive his point home, he says it in both a positive and negative fashion.\u00a0 To be in union with Christ is to stop sinning, and to continue sinning is to neither see him or know him. \u00a0\u00a0This is a theme that John has mentioned before and will do so again, for a key aspect of a relationship with Christ is obedience.\u00a0\u00a0 (See verse 2:3-6)<\/p>\n –\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Out of context this statement can be very troubling to Christians. But John has also said in 1:8 that If we say that we do not have any sin, we are deceiving ourselves and we\u2019re not being truthful to ourselves<\/em><\/strong>. Given this, how are we to understand this passage?\u00a0\u00a0 As one might expect, there are many theories.<\/p>\n Some believe that John is referring to a certain type of sin, normally willful or deliberate sin.\u00a0 This view however has two significant problems. As we all know from experience, not all of our sins are involuntary.\u00a0 Even the best Christians not only sin but sin deliberately at times so this explanation does not really solve the problem. \u00a0\u00a0The second problem is that the discussion of sin in this section does not lend itself in to such a neat division. John does later make a division among sins, but that is toward the end of the letter (1 John 5:16), and thus cannot be considered part of the context here.<\/p>\n Another view is that John is speaking of continual sin and thus the translation keeps on sinning.\u00a0 One problem here is that this could be seen as pushing the grammar farther than it supports. While the present active tense used here can refer to continuous action, it does not in and of itself do so.\u00a0 This must be determined from the context. \u00a0But the context does not really demand this.\u00a0 So the claim that this refers to continual sinning, is more a theological argument than a grammatical one.\u00a0 This does not rule it out, but the neither is it very clear from the context of John\u2019s discussion.<\/p>\n A third view is that John is speaking of an ideal.\u00a0\u00a0 John frequently speaks in stark black and white terms, and is doing so here.\u00a0 This is our goal, this is our ideal.\u00a0 Our goal is not to be mostly free from sin, but to be completely free from sin.\u00a0 This is more than just a goal, it is also our future. When Christ comes, we will be in union with him and will be free from sin.\u00a0 Important to the support of this view is the fact that John started this section by pointing to what we will be like when the Messiah is revealed. (3:2)<\/p>\n I think there may be something else going on here as well.\u00a0 Building off of John\u2019s statement about knowing God equals obedience to God, and that to love God means to obey him, I see the focus of the verse not on so much on sinning, but on remaining in him (\u03c0\u1fb6\u03c2 \u1f41 \u1f10\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7 \u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd).\u00a0 If we remain in him we will not sin.\u00a0 For us to sin requires that we break our fellowship with him, that we cease to know him or see him.\u00a0 When we sin, at that point for us, God does not exist.<\/p>\n If you have question or comments about the class, feel free to send me an email at elgin@hushbeck.com<\/a> and be sure to put \u201cEpistles of John\u201d in the header.<\/em><\/p>\n See here for references and more background on the class<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\nh.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 We are God\u2019s Children Live accordingly (3:2-3:6)<\/h4>\n
i.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Premise:\u00a0\u00a0 We will be like him (3:2)<\/h5>\n
ii.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Live accordingly (3:3-6)<\/h5>\n