Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 1 John 1:8
If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.
8. If we say ] See on 1Jn 1:6. Doubtless there were some who said so, and more perhaps who thought so; ‘say’ need not mean more than ‘say in our hearts’. S. John’s own teaching might easily be misunderstood as encouraging such an error, if one portion of it (1Jn 3:9-10) were taken without the rest.
we have no sin ] ‘To have sin’ is a phrase peculiar to S. John in N. T. There is no need to inquire whether original or actual sin is meant: the expression is quite general, covering sin of every kind. Only One human being has been able to say ‘The things pleasing to God I always do’; ‘Which of you convicteth Me of sin?’; ‘The ruler of the world hath nothing in Me’ (Joh 8:29; Joh 8:46; Joh 14:30). The more a man knows of the meaning of ‘God is light’, i.e. the more he realises the absolute purity and holiness of God, the more conscious he will become of his own impurity and sinfulness: comp. Job 9:2; Job 14:4; Job 15:14; Job 25:4; Pro 20:9; Ecc 7:20.
we deceive ourselves ] Not merely we are mistaken, or are misled, but we lead ourselves astray. In the Greek it is neither the middle, nor the passive, but the active with the reflexive pronoun: the erring is all our own doing. See on 1Jn 5:21. We do for ourselves what Satan, the arch-deceiver (Rev 12:9; Rev 20:10) endeavours to do for us. The active ( ) is frequent in S. John, especially in the Apocalypse (Rev 2:26; Rev 3:7; Rev 2:20; Rev 12:9; Rev 13:14; Rev 19:20; Rev 20:3; Rev 20:8; Rev 20:10). An examination of these passages will shew that the word is a strong one and implies serious departure from the truth: comp. Joh 7:12.
the truth is not in us ] Because we are in an atmosphere of self-made darkness which shuts the truth out. The truth may be all round us, but we are not in contact with it: it is not in us. One who shuts himself in a dark room has no light, though the sun may be shining brightly. All words about truth, ‘the truth, true, truly,’ are characteristic of S. John. Note the antithetic parallelism, and see on 1Jn 1:5.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
8 10. Consciousness and Confession of Sin
8 10. Walking in the light involves the great blessings just stated, fellowship with God and with our brethren, and a share in the purifying blood of Jesus. But it also involves something on our part. It intensifies our consciousness of sin, and therefore our desire to get rid of it by confessing it. No one can live in the light without being abundantly convinced that he himself is not light.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
If we say that we have no sin – It is not improbable that the apostle here makes allusion to some error which was then beginning to prevail in the church. Some have supposed that the allusion is to the sect of the Nicolaitanes, and to the views which they maintained, particularly that nothing was forbidden to the children of God under the gospel, and that in the freedom conferred on Christians they were at liberty to do what they pleased, Rev 2:6, Rev 2:15. It is not certain, however, that the allusion is to them, and it is not necessary to suppose that there is reference to any particular sect that existed at that time. The object of the apostle is to show that it is implied in the very nature of the gospel that we are sinners, and that if, on any pretence, we denied that fact, we utterly deceived ourselves. In all ages there have been those who have attempted, on some pretence, to justify their conduct; who have felt that they did not need a Saviour; who have maintained that they had a right to do what they pleased; or who, on pretence of being perfectly sanctified, have held that they live without the commission of sin. To meet these, and all similar cases, the apostle affirms that it is a great elementary truth, which on no pretence is to be denied, that we are all sinners. We are at all times, and in all circumstances, to admit the painful and humiliating truth that we are transgressors of the law of God, and that we need, even in our best services, the cleansing of the blood of Jesus Christ. The fair interpretation of the declaration here will apply not only to those who maintain that they have not been guilty of sin in the past, but also to those who profess to have become perfectly sanctified, and to live without sin. In any and every way, if we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves. Compare the notes at Jam 3:2.
We deceive ourselves – We have wrong views about our character. This does not mean that the self-deception is willful, but that it in fact exists. No man knows himself who supposes that in all respects he is perfectly pure.
And the truth is not in us – On this subject. A man who should maintain that he had never committed sin, could have no just views of the truth in regard to himself, and would show that he was in utter error. In like manner, according to the obvious interpretation of this passage, he who maintains that he is wholly sanctified, and lives without any sin, shows that he is deceived in regard to himself, and that the truth, in this respect, is not in him. He may hold the truth on other subjects, but he does not on this. The very nature of the Christian religion supposes that we feel ourselves to be sinners, and that we should be ever ready to acknowledge it. A man who claims that he is absolutely perfect, that he is holy as God is holy, must know little of his own heart. Who, after all his reasoning on the subject, would dare to go out under the open heaven, at midnight, and lift up his hands and his eyes toward the stars, and say that he had no sin to confess – that he was as pure as the God that made those stars?
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
1Jn 1:8-10
If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves
Assumptions of sinlessness
This is a strong and clear statement, the utterance of an apostle who speaks out of the fulness of a long and ripe Christian experience, not simply in his own name, but as the organ or representative of the whole Church.
Let us consider its bearing:–
I. On our conceptions of truth. Truth is a wide word, but I use it here in St. Johns sense as equivalent to the truth of the gospel–the truth which regulates the kingdom of God. It is only by patient study and the contributions furnished by prayerful research on the part of her members, the Church can enrich herself with the full contents of Divine revelation. An infallible judgment can only exist in a perfect or sinless character. Prejudice prejudges a question in accordance with its own bias, and unduly discounts the evidence that looks in another direction. Personal feeling blinds us to considerations whose force would otherwise be recognised. Attachment to a theory, or a traditional interpretation, makes us unwilling to acknowledge frankly what tells against it, and tempts us to do violence to the natural meaning of words. To assume, therefore, that because a man is a Christian, sincere, devout, and earnest in his faith, he must be unquestionably right in his views of Scripture, is to assume what the apostle here condemns. It is to suppose that he is absolutely free from all that can limit, warp, or obscure the understanding, that is, that he has no sin. But you may ask–Does not this destroy the infallibility of the apostles themselves? They never claimed to be sinless. I answer to this that for special purposes the apostles were enriched with supernatural gifts. But still farther you may ask–What, then, does St. John mean when he says: Ye have an unction from the Holy One, and know all things? All things, if you look at the verse that follows, St. John uses as equivalent to the truth–the distinctive truth of the gospel. As a man who does not know his own mind is at the mercy of every wind of opinion, and exercises no determining influence upon events, so the Church of Christ unless it knew her Lord, and the peculiar truths which centre in His Person, would be simply and hopelessly lost amid the conflicting eddies of the world. But this is quite a different matter from affirming that every individual Christian will come to correct conclusions on all the debatable subjects that lie within the compass of revelation. Let us, therefore, while we hold fast the faith and rest upon it, as the broad foundation of all our hope, ever remember our own proneness to go astray and to attach a disproportionate importance to secondary truths.
II. In relation to guidance in practical conduct. When we know the gospel we wish to act in accordance with it. In other words, we desire not only to be led into right views of truths, but also into right conceptions of duty. In reality these two are one. To think truly will secure our acting rightly. If we should require to be perfect or sinless men in order to be sure that our conclusions in regard to all matters connected with Revelation are certainly right, we should require to be the same kind of men to be sure that our decisions in points of duty are never wrong. In both cases we must remember that if we say we have no sin we deceive ourselves, and that wherever sin is there is liability to error, just as there is to pride, or hatred, or open transgression. Perhaps you will say: Nobody seriously doubts this; but do we not receive in answer to prayer what will neutralise this confessed liability, and guide us to a right decision? How, then, does God answer our prayer for guidance? He gives us what the Scripture calls grace, inward enlightenment, or strength, according as the occasion may require. But you must not imagine that grace, any more than sin, is a physical quantity which may occupy a definite space within a mans nature. Grace operates throughout our whole nature, renewing the will, cleansing the affections, stimulating and purifying thought, acting as an antidote in all these directions to the power of sin. Without it sin works unqualified by any Divine control, with it sin is always under restraint. Hence no act or perception on the part of a Christian man is wholly the result of grace, but more or less of grace and more or less of sin. In short, it is the outcome or exercise of a sinful nature in which both co-exist. We may interpose an obstacle that will seriously hinder His working or wholly arrest it. Conscience may have been deadened through previous inconsistency or unfaithfulness. The heart may have grown sluggish through neglect. Our affections may have spent themselves too lavishly upon earthly things, and grown dull and indifferent towards things above. Temptation may have prevailed against us, and through pride or unwatchfulness we may have admitted strange and alien guests into the sanctuary of the soul. Is it possible that in such circumstances we should be keenly sensitive to the motions of the Divine Spirit? May we not miss the intimations we might otherwise detect, or yield but a halting and imperfect response to their monitions? The truth is, we conceive of prayer and its results in too mechanical and unspiritual a way. We imagine we are always ready and able to receive, no matter what our petitions may include. It does not always occur to us that spiritual blessings must be spiritually discerned and spiritually used. And hence a double danger ensues. When Christians pray, and the answer does not correspond to the request, their faith in prayer is apt to be shaken. They fail to realise that His answer can never be heard so long as the ear is stopped; that His grace can never enter as long as the heart is preoccupied with other things, and unwilling to surrender itself wholly to Him. Or, on the other hand, they may assume that a Divine light is leading them on, where they are following in reality the sparks of their own kindling. They become dogmatic and opinionative, when there is no warrant for their being so. They contract a self-confidence, and conviction that they are always right, which is apt to blind them to many pitfalls, and dig a ditch for their own feet. (C. Moinet, M. D.)
Self-delusion as to our state before God
It is among the most potent of the energies of sin, that it leads astray by blinding, and blinds by leading astray.
I. The apostle declares that the imagination of our own sinlessness is an inward lie. To believe or to deny the possibility of Christian perfection is to leave the motives of the spiritual life almost wholly unchanged, as long as each man believes (and who on any side doubts this?) that it is the unceasing duty of each to be as perfect as he can, and, in the holy ambition of yet completer conquest, to think nothing gained while aught remains to gain. Were a perfect man to exist, he himself would be the last to know it; for the highest stage of advancement is the lowest descent in humility. As long as this humility is necessary to the fulness of the Christian character, it would seem that it is of the essence of the constant growth in grace to see itself lowlier as God exalts it higher. Besides this operation of humility, it must be remembered that the spiritual life involves a progressively increasing knowledge of God. Now, though the spirit of man assuredly must brighten in purity as thus in faith and love it approaches the great Source of all holiness, it must also appreciate far more accurately the force of the contrast between itself and its mighty model; and thus, as it becomes relatively more perfect, it may be said to feel itself absolutely less so. Nay, I doubt not but it is the very genius of that Divine love which is the bond of perfectness, to be lovingly dissatisfied with its own inadequacy; and such a worshipper in his best hours will feel that, though love be, indeed, as these divines so earnestly insist, the fulfilling of the law, his love is itself imperfect, deficient in degree, and deficient in constancy; and that in this life it can, at best, be only the germ of that charity which, never-failing, is to form the moving principle of the life of eternity. But it is not of those, whom some would not only pronounce perfect, but enjoin to feel and know themselves such; it is not of those, who (as I would rather represent it) doubt all in themselves while they doubt nothing in Christ, that I have now to speak, but of those whose cold hearts and neglectful lives utter the bold denial of a sinlessness which the lips dare not deny; who cry out of the depths! indeed, but not for rescue or redemption; who cannot know God as a Redeemer, for they cannot feel from what He is to redeem!
II. It would be vain to think of specifying the particular, causes of the evil; we can only speak of some of the general principles on which it rests. The whole mystery of deceit must be primarily referred to the governing agency of Satan–in this sense, as in every other, the ruler of the darkness of this world. It is a living spirit with whom we have to contend, as it is a living God whom we have to aid us. The cunning of the Serpent alone can reach the master subtlety of making the soul of man do his work by being its own unpitying enemy, and traitor, and cheat; it is only the father of lies that thus can make the wretched heart a liar to itself. But then it is certain, that as God is pleased to work by means, and to approach circuitously to His ends, so, still more, is His enemy bound to the same law; and that, therefore, as the Creators path of light, through providence and grace, is occasionally discoverable by experience, and directed on principles already prepared to His Almighty purposes, so also may the crooked ways of the Evil One, similarly adjusted, be similarly sought and known.
1. The first and darkest of his works on earth is also the first and deepest fountain of the misfortune we are now lamenting–the original and inherited corruption of the human soul itself. It is ignorant of sin, just because it is naturally sinful. We cannot know our degradation, we cannot struggle, or even wish, to rise, if we have never been led to conceive the possibility of a state higher than our own. Nature can teach discontent with this world, but there her lesson well nigh closes; she talks but vaguely, and feebly, and falsely of another! Now, if this be so, have we not for this mournful unconsciousness of our personal depravity a powerful cause in that depravity itself?
2. If Nature alone–treacherous and degraded nature–is silent in denouncing sin–if she has no instinctive power to arouse herself, what shall she be when doubly and trebly indurated by habit; when the malformed limb becomes ossified; when that faculty which was destined to be, under Divine guidance, the antagonist of nature, a second nature, as it is truly called, to reform, and resist, and overlay the first–is perverted into the traitorous auxiliary of its corruption? We know not ourselves sinners, because from infancy we have breathed the atmosphere of sin; and we now breathe it, as we do the outward air, unceasingly, yet with scarcely a consciousness of the act! The professional man, for example, who may become habituated to the use of falsehood or duplicity, as little knows how to disentangle this, even in conception, from the bulk and substance of his customary business–to regard it as something separately and distinctively wrong–as men think of mentally decomposing into their chemical constituents the common water or air, every time they imbibe them. The mass of men know these, as they know their own hearts, only in the gross and the compound. Is it not thus that constant habit persuades us we have no sin by making us unceasingly sin; and increases our self-content in direct proportion as it makes it more and more perilous?
3. As men copy themselves by force of habit, they copy others by force of example; and both almost equally foster ignorance of the virulence of the evil they familiarise, and perpetually reconcile the sinner to himself. Mankind in crowds and communities tend to uniformity; as the torrents of a thousand hills, from as many different heights, meet to blend in one unbroken level. And in that union, the source of so much happiness and of so much guilt, each countenances the other to console himself; we are mutual flatterers only that the flattery may soothingly revert to our own corruptions.
4. How the power of this universality of sin around us to paralyse the sensibility of conscience is augmented by the influence of fashion and of rank–not merely to silence its voice, but to bestow grace, and attraction, and authority upon deadly sin–I need not now insist. Philosophers tell us that the least oscillation in the system of the material universe propagates a secret thrill to its extremity; it is so in the every act of social man; but the disorders of the upper classes are publicly and manifestly influential–they are as if the central mass itself of the system were shaken loose, and all its retinue of dependent worlds hurled in confusion around it.
5. But to example and authority, thus enlisted in the ranks of evil, and thus fortifying the false security of our imaginary innocence, must be added such considerations as the tendency of pleasure itself, or of indolence, to prolong this deception, and our natural impatience of the pain of self-disapproval. Now you know there are two ways of easing an aching joint–by healing its disease or by paralysing the limb. And there are two ways of escaping an angry conscience–by ceasing from the evil that provokes it or by resolutely refusing to hear its voice, which soon amounts to silencing it forever. And all this proceeds in mysterious silence! There are no immediate visible attestations of Gods displeasure to startle or affright. All our customary conceptions of the justice of heaven are taken from the tribunals of earth, and on earth punishment ordinarily dogs the heels of crime. Hence, where the punishment is not direct, we forget that the guilt can have existed. The very immutability of the laws of visible nature, the ceaseless recurrence of those vast revolutions that make the annals of the physical universe, and the confidence that we instinctively entertain of the stability of the whole material system around us, while they are the ground of all our earthly blessings, and while they are, to the reason, a strong proof of Divine superintendence, are as certainly to the imagination a constant means of deadening our impressions of the possibility or probability of Divine interposition. Surely the God will break forth at length from His hidden sanctuary, and break forth, as of old upon the Mount, in fire and the smoke of a furnace. (Prof. W. A. Butler.)
Deceiving ourselves
How many are there in this congregation, I wonder, who would really say to themselves, We have no sin? I do not mean, would say it just in that form. Of course not. We are too well educated for that. But practically would say it, and would resent with considerable indignation that anyone else should call them sinners. I want you to consider how thus we do deceive ourselves.
1. In the first place, we balance off against our sins certain pseudo virtues. We keep, not very correctly, and certainly not with very good bookkeeping, a debtor and creditor account. Over against the evil in our lives we set certain credit marks. We attend church with regularity–perhaps we say our prayers, as the phrase is; perhaps we read our Bible, if we are not too much driven in the morning with engagements, or too sleepy at night to take it in. And therefore we are virtuous. It is very curious how loth men are to accept this most fundamental and simple truth of religion that God is a righteous God and demands righteousness of His children, and demands nothing else. So the ancient Jew was ready to give Him sacrifice and fast days and pilgrimages; and the ancient Pharisee stood up and prayed within himself, saying, I thank God I am not as these other men are, extortioners, adulterers, unjust, or even as this publican; I fast twice a week, I give tithes of all I possess. Mr. Pharisee, are you fair minded in your dealing and honourable in your work with other men? I fast twice a week. Are you kind in your family, patient with your children, chivalric to your wife? I fast twice every week. Did you ever cheat a man in a bargain? I give tithes of all I possess. Have you ever had a share in political corruption? Oh, it is an old trick, this balancing of one thing over against another, and thinking ourselves excused from righteousness by something else than righteousness. We wonder that in the Middle Ages men would put money into the coffers of the Church and think that balanced their iniquity. We will have no such system of indulgences as that; but there is many a person today in the nineteenth century who lives a life as grasping, as selfish, as covetous, as greedy, as ambitious as his neighbour, and thinks the account is balanced because he goes to church and says his prayers, or because he has at times ideals in which he rejoices. He thinks he is a Christian because he admires Christ; because sometimes his heart fills with emotion as he sings.
2. We assume virtues that are not our own, and think ourselves virtuous because of them. Men pride themselves on their family. Yes, it is a good thing to belong to a good family. But what have you and I done in our family? How much wiser or richer or better or nobler or worthier is it because we are members of it? Men glorify themselves because they are Americans. I thank God that I am not a Turk, that I am not a Russian, that I am not even an Englishman–I am an American. What have you done that is worthy of the name America? That is the real question. What have you done to make politics purer, to make honour brighter, to make the America of the future more assured? So men pride themselves on their Church. I am a member of a benevolent church–look at the list of its contributions; I am a member of a working Church–see its activities, how much it is doing. How much are you doing? How much did you put into that list of benefactions? You are not generous because you belong to a generous Church. Men that laugh openly at the theological doctrine of imputation practise it continually, only they impute to themselves, not the virtues of their God or of their Christ, but the virtues of their fellow men. Men believe in the solidarity of the race for the purpose of satisfying their pride, but not for the purpose of developing their humility.
3. As men take the virtues that do not belong to them, see them and rejoice in them, so they do not take the vices that belong to them. They see the sins of others–not their own. The spendthrift can read you a homily on the vices of the miser, but it never occurs to him that there is any vice in the life he is leading; the miser will read you an eloquent sermon on the vices of the spendthrift, but it never occurs to him that there is no sin in clutching a dollar until it cries. How quick are we to see the vices of our neighbours; how slow to turn our eyes upon our own!
4. We disguise our vices. We give them false names; we dress them up as virtues and call them such, and really think they are. And this young man who never has earned a dollar in his life by solid, honest industry, takes the money that his father has earned by hard industry and throws it freely, hither and yon, among his fellows, and calls it generosity, and thinks it is. He does not know that it is mean to spend in lavish living what another has toiled to acquire.
5. We change the form of our sin, and then think we are done with it. We think that sin consists in the shape it assumes; we do not know that it consists in the evil heart that beats within. We read our Ten Commandments over and say to ourselves, Thou shalt not kill. Thank God we do not live in a murdering age, when men go forth to slay and kill. Thou shalt not steal. Thank God there are no robber barons left that ravage the land and leave it desolate. Thou shalt not commit adultery. We are in America, and we will have no polygamy under our flag. And still the cry of the children goes up from the slums, and the polluted air squeezes the life out of the little ones, and they die three times as fast as they would in healthy atmosphere, because greed walks the earth. Lust there, as in polygamy. Covetousness there, as in robber barons. Murder there, as in unsheathed swords. We have not ceased to sin because we have changed the form of our sinning.
6. And when we can no longer disguise from ourselves that we are doing wrong, we hide behind all manner of excuses. We say: Yes, I admit this is not quite right, but everybody does it. Or, I admit this is not quite according to the Gospel idea], but the Gospel ideals are not practicable in the nineteenth century. Or, I could not help it; I was made so. And so, little by little, we creep up to that excuse so common in our day: There is no real moral evil, there is no real sin. What men call sin is only good in the making. It is the greenness of an apple that by and by will be ripe. It is the foolishness of a child who by and by will be wiser. The fall is only a fall upward. Let us not trouble ourselves, therefore, but wait. There is a good God, and by and by He will bring all things right. Think Canada thistles are wheat in the making; think a broken arm is an athletes arm in the making; think that diphtheria and scarlet fever are health in the making; but do not think that to be estranged, self-willed, and self-indulgent is holiness and righteousness and goodness in the making. But more than of any other class deceive themselves by not thinking about the matter at all. They cast up accounts to see how their finances balance; disease comes into the house, and the doctor inquires as to their health, and so they ascertain their physical health balance, but they never strike a balance in the moral realm. No captain on the Atlantic Ocean will allow twenty-four hours to go by without taking his reckoning, if he can, and finding out where he is. But it will be very strange if in this congregation this Sabbath morning, large as is the proportion of professing Christians, there are not many of us that never have taken an observation and do not know or even ask ourselves what is our moral latitude and longitude. (Lyman Abbott.)
The heart sinful
The seeds of all my sins are in my heart, and perhaps the more dangerous that I do not see them. (R. McCheyne.)
Sins of heart
Motives that seem to you as white as the light may prove, when seen through His prism, to be many coloured. Aims that seem straight as a line may, when tested by the right standard, prove indirect and tortuous. We shall find at last that, in many cases, what we have thought devotion was indevout; what we have thought love was struck through with the taint of selfishness; what we have thought faith was utterly vitiated with the poison of unbelief. (C. Stanford, D. D.)
If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive—
The primary condition of the Divine fellowship fulfilled in the believing compression of a guileless spirit
I. It is not deliberate hypocrisy that we are (verse 8) warned against; but a far more subtle form of falsehood, and one apt more easily to beset us, as believers, even when most earnestly bent on walking in the light as God is in the light. In its subtlest form it is a kind of mysticism more akin to the visionary cast of ancient and oriental musing than to the more practical turn of thought and feeling that commonly prevails among us. Look at yonder attenuated and etherealised recluse, who has been grasping in successive philosophic systems, or schools of varied theosophic discipline, the means of extricating himself out of the dark bondage of carnal and worldly pollution, and soaring aloft into the light of pure spiritual freedom and repose. After many trials of other schemes, Christianity is embraced by him; not, however, as a discovery of the way in which God proposes to deal with him, but rather as an instrument by which he may deal with himself; a medicine to be self-administered; a remedy to be self-applied. By the laboured imitation of Christ, or by a kind of forced absorption into Christ, considered simply as the perfect or ideal, his soul, emancipated from its bodily shackles and its earthly entanglements, is to reach a height of serene illumination Which no bodily or earthly stain can dim. From such aspirations, the next step, and it is a short one, is into the monstrous fanaticism which would make spiritual illumination compatible with carnal indulgence and worldly lust; his inward and sinless purity being so enshrined in a certain Divine sublimity and transcendentalism of devotion that outward defilement cannot touch it. Church history, beginning even with the apostles own day, furnishes more than one instance of men thus deplorably deceiving themselves, saying they have no sin,
II. As to the confession (verse 9), it is the confession of men walking in the light, as God is in the light; having the same medium of vision that God has; it is the continual confession of men continually so walking and so seeing. For the forgiveness, on the faith of which and with a view to which we are thus always to be confessing our sins, will always be found to be a very complete treatment of our case. What is the treatment? The sins we confess are so forgiven that we are cleansed from all unrighteousness with regard to them. The forgiveness is so free, so frank, so full, so unreserved, that it purges our bosom of all reserve, all reticence, all guile; in a word, of all unrighteousness. And it is so because it is dispensed in faithfulness and righteousness; He is faithful and just in forgiving our sins. He to whom, as always thus dealing with us, we always thus submit ourselves, is true and righteous in all His ways, and specially in His way of meeting the confidence we place in Him when we confess our sins.
III. If, in the face of such a faithful manner of forgiveness on the part of God, we continue to shrink from that open dealing and guileless confession which our walking in the light as God is in the light implies–we not only wrong ourselves and do violence to our own consciousness and our own conscience; but, saying that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and His Word is not in us (verse 10). To prefer now, even for a single instant, or with reference to a single sin, the miserable comfort of wrapping ourselves in fig leaves and hiding among the trees of the garden, to the unspeakable joy of coming forth and asking God to deal with us according to His own loving faithfulness and righteousness and truth–that surely is a high affront to Him and to His Word, as well as a foolish mistake for ourselves. There can be no fellowship of light between us and Him if such unworthy sentiments of dark suspicion and reserve as this implies are insinuating themselves into our bosoms. Let me rather, taking Him at His word, try the more excellent way of carrying with me always, in the full confidence of loving fellowship, into the secret place of my God, all that is upon my mind, my conscience, nay heart; all that is harassing, or burdening, or tempting me; my present matter of care or subject of thought, whatever that may be. I would keep beck nothing from my God. I will not deceive myself by keeping silence about my sin. I will not make my God a liar–I will not do my God and Father so great a wrong as to give Him the lie–by refusing entrance into my soul to that Word of His which gives light, even the light of life. (R. S. Candlish, D. D.)
Denial of sin and confession of sin with their respective consequences
I. The denial of sin. If we say that we have no sin, etc. To the enlightened Christian mind it is a matter of wonder how any sane man could deny his own sinfulness.
1. Some claim an absolute exemption from sin. Such were the Pharisees of old.
2. Some say they have no sin, by claiming a relative exemption from sin. They lay stress upon their religious observances, their morality, their benevolence, their fair dealing, etc.
II. The consequence of this denial of sin. We deceive ourselves, etc. In worldly matters to be deceived is a grave consideration. For thus to deny our sin is–
1. To deny indisputable facts.
2. To deny the infallible testimony of the Word of God.
3. To deny the moral propriety of the scheme of redemption. The whole need not a physician, etc. No sinner, no Saviour.
III. The confession of sin. If we confess our sin, etc.
IV. The consequence of confession of sin. He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. (D. Clark.)
Honest dealing with God
God is light, and in Him is no darkness at all; and consequently He cannot have fellowship with darkness. Our tendency to be false is illustrated in the chapter before us, for we find three grades of it there. There is first the man who lies: If we say we have fellowship with Him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth. We say and do that which is untrue if while abiding under the influence of sin and falsehood we claim to have fellowship with God. If this tendency is unchecked, you will find the man growing worse and doing according to the eighth verse, wherein it is written, We deceive ourselves. Here the utterer of the falsehood has come to believe his own lie; he has blinded his understanding and befooled his conscience till he has become his own dupe. He will soon reach the complete development of his sin, which is described in the tenth verse, when the man, who first lied, and then, secondly, deceived himself, becomes so audacious in his falseness as to blaspheme the Most Holy by making Him a liar. It is impossible to say where sin will end; the beginning of it is as a little water in which a bird may wash, and scatter half the pool in drops, but in its progress sin, like the brook, swells into a torrent deep and broad. Our only safe course is to come to God as we are, and ask Him to deal with us, in Christ Jesus, according to our actual condition.
I. Let us consider the three courses laid open before us in the text. I will suppose that we are all earnestly anxious to be in fellowship with God. Our deceitful heart suggests to us, first, that we should deny our present sinfulness, and so claim fellowship with God, on the ground that we are holy, and so may draw near to the Holy God. I mind not how honest your parentage, nor how noble your ancestry, there is in you a bias towards evil; your animal passions, nay more, your mental faculties are unhinged and out of order, and unless some power beyond your own shall keep your desires in check, you will soon prove by overt acts of transgression the depravity of your nature. It is not uncommon for others to arrive at the same conclusion by another road. They have attained to the audacity to say that they have no sin by divers feelings and beliefs which they, as a rule, ascribe to the Holy Spirit. Now, if any man says that all tendency to sin is gone from him, that his heart is at all times perfect and his desires always pure, so that he has no sin in him whatsoever, he may have travelled a very different road from the character we just now warned, but he has reached the same conclusion, and we have but one word for both boasters, it is the word of our text–If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. Some, however, have reached this position by another route. They plead that though it may be they have sin, yet they are not bad at heart; they look upon sin as a technical term, and though they admit in words that they have sin, yet they practically deny it by saying, I have a good heart at bottom; I always was well intentioned from the very first. I know I have–of course we all have–erred here and there, but you cannot expect a fellow to be perfect. I cant say I see anything to find fault with. In so saying or feeling you prove that the truth is not in you–you are either deplorably ignorant as to what holiness is, or else you are wilfully uttering a falsehood; in either case the truth is not in you. A fourth sort of persons say the same thing, for albeit they confess that they have sinned, they think themselves now to be in a proper and fit condition to receive pardon. We have prayed, say they; we have repented, we have read the Scriptures, we have attended public worship, and are as right as we can be: we have tenderness and contrition, and every right and proper feeling; our wonder is that we do not receive salvation. The idea of fitness is only another form of the vain notion of merit, and it cannot find an inch of foothold in the gospel. True penitents can see nothing in themselves to commend them to mercy, and therefore they cast themselves upon undeserved favour, feeling both unworthy and unfit, but hoping to receive forgiveness freely. The second course which is open to us is the one which I trust the Divine Spirit may lead us to follow, to lay bare our case before God exactly as it stands. Lord, I own with shame that as my nature is corrupt such has my life been; I am a sinner both by nature and by practice. Make the confession of the two things, of the cause and the effect, of the original depravity–the foul source, and then of the actual sin which is the polluted stream. When a sinner feels he has no natural fitness for receiving the grace of God; when a broken spirit cries, Oh, what a wretch I am! Not only my past sin but my present feelings disqualify me for the love of God; I seem to be made of hell-hardened steel, he is confessing that sin is in him. It is in your vileness that sovereign grace oer sin abounding will come to you and cleanse you, and therefore the sooner you come to the honest truth the better for you, for the sooner will you obtain joy and peace through believing in Christ. The text means just this–treat God truthfully, and He will treat you truthfully. The blood of Jesus Christ has made a full atonement, and God will be faithful to that atonement. He will deal with you on the grounds of the covenant of grace, of which the sacrifice of Jesus is the seal, and therein also He will be true to you. Now, there are still some who say, Well, yes, I think I could go to God in that way, sir, but oh! my past sins prevent me. I could tell Him I am sinful, I could ask Him to renew my nature, I could lay myself bare before Him, but oh 1 my past sins; all might yet be well if I had not so sinned! Ah, that brings out a third course which lies before you, which I hope you will not follow, namely, to deny actual sin. The very thing which you cannot do would seal your doom, for it would lead you to make God a liar, and so His Word could not abide in you.
II. Let us now consider how we can follow this course, which is the only right one, namely, to confess our sin. Do not shirk the facts or shrink from knowing their full force, but feel the power of the condemning law. Then recollect your individual sins; recall them one by one–those greater sins, those huge blots upon your character, do not try to forget them. If you have forgotten them, raise them from the grave and think them over, and feel them as your own sins. Think of your sins of omission, your failures in duty, your short, comings in spirit. Repent of what you have done, and what you have not done. Think of your sins of heart. How cold has that heart been towards your Saviour! Your sins of thought, how wrongly your mind has often judged; your sins of imagination, what filthy creatures your imagination has portrayed in lively colours on the wall. Think of all the sins of your desires and delights, and hopes and fears. Let us take care that we confess all. And then let us try to see the heinousness of all sin as an offence against a kind, good, loving God, a sin against a perfect law, intended for our good.
III. Let us consider why we should confess sin.
1. I shall say first, do so because it is right. Religious lie telling is a dreadful thing, and there is plenty of it; but if I could be saved by masking my condition before God, I would not like to be saved in that way.
2. Moreover, upon some of us it is imperative, because we cannot do anything else.
3. Besides, suppose we have tried to appear before God what we are not, God has not been deceived, for He is not mocked. (C. H. Spurgeon.)
The conviction and confession of sin
The apostle had said, The blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth us from all sin. But who are understood by us? Certainly not all men. The impenitent, and unbelieving, and ungodly, have not been cleansed from their sin.
I. Conviction of sin. If we say that we have no sin, etc. Many will own they are sinners, and yet think they may come to God as they are, independent of Christ and His blood. They do not say so, but they act so. Listen to their prayers, and they call upon God without any mention of His Son. It is obvious they have no sense of their real position in His sight. They have not entered into the spirit of Christs words, No man cometh unto the Father but by Me. In this sense they say they have no sin. The same may be said of their fellowship with Christ. They may think of Him as a model of perfection. But His death does not specially affect them. They attach no peculiar efficacy to the shedding of His blood. And the reason is, they have no adequate sense of their sin. So also as to fellowship with believers. They can meet them as friends, and neighbours, and brethren, but they have no perception of the communion arising out of the blood of Christ. They do not feel either its necessity or influence as a bond of union. Of all such the apostle testifies they deceive themselves. They are deceived by an imagination of their own excellence, while in reality they are dead in sin. It is said of them farther, the truth is not in them. Its light may be all around them, but it has never penetrated to the inner man. Such was the condition of the church at Laodicea (Rev 3:17-18). The same admonition and counsel are applicable to all who have not an adequate idea of their sinfulness, such an idea as to make them feel that their only hope is the blood of Christ.
II. Confession of sin. If we confess, etc. There is a close and natural connection between conviction and confession. Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh. If the heart be touched by a sense of sin it cannot be restrained from pouring forth the accents of humiliation. What are the features of such confession? It is sincere, coming from the heart. It is full, no attempt being made to hide anything from God or ourselves. It is special, not satisfied with acknowledging sin generally, but noting special offences and dwelling on their aggravations. It fills the mind with grief for sin. It rouses to the hatred of it. It constrains to an immediate and total abandonment of it. It is such as was exemplified by David (Psa 2:1-12). To such confession there is the most gracious encouragement in the text, If we confess our sins. This is all we are required to do. We are not sent on some toilsome pilgrimage, or subjected to some round of self-mortification. We are to come to God as we are–now–and with the whole burden of our sin upon our hearts. Then God is faithful to forgive us our sins. He has said in His Word He that covereth his sins shall not prosper; but whoso confesseth and forsaketh them shall have mercy. It is not presumption, therefore, to expect pardon on confession. On the contrary, it is distrust of God to doubt it. And observe the gracious yet warning words that follow, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. They are designed to meet the jealousy of the awakened soul. We are taught that God will accompany His pardon with sanctifying grace. Our plan would be to put purity first and pardon next. But Gods plan is the reverse. We are to accept pardon at once, and it will be accompanied and followed by holiness.
III. Habitual penitence for sin. If we say we have not sinned, etc. Observe the difference between this verse and the eighth. There the expression is, if we say we have no sin; here it is, if we say that we have not sinned. The former describes the condition of the man who does not feel his present sinfulness, the latter of him who justifies his past conduct. The former needs to be convinced of his sinfulness, the latter to be exercised aright about his past transgressions. In the one verse there is reference to the beginning of the Divine life, in the other to the maintenance of it. The one consists in the conviction which brings the sinner to the blood of Christ for salvation, the other in the habit of penitence which must accompany him as long as he lives. Let me exhort you to cultivate this habit. Many important ends are served by it. It will keep us mindful of what we once were, and of how much we are debtors to Divine grace. It will stimulate us to devote ourselves more unreservedly to God in the future. It will promote watchfulness against temptation. It will strengthen faith. Calling to mind how graciously God dealt with us in other days, we are encouraged to trust Him to the end. It will kindle repentance. Like Ephraim of old, it will lead us to say, What have I to do any more with idols? It will promote holiness. It will urge perseverance. (James Morgan, D. D.)
Confession of sin
There are two ways in which men are wont to make confession of their sins, which appear to my mind the same as making no true confession at all. One is to acknowledge sin, in general terms, as a customary and proper part of public, domestic, or private devotion, but without any accompanying feeling of contrition, desire of amendment, or even thought of personal application. The other is to confess our sinfulness in such extravagant terms that the force of the confession is destroyed by its palpable discordance with nature and truth. It is to confess that we are all utterly vile and abominable. In a common congregation of worshippers such language is senseless and nugatory. It is so, because it is felt to be inapplicable, even by those who think it religious to use and assent to it.
I. Do we then say that we have no sin? Certainly not. If we say so, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. There is not one of us who will not see loads of sin pressing heavily upon his life if he will send his reflections back and impartially retrace its history.
1. We can all of us look back on our childhood. And what see we there? Perfect innocence, spotless virtue, blameless affections? Who is there of us who never caused his parents hearts to ache–I do not mean ignorantly, but knowingly and recklessly?
2. Is our survey more or less satisfactory, do our reflections become more or less gratifying, when we leave the days of our childhood and come forward to those of our youth? Youth is lifes seedtime. Did we prepare ourselves for the harvest as we ought to have done? Did we acquire all the knowledge that was within our reach? What attention did we pay to the formation of our character? Did we guard it anxiously, and mould it carefully, and keep it away from polluting influences, and lay strong foundations for it, and build it up, and beautify it, after the best and purest models; or did we give it over to chance, to custom, and to the world? Did our Maker have as much of our time, thoughts, desires and obedience as was due to Him?
3. And I call on those who have advanced into the middle regions of life to say whether, when youth passed away, folly and sin went with it, and left their maturer years to the peaceful and undisturbed dominion of wisdom and virtue. Have they acquired such habitual self-command that they constantly and willingly obey the commandments of God? Do they walk within their houses with perfect hearts? Do they never take a hard and griping advantage of their neighbours weakness, or ignorance, or necessity?
II. What then will be the effect of a true confession of sin? The mere verbal confession of sin can be of no possible benefit to us; can do us no more good than the repetition of any other words, with or without meaning. But if our confession is accompanied by a sincere conviction of sin, we shall be forgiven and cleansed by a faithful and just God. There is nothing vindictive in the government of God. We shall not be made to suffer for sins which we have renounced, and which our spirit now looks upon with abhorrence, as foreign and hateful to it. The character which we have formed here will accompany us to the unseen world; and as it has worked out our pardon here, so has it prepared for us eternal felicity. (F. W. P. Greenwood, D. D.)
Confession
Prayer (in the wide sense of the word) is a varied melody, now rising, now falling upon the ear. It has its bass notes and its high notes, its plaintive cadences and its jubilant cadences, or (to transfer the imagery from the domain of sound to that of sight), it has its gleams of sunlight and its depths of shadow. It is with the low and plaintive cadences of prayer that we purpose to deal, in other words, we shall speak of confession of sin.
I. Confession of sin should be a real element in the devotional system of each one of us. Confession is nothing more nor less than the practical recognition of our sinfulness and of our sins. Now both our sinfulness and our sins are always with us in this life. As saith the Scripture, There is no man that sinneth not.
II. If Confession is to become in reality part and parcel of the religious system of each individual–if it is to enter as an element into his devotion–it must not be pointless and vague, but definite and precise. It must turn upon those particular faults of conduct and character, of which we are personally conscious. It must aim, not merely at bringing to light erroneous conduct, but at ascertaining the general drift and current of our character. It must not rest contented with a general survey of our faults; but must unmask, if possible, the ruling passion. But it may be asked, Does not our Church place in the forefront of her public worship a general confession; a confession whose ample terms embrace all mankind universally, and which seems to eschew all details of wrong sentiment and wrong action? No doubt she does so; but her intention, here and elsewhere in her formularies, is that under the general expression should be represented in the mind of each individual that individuals case. Each man is to glance mentally at his own sins as he repeats the general confession; at his own wants as he follows the collects and Lords Prayer; at his own mercies as he follows the general thanksgiving. It is to be found in that ordinance of the Levitical law, which prescribes the expiation of the sin of the whole congregation of Israel. In every genuine act of public confession, hearts from all quarters encircle the Victim, and bring each one its own burden and each one its own bitterness, to lay it with the outstretched hand of faith on that sacred and devoted Head.
III. But does the Church of England recommend to her sons and daughters in the matter of confession nothing of a more specific character than what we have announced? What the Prayer book says amounts to this: If, on examination of your state of health, you find yourself sick, I recommend your seeking out and resorting to a discreet and learned physician. The implication clearly is, whatever some devout and good men may have conceived to the contrary, that, if we find ourselves well, or at least able to treat our own case, we shall not resort to him. Is not this the plain rule of reason in the analogous case of the treatment of the body? I am not ignorant of the answer which may be made. Is there my one of us, our opponents ask triumphantly, who enjoys spiritual health, who has not a sin-sick soul–any one of us who has not to take up into his mouth this testimony respecting himself, There is no health in me? Then, if all be spiritual invalids, all should resort regularly and habitually to the physician. We reply by admitting fully that every soul of man is sinful, and as such has in it the seeds of spiritual disease. But this is a totally different thing from saying that every conscience of man is morbid, perplexed with scruples, agitated with timid doubts, and unable by Gods grace to guide itself. Confession to our Lord Jesus Christ, and that self-scrutiny which must precede it, are most healthful practices; but they require to have their tendencies counterbalanced and held in equipoise by devotional exercises of a contrary kind. Self-introspection may easily, and will certainly, become morbid if it be not checked by a constant outlooking of the mind. Look into yourself to see your own vileness, look out of yourself to Christ. The knowledge and deep consciousness of thy dark guilt is only valuable as a background on which to paint more vividly to thy minds eye the rainbow colours of the love of Jesus. Walk abroad ever and anon, and expatiate freely in the sunlight of Gods grace and love in Christ. A religion, if it is to be strong, must be joyous; and joyous it cannot be without the light of Gods love in Christ shining freely into every corner of the soul. (Dean Goulburn.)
The true comfort
Suppose the case of a man, the victim of a mortal disease, yet clinging eagerly to life: that man may find comfort from persuading himself that his complaint is but trifling and will speedily disappear; this is a false, deceitful comfort. Or he may derive comfort from knowing that, though his complaint be in itself deadly, yet he has at hand an infallible specific, in the use of which his disease will be eradicated, and his health restored. This is a true and solid comfort. It is even so in the concerns of the soul. The sinner may find comfort from trying to persuade himself that his sins, if any, are inconsiderable, and do not seriously affect the safety of the soul. This is a false and unscriptural source of comfort. Or else he may have a deep, overwhelming sense of his own vileness, of his naturally guilty, hopeless state, and yet be comforted by the assurance of Gods forgiving love in Christ. This is a sure, Scriptural, and solid ground of comfort.
I. There is a false ground of comfort that is here condemned. If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. While all, in so many words, allow that they are sinners, yet very many so qualify that confession as in effect to say that they have no sin.
1. One, for example, when appealed to, says, Oh, I know, of course, that Im a sinner. All are sinners, but Im not a great sinner. I am not, perhaps, what I ought to be; I have no doubt done many things that were wrong. Everyone does the same; but I have committed no sin of a gross or heinous character.
2. Others, while admitting that they are sinners–grievous sinners–yet so extenuate and explain away their sins as virtually to affirm that they have no sin. They have done very wickedly; but then it has been through surprise, or ignorance, or the influence of others: the temptation has been so strong, and their natural weakness so great, that they were overcome; they had, however, no deliberately wicked purpose, and God will, they trust, on that ground, mercifully overlook their sins.
3. Others, again, while admitting that their sins are neither few nor trifling, yet trust that their good deeds so preponderate as that God will in His mercy overlook what they have done amiss. They open a kind of debtor and creditor account with heaven. May it not be feared that much of almsgiving, much of attendance at the house of God, and at sacraments, is to be ascribed to motives not very different from these?
II. If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins. The confession here meant must be, of course, not a mere cold and formal one–the mere confession of the lip. No; it must be sincere and earnest, the unveiling of the heart to Him to whom all hearts be open. It must, furthermore, be penitent and contrite; we must be taught to mourn over sin. We must confess our sins, then, with a sincere, penitent, believing heart; and, if so, God is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. But are not Gods faithfulness and justice pledged to punish sin and to destroy the sinner? Yes, out of Christ it is so, but in Christ God stands to the sinner in a new covenant relationship, and He who was faithful and just to destroy is, in Christ, faithful and just to forgive us our sins. God is faithful to forgive; for God has promised, through Christ, forgiveness to the believing penitent; and He is faithful that promised. (W. A. Cornwall, M. A.)
Compression of sins and the power of absolution
If we say that we have no sin, we sin in saying so, for we give God the lie (verse 10).
I. The necessity of confession. If we confess God will forgive, not otherwise. Though we cannot of ourselves avoid those sins without the grace of God, yet we might, if we would have that grace which would enable us to avoid them. And if man hath not this grace of God, the want is not in God, but in ourselves. Our confession must be with a purpose of obedience for the time to come. Not everyone that confesseth, but he that confesseth and forsaketh his sins shall have mercy.
II. Where is any to take our confessions? Here is none in the text to confess to, if we had a mind to it. None indeed expressly named, but here is one plainly enough described, that can pardon our sins and purge us from all our iniquities; to whom can we better confess than to Him that hath the power of absolution? Would you know who this He is? I, even I, saith God, am He who blotteth out all your iniquities, and that forgiveth your sins (Isa 43:25). (Bp. Sparrow.)
Confession of sins the sure condition of forgiveness and cleansing
I. Confession of sin. What is it? Everyone admits, in a general way, that confession of sin is a necessary condition of forgiveness. But in how many cases is this confession altogether unreal!
1. Every sin must be confessed. We must deal honestly with God. We must tell Him all that is in our hearts.
2. No sin must be excused. It must be confessed precisely as it is. Nothing must be added to it, nothing taken from it; there must be no false or affected exaggeration, and still less must there be any attempt at palliation.
3. Sin when once confessed must be at once forsaken. Joined with this inward abandonment of sin there must of necessity be the outward abandonment also. We must forsake our sins, both in disposition and in action. We must forsake our sin and follow righteousness.
II. Forgiveness of sins and cleansing from unrighteousness. God bestows this double blessing on those who confess their sins. Two benefits are spoken of; yet, though separable in idea, they are not divided in fact.
1. Forgiveness of sins. To understand what this is we must consider what effects sin produces on those who commit it in their relations towards God.
(1) It calls forth the anger of God.
(2) It condemns the sinner to the punishment of death. The soul that sinneth, it shall die; the wages of sin is death.
2. Cleansing from unrighteousness is the second benefit which God bestows on those who confess their sins. Righteousness is not only imputed to us, it is also implanted within us. We are renewed unto righteousness.
III. The certainty that where sin is confessed, it will be forgiven and cleansed away.
1. Because He is faithful. God is always true to Himself; He cannot deny Himself. One is true to himself when he does that which he must do, according to the constitution of his whole being. And so it is with God God is Light, and in Him is no darkness at all; He is only, altogether, and always, Light; He must, therefore, ever manifest Himself as such. He has bound Himself to us by His covenant of mercy, and His covenant is inviolable. If we confess our sins, we are walking in the Light; and God, who is Light, cannot deny Him self, cannot prove unfaithful to that fellowship of Light.
2. But, again, our confidence rests not only upon the faithfulness of God, but also upon His righteous ness. The righteousness of God not only prompts Him to punish unrighteousness; it also prompts Him to cleanse and deliver from unrighteousness. And surely, if the righteousness of God is vindicated and magnified in the punishment of men for their unrighteousness, much more thoroughly is it vindicated, and much more illustriously is it magnified, in delivering men from their unrighteousness. Have we not here a hopeless schism, a division of righteousness against itself? The solution of this problem depends on the following considerations:
(1) All things are possible with God. His resources are infinite. His wisdom is unsearchable. We may be sure that He is able to solve the problem, that He is able to meet and satisfy both demands of righteousness.
(2) God, in His manifold wisdom, has solved the problem. The Cross of Christ, the death of Gods Son, supplies a full answer to every question. Righteousness has been satisfied, in all its requirements, by the sacrifice which was offered once for all on the accursed tree. All unrighteousness of men has been judged, condemned, and punished in the death of Christ; all unrighteousness of men has been abolished, cleansed, and purged away in the death of Christ.
(3) But, again, both aspects of righteousness are conserved by the way in which we become partakers of the redemption which is in Christ Jesus. It is, as we have seen, by confession of our sins that we attain this. Now, when we confess our sins we do two things, we condemn our sins, and we renounce them. We cease to yield our members as weapons of unrighteousness unto sin; we henceforth yield our members as weapons of righteousness unto God. Being made free from sin, we become the servants of righteousness. All this is brought about through our being made partakers of Christs death. (J. J. Glen-Kippen.)
Confession of sin
I. Confession must be particular. While you confess only in general terms, you confess others sins rather than yours; but this is it to descend into our own hearts, and find out our just and real debt; to charge ourselves as narrowly as we can, that He may discharge us fully, and forgive us freely.
II. Confession must be universal, that is, of all sin, without partiality or respect to any sin. I doubt if a man can truly repent of any sin, except he in a manner repent of all sin, or truly forsake one sin, except there be a divorcement of the heart from and forsaking of all sin; therefore the apostle saith, If we confess our sins, not sin taking in all the body and collection of them. Then there lies a necessity upon us to confess what we have; we have all sin, and so should confess all sins.
III. Confession should be perpetuated and continued as long as we are in this life. That stream of corruption runs continually, let the stream of your contrition and confession run as incessantly; and there is another stream of Christs blood, that runs constantly too, to cleanse you. (H. Binning.)
Honest confession best
If you have done wrong, dont go days and weeks under conviction of sin. Suppose that I had lied to my partner in business. Suppose he were to charge it upon me, and I were to try to evade the matter, and were to oblige him to chase me through a whole week, until at last he cornered me so closely that, seeing escape to be impossible, I gave in, and said, Well, I have lied, and I am sorry, just because I could not help yielding. How mean a spirit should I thus show! How much better if, upon sudden press of temptation I had sinned, for me to stop at once when the lie was charged upon me, and say honestly, blushing with shame, Yes, I am wrong, all wrong. I am sorry, and will do so no more. Why will not men, when they see their guilt and danger, face right about, and make short work with themselves? (H. W. Beecher.)
Insincere confession
Pastor R., of Elberfeld, was once sent for to see a dying man. He found the patient really very ill, and entered at once into an earnest conversation about the state of his soul. The patient began, in the strongest terms, to describe himself as the very chief of sinners, and declared that his past life filled him with abhorrence. He continued so long in this strain that the pastor could scarcely find an opportunity to speak. At last, taking advantage of a pause, he remarked gently, It was then really true what I heard of you? The patient raised himself in the bed, stared in astonishment at the pastor, and demanded, What, then, have you heard? No one, in truth, can say anything against me; and continued, in a strain of unbounded self-satisfaction, to tell of his virtues, and recount all his good deeds, pouring out at the same time a torrent of execrations against the slanderers who had tried to injure his character. It was not from foes or slanderers, said the pastor, that I heard it, but from yourself; and now it grieves me to hear that you do not believe what you said. (C. H. Spurgeon.)
Divine forgiveness
Consciousness of sin in every man. Hence the inevitable need of forgiveness. Is there any answer on the part of God to this need? Current answers–
1. He never forgives: He cannot, in the nature of the case. Moral forces are as irresistible, moral laws as inexorable as physical laws. The man who breaks law must take the consequences. This is the answer of the positivist and the Deist. A terrible response to our keen need.
2. He forgives capriciously: Those born of good parents, who have lived in Christian society, who have a fortunate mental constitution, who have done nothing flagrantly bad, such are forgiven. This answer is still more terrible than the other; it shows favour to those who have had better opportunities. It cannot be admitted.
3. He forgives universally: without reference to circumstances, or distinction of character, because He is kind. This is the worst answer of all. By it moral law is aunulled, and chaos comes into the spiritual universe. God ceases to have regard to His holiness. It is incredible that this should be the answer to mans need of forgiveness.
4. The answer of the gospel: God forgives universally on the ground of the atonement, on the condition of repentance and faith. This answer suits Gods character and mans need. It makes forgiveness attainable, and upholds moral order. It shows the preciousness of the Bible, argues its Divine origin, the privilege of accepting Gods offer, and the infinite hazard of neglecting or refusing it. (R. S. Storrs.)
Justice satisfied
(with Rom 3:27):–When the soul is seriously impressed with the conviction of its guilt, it is afraid of God. It dreads at that time every attribute of Divinity. But most of all the sinner is afraid of Gods justice. The sinner is right in his conviction that God is just, and he is moreover right in the inference which follows from it, that because God is just his sin must be punished. Except through the gospel, justice is thine antagonist. It cannot suffer thee to enter heaven, for thou hast sinned. Is it possible, then, that the sinner cannot be saved? This is the great riddle of the law, and the grand discovery of the gospel.
I. How has justice been put aside? Or rather, how has it been so satisfied that it no longer stands in the way of Gods justifying the sinner? And through that second representative of manhood, Jesus, the second Adam, God is now able and willing to forgive the vilest and justify even the ungodly, and He is able to do so without the slightest violation of His justice.
1. Note the dignity of the victim who offered Himself up to Divine justice.
2. Think of the relationship which Jesus Christ had towards the great Judge of all the earth, and then you will see again that the law must have been fully satisfied thereby.
3. Furthermore, consider how terrible were the agonies of Christ, which, mark you, He endured in the stead of all poor penitent sinners, of all those who confess their gins and believe in Him; I say when you mark these agonies, you will readily see why justice does not stand in the sinners way.
II. It is an act of justice on Gods part to foil, give the sinner who makes a confession of his sin to God. The same Justice that just now stood with a fiery sword in his hand, like the cherubim of old keeping the way of the tree of life, now goes hand in hand with the sinner. Sinner, he says, I will go with thee. When thou goest to plead for pardon I will go and plead for thee. Once I spoke against thee; but now I am so satisfied with what Christ has done that I will go with thee and plead for thee. I will not say a word to oppose thy pardon, but I will go with thee and demand it. It is but an act of justice that God should now forgive. Sinner! go to God with a promise in your hand Lord, thou hast said, He that confesseth his sin, and forsaketh it, shall find mercy. I confess my sin, and I forsake it: Lord, give me mercy! Dont doubt but that God will give it you. Take that pledge and that bond before His throne of mercy, and that bond never shall be cancelled till it has been honoured. But, again, not only did God make the promise, but according to the text man has been induced to act upon it; and, therefore, this becomes a double bond upon the justice of God. Do you imagine when God has brought you through much pain and agony of mind to repent of sin, to give up self-righteousness, and rely on Christ, He will afterwards turn round and tell you He did not mean what He said? It cannot be. No, He is a just God, Faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. One more aspect of this case. Gods justice demands that the sinner should be forgiven if he seeks mercy, for this reason: Christ died on purpose to secure pardon for every seeking soul. Now, I hold it to be an axiom that whatever Christ died for he will have.
III. I must just enter into some little explanation of the two great duties that are taught in the two texts. The first duty is faith–believeth in Christ; the second text is confession–if we confess our sins. I will begin with confession first. Whenever grace comes into the heart it will lead you to make amends for my injury which you have done either by word or deed to any of your fellow men; and you cannot expect that you shall ,be forgiven of God until you have forgiven men, and have been ready to make peace with those who are now your enemies. If you have done aught, then, against any man, leave thy gift before the altar, and go and make peace with him, and then come and make peace with God. You are to make confession of your sin to God. Let that be humble and sincere. Then the next duty is faith. Whosoever believeth on the Son of God hath eternal life, and shall never come into condemnation. (C. H. Spurgeon.)
Gods justice in forgiveness
Any consideration of the justice of forgiveness must be based upon a true estimate of what sin is, and what punishment is. We must clearly recognise that sin is evil in itself and in its inherent effects and not merely evil by the arbitrary decree of the lawgiver. Sin is that which is absolutely bad for man, and generally speaking it is not bad because forbidden, but forbidden because bad. When man sins he is doing something unworthy of himself, something contrary to nature, (if by nature we understand the original nature in which God first created him). Sin being thus mans evil, the good God, because He is good, will do all that is possible to keep His children from sin. And one of the ways of keeping man from sin is by ordaining punishment for sin. Punishment is made conditional on sin in three ways. Sometimes it is simply a sentence pronounced upon sin by arbitrary decree. Sometimes it is the fruit of sin, growing out of and resulting from the sin, in the nature of things. Sometimes it is the sin itself intensified, robbed of its pleasure and pressed as a burden and a curse upon the man. For example: if a schoolboy is habitually idle and neglects his studies we may trace out a retribution connected with the sin in each of these three several ways.
1. The master punishes the boy for his idleness. This is a punishment which conies a simple sentence upon the sin, not as a natural or necessary consequence of the sin.
2. A worse retribution comes upon the boy when he grows up. He finds himself not fitted for the position in life which he might have occupied if he had had a better education.
3. He may experience a still more terrible punishment, he did not learn industry at school and his idleness clings to him all his life. Thus he has a triple punishment. I may give you from the Bible an allusion to each of these. For the first case we have the sentence pronounced upon the murderer in Genesis (Gen 9:6). For the second we may think of idleness leading to want, that natural law endorsed by St. Paul when he wrote (2Th 2:10). For the third we may take the solemn sentence (Rev 22:11). With this third class of punishment the human legislator and the human judge have little or nothing to do. God alone can make sin to be its own punishment. With the second class the legislator rather than the judge is concerned, lest unwise legislation should promote wrong doing by viciously shielding the offender from the natural consequences of his sin. The first class of punishment, attending upon the wisdom of the lawgiver and the sentence of the judge, is that which man can ordinarily inflict or remit. And it is in studying the application of such punishment that we shall find that human justice which is to be a light to show us something of Divine justice. Gods ordinance in punishment may operate to keep men from sin in either of two ways:
(1) by exhibiting Gods sense of the badness of sin, and so training men to see for themselves the badness of sin, and to avoid it; or
(2) by holding forth retribution as a terror, that those who are too degraded to recognise the evil of sin may be deterred from sin by fear of the evil which they do recognise, the evil of pain or loss. This is the purpose of righteous punishment. However wicked a person may be, to inflict pain or loss upon him, which is not calculated to do some good in the way of remedying sin, either by reforming the particular offender or by deterring others from wrong, would be torture, not correction, cruelty and not righteousness. It follows that if the end which punishment is designed to accomplish has been attained by some other means, punishment becomes unrighteous, for it is only the end which justifies our infliction of pain or loss; upon our brother. If no good will come either to the individual or to the world from our inflicting the punishment, it is right to remit the punishment. This surely must be the key to our interpretation of the statement that God is righteous or just to forgive us our sins. If His justice is analogous to mans justice then His purpose in punishment is to exhibit His own sense of the sinfulness of sin and to deter from sin. It is plain that before He can remit the punishment which we deserve, some other means must be taken to show the world how God esteems sin. It is plain that the lesson of Gods true regard for sin must be learned by the sinner, and it must produce in him the penitence which will restrain him from sin. A simple gospel of the forgiveness of the penitent without the death of Christ would not have fulfilled these three conditions. If the gospel proclaims the remission of the punishment which was to evidence Gods condemnation of sin, this evidence must be displayed to the world in some other way. It is displayed from the Cross of Christ. God exhibits the deathliness of sin, not in the death of the sinner but in the death of Christ. But the sinner to be forgiven must have learnt this lesson. Here you see the necessity of faith in Christ crucified as a condition of pardon. And your faith in the Cross must produce penitence: otherwise there is nothing to supply the place of punishment to deter from sin. But it is obvious that if the final penalty of sin is not merely attached to it by arbitrary decree, but is something which follows as the fruit and consequence of sin, the pardon which is given us must be something more than an arbitrary warrant of acquittal; it must involve in some way a change in our spiritual growth and bearing; for the fig tree cannot bear olive berries neither the vine figs, nor can sin grow into holiness nor a wicked heart bear fruit unto eternal life. This teaches us again that repentance is an absolute necessity as a condition of pardon. Perhaps we may sometimes have thought of repentance as a condition arbitrarily imposed: we may have said that God does not choose to forgive us unless we repent. But in the light of our present consideration this would seem to be an imperfect statement of the case. We must rather say that in the nature of things (if punishment is the growth and fruit of sin) there can be no such thing as the remission of punishment without a change–a conversion–of the man. It is this thought of sin becoming ultimately its own punishment that stands in the way of a belief in a universal restoration, a universal salvation. But even if we take the other view of hell and think of it simply as pain arbitrarily imposed as a penalty for sin and capable of being arbitrarily withdrawn, there is yet an objection to our believing in any ultimate restoration. We might, of course, believe that when a sufficiency of punishment has been inflicted, the soul might then be delivered from hell. But what then? If it be still evil, it will be a hell to itself. Yet again, the good God will do all that may be for us; for He is just to forgive us our sins. But it may be said–if the forgiveness of our sins is thus a matter of justice, what have we to do with prayer for pardon? God will forgive us if it is right: He will not forgive us if it is not right to forgive us. What is the use of confession and prayer? The answer is, that the right or wrong of forgiveness depends on the disposition of the sinner. Has he or has he not learned the lesson of the Cross? Is he or is he not firmly convinced of the deathliness of sin? that it is an evil upon which God cannot look with indifference? that it is and ever must be the object of Gods wrath and condemnation? And if the sinner is in that state of heart and mind which makes forgiveness fit for him, then confession and prayer are the spontaneous expression of his penitence. (W. A. Whitworth, M. A.)
Gods justice in forgiveness
In a conversation which the Rev. Mr. Innes had with an infidel on his sick bed, he told him that when he was taken ill he thought he would rely on the general mercy of God; that as he had never done anything very bad, he hoped all would be well. But as my weakness increased, he added, I began to think, Is not God a just being as well as merciful? Now what reason have I to think He will treat me with mercy, and not with justice? and if I am treated with justice, he said, with much emotion, where am I? I showed him, says Mr. Innes, that this was the very difficulty the gospel was sent to remove, as it showed how mercy could be exercised in perfect consistency with the strictest demands of justice, while it was bestowed through the atonement made by Jesus Christ. After explaining this doctrine, and pressing it on his attention and acceptance, one of the last things he said to me before leaving him was, Well, I believe it must come to this. I confess I see here a solid footing to rest on, which, on my former principles, I could never find. (K. Arvine.)
Spiritual cleansing
The trees and the fields are clothed new every year in the freshest and purest hues. In the spring all the colours are bright and clean. As the summer goes on the leaves get dark and grimy. Sometimes a shower of rain makes them a little fresher, but they are soon dirtier than ever again. They all fall in the winter: The tree cannot cleanse its own leaves, dirty with the citys smoke, but God in His own time cleanses it, and gives it an entirely new suit. The little rain cleansings, soon to be dirtied again, are the partial reformations which men make for themselves, saying: I will stop this habit, or that other. I will be a better man–yet not doing it in Gods strength. The new white robe which God gives the trees is the robe of Christs righteousness. The difference is that in the eternal kingdom our robe of Christs righteousness will never be soiled, for there is none of the defilement of the earth.
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 8. If we say that we have no sin] This is tantamount to 1Jo 1:10: If we say that we have not sinned. All have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; and therefore every man needs a Saviour, such as Christ is. It is very likely that the heretics, against whose evil doctrines the apostle writes, denied that they had any sin, or needed any Saviour. In deed, the Gnostics even denied that Christ suffered: the AEon, or Divine Being that dwelt in the man Christ Jesus, according to them, left him when he was taken by the Jews; and he, being but a common man, his sufferings and death had neither merit nor efficacy.
We deceive ourselves] By supposing that we have no guilt, no sinfulness, and consequently have no need of the blood of Christ as an atoning sacrifice: this is the most dreadful of all deceptions, as it leaves the soul under all the guilt and pollution of sin, exposed to hell, and utterly unfit for heaven.
The truth is not in us.] We have no knowledge of the Gospel of Jesus, the whole of which is founded on this most awful truth-all have sinned, all are guilty, all are unholy; and none can redeem himself. Hence it is as necessary that Jesus Christ should become incarnated, and suffer and die to bring men to God.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
In pursance of which scope, he fitly adds: If we should say, i.e. either profess it as a principle, or think in our minds, or not bear in our hearts a penitential, remorseful sense, correspondent to the contrary apprehension; such as is implied in confessing, 1Jo 1:9; for saying usually signifies the habitual bent and disposition of the heart and practice, Job 21:14; Jer 22:21.
That we have no sin; viz. that we are so innocent creatures as not to need such an expiatory sacrifice as that above mentioned, and such purifying influence thereupon, but that we may be admitted to communion with God upon our own account, and for our worthiness sake, without being beholden to the blood of Christ.
We deceive ourselves, delude our own souls.
And the truth; i.e. the system and frame of gospel doctrine, as 2Jo 1:1,2,4.
Is not in us; cannot be duly entertained, lies not evenly and agreeably with itself in our minds, or hath no place with effect in us, as Joh 8:37.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
8. The confession of sinsis a necessary consequence of “walking in the light” (1Jo1:7). “If thou shalt confess thyself a sinner, the truthis in thee; for the truth is itself light. Not yet hasthy life become perfectly light, as sins are still in thee, but yetthou hast already begun to be illuminated, because there is in theeconfession of sins” [AUGUSTINE].
that we have no sin“HAVE,”not “have had,” must refer not to the past sinfullife while unconverted, but to the present state whereinbelievers have sin even still. Observe, “sin” is inthe singular; “(confess our) sins” (1Jo1:9) in the plural. Sin refers to the corruption of theold man still present in us, and the stain created by theactual sins flowing from that old nature in us. To confess ourneed of cleansing from present sin is essential to “walkingin the light”; so far is the presence of some sin incompatiblewith our in the main “walking in light.” But thebeliever hates, confesses, and longs to be delivered from all sin,which is darkness. “They who defend their sins, will seein the great day whether their sins can defend them.”
deceive ourselvesWecannot deceive God; we only make ourselves to err from the rightpath.
the truth (1Jo2:4). True faith. “The truth respecting God’s holiness andour sinfulness, which is the very first spark of light in us, has noplace in us” [ALFORD].
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
If we say that we have no sin,…. Notwithstanding believers are cleansed from their sins by the blood of Christ, yet they are not without sin; no man is without sin: this is not only true of all men, as they come into the world, being conceived in sin, and shapen in iniquity, and of all that are in a state of unregeneracy, and of God’s elect, while in such a state, but even of all regenerated and sanctified persons in this life; as appears by the ingenuous confessions of sin made by the saints in all ages; by their complaints concerning it, and groans under it; by the continual war in them between flesh and spirit; and by their prayers for the discoveries of pardoning grace, and for the fresh application of Christ’s blood for cleansing; by their remissness in the discharge of duty, and by their frequent slips and falls, and often backslidings: and though their sins are all pardoned, and they are justified from all things by the righteousness of Christ, yet they are not without sin; though they are freed from the guilt of sin, and are under no obligation to punishment on account of it, yet not from the being of it; their sins were indeed transferred from them to Christ, and he has bore them, and took them and put them away, and they are redeemed from them, and are acquitted, discharged, and pardoned, so that sin is not imputed to them, and God sees no iniquity in them in the article of justification; and also, their iniquities are caused to pass from them, as to the guilt of them, and are taken out of their sight, and they have no more conscience of them, having their hearts sprinkled and purged by the blood of Jesus, and are clear of all condemnation, the curse of the law, the wrath of God, or the second death, by reason of them; yet pardon of sin, and justification from it, though they take away the guilt of sin, and free from obligation to punishment, yet they do not take out the being of sin, or cause it to cease to act, or do not make sins cease to be sins, or change the nature of actions, of sinful ones, to make them harmless, innocent, or indifferent; the sins of believers are equally sins with other persons, are of the same kind and nature, and equally transgressions of the law, and many of them are attended with more aggravating circumstances, and are taken notice of by God, and resented by him, and for which he chastises his people in love: now though a believer may say that he has not this or that particular sin, or is not guilty of this or that sin, for he has the seeds of all sin in him, yet he cannot say he has no sin; and though he may truly say he shall have no sin, for in the other state the being and principle of sin will be removed, and the saints will be perfectly holy in themselves, yet he cannot, in this present life, say that he is without it: if any of us who profess to be cleansed from sin by the blood of Christ should affirm this,
we deceive ourselves; such persons must be ignorant of themselves, and put a cheat upon themselves, thinking themselves to be something when they are nothing; flattering themselves what pure and holy creatures they are, when there is a fountain of sin and wickedness in them; these are self-deceptions, sad delusions, and gross impositions upon themselves:
and the truth is not in us; it is a plain case the truth of grace is not in such persons, for if there was a real work of God upon their souls, they would know and discern the plague of their own hearts, the impurity of their nature, and the imperfection of their obedience; nor is the word of truth in them, for if that had an entrance into them, and worked effectually in them, they would in the light of it discover much sin and iniquity in them; and indeed there is no principle of truth, no veracity in them; there is no sincerity nor ingenuity in them; they do not speak honestly and uprightly, but contrary to the dictates of their own conscience.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
| Confession and Forgiveness. | A. D. 80. |
8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. 9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.
Here, I. The apostle, having supposed that even those of this heavenly communion have yet their sin, proceeds here to justify that supposition, and this he does by showing the dreadful consequences of denying it, and that in two particulars:– 1. If we say, We have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us, v. 8. We must beware of deceiving ourselves in denying or excusing our sins. The more we see them the more we shall esteem and value the remedy. If we deny them, the truth is not in us, either the truth that is contrary to such denial (we lie in denying our sin), or the truth of religion, is not in us. The Christian religion is the religion of sinners, of such as have sinned, and in whom sin in some measure still dwells. The Christian life is a life of continued repentance, humiliation for and mortification of sin, of continual faith in, thankfulness for, and love to the Redeemer, and hopeful joyful expectation of a day of glorious redemption, in which the believer shall be fully and finally acquitted, and sin abolished for ever. 2. If we say, We have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us, v. 10. The denial of our sin not only deceives ourselves, but reflects dishonour upon God. It challenges his veracity. He has abundantly testified of, and testified against, the sin of the world. And the Lord said in his heart (determined thus with himself), I will not again curse the ground (as he had then lately done) for man’s sake; for (or, with the learned bishop Patrick, though) the imagination of man’s heart is evil from his youth, Gen. viii. 21. But God has given his testimony to the continued sin and sinfulness of the world, by providing a sufficient effectual sacrifice for sin, that will be needed in all ages, and to the continued sinfulness of believers themselves by requiring them continually to confess their sins, and apply themselves by faith to the blood of that sacrifice. And therefore, if we say either that we have not sinned or do not yet sin, the word of God is not in us, neither in our minds, as to the acquaintance we should have with it, nor in our hearts, as to the practical influence it should have upon us.
II. The apostle then instructs the believer in the way to the continued pardon of his sin. Here we have, 1. His duty in order thereto: If we confess our sins, v. 9. Penitent confession and acknowledgment of sin are the believer’s business, and the means of his deliverance from his guilt. And, 2. His encouragement thereto, and assurance of the happy issue. This is the veracity, righteousness, and clemency of God, to whom he makes such confession: He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness, v. 9. God is faithful to his covenant and word, wherein he has promised forgiveness to penitent believing confessors. He is just to himself and his glory who has provided such a sacrifice, by which his righteousness is declared in the justification of sinners. He is just to his Son who has not only sent him for such service, but promised to him that those who come through him shall be forgiven on his account. By his knowledge (by the believing apprehension of him) shall my righteous servant justify many, Isa. liii. 11. He is clement and gracious also, and so will forgive, to the contrite confessor, all his sins, cleanse him from the guilt of all unrighteousness, and in due time deliver him from the power and practice of it.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
If we say ( ). See verse 6.
We have no sin ( ). For this phrase see John 9:41; John 15:22; John 15:24. That is, we have no personal guilt, no principle of sin. This some of the Gnostics held, since matter was evil and the soul was not contaminated by the sinful flesh, a thin delusion with which so-called Christian scientists delude themselves today.
We deceive ourselves ( ). Present active indicative of , to lead astray. We do not deceive others who know us. Negative statement again of the same idea, “the truth is not in us.”
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
That we have no sin. %Oti that, may be taken merely as a mark of quotation : “If we say, sin we have not.” On the phrase to have sin, see on Joh 16:22, and compare have fellowship, ver. 3. Sin [] is not to be understood of original sin, or of sin before conversion, but generally. “It is obvious that this ecein aJmartian (to have sin), is infinitely diversified, according to the successive measure of the purification and development of the new man. Even the apostle John does not exclude himself from the universal if we say” (Ebrard).
Heathen authors say very little about sin, and classic paganism had little or no conception of sin in the Gospel sense. The nearest approach to it was by Plato, from whose works a tolerably complete doctrinal statement might be gathered of the origin, nature, and effects of sin. The fundamental idea of aJmartia (sin) among the Greeks is physical; the missing of a mark (see on Mt 1:21; Mt 6:14); from which it develops into a metaphysical meaning, to wander in the understanding. This assumes knowledge as the basis of goodness; and sin, therefore, is, primarily, ignorance. In the Platonic conception of sin, intellectual error is the prominent element. Thus : “What then, I said, is the result of all this? Is not this the result – that other things are indifferent, and that wisdom is the only good, and ignorance the only evil ?” (” Euthydemus, “281).” The business of the founders of the state will be to compel the best minds to attain that knowledge which has been already declared by us to be the greatest of all – they must continue to rise until they arrive at the good “(” Republic,” 7, 519). Plato represents sin as the dominance of the lower impulses of the soul, which is opposed to nature and to God (see “Laws,” 9, 863. “Republic,” 1, 351). Or again, as an inward want of harmony. “May we not regard every living being as a puppet of the gods, either their plaything only or created with a purpose – which of the two we cannot certainly know? But this we know, that these affections in us are like cords and strings which pull us different and opposite ways, and to opposite actions; and herein lies the difference between virtue and vice” (” Laws, “1, 644). He traces most sins to the influence of the body on the soul.” In this present life, I reckon that we make the nearest approach to knowledge when we have the least possible communion or fellowship with the body, and are not infected with the bodily nature, but remain pure until the hour when God himself is pleased to release us. And then the foolishness of the body will be cleared away, and we shall be pure, and hold converse with other pure souls, and know of ourselves the clear light everywhere, which is no other than the light of truth “(” Phedo,” 67). 62 We find in the classical writers, however, the occasional sense of the universal faultiness of mankind, though even Plato furnishes scarcely any traces of accepting the doctrine of innate depravity. Thus Theognis : “The sun beholds no wholly good and virtuous man among those who are now living” (615). “But having become good, to remain in a good state and be good, is not possible, and is not granted to man. God only has this blessing; but man cannot help being bad when the force of circumstances overpowers him” (Plato, “Protagoras,” 344). ” How, then : is it possible to be sinless? It is imp
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “If we say that we have no sin”. John includes himself in this hypothetical affirmation. “If we (subjunctive) should say, affirm, or claim” “that (a) sin not we (Greek echomen) have, hold, contain or embrace”; this affirms at least an abiding sin nature or disposition exists in every Child of God. Rom 7:17-18; Rom 7:20-21; Rom 7:23.
2) “We deceive ourselves” (Greek heautous) “Ourselves, you and I”, (Greek planomen), “we deceive or delude” – we stick our head in the sand, like an ostrich; we pull the wool over our own eyes; we look the other way, like the man with a beam in his eye who tries to detect a speck in the eye of another, Mat 7:3-5.
3) “And the truth is not in us”. Anyone claiming not to have, hold, contain or embrace sin in him, his old nature, old man, is a self -deceiver. And concerning his claim to have no sin John asserts the claimant doesn’t tell the truth. His relatives know he doesn’t tell the truth; his acquaintances know he doesn’t tell the truth; the devil knows he doesn’t tell the truth and John wanted these “little children”, believers, to recognize that they still had the old nature of sin continually present to incite them to thoughts, words, and deeds of wrong.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
8. If we say. He now commends grace from its necessity; for as no one is free from sin, he intimates that we are all lost and undone, except the Lord comes to our aid with the remedy of pardon. The reason why he so much dwells on the fact, that no one is innocent, is, that all may now fully know that they stand in need of mercy, to deliver them from punishment, and that they may thus be more roused to seek the necessary blessing.
By the word sin, is meant here not only corrupt and vicious inclination, but the fault or sinful act which really renders us guilty before God. Besides, as it is a universal declaration, it follows, that none of the saints, who exist now, have been, or shall be, are exempted from the number. Hence most fitly did Augustine refute the cavil of the Pelagians, by adducing against them this passage: and he wisely thought that the confession of guilt is not required for humility’s sake, but lest we by lying should deceive ourselves.
When he adds, and the truth is not in us, he confirms, according to his usual manner, the former sentence by repeating it in other words; though it is not a simple repetition, (as elsewhere,) but he says that they are deceived who glory in falsehood.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
HEREBY WE KNOW
PART II
1Jn. 1:8-10; 1Jn. 2:1-29
God Is Light . . . To Walk In The Light
Is To Have Fellowship With Him
Fellowship Is Tested By Our Sharing
of Gods Attitude Toward:
1.
Personal Guilt
2.
Our Brothers
3.
His Son
CHAPTER IV
TO WALK IN THE LIGHT IS TO SHARE
GODS ATTITUDE TOWARD SIN AND OBEDIENCE
(The First Test . . . The First Time)
1Jn. 1:8-10; 1Jn. 2:1-6
A.
The Text
If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. (9) If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. (10) If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His word is not in us. (1Jn. 2:1) My little children, these things write I unto you that ye may not sin. And if any man sin, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous: (2) and He is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for the whole world. (3) And hereby we know that we know him, if we keep His commandments. (4) He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him; (5) but whoso keepeth his word, in him verily hath the love of God been perfected. Hereby we know that we are in him: (6) he that saith he abideth in him ought himself also to walk even as he walked.
B.
Try to Discover
1.
Is it possible for a child of God to sin?
2.
What should a Christian do if he does sin?
3.
What are the consequences of claiming we do not sin?
4.
What is the relationship of Jesus now to a Christian who does sin?
5.
What does it mean to know God?
6.
Does the claim to know God in any way obligate the one making the claim?
7.
What is the intended end of Gods love to man?
C.
Paraphrase
(1Jn. 1:8) If we saySin have we none! we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us. (9) If we are confessing our sins faithful is he and righteous that he should forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteous, (10) If we sayWe have not sinned! false are we making him and his word is not in us. (1Jn. 2:1) My dear children! these things am I writing unto you in order that ye may not be committing sin, And if anyone should commit sin An Advocate have we with the Father, Jesus Christ the Righteous; (2) and he is a propitiation concerning our sins, and not concerning our own only but also concerning those of the whole world. (3) And hereby perceive we that we understand him, if his commandments we are keeping. (4) He that saithI understand him! and his commandments is not keeping is false, and in him the truth is not! (5) But whosoever may be keeping his word of a truth in this man the love of God hath been made perfect. Hereby perceive we that in him we are, (6) He that saith that in him he abideth ought just as He walked himself also to be walking.
D.
Comments
1.
Preliminary Remarks
Eternal life is here considered as fellowship with God. To walk in the light as God is in the light is first to share Gods attitude toward sin. This is the initial test of life presented by John after he has established the base (God is light) from which the tests are to be set forth.
To share Gods attitude toward sin is to face reality. To deny it is to participate in that which is unreal and therefore to act our as well as speak a lie.
2.
Translation and Comments
a.
Sin denied as guilt . . . 1Jn. 1:8
(1Jn. 1:8) If we should say that we are not having sin we are deceiving ourselves and sincerity is not in us.
Sharing the attitude of God toward sin begins with the realization of personal guilt. If we should claim that we personally have no guilt we are deceiving ourselves.
We cannot deceive God in whom is no darkness at all. (1Jn. 1:5) To deceive man is ultimately pointless. In the vast beyond that is eternity it will not matter that we have been able to hide our guilt from men behind a facade of sophistication, social propriety, or pseudo-intellectual-ism. Fundamentally, it is the deceiver himself who is deceived.
The colossal ignorance which prompts the denial of personal guilt is measured by the fact that it removes the one who denies his guilt from all that is real. The sine qua non of Gods entire approach to man in the person of Jesus is the basic reality of human guilt! This is born out by virtually every writer of divine scripture.
For example, in Gen. 42:21, the brothers of Joseph recognized their guilt in the mistreatment of him. In Num. 21:7, the people of Israel came before Moses to confess their guilt in that they had spoken against the Lord. In Ezr. 9:6, the prophet blushes to lift his face before the Lord because of the guilt of the people. Psa. 40:12, records Davids recognition of his own guilt as being so great he is not able to look up. In Act. 2:37, those who had cried out for the blood of Jesus were cut to their heart by the guilt of what they had done and cried out for some means of deliverance. In Act. 24:25, Felix, the Roman governor, trembled in terror at the awareness of his guilt.
The last word on the matter is recorded by Paul in Rom. 3:9-22. The passage begins with a quotation from Psa. 14:1-7 to the effect that none are righteous and ends with . . . there is no distinction; for all have sinned and come short of the glory of God . . .
Therefore, to deny the personal guilt of sin is to speak that which is contrary to the primary revelation of God. When men have attempted to discover the truth about guilt in their own wisdom, they have called it complexes. They have explained away the guilt of it on the basis of environmental handicaps, and they have tried to treat it by blasting it out of memory with electrotherapy and insulin shock.
Gods solution to the problem begins with facing the reality of personal guilt by bringing it into the strong light of revealed truth.
b.
Sin confessed as guilt . . . 1Jn. 1:9
(1Jn. 1:9) If we are confessing the sins that are ours, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
The recognition of guilt by the Christian results immediately and constantly in the divine therapeutic of forgiveness. It is for just this purpose that Jesus came to seek and save that which was lost. (Luk. 19:10)
The tense of Johns verb confess indicates that the confessing of sin is not a mechanical ceremony or ritual. Rather, this confessing is a constant attitude toward self before God, which faces the reality of personal guilt in the light of divine revelation.
Homologeo, here translated confess, means literally to speak as one. When our attitude toward ourselves is one of recognition of guilt; we are speaking as one, or agreeing with God about our sin.
The result of this attitude toward guilt is not, in the life of a Christian, a guilt complex or manic-depression, but rather the realization of forgiveness. God, through Isaiah, wrote: Come now, let us reason together . . . though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool. (Isa. 1:18)
There is no greater blessing in the Christian life than that of realized forgiveness! It can only come to one who will stop rationalizing and realize his own personal responsibility, his own guilt, for his own misdeeds.
The realization of forgiveness depends upon personal confidence in the incarnate Word. It is through His blood that we have cleansing from sin. Just as we constantly maintain an attitude of personal responsibility for our guilt, so God, by Jesus blood, is constantly cleansing us from all unrighteousness. There is therefore now no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus. (Rom. 8:1)
When the fact of this forgiveness is realized, it brings peace that nothing else can give, and a boldness to stand straight and tall as a child of God.
c.
Sin denied as fact . . . 1Jn. 1:10
(1Jn. 1:10) If we should say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar and His word is not in us.
From the consideration of sin as guilt, John turns our attention to sin as fact. Again we are to test the honesty of our claim to walk in the light, this time by our attitude toward the fact of sin.
If we deny the fact of sin (expressed here by the Greek aorist tense) we make God a liar! This challenges the imagination. For the creature to dispute the Creators knowledge of reality to the extent that he actually makes God out as acting according to that which is not real staggers the faculties of perception! Yet this, says John, is precisely what one does say when he claims to know God and at the same time to deny that he does in fact commit sins.
In such an attitude, the word of God simply does not exist. His word is not in us, when we deny the fact that we sin. Whether we take this to mean the written word or the incarnate Word, the end result is the same. The written word is the record of Gods revelation of truth. This revelation reaches its zenity in the person of Jesus, the incarnate Word.
Everything God has revealed about man in his present environment indicates that man does not do as God would have him do; that man does what God would not have him do. This is perhaps the primary truth of human experience. To deny this is true in the individual life is to remove from that life the entire revelation of God concerning human behavior.
d.
Sin confessed as fact . . . 1Jn. 2:1-2
(1Jn. 2:1) My little children, I am writing these things in order that you may stop committing sins. But if one should sin, we have one called to our side toward the Father, Jesus as righteous Christ (2) and He is a covering on account of the sins which are ours and not just concerning ours, but also concerning those of the whole world.
It is only in the recognition of sin and the sinfullness of it that there is any hope of eliminating it from ones life. So, says John to those he considers as dear little ones in Gods family, I am writing this to you in order that you may stop committing sins.
If we will recognize that there is such a thing as acting contrary to Gods will, and that when we do so act, we are personally guilty, we will have come a long way toward the expelling of sinful activity from our daily lives. This stands out in contrast to the modern popular idea that there is no moral absolute. God has revealed right. The opposite of right is wrong.
If we will recognize the cost of our guilt by remembering that only Calvary is equal to it, we will have come close to seeing the tremendous seriousness of the matter. To know that the blood of Gods only Son is required each day to cleanse us from the normal daily guilt of well-adjusted lives, is to realize the phenomenal deadliness of sin. This will go far toward changing the pattern of our behavior and the sinful acts will become less and less frequent.
But let us not be so blind as to believe that we will ever reach the point of perfection at which we do not need the blood. If we do sin, we have an Advocate.
The English word Advocate is used here to translate the Greek paraklete. Paraklete means literally, one who is called along side. The reason for calling is the primary concern. The idea seems to be one who lends his presence to assist His friends.
The most precious idea of Jesus to be found in the Bible is that He is simply our friend! A great deal is made, in Hebrews chapter two, of the fact that Jesus shared flesh and blood with those he came to save. He has felt the tug of temptation as only a human being can feel it. While He does not approve of sin in the life of any child of God, he does understand the pressures of life which often bring it about.
It is just here that the real meaning of Jesus incarnation experience begins to be seen in the life of a Christian. To the person who has committed his life to God on this ground, who constantly accepts not only the fact of his own sin but also its guilt, there is the blessed comfort of knowing that an understanding Friend intercedes for him before God. There is no need to make excuses. There is no need to deny or explain away sin. One who knows Jesus as a personal. Friend can face up to his guilt in the awareness that . . . He ever liveth and maketh intercession for them. (Heb. 7:25)
The word, hilasmos, (propitiation) in verse two is deserving of special attention. This friend who is our advocate or paraklete is also our propitiation for sins.
Hilasmos, (propitiation) has at its root the idea of appeasing and conciliation. The fundamental problem in any religion is that of personal relationship to God. The difficulty is brought about by sin.
To solve this problem of divine-human relationship, the idea of sacrifice is introduced. Every sacrifice ever offered by every human religion has been for the purpose of appeasing the wrath and currying the favor of a god or gods.
The idea of restoring divine-human relationships broken by sin is not strange to the Christian Gospel. We have already seen, in I John, chapter one, that the whole purpose of the incarnation is to establish fellowship between man and God, and consequently, between man and man.
What makes the Christian sacrifice unique among sacrifices is that God has offered the sacrifice to man! In 2Co. 5:19, we learn that . . . God was in Christ reconciling the world unto Himself . . . Thus, while we would contradict scripture should we deny the wrath of God is released against sin, we gain in Christ a much deeper insight into both the wrath and the mercy of God. Gods wrath is not appeased by sacrifices of human origin. It is rather conciliated through our acceptance of the sacrifice which He Himself has provided!
In brief, we are brought back into fellowship with God, not because we desire it to the point of offering sacrifices, but because He desires it to the point of sending His only Son as the propitiation, the covering for our guilt. It is, therefore, impossible to even discuss, much less to comprehend the love of God apart from the fact of sin and His sacrifice of Jesus for it. (Joh. 3:16)
John further adds that this sacrifice is not only a sin covering for us, but for the whole world also. Heb. 2:9 tells us Christ tasted death for every man. The Gnostic fancied himself to be part of an exclusive few in whom God took special interest. This interest included endowment with special knowledge, and the knowledge revealed in Jesus was the choicest of it all. Not so, says John! Jesus is not the means whereby a few are brought into a special relationship with God; He is the propitiation of the entire world.
This ought not be construed as supporting universalism, or the doctrine that all men are automatically saved by Christ, and that, therefore, none will be lost. The tests being presented by John are evidence that those who do not meet the tests do not have life, much less fellowship with God.
e.
Hereby we know we know Him . . . 1Jn. 1:3
(1Jn. 1:3) And in this we are knowing that we come to know and still do know Him, if we are keeping His commandments.
Know is the favorite word of the gnostic. John here turns their own word on them, and will do so many times throughout the remainder of the epistle. Hereby we know!
There is a play on the tenses in verse three which is not apparent in the English versions. John, quite literally, says, In this we are knowing that we got to know, and still do know, Him; that we are keeping His commandments. Here is a challenge to the claim of special knowledge by an appeal to experimental knowledge. The person, who really got acquainted with God and to whom knowing Him is the way of life, has the habit of keeping Gods commandments. Not my will, thine be done is more than poetry, it is the touch stone of practical Christian life.
James says, . . . faith apart from works is barren. (Jas. 2:20) John here makes virtually the same claim for knowledge. Knowledge apart from obedience is no knowledge at all! Perhaps a timely application of the truth can be made by saying that a knowledge of Gods word is meaningless in the life of one who does not practice obeying it. Such a person may really know the Bible, and not know the God of the Bible at all!
What commandments does John have in mind? The moral precepts of the ten commandments? Perhaps. Certainly, John includes obedience to that which Jesus identifies as the first and second commandments: Thou shalt love the Lord thy God . . . thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. Upon these depend all Gods commandments. (Mat. 22:40) He who does not love does not know God, no matter what his claim to special enlightenment.
Safely, we may assume that Johns test includes the willingness, and the effort to obey all things, whatsoever I have commanded you. (Mat. 28:20) When love meets command, the result is obedience.
f.
To say we know God, but not keep His commandments . . . 1Jn. 1:4
(4) whoever is saying, I know Him, and is not keeping His commandments, is a liar, and reality is not in him.
Here is a terrible indictment. It is but the negative side of the test presented in verse three. If keeping His commandments proves we do know God, failing to keep His commandments proves we do not know Him.
Perhaps a word should be said just here about the meaning of the word ginosko (know). A synonym is oida, and it is in the contrast between the two that the real meaning becomes apparent. Oida, also translated know, means to know through reflected study, and mental deduction. Ginosko (know) means to know by observation and experience. Ginosko is properly called experimental knowledge.
It is only the constant day by day experience of keeping Gods commandments that gives one this experimental knowledge. The claim to know God aside from this day by day experience is unreal. Consequently, John says whoever makes the claim is lying and the truth (reality) is not in him!
If failure to keep His commandments proves we do not know Him, it is also evidence we do not have life. He that believeth on the Son hath eternal life; but he that obeyeth not the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abideth on him. (Joh. 3:36)
g.
The intended end of divine love . . . 1Jn. 1:5 (a)
(1Jn. 1:5) But whoever goes on keeping His word, truly in that one the love of God has reached its intended end.
The love of God toward man reaches the completeness of its purpose when an individual habitually keeps Gods word. To keep His word is to obey Him faithfully, not by loud claims contradicted by lives inconsistent with the claim. Rather such obedience becomes more and more habitual in the life of one who lives daily in the awareness that Christ is Lord.
Everyone is familiar with Joh. 3:16. For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on Him might not perish, but have everlasting life. It was the love of God from the beginning which brought Jesus into the world. The long years of preparation recorded in the Old Testament were overtures of this divine love.
In Luk. 24:44ff, Jesus pointed out to His apostles; it stands written in the Law and the Prophets and the Psalms that the Christ must suffer and be slain and be raised again the third day, and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached to the whole world in His name. God did not begin to love the world the night Jesus was born. He loved the world when he called Abram and made with him a covenant through which He would bless all the nations of the earth. Everything that went before the birth of Jesus was preparation for the manifestation of His love on Calvary.
One cannot read the Gospel accounts of the crucifixion without being moved by the demonstration of Gods love for a world which was deserving of anything but love. The insults, the shame, the humiliation, the pain of the cross, bespeak a love beyond human comprehension. The controlling factor of this love in Gods people is that Christ died for all. (2Co. 5:14) The aim of this love is that . . . repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all the nations. (Luk. 24:47)
All the plan of God, all the call of the covenant, all the ages of preparation, all the agony of the cross are meaningless until they produce in the individual heart the obedience of faith. (Rom. 16:26) So, John writes, . . . whoever goes on keeping His word, truly in that one the love of God has reached its intended end.
h.
Hereby we know we are in Him . . . 1Jn. 1:5 (b)
(1Jn. 1:5) In this we are knowing from experience that we are in Him:
It is not hereby we know, as though this were the only test necessary. John will present two other tests equally significant in testing eternal life as fellowship with God. Rather, in this we are knowing. (See on 1Jn. 2:4 concerning know) The habitual keeping of His commandments is an experience had only by those who walk in the light as He is in the light. Thus keeping His commandments becomes to the individual evidence that he is indeed in Him.
i.
Moral obligation and proof of the claim to know God . . . 1Jn. 1:6
(1Jn. 1:6) The one claiming to remain in Him is morally obligated himself to keep on walking just as that one walked.
In His prayer, recorded in Joh. 17:1-26, Jesus identifies eternal life as knowledge of God and His Son, And this is eternal life, that they should know thee, the only true God, and Him whom thou didst send, Jesus Christ. (Joh. 17:3)
The word translated know in Joh. 17:3 is the word ginosko (experiential knowledgesee on Joh. 17:4 above) This knowledge which results from experience is here presented as resulting from fulfilling the moral obligation which comes from claiming such knowledge of God. Whoever says he knows God is morally obligated to walk as Jesus walked. It was His commitment to Gods will which substantiated His claim to know the Father! (Joh. 6:38) Here is the practical meaning of walking in the light. (1Jn. 1:7)
This entire passage (1Jn. 1:8-10; 1Jn. 2:1-6) deals in phrases familiar to the ancient world. As is typical of Johns style, he takes well known phrases and pours them full of Christian meaning. The one of these with which we are especially concerned here is knowing God.
The Ancient Greeks of the pre-Christian era were convinced that they could arrive at the knowledge of God by the sheer process of intellectual reasoning, argument, and thought. This concept is reminiscent of the modern liberal theologian who believes he can deduce the nature of God (whom he prefers to call the Ground of Being) through dialogue, counsel, and the sharing of various religious traditions.
Obviously, such an academic approach to God has no essential bearing at all on human behaviour. It is not necessarily ethical. A man may know God in this sense, if indeed God can be known in this way at all, and it makes no difference in his life.
The later Greeks, who were contemporary with John and Jesus, sought to find God through an emotional experience. They re-enacted the myths of martyred gods in public services in such a way that the worshiper identified himself emotionally with the suffering god. Special lighting effects, sensual music and such were used to bring about this emotional experience. Once the desired emotion was produced, the worshiper believed that he shared the victory and immortality of his slain deity.
This practice at once calls to mind many of the devices used by some present day revivalists to produce a Christian experience. The purpose of such revivalism, whether it be practiced in a marble hall in Greece or in a tent on Main Street, U.S.A., is to produce a knowledge of God through emotional experience.
The emotional approach to God shares, at its base, the same failure as does the intellectual. It does not carry with it any necessary change in the moral and ethical life of the individual. The Christian experience which proves salvation is obedience!
Johns contention here is that the test of validity for the claim to know God is that the one making the claim must necessarily act as Jesus acted. Whether it be based on academic deduction or revivalistic emotion, the failure to produce a new life puts the lie to the claim. There is no knowledge of God that does not issue in obedience to Him! It is by the experience of obedience that we know we know Him, and thereby, we know we have life eternal . . . for eternal life is to know Him!
E.
Review Questions
1.
What does the claim not to sin reveal about the sincerity of the one making the claim? (1Jn. 1:8)
2.
What is meant by If we confess our sins? (1Jn. 1:9)
3.
What is the attitude toward God of one who claims he has not sinned? (1Jn. 1:10)
4.
Why does John say he is writing these things? (1Jn. 2:1)
5.
If one should sin, we have an advocate with the Father. Explain. (1Jn. 2:1)
6.
Jesus is our propitiation for our sin. Explain. (1Jn. 2:2)
7.
In what sense is Jesus also a propitiation for the sins of the whole world? (1Jn. 2:2, compare 1Jn. 2:5)
8.
How does 1Jn. 2:3 challenge the claim of the gnostic to special knowledge of God?
9.
How is keeping Gods commandments evidence that we know Him? (1Jn. 2:4)
10.
How does the love of God reach its intended end in the life of the individual believer? (1Jn. 2:5)
11.
What does it mean to walk as That One walked? (1Jn. 2:6)
12.
What is the moral obligation of one who claims to know God? (1Jn. 2:6)
13.
State in your own words, in a single sentence, the first test presented in I John whereby we may assure ourselves that we have eternal life.
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
8. If we say As the Nicolaitans (or antinomian Gnostics) do. See notes on Rev 2:15, and Introduction to this epistle.
Have no sin Whether we say by denying we have done wrong, or by affirming that no wrong we commit is sin.
Deceive ourselves We are not merely mistaken or deceived, but we are also our own deceivers. We are the deceived and deceivers in one. We have the misfortune to be mistaken, and the guilt of framing the deception by which we mistake.
The truth It is not said that there is not truth in us, for all men have some truth. But the divine truth of pure fellowship with God through Christ is not in us, the only truth by which we are saved. Huther and Alford maintain that this saying, we have no sin, refers even to the true Christian. But, 1. Surely of a Christian who is by forgiveness freed from all guilt of sin, and by sanctification cleansed from all unrighteousness, it may be truly said in an evangelical sense that he has no sin. God imputes to him no sin. And to say that such a non-imputation to the Christian of sin makes God a liar, is, to say the least, very severe language. 2. Very plainly, the apostle is showing how the sinner may come into fellowship with the divine light. He tells such sinner that it is not by denying his sins, but by confessing them, that he can become right. The deceive ourselves refers to the man, therefore, before justification. 3. But in truth, the four instances in this chapter of if we say, are quotations of the language of Nicolaitan antinomians, who maintained that however bad their conduct they were still sinless.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘ If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.’
Those who are His are very much aware of sin, the sin that plagues their hearts and lives and seeks to draw them away from His ways. For the truth is that if we are His the light of God will shine on the hearts of His own, revealing to us our sinfulness. But it will also bring home to us Christ as our Saviour and Lord. And being such men we will never doubt our own sinfulness as we are in ourselves.
This ‘sin’ is defined in 1Jn 3:4 as ‘lawlessness’, the refusal to respond to and obey God’s law. Thus John is declaring that there is within us all a streak of lawlessness, of rebellion, of unwillingness to submit. And the response to such is to come to the light and be open with God and with each other for the purpose of submission.
The message that John brings is not that men have been purified as a result of some religious ordinance and can therefore come into God’s presence without a qualm, (which probably some were declaring), and therefore do not need continual forgiveness. It is that men without exception are sinful. ‘If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us.’ Note the singular for sin. This may be because it speaks of the sinful tendency within our nature, the sin that is so much a part of what we are, deeply rooted within us, our lawless nature. Or it may refer to sin seen as a whole, differing in sins done from one to another although all coming from the same root and all disobeying the law of God. Or it may be referring to the guilt associated with sin. Or it may include all with each left to apply it to his own situation. It tells us that to deny this fact, or to claim that some religious ordinance or experience has totally removed it, is not to improve us or increase our worthiness. It is to deceive ourselves about what we are and to avoid the truth. It is to ignore the fact that morality is of prime importance. It makes us liars to ourselves and to God. It means that we have not truly come to Him who is pure light. For if we had so come we would be aware of our sinfulness within from which we can never be fully free in this world, although we may be victors over it. If we would come to God we must first face up to sin and morality.
For the truth is that we are all made up of sinful flesh which constantly seeks to drag us away from the ways of the Spirit, to drag us down into sin and disobedience (Gal 5:16). And to be aware of that is to be on our guard and with Christ’s help and the uplifting power of the Spirit to find deliverance from it. But let us drop our guard and grow careless towards God, and sin will have us in an instant. Once we deceive ourselves and fail to recognise the truth, we are undone and will soon find ourselves constantly sinning. As Cain was told so long ago, ‘if you do not do well, — sin crouches like a wild animal at the door’ (Gen 4:7).
‘The truth is not in us.’ If we say that we have no sin we are controlled by falsehood and not by truth. Truth has not been allowed its way within us. It has been turned out and rejected.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Sin and its forgiveness:
v. 8. If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.
v. 9. If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
v. 10. If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His Word is not in us. What St. John here discusses is the heresy of perfectionism, the idea which is held by many people to this day, namely, that they can attain to such a perfect state in this world that they are completely free from sin in their own persons, “in an uninterrupted obedience. ” To these the apostle says: If we say that sin we do not have, ourselves we deceive, and the truth, not is it in us. The very position of the words expresses the horror which John must have felt at the mere suggestion of such blasphemy. There is no such thing as perfect sanctification in our own persons in this life, making the forgiveness of sins superfluous so far as we are concerned. If anyone should hold this foolish notion and even confess it, he is deceiving himself, he is leading himself astray, he is leaving the eternal truth as revealed in the Word of God. He is denying the truth that all men have sinned and come short of the glory of God, that there is none that doeth good, no, not one. He has left the truth that we sinners are justified before God by grace, for Christ’s sake, through faith. Thus the truth will no longer be in such a person, he is lost in the blindness of self-righteousness, he has lost the fellowship with God and with Jesus Christ, his Savior.
But, on the other hand: If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just, that He forgives the sins and cleanses us from all unrighteousness. That is the custom which the Christians have, to bring their transgressions before their heavenly Father in contrition and repentance, to confess them all without excuse or attempt at mitigation. We can do that so freely because we know that God is reconciled to us through the blood of His Son. He forgives us our sins for the sake of Christ, He cleanses us from all our imperfections and unrighteousnesses, from the sins which still cling to us and make us laggards in the fulfillment of God’s will. This He can do because the righteousness of Christ is there in sufficient quantity to outweigh all our trespasses; His expiation is great enough to cover all our sins. What is more, in doing this, our heavenly Father is proving Himself faithful to His promises, Heb 10:23. And He is just; having accepted the redemption of Christ, His perfect reconciliation, it would be an act of unrighteousness and injustice on His part to break His promise ratified by the blood of Jesus. If Christ were still in the grave, then our hope were vain; but with the risen Christ exalted to the right hand of God we are courageous and defiant in faith.
The apostle again lifts his finger in warning to check the pride and self-righteousness of our hearts: If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His Word, not is it in us. If any person that is at all acquainted with the Word of God is so blind and perverse as to deny his own sinfulness, he is stifling the voice of his conscience, he is setting aside the entire Word of the Gospel, he is rejecting the entire experience of mankind. Thus he makes God a liar; for the entire content of His Word may be given in the two words, sin and grace; and he most assuredly has not the faintest conception of the truth of God as it is contained in His revealed Word. Let every Christian, therefore, guard against such a delusion with all vigilance, and to that end make the study of God’s Word a daily practice. Then his own sin, but above all the greatness of God’s mercy, will be revealed to him with ever greater emphasis.
Summary. The apostle gives a brief summary of the doctrine concerning the person and the office of Christ, showing at the same time that God is Light and that we should walk in this light, recognizing and acknowledging our sins, but also the forgiveness of God through the blood of Christ.
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
1Jn 1:8. If we say that we have no sin, &c. Several commentators of note judge that this text has particular reference to the Gnostics: others give it a more general sense, but still as referring solely to the unawakened or unconverted, and having no allusion to the children of God: others, that the first clause signifies If we say that we have not sinned, the present tense being inserted instead of the past. The followers of Dr. John Calvin lay peculiar stress upon these words, as favouring the doctrine which maintains the impossibility of being saved from all sin in the present life. Mr. John Wesley supposes that the words before his Blood has cleansed us, are to be understoodIf we say that we have no sin before his Blood has cleansed us. And when I compare the following passages of this epistle, viz. ch. 1Jn 1:9 1Jn 2:5 1Jn 3:3; 1Jn 4:12; 1Jn 4:16-18; 1Jn 5:18 with the present, I am constrained to acknowledge that I believe Mr. Wesley’s comment on the passage to be perfectly just. At the same time I suppose no one will deny, that every human being on this side of the grave, may say with truth, “Father, forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive them that trespass against us.” We every moment need the atoning Blood, the propitiatory Sacrifice as such, whatever be our situation or experience in the church of God.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
1Jn 1:8 . Purification from sin presupposes the existence of sin even in believers; the denial of this is self-deception.
] as in 1Jn 1:6 ; thereby is meant not merely “the speech of the heart” (Spener), but the actual expression and assertion.
] The view of Grotius, [59] that this refers to sinning before conversion, and that therefore means the guilt of sin, is rightly rejected by Lcke, Sander, etc.
The question, especially of earlier commentators, whether is here original sin (or sinfulness, as Weiss still thinks) or actual sin (pecc. actuale), desire (concupiscentia) or deed, is solved by the fact that the idea is considered quite generally by the apostle (so also Braune) only, of course, with the exception of the sin spoken of in chap. 1Jn 5:16 . The 1st person plural is to be noticed in so far as the having sin is thereby represented as something that is true of all Christians. The expression describes in a quite general way the taint of sin; only of the absolutely pure, in whom no trace of sin exists, is it true that he ; the relation of this to (1Jn 1:6 ), in which the will of man serves sin (or in which sin is the dominating principle of life), is therefore not that of contrast (say in this way, that is a being tainted with sin, where no act of will takes place), [60] but is to be defined thus, that the latter ( ) is a particular species of . Even though as Christians, who are born of God, we have no longer sin in the sense that . is true of us, nevertheless we do not yet cease to have sin; if we deny this, if we maintain that we have no sin at all, then what John says in the following words is the case with us. ] not = “we are mistaken,” which would mean; [61] but, as Sander explains: “we mislead ourselves, take ourselves astray from salvation (or better: from truth);” by that assertion, which is a lie (not an unconscious mistake), the Christian (for the apostle is not here speaking of non-Christians) deceives himself about the truth, for which he leaves no room in himself. Braune rightly observes that emphasizes the self-activity, which the middle with its passive form leaves in the background.
] is not a mere repetition of , but adds to this another new element.
, as in 1Jn 1:6 , is neither = studium veri (Grotius), nor = castior cognitio (Semler), nor even = uprightness, or truthfulness (Lcke in his 2d ed.), or, as de Wette explains: “the veracity of self-knowledge and self-examination;” [62] but truth in its objective character (Lcke in his 1st ed., Baumgarten-Crusius, Dsterdieck, Brckner, Braune). Baumgarten-Crusius rightly says: “ does not need to be taken in subjective sense, the subjective lies in .” The expressions used here: . and . , are not milder (Sander) than the corresponding expressions in 1Jn 1:6 : and , but stronger (Ebrard), since in . . the self-injury, and in . the negation of possession of the truth, are more sharply marked.
[59] Habere peccatum, non est: nunc in peccato esse, sed ob peccatum reum posse fieri.
[60] Even Ebrard does not correctly state the relation of the two expressions to one another, when he says that “in man is not in , but is in man,” for plainly he also who is in has this in himself.
[61] When Ebrard, in opposition to this, remarks that it cannot be asserted “that the middle means ‘to be mistaken,’ and , on the other hand, ‘to mislead oneself,’ ” this is not at all to the point, since it is not said that has always the meaning “to be mistaken,” but that the German “sich irren” [Engl. “to be mistaken”] is expressed in Greek not by , but by .
[62] Ewald’s explanation is also unsatisfactory: “truth about this relation of things, and therefore easily about every other also.”
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
3. Second Inference.Perception and Confession of Sins
1Jn 1:8-10
8If we say that we have no19 sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.20 9If We confess our sins, he is faithful and just21 to forgive us our sins,22 and to cleanse23 us from all unrighteousness. 10If we say that we have not sinned; we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
Connection.The structure of these verses is unmistakably the same as that of those immediately preceding them: negative (1Jn 1:8) and positive (1Jn 1:9), while the negation (1Jn 1:8) is continued (1Jn 1:10) with reference to the positive (1Jn 1:9), and the parallel is even indicated in the form: . 1Jn 1:8; 1Jn 1:10. The connection of 1Jn 1:8 with the presuppositions at the end of 1Jn 1:7 () that sin is still inhering in us, is equally unmistakable. But it is just as unmistakable that the perception and confession of sins are here emphatically dwelt upon as following and accompanying the true fellowship with its walk in the Light. The continuance of the Plural form (we, us, our) denotes also the general character both of what is said here and in the preceding verses. After all, we have here a second inference drawn from the leading thought that God is Light, (1Jn 1:5).
1Jn 1:8. Perception of Sin.If we say, cf. 1Jn 1:6, above in Exegetical and Critical.
That we have no sin. in the Singular denotes sin in general; the absence of the Article points out that the reference is neither to a particular sin, nor to the whole, full sin [but to any sin.M.]. Hence the application of the term to original sin as contrasted with actual sins (peccata actualia), as maintained by Augustine, Bede, Luther, Calvin, Beza, Calov, Baumgarten-Crusius, Neander, Sander and Dsterdieck, is as inadmissible as that which refers it to a particular sin or a particular kind of sins, as in 1Jn 5:16; , or , sins of infirmity, light offences, against which so early a writer as Augustine remarks: Multa levia (peccata) faciunt unum grande. Nor can designate the guilt of sin, as held by Socinus, Episcopius, Lffler and Grotius, the latter saying: Habere peccatum non est: nunc in peccato esse, sed: ob peccata reum posse fieri, nor describe sins committed or inhering anterior to entrance into fellowship with God the Light, where the Greeks Oecumenius, Theophylact and the Scholiasts have the precedence. is simply sin, nothing more or less, but it is certainly sin. Nor does make any change in the matter, so as to designate the state in which sin has not yet wholly disappeared (Lcke). But it is less the state which is the result of continued sinning, than the state from which results such sinning, i.e., the state which is not the product of former sin, but the producer of new sin. John says: We have sin, and that denotes, both that original sin gives us still trouble, and that we still do sin in thought, in word and in deed; if not as servants, under the dominion of sin, who looking for reward are in the service of sin, yet by hastiness, infirmity or ignorance, now only suffering it by the force of habit or because of its congenital strength, or again by offering it too little resistance; sin insinuates itself into our good and our good works, even into prayer, partly in affectu (self-love, hardness in firmness, etc.), partly in defectu (gentleness even to parting with virtue, the love of our neighbour, as well as the love of self with fear, etc.). is a sinful demeanour of any kind, falling away from true, godliness, from that which is well-pleasing to God; here we may name particular inclinations, tendencies, principles, and especially the forms of the life of the imagination [German: Artung des Phantasielebens, an expression of Ebrard, who alludes to the impure representations of a depraved imagination preceding the overt acts of vice and sin.M.]. This we must not deny. The sentence with its substance and bearing becomes clearer if we take it in connection with . The darkness is the territory of the undivine, well marked off in every direction and containing the whole system of sin,the sphere of the walk, the life and doings of men. A Christian cannot and may not be said to walk thus in the darkness, but he still has sin. There is still within him a territory which is constantly receiving some kind of admixture from the territory of darkness. He is no longer in sin, but sin is in him; the degrees, indeed, are infinitely different and adjusted to the degree of the cleansing and growth of the inner man. But even John is constrained to say: We have sin.
We deceive ourselves.Here we have the Active, not the Middle Voice; . This form brings out the self-activity which sinks more into the background by the use of the Middle with its Passive form. This brings out a difference like that in the German, ich selbst rgere michich rgere mich selbst. In the latter case the cause is excluded in others, while in the former it is definitely laid within myself, and thus gives prominence to my own guiltiness, whereas the second case describes only a suffering without any one elses guilt. The pronoun of the third person in the Plural is used frequently both for the first (Rom 8:23) and the second person (Joh 12:8). See Winer, p. 163, No. 5. The context removes all doubt that the reference is here to deception, to lying and error, as in 1Jn 3:7; Mat 24:4; Mat 24:11, and elsewhere. This is also the proper meaning of this verb. It is parallel with of 1Jn 1:6, but gives greater prominence to self-guilt; there he lies before others in word or deed, here he lies to himself and this sin works into himself greater perdition. There an unregenerate man wants others to believe that he is a Christian, here a regenerate man deceives himself through pride. [Augustine: Si te confessus fueris peccatorem, est in te veritas: nam ipsa veritas lux est. Nondum perfecte splenduit vita tua, quia insunt peccata: sed tamen jam illuminari cpisti, quia inest confessio peccatorum.M.]
And the truth is not in us.Since deceiving oneself runs parallel with the lying of 1Jn 1:6, so this sentence concludes parallel with not doing the truth, (1Jn 1:6). The truth, is to be taken objectively (Dsterdieck, Ebrard, Huther); the subjective lies in (Bengel: non in corde, neque adeo in ore). It is the Divine truth in Christ; the absolute principle of life from God, received into our heart. Hence it is neither studium veri (as maintained by Grotius and Episcopius), nor a truthful disposition (Lcke), nor the truthfulness of self-knowledge and self-examination, of purity (de Wette), nor that which is true in general (S. G. Lange, Paulus), nor better moral perception, melior rerum moralium cognitio, as Semler interprets. Moreover, the being, the existence of the Divine truth as the principle of life in us is also denied ( ). Hence this is even stronger than the former , 1Jn 1:6; the latter is without the deed of the truth, the former without its existence; here the truth being in us is denied, in 1Jn 1:6, only its manifestation and expression in our life.
1Jn 1:9. Confession of Sins.If we confess our sins.The connection of this sentence with the preceding is not like that of 1Jn 1:7 with 1Jn 1:6, by , as Luther renders; the negatives of the preceding verse are strongly and abruptly antithetical to the positive of this verse; [Ebrard: Now follows the second thought-member in a conditional sentence which introduces the opposite case. . Here also John scorns a merely tautological repetition; he does not say: , but where he opposes to the negative the positive, Confession, he does not speak of sin in general (as a state), but of definite, concrete, specific sins. For this is the form which the confession of sins must assume, in order to be inwardly true and efficacious. The mere confession in abstracto that we have sin, would be without truth and value and shrink into a hollow phrase, unless it be attended by the perception and acknowledgment of concrete particular sins. It is much easier to make pious speeches concerning repentance and the greatness of the misery engendered by sin, than in a specific case of sin to see ones wrong, admit and repent it, and to be sorry for it. John requires the latter.M.].The Apostle is not satisfied with as before, but uses , which is much more comprehensive than the former, and of course involves it as well as the inward opining, thinking, saying and feeling convinced, which finally develops into audible utterance and declaration before men; nor is this all, for it involves the additional particular of confessing ones guilt before God, and this confession of guilt must be so lively and profound as to become public and ecclesiastically ordained, and stands in nothing behind the former . It is therefore not enough to see here only a perception or recognition (Socinus: Confiteri significat interiorem ac profundam suorum peccatorum agnitionem. Baumgarten-Crusius: is to perceive, to be sensible, and to become conscious of, as contrasted with ), or an inward act grounded in the whole inward bias of the mind (Neander), all which is taken for granted. Nor is it only the real utterance of sin inwardly identified and confessed to oneself (Huther, Dsterdieck), for this also is implied as a consequence. Nor must we exclude the acknowledgment before God, and the confession ordained for the comfort of a disquieted conscience, from which no truly penitent man will withdraw himself, and which is gladly sought and made by such as are of a contrite heart. [The reference here is to the Lutheran confession, which must not be confounded with the R. C. auricular Confession., Luther himself distinguishes three kinds of confession: the first, before God (Psa 32:6), which is so essential that it ought to be the sum-total of a Christian mans life; the second, towards our neighbour, and is the confession of love as the former is that of faith (Jam 5:16. This confession, like the former, is necessary and ordained. The third is that ordered by the Pope to be made secretly into the ears of a priest with an enumeration of sins. Luther condemned compulsory private confession, and left it optional with individuals to determine if, and what they should confess. Still he commends private confession, saying, it is advisable and good. The Augsburg Confession, II., IV., says: Confession has not been abolished in our Churches, and the usage is not to give the Lords Body to those who have not been previously examined and absolved, and Luther in his Larger Catechism supplies a form of confession which is very full of private matters (Catech. Minor., IV., 1629). The present practice varies in different Lutheran establishments, some retaining private confession, others substituting general confession. The latter custom prevails, I believe, among Lutherans in the United States.M.].The proud stands in antithesis with the humble , which includes all the aforesaid particulars. The original signifies to speak together [hence to hold the same language.M.], then to accord, assent to, and points to a dialogue between God accusing and reproaching us in our consciences by His Word and His Spirit, and man assenting thereto in humility, faith and prayer, even unto pouring out his heart before loved fellow-men, from his nearest friend to the spiritual guardian of his soul, the servant of the Word, the Minister of the gifts and Steward of the mysteries of God. Hence the object is designated by . The sins are the particular manifestations of (Huther), definite, concrete, specific sins (Ebrard), of whichever kind they may be, lesser and even the least sins, even as repentance goes ever deeper and deeper and attains more clear and distinct perceptions of sin in its endless turns, in its hideousness and wrong. See below on 1Jn 1:10, and on 1Jn 3:4.
He is faithful and righteous.That is only God the Father (so Lcke, de Wette and the majority of commentators), who is the ruling subject in the work of redemption, since for Christs sake, and through Christ the Mediator, He forgives and makes us happy, although Christ is referred to in 1Jn 1:7, and below in 1Jn 2:1. The reference to the Father and the Son is inadmissible (J. Lange, Sander, S. Schmid). The subject is not defined, because the reference is to God the Father, who is the principal subject throughout [1Jn 1:5-10]. God is faithful, He does not become so through forgiveness consequent upon our repentance. God is faithful because His Essence accords with His workings, and these in all particular manifestations accord with one another and all of them together. The primary reference is to Gods faithfulness towards us, to the truth-and-light-essence which reigns in us, if we confess our sins, and is related to and in accordance with His Own Essence (Ebrard); but to this must be added a secondary reference to His Word with its promises of help, blessings, redemption and remission of sins (Dsterdieck, Huther, al.), and this secondary reference follows from the context 1Jn 1:10, which re-adverts to the Word of God, although it had already been mentioned in 1Jn 1:1; 1Jn 1:3; 1Jn 1:5, and is in perfect harmony with the grammatical usage of both Testaments and the views they express (cf. Psa 32:3 sqq.; Eze 18:31 sq.; 1Co 1:9; 1Co 10:13; 2Co 1:18-21; 1Th 5:24; Heb 10:23; Heb 11:11). And more than this, the term , held thus absolute and undefined, has surely a wider bearing. It concerns something which He has produced as Creator and suggested as Regent in dispensations, to which the Father and the Lord have given consciousness in the Word, and which is in perfect harmony with the Light-nature of God. He is faithful to His Own Being, to His doings for, and in man as Creator, Preserver, Governor, Redeemer and Revealer. He is stiff and firm (Luther) in cleaving to His holy purpose of grace, that is, His faithfulness; therefore is not only misericors (S. Schmid). Besides this we have the epithet , righteous, just, which applies to one who acts in accordance with the duties arising from his position; it denotes the disposition and righteousness which gives to every man his due. God is righteous or just when He punishes those who walk , 2Th 1:5; 2Th 1:7, where the reference is to , then He but blesses those who walk , forgiving, cleansing and ultimately glorifying them. It is only the juxtaposition of and the context which render the limitation of to the judicial character of God with reference to the penitent admissible in this passage. Faithful towards the penitent, agreeably to His Love, His eternal purpose of grace, His Word of promise and His work of redemption, He is also righteous, just, to them as promising them forgiveness and cancelling what is still unrighteous in them in conformity to His appointed laws. Hence is not =bonus, lenis (Grotius, Schttgen, Rosenmller, nor = quus, benignus (Semler, G. S. Lange, Carpzov, Bretschneider), nor again = (Hornejus, in promissis servandis integer), nor = (Ebrard). Nor does the righteousness of God appear here as justitia vindicativa, which was revealed in the death of Christ, so that the forgiveness of sins is Christo justa non nobis (Calov), or in that the sinner, appealing to the ransom paid in the blood of Christ, has his sin cancelled, because it would be unjust to insist upon a twofold payment (Sander). Luthers explanation is excellent; he says, God is righteous who gives to every man his due and accords to those who confess their sins and believe, the righteousness acquired through the death of Christ, and thus makes thee righteous. This righteousness of God is closely connected with His faithfulness. But we must guard against the distinction that relates to peccata mortalia, to peccata venalia, quia sc. justi per opera pnitenti, caritatis etc. merentur de condigno hanc condonationem (Suarez). Faithfulness is rather the soil and foundation from which righteousness springs up. [The blessings conferred upon Christians conformably to the of God, are in fulfilment of the Divine promises.M.]. In Holy Scripture goodness and righteousness, truth and righteousness are syzygies (Nitzsch, System, 6th ed., p. 176). Cf. Psa 143:1, and notes on 1Jn 2:29.
To forgive us our sins. is not =, so that, or with which it alternates, 1Jn 1:5, 1Jn 3:11. The difference is, whether we have here simply the contents of the message (1Jn 1:5), or its purpose (1Jn 3:11). The meaning here seems to be: He is faithful and righteous for the purpose of forgiving. It is His Law and Will to forgive (de Wette), but of course the Will manifests its energy in action (contrary to Huther). [I should prefer putting this with Winer thus: He is faithful and righteous in order to forgive us, i.e., the Divine attributes of faithfulness and righteousness are exercised in order to our pardon, as Wordsworth puts it.M.]. The sins which have been confessed He remits. Pardon, forgiveness of sins, i.e., the cancelling of the debt of sin and its culpability as well as of the consciousness of guilt or of an evil conscience; justification and reconciliation are therefore the first consequence of the confession of sin; the second consequence is:
And cleanse us from all unrighteousness.Neither an epexegetical addition (Semler) nor an allegorical repetition of the preceding (Lange). It is a cordinated clause describing sanctification as the continuation of justification, or redemption as the consequent of reconciliation. On see notes on 1Jn 1:7. Unrighteousness, , is synonymous with , and consequently not =pna peccati (Socinus); the latter denotes the formal, the former the material side of sin; the latter indicates the genesis of sin (or its course of development) which does not coincide with the law, the former the fact of the effect of sin as violating, transgressing and offending against the Law, and on that account liable to punishment and conducing to ruin and perdition.
1Jn 1:10. Conclusion.If we say.Cf. 1Jn 1:8, of which this verse is not merely the repetition, but the intensification and continuation.
That we have not sinned goes back to , but is a much stronger expression; the former denotes a state or condition of which the latter is the actual expression [1Jn 1:10 describes the concrete act, 1Jn 1:8 the abstract stateM.]; we have here the conduct (1Jn 1:10) in a certain relation (1Jn 1:8) in connection with , 1Jn 1:9. The use of the Perfect does not warrant an exclusive reference to sins anterior to entrance into the Church (Socinus, Paulus), but denotes active sinfulness reaching down to the present and sins just committed; , 1Jn 1:9, show that the separate acts, the actuosity [actuositasM.] of the (1Jn 1:8) are here dwelt upon. [Huther: The Perfect does not prove that denotes sinning prior to conversion (Soc. Russmeyer, Paulus, etc.); the reference here, as well as in all the preceding verses, is rather to the sinning of Christians; for no Christian would think of denying his former sins. The Perfect is in part accounted for by Johns usus loquendi, according to which an activity reaching down to the present is often expressed by the Perfect tense, and in part by the fact that confession always has respect to sins committed before.M.]
We make Him a liar.This clause answers to and , but is a much stronger expression; we not only lie for ourselves, we not only deceive ourselves, but we make God () a liar, and this takes place not without pride, stubbornness or bitterness even unto blasphemy (cf. Joh 5:18; Joh 8:53; Joh 10:33; Joh 19:7; Joh 19:12). He who is is blasphemed as. , of course only by such men.
And His word is not in us, i.e., His word of promise containing the , 1Jn 1:8; not only the truth and its knowledge are wanting to such persons, but they are also without the Word, the frame and vessel of the truth. As the reference is to Christians, His word probably designates the Gospel of, or concerning Jesus (Socinus, Calov, Neander, Luther, Huther, Dsterdieck), and not the Old Testament in particular (Oecumenius, Grotius, de Wette, al.), or only the New Testament (Lachmann, Rosenmller, nor in general the revelation of God absolutely, His entire self-disclosure, including the , Joh 1:1 (Ebrard).It is not stamped into the heart in living characters (Spener), it has remained or become again outwardly or inwardly strange to us (Huther); for the regenerate may fall from grace. A man that is not conscious of sin still adhering to him, not conscious, therefore, of the true nature of the holiness for which he was born and born again, cannot be or have been wont to contemplate and examine himself in the mirror of the Divine Law, in the Light of the Divine Word, by the pattern held up to us in the revelation of Jesus Christ. Such a one does actually, carelessly or maliciously accuse of falsehood the Word of God and the God of the Word, who looks upon us sinners and calls us to the consciousness of sin. Such men may remember the Word of God, know it by heart, but it is not to them an animating life-principle and impelling power; it is not extant in their inward life and consciousness.
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL
1. The want of redemption which is universal is also permanent, which even in the Church of the redeemed has not disappeared (1Jn 1:8), although it is disappearing more and more (1Jn 1:9). The certainty of the difference between walking in the darkness ( ) and walking in the light ( ) is not greater than the certainty that those who are walking in the light have sin adhering to them ( ). Vast as is the difference between these two modes and spheres of life, yet the import of the difference among Christians still affected with sin, but experiencing a daily growing redemption from sin, vanishes before the purity of God the Father, no matter how marked and important the difference may be between a John and individual Church members. The perception and cognition of sin, especially of ones own sin, and the clear consciousness of it in all humility, are indispensable requisites for the walk in the Light. Though your sin, as compared with that of the unregenerate, be light, take care lest you esteem it light. The smallest stain soils a clean garment. If you despise it when you weigh it, be afraid when you count it up. Many little sins make one great sin; many drops make a river.
2. Self-deception is so fearful because it will progress to the denial of the truth and the truthfulness of God and His Word, even to open and formal blasphemy (we lie, 1Jn 1:6; we deceive ourselves, 1Jn 1:8; we make God a liar, 1Jn 1:10). Christians are saints, but only in process of being, and not already complete and perfect. [German:becoming, not yet become.M.]. This contradicts the Donatist error.
3. Justification is before sanctification, its antecedent; precedes the (1Jn 1:9); this is the fixed order in the kingdom of God.Both are acts of God; the first an act occurring once only, the second involving the continuous doing of God [the first is a solitary act, the latter a continuing processM.]. Although the former is only a solitary, momentary act, and not a process like the latter, the former repeats itself whenever there occurs an interruption in the walk in light, or a loosening or sundering of the fellowship with God (1Jn 1:9).
4. The forgiveness of sins, as the principal part of justification, consists of different elements: 1. cancelling or diminishing of the punishments of sin; 2. cancelling of the debt of sin and the culpability connected therewith (culp et debiti); 3. removal of the consciousness of guilt or of an evil conscience; 4. the inclination of Divine grace to the sinner as actually evidenced in the communication of positive, and especially of spiritual and eternal riches; 5. abrogation of the strength and power of sin, wherewith the blotting out of sin did begin, redemption, loosening from the power of evil, the purification of the reconciled sinner from sin. While the two last elements (Nos. 4. 5) mark the transition from the realm of justification to that of sanctification (, 1Jn 1:7) that named first and relating to the punishment of sins is so externally related to the subject needing the forgiveness of sins, that its centre may be sought and found only in the other two, viz., the cancelling of the guilt and the removal of the consciousness of guilt, in perfect analogy with the confession of a justified man, as supplied by St. Paul in Rom 5:1-5, a passage which may be called classical in this matter: . The centre of the forgiveness of. sins is the non-imputatio peccati. Temporal ills appointed as punishments of sin cease to be punishments to one who has received the forgiveness of sins, they are to him only or ; they are not always or altogether cancelled and removed, and are not the worst, particularly as they do not terminate in damnation, , whereas guilt and an evil conscience disquiet and cause pain. The forgiveness of sins simply changes the sinners relation to and before God, but afterwards there springs up a different conduct of God towards the sinner and of the sinner towards God in sanctification, wherein sins are forgiven and forgotten, the sinner is no longer regarded by God as a sinner, but as another man, and God appears to, and is felt by the sinner no longer as Judge, but as a merciful Father. But such a relationship springing from the forgiveness of sins may indeed be disturbed and impaired and needs therefore repeated renewing and quickening.
5. The factor of the forgiveness of sins is God the Faithful and Righteous with His purpose of grace and its revelation (1Jn 1:9). No man can forgive his sins to himself; self-redemption is a lie. Very beautifully says Luther in execrable Latin: Amor Dei non invenit, sed creat suum diligibile; amor hominis fit a suo diligibili.
6. The condition of the forgiveness of sins is the confession of sins ( ) resting upon and conditioned by perception of sins and self-knowledge. After the death of Christ with its sufferings as well as with the proof of His perfect obedience (1Jn 1:7) has operated on the sinners conscience and caused him by that light to perceive his own sinfulness, and to feel at the same time the mercy of God, as having special regard to, and influence upon him, he ceases in the love of faith in Christ to love himself and sin within himself, is afraid of himself in his ugliness, afraid of sin and its perdition reaching to the bottom of his heart and to eternal damnation, afraid of the wrath of God in the holy energy of holy love, and confesses his sin, which he has discovered, before himself, before God and before men. Thus penitent he not only confesses his sins, but he is also another man, he is regarded as such by God, who now remits to him the debt of sin. This is the initial phase of sanctification, which begins with the forgiveness. The reconciliation of sinners is effected through the reconciliation in the bloody sacrificial death of Jesus, so that as the sons of God by grace, through the Son of God by nature, they make experience of the further communication of His grace, and in virtue thereof grow up into heirs of His glory. This was very correctly perceived by Luther: Here John meets the objection: What must I do then? my conscience reproaches me with my many sins, and John says, Confess thy sins. Thereby he confounds all such objections as if conscience says: What must I do to be saved? How shall I set about to grow better? Nothing else, says he, but this: Confess thy sins to Him, and pray Him to pardon thy grievous guilt. This must be the form of confession, says Ebrard, in order to be inwardly true and efficacious. The mere confessing in abstracto that we have sin, etc. [See above in Exegetical and Critical on 1Jn 1:9.M.] The child after the deed and with his deed, which is evil, is a very different child, if he goes and sorrowfully and truthfully confesses his sins to his father. [I will arise and go to my Father and will say unto Him, Father, I have sinned against heaven and before thee, and am no more worthy to be called Thy son, etc. Luk 15:18-19, compared with Luk 1:21-24.M.] It is wholly unwarranted that the Concil. Trident. XI 1:100:5, p. 37, cites this passage along with Luk 5:14; Luk 17:14; Jam 5:14, in proof of auricular confession, that auricularis carnificina and alleges Dominus noster Jesus Christus, e terris ascensurus ad clos, sacerdotes sui ipsius vicarios reliquit tamquam praesides et judices, ad quos omnia mortalia crimina deferantur. Likewise lapide says: Quam confessionem exigit Johannes? Hretici solam, qu fit deo, admittunt; catholici etiam specialem requirunt. Respondeo, Johannem utramque exigere. Generalem pro peccatis levibus, specialem pro gravibus. Equally unwarranted is the inference drawn in favour of purgatory from as if the forgiveness ( ) took place here and the cleansing from all unrighteousness () not until hereafter in another state of existence; even the reading would not warrant such a construction. It is Pauls particular aim to guard his readers against all such false satisfactions and hopes as those in which auricular confession and purgatory entangle men, and pastors and friends also should bear this in mind in private confessions. [See above note on 1Jn 1:9.M.]
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL
The truth that we are altogether sinners is very bitter, universal in its application and reaches deep. But those who flatter themselves, and think higher and better of themselves than they really are, lose the truth. If you think any thing of yourself, you ruin yourself. God only knows and is able to make something of man. Without the perception of sin no confession of sin, without confession of sin no forgiveness of sin, without forgiveness of sin no cancelling of sin, ergo without grace no salvavation. The denial of our sin and sinfulness will hardly avail with a human judge, but it will ruin us with the Judge Eternal. Without truthfulness and the love of truth you will have no room for God and His word in your heart and lose all susceptibility for them. Be afraid of desiring to know any thing, and especially thy heart, better than God, the Lord.
Starke:We must not look for perfect holiness in this world; those who entertain the fancy that they may be or are perfect are like those who walk on stilts or over precipitous cliffs: before they are aware of it they will
fall and come to naught. Whoso seeks righteousness in absolute deliverance from sin, will lose it if he has it already, and never get it if he has it not. Confession of sins before God is necessary to the forgiveness of sins; but we cannot merit forgiveness by confession of sins. The confession of sins is here simply adduced as a sign of hearty, contrite repentance; it comprises all these parts and is founded on a thorough knowledge accompanied by a perfect hatred and detestation of sin; but it must take place without all cloaking and concealment, sincerely and from the heart. Moreover it must take place with the heart and with the mouth, first and foremost before God whom we have offended therewith and who, we hope, may forgive it us; but also before men, whom we have either offended or vexed thereby. It is a congenital fault of men to love making themselves innocent by their own efforts [literally to burn themselves whiteM.]; but let none act the hypocrite to himself; for God has concluded all under sin, and no man living is righteous before him.
Spener:Those also who walk in the light, stand in fellowship with God and are cleansed by the blood of Christ, have sins adhering to and remaining in them, from which they still require to be cleansed. If God has forgiven your sins, He will also cleanse you from all unrighteousness: now if you desire the one benefit without striving for or refusing to receive the other, you seek to overturn the righteousness of God and therefore cannot get it; for God has ordered that they must remain together. If the word of God is to be profitable to us, it must be kept and planted within us in order that it may be powerful and efficacious in us.
[Collect for second Sunday in Advent: Blessed God, who hast caused all holy Scriptures to be written for our learning: grant that we may in such wise hear them, read, mark, learn and inwardly digest them, that, by patience and comfort of thy holy Word, we may embrace and ever hold fast the blessed hope of everlasting life, which Thou hast given us in our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen.M.]
J. Lange:If God daily forgives penitents their sins, how much more ought we to forgive one anothers sins; if we have been offended by men and we do not willingly and truly forgive them, neither will God forgive us.
If one thinks himself perfectly holy and pure, he comes short of,
1. Daily renovation;
2. The sense of godly poverty of spirit;
3. The daily prayer for the forgiveness of the sins and transgressions he has committed;
4. Spiritual watchfulness and carefulness;
5. Avoiding what may excite his inward desires and appetites;
6. The right use of the means of grace which are appointed for the furtherance of virtue;
7. The proper regard and daily appropriation of the blood of Christ for cleansing from all unrighteousness;
8. Bounden sympathy with, and compassion on his faulty and erring brethren. Thus he will at last fall from the grace of God into abominable selfishness and spiritual pride; and, unless he turn from the error of his ways, into eternal perdition.
Whiston:Although we should like David and Peter fall from fellowship with God, He will, if we humbly and penitently confess those repeated sins and beg for mercy for Christs sake, forgive them also and cleanse us from all unrighteousness. We must not however boldly go on sinning, but rather shun sin the more.
Heubner.:The beginning of all wisdom is to know ones sin. There is a difference between having and doing sin. The first is partly former guilt, partly the remaining bias to sin which misleads us to the commission of many sins of infirmity; the second is living in some master sin, to be wholly the servant of sin. The matter stands thus: God says on every page of His Book: All men, consequently you and I also, are sinners; but man says, I am not a sinner. One or the other therefore must lie. If man denies his sin, he affirms that God has lied in His Word; yea, the whole Christian religion, Christs coming into the world would become a lie; for He came for the salvation of sinnersand there would be no sinners! Hence pride, self-righteousness is so dangerous, hateful and loathsome to God, because the proud accuse God of lying.
Nitzsch:I. The warning against the false method of getting acquitted of the burden of our guilt before God. The Apostle warns,
1. Against the false interpretation and depreciation of the law; the precepts, which I have not violated, cannot preserve my righteousness and innocence in the one which I have broken; nor is ignorance of any avail to me, how often I have unconsciously or half-consciously transgressed; more malice may lie concealed in a word than in a deed, and more still in a thought. Knowledge of sin is the only gain we can derive from the law.
2. Against excuses of sin from external or internal circumstances (the world, fate, human nature); we lose more by taking from God what is His, than if we give up all self-praise. Why did you not threaten or entice with God when men threatened or enticed you with the world, and seek to lead those to virtue who wanted to mislead you to vice? and have you always done the good you knew and were able to do? That ignorant sinner remains to be found who has not knowingly transgressed the Divine precepts.
3. Of false satisfactions; for they contain one and all an untrue and unhappy release from the state of guilt.
II. The true way of getting acquitted of our guilt before God:
1. Ask what the confession of our sins is; and,
2. Consider how on the right confession of sin God the True and Righteous will forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
The man who confesses his sins in Psalms 32, does not make a show of his wickedness, nor regard his transgressions with the fear or carelessness of the natural man, nor say yea to the general situation and complaint, and yet feel his guilt as he feels the regular pulsation of his heart, satisfied with his condition. No, his whole being, thinking, moving and life fully participate in his confession, which insists upon the full act and truth of our separation from sin and the accomplishing of all that to which grace in Christ will lead us. It is full knowledge of sin and of our sin in us; we feel truly the guilt and misery of sin and that sin imperils our life, we confess in despair unto salvation, yet not without faith, but in faith in holy Love. This is the way with the beginning and progress of being cleansed from all unrighteousness.
T. A. Wolf:Of the true constitution of those who live without the knowledge of sin.
1. Its marks: rude security, tender selfishness, self-contented pride.
2. Its consequences: without the light of the truth, without the consolation of forgiveness, without strength for real amendment.
3. Its end: either dying without the knowledge of sin, partly with fearful presumptuousness, partly with a firm courage that might make us doubt our belief, or attaining to a penitent and sincere knowledge of our sin.
Krummacher:The throne of grace1. Is concealed from ignorant or bad self-righteous men; 2. Unveiledto believers; 3. Left too soon by levity, idleness, or culpable opinionativeness.
Friedrich:Either God is a liar, or we are altogether sinners. 1. A call to decision as to whether we will believe Gods Word in general or not. 2. A call from sleep whether we will continue to yield ourselves to the dream of self-deception or not. 3. A call of the judgment, whether we will seek the grace of the forgiveness of our sins, or be lost forever.
Clauss:The Confession: 1. What it ?Isaiah 2. What are its effects?
Besser:God grant that the truth be written not only in our confessions, but in our hearts!No sanctification unless its root be forgiveness; and no forgiveness unless its fruit be sanctification.
[Stanhope:On 1Jn 1:9, That the true purport of this condition be not mistaken, it is fit we remember that nothing is more usual in Scripture than to express a mans duty by some very considerable branch of it. Thus the whole of religion is often implied in the love or the fear of God; and thus confession here, no doubt, denotes not only an acknowledgment of our faults, but all that deep humility and shame, all that afflicting sorrow and self-condemnation, all that resolution against them, all that effectual forsaking them for the future, all that diligence to grow and abound in the contrary virtues and graces, all that entire dependence on the merits and sacrifice of our crucified Redeemer, all that application of His Word and sacraments ordained to convey this cleansing blood to us, which accompany such acknowledgments, when serious and to the purpose, and which are elsewhere represented as constituent parts of repentance and necessary predispositions to forgiveness. In the mean while, as the mention of this singly was sufficient, so was no part of repentance as proper to be mentioned as this; for it was directed to persons vain and absurd enough to suppose themselves void of sin, and thereby evacuating, so far as in them lie, the whole Gospel of Christ; for the Gospel propounds a salvation to all men, to be obtained only by His death,a death undergone on purpose that it might propitiate for sin, and consequently a death needless to them who had no sin; a death of none effect to any who do not allow the necessity and trust to the virtue of it, for the remission of their own sins; but to all who do, so beneficial that God can as soon renounce His Word, as disappoint their reasonable expectations. His promise is passed, and He is faithful; the Judge of all the earth cannot but do right; His Son has paid the debt, and He is just; He will not therefore require from the principal what the Surety has already discharged. So sure are we to be happy, if we be but sensible how miserable we have made ourselves; so sure to be miserable, if puffed up with vain confidence in our own real impotence, and insensible that to Jesus Christ alone we owe the very possibility of our being happy.]
[Barrow:When from ignorance or mistake, from inadvertency, negligence or rashness, from weakness, from wantonness, from presumption we have transgressed our duty and incurred sinful guilt; then, for avoiding the consequent danger and vengeance, for unloading our consciences of the burden and discomfort thereof, with humble confession in our mouths, and serious contrition in our hearts, we should apply ourselves to the God of mercy, deprecating His wrath and imploring pardon from Him, remembering the promise of John: If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.M.].
[Sermons:
1Jn 1:8-9. Augustine: If we say that we have no sin, etc. Libr. of the Fathers, 20. 947.
Trench: Sin forgiven by a faithful and just God.
1Jn 1:9. Burnet, Gilbert: Gods readiness to receive returning sinners. Pract. Serm., 2. 321.
Hook, W. T.: Auricular Confession. Controversies of the Day, 187.M.].
Footnotes:
[19]1Jn 1:8. [ German: If we say that we have not gin, but the rendering of E. V. is better and idiomatically more correct, for is to have sin, and denotes to have no sin, to be absolutely free from it.M.]
[20] A. C. K. al. [Lachm., Tischend., Wordsw.M.] is a more authentic reading than B, G. al. Sin. Vulg.; which is probably a correction according to 1Jn 5:10.
[21]1Jn 1:9. [German: He is faithful and righteous to forgive us the sins. ocurs other five times in this Epistle, and is always in E. V. so rendered. The opposition, moreover, between God as and the from which the Church is cleansed, is lost in E. V. Lillie.The omission of our, supplied in E. V., is idiomatic German, but hardly English.M.]
[22], Cod. Sin., but otherwise feebly sustained, is probably added from the first clause of the verse.
[23] A. al. [perhaps also in C**] cannot be received as the original reading. has the the weightier authority of Sin. B.
Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange
DISCOURSE: 2432
CONFESSION NECESSARY TO FORGIVENESS
1Jn 1:8-9. If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us: if we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
THESE words are rendered familiar to our ears by being read almost continually as introductory to the service of our Church. On this account they may appear perhaps the less interesting; though in reality they are, from that very circumstance, commended to us as deserving a more than ordinary attention. The truths indeed which are contained in them are extremely plain and simple: but they are of infinite importance to every child of man, inasmuch as they declare the pitiable condition of a self-applauding moralist, and the happy condition of a self-condemning penitent. We shall consider the substance of them under these two heads:
Let us consider,
I.
The pitiable condition of a self-applauding moralist
Persons of a high moral character are too often classed with the Pharisees of old, whose leading feature was hypocrisy. But,
Moral characters are proper objects of our love
[No one can doubt but that morality is highly estimable, even though it do not flow from those divine principles which give it its chief value in the sight of God. So at least St. Paul thought, when before the whole Jewish council he said, Men and brethren, I have lived in all good conscience before God until this day [Note: Act 23:1.]. In this assertion he spoke of his life previous to his conversion. In another place, speaking of the same period, he informs us, that he was, as touching the righteousness of the law, blameless; and, that he had justly considered this as gain to him [Note: Php 3:6-7.]. And such may morality well be considered, wherever it exists: it is a gain to the person himself, in that he is kept from many actual offences: it is a gain to all his neighbours, who cannot but feel a beneficial influence from such a life: and it is a gain to the whole world, as far as the light of such an example can extend. True it is, that when St. Paul fully understood the Gospel, he counted all his morality but loss for Christ. Yet this does not at all derogate from the intrinsic excellence of morality: and to speak of morality in the contemptuous and degrading terms which many religious persons, and not a few incautious ministers too, use in reference to it, is extremely erroneous and blameworthy, inasmuch as it tends to lessen mens regard for moral virtue, and to render the Gospel itself odious as hostile to good works. I would that every disciple of Christ would consider the example of his Divine Master in reference to this very point; and not consider it only, but follow it. When the Rich Youth came to him, and was directed by him to keep the different commandments of the decalogue, he answered, Master, all these have I observed from my youth. Now I would ask, What is the treatment which that young man would have experienced from the great mass of religious professors? I greatly fear that the general feeling towards him would have been that of contempt, rather than of love. But how did our blessed Lord and Saviour regard him? We are told, Then Jesus beholding him, loved him [Note: Mar 10:19-21.]. And this is the spirit we should manifest towards all who are observant of the Divine laws, though they may not possess that faith in Christ which would stamp a new character upon the whole of their conduct. In proportion as any man excels in the different branches of moral virtue, he ought to be held as an object of respect, esteem, and love.]
But when they trust in their morality, they deserve our pity
[I do not suppose that any persons would affirm, that they never had sinned at all. I rather conceive, that the Apostle speaks of persons affirming, that they never had sinned to such a degree as to deserve Gods wrathful displeasure. This, alas! is too often the effect of morality; that it causes men to overlook their manifold defects, and to be filled with self-complacency, when, if they had juster views of themselves, they would be bowed down rather with a sense of their own unworthiness.
Now such persons, how excellent soever they may be in other respects, are in a truly pitiable condition: for they deceive themselves.
They deceive themselves in relation to the extent of their attainments. They do, in fact, say with the Rich Youth, What lack I yet? whilst they lack one thing, even that very thing which is indispensable to their acceptance with God. Our Lord brought the young man to the test; and, by a command which he gave, tried him, whether God or the world were the higher in his esteem? It was a grief to the young man to renounce all hope of an interest in the Saviour; but he knew not how to part with his possessions; and therefore abandoned the Lord Jesus rather than them. So, if moralists were brought to the test, they would shew, and indeed they do continually shew, that the love of Christ is not dominant in their hearts, and that they have never seen him as that pearl of great price, for which they are ready to part with all.
They deceive themselves also in relation to their state before God. They imagine that they do not deserve, and consequently are not in danger of, his wrath and indignation. Thus it was with the Apostle Paul before his conversion. Hear his own acknowledgment respecting it: I was alive without the law once; but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died [Note: Rom 7:9.]: that is, before I understood the spirituality of the law, I thought my obedience to it so perfect that I was in no danger of condemnation for my offences against it: but when my eyes were opened to see the extent of its demands and the defects of my obedience, I saw at once that I was deservedly under a sentence of death and condemnation.
Thus it is with multitudes who are exemplary in their moral conduct: in the midst of all their confidence they deceive themselves; and whilst they take credit to themselves for being right in the sight of God, they shew, that they have never yet received the truth as it is in Jesus, and that, consequently, the truth is not in them.]
Let us now turn our attention to,
II.
The happy condition of the self-condemning penitent
The confession which characterizes a true penitent, of course is not to be understood of a mere acknowledgment, but an acknowledgment accompanied with suitable contrition, and with a humble faith in the Lord Jesus. It imports such a confession as was made by the high-priest on the great day of annual expiation, when he laid his hands on the scape-goat, and confessed over him all the sins of all the children of Israel, whilst all of those whose sins he so transferred were afflicting their souls before God [Note: Lev 16:21; Lev 16:29-30.]. I may add, that this confession implies also a forsaking of the sins so confessed; as it is said, He that covereth his sins shall not prosper; but whoso confesseth and forsaketh them shall have mercy [Note: Pro 28:13.].
Now respecting all such penitents, I do not hesitate to say, that,
1.
Whatsoever they need shall certainly be vouchsafed unto them
[Two things the penitent panteth after; namely, the forgiveness of his sins, and the renovation of his soul after the Divine image. And, behold, these are the very things promised to him in our text: If we confess our sins, God will forgive our sins, and cleanse us from all unrighteousness. How reviving to the contrite soul is such a declaration as this! Here is no limitation as to the number or heinousness of the sins that may have been previously committed; nor any exception as to the measure of depravity which may have defiled the soul, or the degree of obduracy to which it may have attained. Though our sins may have been as scarlet, or of a crimson dye, they shall all be washed away in the blood of Christ, and the soul become white as the driven snow [Note: Isa 1:18.]. Clean water also shall be sprinkled on us, even the Holy Ghost in his sanctifying operations, to cleanse us from all our filthiness and from all our uncleanness. A new heart shall be given us, and a new spirit be put within us: and God, by the mighty working of his own power, will cause us to walk in his judgments and to keep his statutes [Note: Eze 36:25-27.]. Here is all that the penitent can desire. The promises are perfectly commensurate with his necessities: and, laying hold on these promises, he shall be able to cleanse himself from all filthiness both of flesh and spirit, and to perfect holiness in the fear of God [Note: 2Co 7:1.].]
2.
For this, those very perfections of the Deity which are most adverse to them, are pledged
[If the penitent desire mercy, Justice frowns upon him, and demands judgment against him: and Truth requires, that all the threatenings which have been denounced against sin and sinners should be executed upon him. But, through the mediation of the Lord Jesus Christ, these perfections of the Deity are not only satisfied, but are converted into friends, yea, and made the strongest advocates for the penitents salvation. What a wonderful declaration is this, that, if we confess our sins, God is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness! That mercy should be displayed in forgiveness, we can easily imagine: but how can justice? and how can truth? when, as has been before observed, both these attributes demand the sinners condemnation? The Gospel solves this difficulty: it declares to us, that the Lord Jesus Christ has undertaken for us, and become our Surety, and by his own obedience unto death has satisfied all the demands of law and justice, and obtained for us the promise of eternal life: so that, if only we believe in him, and come to God through him, we may plead, even upon the very ground of justice and of truth, that God will fulfil to us all that he has promised to the Lord Jesus in our behalf, and impart to us all the blessings which his only dear Son has purchased for us. Through this mysterious dispensation, the very righteousness of God is magnified in the exercise of mercy; and God is just, whilst justifying the sinner that believes in Jesus [Note: Rom 3:26.].
How blessed is the condition of the penitent when viewed in this light! Every thing is secured to him that his necessities require! and every thing confirmed to him by the very justice and faithfulness of Jehovah! Wipe away thy tears, thou weeping penitent; and put off thy sackcloth, and gird thee with gladness: for God has here given thee the oil of joy for mourning, and the garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness.]
Attend however to a few words of parting advice
1.
Let your humiliation be deep and abiding
[It can never be too deep: there is no measure of self-lothing or self-abhorrence that can exceed what the occasion calls for. Thou mayest heretofore have thought thyself so pure, that thou hadst no sin which could subject thee to the wrath of God. Now thou knowest, that the bed was too short for thee to stretch thyself upon, and the covering too narrow for thee to wrap thyself in [Note: Isa 28:20.]. The pillows are plucked from thy arms; and the untempered mortar with which thou daubedst thy wall, adheres no longer [Note: Eze 13:10-20.]. You have now learned to estimate your character by another standard. You see now your defects. You compare your obedience, not with the mere letter, but with the spirit of the law: and from this view of your past life you know your just desert, and are convinced that the very best action, word, or thought of your whole life, if tried by the standard of Gods holy law, would plunge you into merited and everlasting perdition. And so it is at this very moment, notwithstanding your change of character. You could no more bear the scrutiny of that perfect law, than you could in your days of unregeneracy. Let this thought never be forgotten: let it abide with you day and night. Job, before that God had appeared unto him, said, If I justify myself, mine own mouth shall condemn me [Note: Job 9:20.]: and after he had beheld God in his majesty and glory, his humiliation, so far from being removed, was deepened: and he exclaimed, Behold, I am vile: I repent therefore, and abhor myself in dust and ashes [Note: Job 40:4; Job 42:6.]. So let your increase both in grace and peace be marked by a proportionable increase in humiliation and contrition.]
2.
Let your affiance in God be simple and uniform
[Never for a moment entertain a thought of any worthiness in yourself, or suffer any thing to be blended with your faith in Christ. Rely on him as entirely as if your whole life had been a scene of the most enormous wickedness. Renounce entirely every thing of your own in point of dependence; and seek to be found in Christ, not having your own righteousness, but the righteousness which is of God through faith in him. And let this abide with you to your latest hour. Let neither a relapse into sin deter you from coming thus to Christ; nor the most spotless continuance in holiness render such a mode of coming to him unnecessary in your eyes. This is the way in which you may come, however aggravated may have been your guilt; and this is the way in which you must come, however eminent your attainments. It is not possible for you to be too much on your guard against either doubting the sufficiency of Christ to save you, or attempting to unite any thing with him as a joint ground of your hope. To err in either of these respects will be fatal: it will arm both justice and truth against you, and will make void all that the Lord Jesus has done and suffered for you. But rely simply and altogether upon him, and you shall not be ashamed or confounded world without end.]
Fuente: Charles Simeon’s Horae Homileticae (Old and New Testaments)
8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.
Ver. 8. If we say that we have ] If any should be so saucy, or rather silly, as to say with Donatus, Non habeo, Domine, quod ignoscas, I have no sin for Christ to cleanse me from, he is a loud liar, and may very well have the whetstone. St James for his innocent conversation was surnamed Justus; and yet, putting himself into the number, he saith, “For in many things we offend all,” Jas 3:2 .
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
8 .] If we say (see on with subj. above, 1Jn 1:6 ) that we have not sin (i. e. in the course and abiding of our walking in light: if we maintain that we are pure and free from all stain of sin. St. John is writing to persons whose sins have been forgiven them (ch. 1Jn 2:12 ), and therefore necessarily the present tense refers not to any previous state of sinful life before conversion, but to their now existing state and the sins to which they are liable in that state. And in thus referring, it takes up the conclusion of the last verse, in which the onward cleansing power of the sanctifying blood of Christ was asserted: q. d. this state of needing cleansing from all present sin is veritably that of all of us: and our recognition and confession of it is the very first essential of walking in light. The Socinian interpreters, Socinus, Schlichting, and following them Grotius, go in omnia alia, and understand the passage of sins before conversion, or of the general imputation of sin. And our own Hammond has been entirely led away from the sense of the passage by the unfortunate notion of Gnostics being every where aimed at in this Epistle: imagining that their profession of perfection while living impure lives was here intended. See these erroneous interpretations refuted at length in Lcke and Dsterdieck), we are deceiving ourselves (causing ourselves to err from the straight and true way), and the truth (God’s truth, objective) is not in us (has no subjective place in us. That truth respecting God’s holiness and our own sinfulness, which is the very first spark of light within, has no place in us at all. It would be mere wasting of room and of patience, at every turn to be stating and impugning the inadequate interpretations of the Socinian Commentators and of their followers, Grotius, Semler, &c. It may be sufficient here just to notice Grotius’s “non est in nobis studium veri,” and Semler’s “castior cognitio.” Even Lcke has gone wrong here; “ die Selbsttuschung verubet auf Mangel an innerem Wahrheitssinn und ist dieser Mangel selbst .”
= , see Winer): if we confess our sins (it is evident, from the whole sense of the passage, which has regard to our walking in light and in the truth, that no mere outward lip-confession is here meant, nor on the other hand any mere being aware within ourselves of sin (as Socinus: “confiteri significat interiorem ac profundam suorum peccatorum cognitionem”), but the union of the two, an external spoken confession springing from genuine inward contrition. As evident is it, that the confession here spoken of is not confined to confession to God, but embraces all our utterances on the subject, to one another as well as to Him; cf. Jas 5:16 ; and see more below), He (God, the Father; not, Christ, though this may at first sight seem probable from 1Jn 1:7 and ch. 1Jn 2:1 ; nor, the Father and Christ combined, as Lange and Sander hold. God is the chief subject through the whole passage: cf. , 1Jn 1:5 ; , 1Jn 1:6 ; , and , in 1Jn 1:7 . It is ever God’s truth (1Co 1:9-10 ; 1Co 1:13 ; 2Co 1:18 ; 1Th 5:24 ) and righteousness (Joh 17:25 ; Rom 3:25 ; Rev 16:5 ) that are concerned in, and vindicated by, our redemption) is faithful and just (His being faithful and just does not depend on our confessing our sins: He had both these attributes before, and will ever continue to have them: but by confessing our sins, we cast ourselves on, we approach and put to the proof for ourselves, and shall find operative in our case, in the and , &c., those His attributes of faithfulness and justice.
On the former of these adjectives, , almost all Commentators agree. It is, faithful to His plighted word and promise: see reff. and citations above. c. and Thl. alone have given a singular and not very clear interpretation: . , , . The latter, , has not been so unanimously interpreted. The idea of God’s justice seeming strange here, where the remission of and purification from sin is in question, some Commentators have endeavoured to give the sense of good, merciful : so Grot., Rosenm.; or, which amounts to the same, fair, favourably disposed : so Semler, Lange, Carpzov Bretschn. Lex. But Lcke has shewn, that in none of the O. T. passages which are cited to substantiate these meanings, have they really place; but in all, righteousness, justice, is the fundamental idea, and the context only makes it mean, justice in this or in that direction. See note on Mat 1:19 . The meaning then being just , we have still to decide between several different views as to what particular phase of the divine justice is meant. Some, as Calov., Wolf, al., understand that God’s justice has been satisfied in Christ, and thus the application of that satisfaction to us if we confess our sins, is an act of divine justice: is due to us in Christ. But this is plainly too much to be extracted from our verse. In Rom 3:26 , where this is asserted, the reason is given, and all is fully explained: whereas here the ellipsis would be most harsh and unprecedented, and thus to fill it up would amount to an introduction into the context of an idea which is altogether foreign to it. (The notion that = need only be mentioned to refute itself: Rom 3:26 is decisive against it.) The correct view seems to be, that as well as here is an attribute strictly to be kept to that which is predicated of it under the circumstances, without entering upon reasons external to the context. God is faithful , to His promise: is just , in His dealing: and both attributes operate in the forgiveness of sins to the penitent, now and hereafter; and in cleansing them from all unrighteousness. The laws of His spiritual kingdom require this: by those laws He acts in holy and infinite justice. His promises announced it, and to those promises he is faithful: but then those promises were themselves made only in accordance with his nature, who is holy, just, and true. In the background lie all the details of redemption, but they are not here in this verse: only the simple fact of God’s justice is adduced) to forgive us our sins ( here is not = : it is not “so as to forgive, &c.,” but “that He may forgive, &c.” His doing so is in accordance with, and therefore as with Him all facts are purposed, is in pursuance of, furthers the object of, His faithfulness and justice. “So that He is faithful and just, in order that He may, &c.” See Joh 4:34 note: reff. here: and Winer, 44. 8 c. With regard to the particular here mentioned, is the continued remission of the guilt of each committed sin, which is the special promise and just act of God under the Gospel covenant: see Heb 10:14 ; Heb 10:18 ), and cleanse us from all unrighteousness (the explanation of the sense, see above. Here is used, in reference to above, as corresponding to in 1Jn 1:7 . The divine is revealed in God’s law: every transgression then of that law ( , : cf. Theodorus Abukara in Suicer, s. v. ) is of its nature and essence an , an unrighteousness, as contrary to that . Observe, the two verbs are aorists, because the purpose of the faithfulness and justice of God is to do each as one great complex act to justify and to sanctify wholly and entirely.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
8 2:2 .] Unfolding of the idea of purification from sin by the blood of Christ, in connexion with our walking in light . This last is adduced in one of its plainest and simplest consequences, viz. the recognition of all that is yet darkness in us, in the confession of our sins. “Si te confessus fueris peccatorem, est in te veritas: nam ipsa veritas lux est. Nondum perfecte splenduit vita tua, quia insunt peccata: sed tamen jam illuminari cpisti, quia inest confessio peccatorum.” Aug [11] The light that is in us convicts the darkness, and we, no longer loving nor desiring to sin, have, by means of the propitiatory and sanctifying blood of Christ, both full forgiveness of and sure purification from all our sins. But the true test of this state of communion with and knowledge of God is, the keeping of His commandments ( 1Jn 2:3-6 ), the walking as Christ walked: and this test is concentrated and summed up in its one crucial application, viz. to the law of love ( 1Jn 2:7-11 ).
[11] Augustine, Bp. of Hippo , 395 430
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
1Jn 1:8-10 . The heresy of Perfectionism. Some might not say, with the Antinomians, that they were absolved from the obligation of the moral law, but they maintained that they were done with sin, had no more sinful propensities, committed no more sinful acts. In opposition hereto the Apostle asserts two facts: (1) Inherent corruption . Distinguish (“to have sin”) and (“to sin”), corresponding to the sinful principle and its manifestation in specific acts. Our natures are poisoned, the taint is in our blood. Grace is the medicine, but recovery is a protracted process. It is begun the moment we submit ourselves to Christ, but all our lives we continue under treatment. , “lead astray” ( cf. Mat 18:12 ). , in Johannine phraseology not simply “der Wahrheitssinn, die Wahrhaftigkeit der Selbstprfung und der Selbsterkenntniss” (Rothe), but the revelation of “the True God” (ver. 20; Joh 17:3 ), which came “through Jesus Christ” (Joh 1:17 ), Himself “the Truth” (Joh 14:6 ). Nearly equivalent to (1Jn 1:10 ). The Truth is a splendid ideal, never realised here, else it would cease to be an ideal; always as we pursue it displaying a fuller glory, And thus the nearer we approach it the further off it seems; when we walk in the light we see faults which were hidden in the darkness. Self-abasement is a characteristic of the saints. When Juan de Avila (A.D. 1500 69) was dying the rector of his college approached him and said: “What joy it must be to you to think of meeting the Saviour!” “Ah!” said the saint, “rather do I tremble at the thought of my sins.” (2) The frequent falls of the believer . We all “have sinned ( ),” i.e. , committed acts of sin ( ) manifesting the strength and activity of the sinful principle ( ) in our souls. This, however, is no reason for despair. There is a remedy forgiveness and cleansing in the blood of Jesus; and there is a way of obtaining it confession. , i.e. , to His promise ( cf. Heb 10:23 ). : He would be unrighteous if He broke His promise ratified by the blood of Jesus. Peace is not got by denying our sinfulness and our sins, but by frankly confessing them and availing ourselves, continually and repeatedly, of the gracious remedy. “Woe to that soul which presumes to think that he can approach God in any other way than as a sinner asking mercy. Know yourself to be wicked, and God will wrap you up warm in the mantle of His goodness” (Juan de Avila). “Remission of sins cannot be sundered from penitence, nor can the peace of God belong to consciences where the fear of God does not reign” (Calv.).
Perfectionism has two causes: (1) The stifling of conscience : “we make Him a liar, i.e. , turn a deaf ear to His inward testimony, His voice in our souls. (2) Ignorance of His Word : it “is not in us”. Such a delusion were impossible if we steeped our minds in the Scriptures. Consider the lapses of the saints, e.g. , David, Peter.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
no = not (1Jn 1:6).
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
8.] If we say (see on with subj. above, 1Jn 1:6) that we have not sin (i. e. in the course and abiding of our walking in light: if we maintain that we are pure and free from all stain of sin. St. John is writing to persons whose sins have been forgiven them (ch. 1Jn 2:12), and therefore necessarily the present tense refers not to any previous state of sinful life before conversion, but to their now existing state and the sins to which they are liable in that state. And in thus referring, it takes up the conclusion of the last verse, in which the onward cleansing power of the sanctifying blood of Christ was asserted: q. d. this state of needing cleansing from all present sin is veritably that of all of us: and our recognition and confession of it is the very first essential of walking in light. The Socinian interpreters, Socinus, Schlichting, and following them Grotius, go in omnia alia, and understand the passage of sins before conversion, or of the general imputation of sin. And our own Hammond has been entirely led away from the sense of the passage by the unfortunate notion of Gnostics being every where aimed at in this Epistle: imagining that their profession of perfection while living impure lives was here intended. See these erroneous interpretations refuted at length in Lcke and Dsterdieck), we are deceiving ourselves (causing ourselves to err from the straight and true way), and the truth (Gods truth, objective) is not in us (has no subjective place in us. That truth respecting Gods holiness and our own sinfulness, which is the very first spark of light within, has no place in us at all. It would be mere wasting of room and of patience, at every turn to be stating and impugning the inadequate interpretations of the Socinian Commentators and of their followers, Grotius, Semler, &c. It may be sufficient here just to notice Grotiuss non est in nobis studium veri, and Semlers castior cognitio. Even Lcke has gone wrong here; die Selbsttuschung verubet auf Mangel an innerem Wahrheitssinn und ist dieser Mangel selbst.
= , see Winer): if we confess our sins (it is evident, from the whole sense of the passage, which has regard to our walking in light and in the truth, that no mere outward lip-confession is here meant, nor on the other hand any mere being aware within ourselves of sin (as Socinus: confiteri significat interiorem ac profundam suorum peccatorum cognitionem), but the union of the two, an external spoken confession springing from genuine inward contrition. As evident is it, that the confession here spoken of is not confined to confession to God, but embraces all our utterances on the subject, to one another as well as to Him; cf. Jam 5:16; and see more below), He (God, the Father; not, Christ, though this may at first sight seem probable from 1Jn 1:7 and ch. 1Jn 2:1; nor, the Father and Christ combined, as Lange and Sander hold. God is the chief subject through the whole passage: cf. , 1Jn 1:5; , 1Jn 1:6; , and , in 1Jn 1:7. It is ever Gods truth (1Co 1:9-10; 1Co 1:13; 2Co 1:18; 1Th 5:24) and righteousness (Joh 17:25; Rom 3:25; Rev 16:5) that are concerned in, and vindicated by, our redemption) is faithful and just (His being faithful and just does not depend on our confessing our sins: He had both these attributes before, and will ever continue to have them: but by confessing our sins, we cast ourselves on, we approach and put to the proof for ourselves, and shall find operative in our case, in the and , &c., those His attributes of faithfulness and justice.
On the former of these adjectives, , almost all Commentators agree. It is, faithful to His plighted word and promise: see reff. and citations above. c. and Thl. alone have given a singular and not very clear interpretation: . , , . The latter, , has not been so unanimously interpreted. The idea of Gods justice seeming strange here, where the remission of and purification from sin is in question, some Commentators have endeavoured to give the sense of good, merciful: so Grot., Rosenm.; or, which amounts to the same, fair, favourably disposed: so Semler, Lange, Carpzov Bretschn. Lex. But Lcke has shewn, that in none of the O. T. passages which are cited to substantiate these meanings, have they really place; but in all, righteousness, justice, is the fundamental idea, and the context only makes it mean, justice in this or in that direction. See note on Mat 1:19. The meaning then being just, we have still to decide between several different views as to what particular phase of the divine justice is meant. Some, as Calov., Wolf, al., understand that Gods justice has been satisfied in Christ, and thus the application of that satisfaction to us if we confess our sins, is an act of divine justice: is due to us in Christ. But this is plainly too much to be extracted from our verse. In Rom 3:26, where this is asserted, the reason is given, and all is fully explained: whereas here the ellipsis would be most harsh and unprecedented, and thus to fill it up would amount to an introduction into the context of an idea which is altogether foreign to it. (The notion that = need only be mentioned to refute itself: Rom 3:26 is decisive against it.) The correct view seems to be, that as well as here is an attribute strictly to be kept to that which is predicated of it under the circumstances, without entering upon reasons external to the context. God is faithful, to His promise: is just, in His dealing: and both attributes operate in the forgiveness of sins to the penitent, now and hereafter; and in cleansing them from all unrighteousness. The laws of His spiritual kingdom require this: by those laws He acts in holy and infinite justice. His promises announced it, and to those promises he is faithful: but then those promises were themselves made only in accordance with his nature, who is holy, just, and true. In the background lie all the details of redemption, but they are not here in this verse: only the simple fact of Gods justice is adduced) to forgive us our sins ( here is not = : it is not so as to forgive, &c., but that He may forgive, &c. His doing so is in accordance with, and therefore as with Him all facts are purposed, is in pursuance of, furthers the object of, His faithfulness and justice. So that He is faithful and just, in order that He may, &c. See Joh 4:34 note: reff. here: and Winer, 44. 8 c. With regard to the particular here mentioned, is the continued remission of the guilt of each committed sin, which is the special promise and just act of God under the Gospel covenant: see Heb 10:14; Heb 10:18), and cleanse us from all unrighteousness (the explanation of the sense, see above. Here is used, in reference to above, as corresponding to in 1Jn 1:7. The divine is revealed in Gods law: every transgression then of that law (, : cf. Theodorus Abukara in Suicer, s. v. ) is of its nature and essence an , an unrighteousness, as contrary to that . Observe, the two verbs are aorists, because the purpose of the faithfulness and justice of God is to do each as one great complex act-to justify and to sanctify wholly and entirely.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
1Jn 1:8. , sin) There is an opposition between those who say, We have no sin, and those who confess their sins (plural). He is therefore speaking of actual sins, which flow from original sin. In proportion as each person has contracted less or more, so he deems it necessary to confess less or more; Pro 28:13; and that either respecting the past, 1Jn 1:10, or the present, 1Jn 1:8. John comprises in his discourses all to whom that declaration comes, both good and bad; without distinction, according to their measure. But there were even then some who extenuated sin, and therefore also disparaged grace.- , the truth) John often comprises faith also together with the notion of truth: ch. 1Jn 2:4. and are conjugate words.- , is not in us) is not in our heart, and therefore not in our mouth. The fault is in us; is ours: the glory belongs to God: 1Jn 1:9.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
1Jn 1:8-10
SIN AND ITS FORGIVENESS
(1Jn 1:8-10)
8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.–Inasmuch as there is no article before the word “sin” in this passage, it is contemplated in essence, ab-stractly considered. These words were penned to refute the pre-vailing notion of the heretics–and some to this day advocate the same view–that it is possible for one to live above sin. Those who so affirm (a) deceive themselves, and (b) exhibit the fact that the truth is not in them. Because of the weakness of the flesh and the ever-present problem of temptation, even the best of peo-ple inadvertently sin, and hence have need of the cleansing power inherent in the blood of Jesus. Aware of such, John was shortly to write: “My little children, these things write I unto you that ye may not sin. And if any man sin, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.” (1Jn 2:1.)
Those who deny that they have sin, add to the sin they already have, and sin in so affirming! The ever-present problem of sin is adduced by the apostle as the reason why children of God must have the cleansing power of the blood applied. This clearly refutes the notion that men have lived, or may live in this life, without sin. The truth is not in those who so allege. It may be around them or near them, but it is not in them; it does not constitute a part of their character. These to whom John wrote had been forgiven of their past or alien sins; thus reference here is not to any previous state of guilt prior to conversion, but to present sin, sin at the time he wrote, sins of omission and commission, sins of the flesh and of the disposition, all sin, any sin of which we may be guilty. The recognition and confession of sin is a prerequisite to our approval before God. To refuse such recognition and confession is simply to deceive ourselves and to demonstrate the fact that the truth is not in us.
9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. –The phrase, “If we say . . .,” a mere formal admission of guilt (1Jn 1:8), becomes here “If we confess . . .,” a much more vivid concept. One may indeed “say” (eipon) that he has sin without experiencing any deep or abiding sense of guilt or wrong and without being moved to repentance. The confession (homologe) here contemplated is a humble acknowledgment of wrong, a peni-tent attitude essential to forgiveness. The word homologeo, from which the word “confess” is translated, means to say the same thing, to speak together, and figuratively implies a dialogue be-tween God and the sinner, in which the Father describes the con-dition of the sinner, and the sinner finally accedes to the correct-ness of the description and thus confesses that God is right!
The word “sin” of 1Jn 1:8, an abstract concept of wrong, be-comes “sins,” individual and specific acts of wrong-doing in verse 9. It follows, therefore, that the sins we are to confess are the specific and particular manifestations of the sin which all sincere believers of the Word know in their hearts they possess.
The verb “confess” is translated from a present active subjunctive, thus literally, “If we keep on confessing our sins . . .,” indicative of a continuous process. There are two definite and specific types of confession required of the erring in the New Testament (1) confession before the Father, as here (2) acknowledgement of sins before others, as in Jas 5:16. It is scarcely necessary to add that an additional confession before a priest on the pretext that such a one can absolve sins is wholly unknown to the New Testament, is contrary to the teaching of the scriptures, and inimical to the genius and character of the Christian religion. With Jesus as our Priest, Mediator, and Advocate, we need no other assistance in approaching the Throne of Grace. (Heb. 7:25; 10 19, 20; 1Jn 2:1; 1Ti 2:5.)
If we keep on confessing our sins, God “is faithful and righteeous to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” “Faithfulness” and “righteousness” are attributes of the great Jehovah; and when we confess our sins before him, we enter into and partake of the blessings which result from them.
He has promised to forgive us on condition that we confess our sins; and since he is faithful, he will not fail in the performance of his promises. David joined these attributes in Psa 143:1 “Hear my prayer, O Jehovah; give ear to my supplications; in thy faithfulness answer me, and in thy righteousness.” It is God’s nature to be faithful and righteous, and it is his purpose to cleanse when the conditions–confession and penitence–are met. “Unrighteousness,” the opposite of “righteousness,” is synony-mous with the word sin, of 1Jn 1:8. Wrong-doing is set forth under various aspects in the scriptures. A collection of terms in-dicative of its different qualities occurs in Exo 34:7.
10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.–Compare 1Jn 1:8. Here, again, there is an advance in thought, as in 1Jn 1:8-9. The “if we say we have no sin” (abstractly considered) becomes here, “If we say that we have not sinned . . .” (have not been guilty of specific and concrete acts of sin).
Verse 10 designates specific acts of sin; in verse 8 sin is regarded as a state or condition. Those who insist that they have not sinned make God a “liar” and demon-strate the fact that God’s word is not in them. Much emphasis is given here to the fact and reality of sin in the lives of us all. Those who deny this lie (1Jn 1:6) deceive themselves (1Jn 1:8) make God a liar (1Jn 1:10). Taught here, in the most emphatic fashion possible, is the constant and recurring need of pardon on the part of all children of God. Not only is such essential to the alien sinner in order that he may be adopted into the fellowship of God; he must continue to seek it and avail himself of its benefits throughout life. As sin is evermore about us, and, alas, all too often in us, we must continually seek new pardons through the means hereinbefore set forth. This section of the Epistle, far from teaching that the Lord forgave us of all sins, “past, present, and future,” as the advocates of the doctrine of the impossibility of apostasy allege, establishes the fact of an ever-present need of the cleansing power of the blood of Jesus Christ our Lord. Happily we have the assurance that “the blood of Jesus his Son keeps on cleansing us from all sin” (1Jn 1:7) as we conform to the conditions on which such depends.
Those who deny the fact of sin in their lives make God a liar by contradicting his express statements of man’s sinfulness before him, and they demonstrate the fact that the truth is not in them by exhibiting ignorance of the truth in their allegation.
Commentary on 1Jn 1:8-10 by E.M. Zerr
1Jn 1:8. This verse does not contradict the preceding one or the comments made on it. To say we have no sin would be like saying we do not have any need for the blood of Christ. Hence even a faithful disciple should admit his weaknesses and understand his dependence upon the blood of Christ for his cleansing.
1Jn 1:9. Confess our sins. This does not say that we are to confess that we have sins for that would be so general that it would be virtually no confession at all; the sins themselves is what we are to confess. Sometimes persons will come forward in a meeting saying they wish to make a confession, and when given the opportunity will say, “I have not been living as I should.” That does not confess any sin as our verse requires. It may be replied that David made that sort of confession to the prophet because all lie said was, “I have sinned.” That is true but it was after his sin had been pointed out so that his statement was an acknowledgment of the specific sin. It was like the action of a jury that says, “We find the defendant guilty as charged” without naming any particular misdeed. If a disciple does not know of anything wrong he has done then he has none to confess. Should he have some faults of which he is not aware, verse 7 of this chapter will take care of them. If he has committed sins which only he and the Lord know about, then he needs only to make his confession to Him. Faithful and just. The first word means He will keep his promise to forgive the sins of the penitent, and it is just for Him to do so since the sacrifice of Christ makes it possible for God to be merciful and just at the same time (Rom 3:26).
1Jn 1:10. Have not sinned differs from have no sin in verse 8 because it goes back over the past of our lives. When the two are considered together they mean that there never has been a time since we were old enough to be responsible. that we were “as free from sin as the angels” as it is sometimes expressed; hence man has needed a Saviour all the years of his life. Make him. a liar. If a person makes an assertion that contradicts what another has said, it is equivalent to calling him a liar even though no direct reference is made to him. God has said in his word that all men are sinners (Ecc 7:20), therefore if a man says he has not sinned he contradicts the Lord and that is why John says such a man will make him a liar. His word is not in us because that word declares that all men have sinned.
Commentary on 1Jn 1:8-10 by N.T. Caton
1Jn 1:8-If we say that we have no sin.
We can not, however, claim that we have reached a sinless state in this life. Should we so claim we deceive ourselves and possess no knowledge whatever of the truth on that subject, as taught by Christ and his disciples. The Nicolaitans in the days of John, the writer of this Epistle, made this claim. They claimed that they could do no wrong, and hence indulged in all sorts of excesses, and yet they were promptly repudiated by the Master. (Rev 2:6.) All along the ages and in our own day there are those who, in one way or another, and to one extent or another, make the claim that they have attained to a state in which they sin not. Now the language of the apostle is in direct opposition to this claim.
1Jn 1:9-If we confess our sins.
Since it is that while we are in this life we are liable to sin, be it known to you brethren, that God is faithful and just to forgive our sins if we confess to him. Admitting our sins and our firm determination to forsake them, God will pardon. We obtain this pardon through the blood of Christ, coming to God in penitence. Note carefully, the confession of sins must be made by the sinning one directly to God. Since the pardon comes from him, the confession must be made to him, exhibiting at the time of such confession the other requisites indicative of true penitence. True penitence is followed, as a matter of course, by a reformation in the matter wherein the sin occurred.
1Jn 1:10-If we say that we have not sinned.
We attempt to make God a liar when we say we have not sinned. This will appear evident to every mind when we reflect that on this subject God has spoken. He has said: “For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God” (Rom 3:23). “They are all gone aside; they are altogether become filthy; there is none that doeth good, no, not one” (Psa 14:3). Or, as this Psalm is quoted by the apostle Paul: “As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one There is none that understandeth; there is none that seeketh after God. They are all gone out of the way; they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one” (Rom 3:10-12). Thus, God has spoken by his servants, and should we in the face of these declarations declare our sinlessness, we make God a liar and his word is not in us. We must observe that the verses 8, 9 and 10 are addressed to and intended for Christians, and the impression is intended by the Apostle John, to be left indelibly upon their minds, their constant dependence upon God; their great necessity for God’s pardoning mercy day by day. The alien is elsewhere taught how to obtain the pardon of his sins, and become, by adoption, a member of God’s family and an heir of eternal life. But the apostle, in the ninth verse of this chapter, points out the law of pardon to the erring Christian. These distinctions kept in mind, all is plain.
Commentary on 1Jn 1:8-10 by Burton Coffman
1Jn 1:8 –If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.
If we say that we have no sin … This is the second false claim John refuted, the first being that of 1Jn 1:6. Here the error is that of claiming inherent sinlessness, perfection, the absence of any need of cleansing through the blood of Christ. Such a claim is capable of deceiving the claimant, but not anyone else! Despite the effrontery of such a proposition, entire religions are founded upon just such claims. “There is no sin” – this is the proposition that underlies a great deal of current thinking. See under 1Jn 1:9. Scott and others have supposed that John might also have had in mind “the Gnostic subtlety that sin was a matter of the flesh and did not touch or defile the spirit.”[36]
If we say … is an expression of remarkable interest, because the apostle here identified himself with the false teachers, not through any agreement with them, but out of a delicate regard for his readers. This identification of an apostle with those addressed is prevalent in the New Testament. Heb 2:3 is a remarkable example of the same thing; and yet that instance of it has been perverted to mean that no first generation Christian could have written that epistle!
Some have pointed out that the need for John’s teaching here resulted from the most audacious immorality advocated, indulged, and rationalized by heretics such as Valentinus. Irenaeus has a description of such views, which although later associated with the heretic whose name was given to the error, nevertheless existed early in the first century.
They hold that they shall be entirely and undoubtedly saved, not by means of conduct, but because they are spiritual by nature. It is impossible that spiritual substance (and by this they mean themselves) should ever come under the power of corruption, whatever the sort of actions they indulged. For as gold submersed in filth, loses not on that account its beauty, but retains its own native qualities, filth having no power to injure gold, so they affirm that they cannot in any measure suffer hurt, or lose their spiritual substance, whatever the material actions in which they may be involved.[37]
This ancient heresy exists today in a much more sophisticated form in what is heralded as salvation “by faith alone,” which has exactly the same meaning as salvation “not by means of conduct.”
Man’s presumptuous blindness in denying the existence of sin, either as a principle, or as existent within himself, is self-deception at its worst. The Lord’s Prayer which enjoined the petitions for daily bread and forgiveness, both assumed and implied the need of daily prayers for forgiveness. “Woe to that soul that presumes to think that he can approach God in any other way than as a sinner asking mercy.”[38]
[36] John R. W. Stott, op. cit., p. 77.
[37] Iraeneus, The Ante-Nicene Fathers, On Heresies I, 6,2 (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, n.d.), p. 324.
[38] David Smith, op. cit., p. 172.
1Jn 1:9–If we confess our sins, he is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
If we confess our sins … To whom shall sins be confessed? Certainly, the usual concept of a confessional in a church, where confession is a one-way street, is not what is meant here. Macknight paraphrased this: “If we confess our sins to God with a firm resolution to forsake them, etc.” In any confession to other Christians, a mutual confession of sins “to one another” would be the requirement.
Even the confession of sins by Christians to each other is a practice that can be very unrewarding and hurtful. Currently, there are outcroppings of a practice among fervidly religious groups of holding confessionals in which the most sensual and reprehensible conduct is unreservedly reported openly and publicly within such groups. In such a context, that is bragging about sins, not confessing them; and it cannot be possible that John had any such thing in mind. There are no New Testament examples of a religious service being built around any such orgy of self-revelation. Confessions of sins “one to another” among Christians means an admission of guilt where it exists as a barrier to their fellowship, a mutual sharing of blame, and a restoration of the broken harmony.
It is difficult for man’s ego to admit blame and guilt, society as a whole being hardly capable of any such admission. More and more, the trend is to deny sin exists. Drunkards have merely contracted an unfortunate disease, alcoholism! Adulterers and philanderers are schizophrenic! Thieves, murderers, outlaws, etc. are not criminals at all, but anti-social, a state induced by society itself. Sinful behavior is not that at all, but the natural response to one’s heredity, environment, deprivation or other things beyond the sinner’s control. The apostolic word for all such thinking is “self-deception.”
Our sins … It is not the principle of sin merely that is to be acknowledged but the plurality of sins. This has been misunderstood as meaning “all of our sins publicly”; but no such meaning is in it. Rather the need for acknowledging and confessing sin again, and again, as multiple occasions arise requiring it, is the true meaning. The right course is not repetitious confessions of all the sins one can remember, but the admission of sin on the successive occasions when the believer stumbles. If this is done, the aggregate is “confessing our sins,” no less than the indulgence of such things as the group confessionals mentioned above.
(God) is faithful and just to forgive us our sins … It is a false view that construes this as meaning that God would not be just and righteous if he did not forgive us wicked sinners! God does not prove his righteousness by forgiving sinners, who in any just frame of reference must be accounted as worthy of eternal death. No, that is not what John meant. Roberts has the truth thus: “He is faithful in that he will not go back on the promise he made in Christ Jesus.”[39] Scott also has a wonderful word on this: “He is faithful to forgive us because he has promised to do so, and just because his Son died for our sins.”[40] In the forgiveness of Christians of their sins and his continual cleansing them from such sins, God displays loyalty to the sacred covenant he himself established. Furthermore, the theoretical grounds, the rational basis, upon which it is just for God to forgive sins is established in the Person and sacrifice of the Son of God. God may justly forgive us, because Christ paid the penalty that was due. The justice of God in allowing our participation in the benefits of that sacrifice is vindicated and proved by the manner of incorporating those to be forgiven into the spiritual body of Christ, and then justifying them, not in their own sinful identities, but as Christ and in Christ.
[39] J. W. Roberts, op. cit., p. 35.
[40] John R. W. Stott, op. cit., p. 77.
1Jn 1:10 –If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.
If we say … These repeated expressions (1Jn 1:6; 1Jn 1:8; 1Jn 1:10) indicate the principal stream of the apostle’s thought in this section. He is still dealing with evil heresies that had encroached upon the Christian fellowship.
If we say that we have not sinned … This is the most blatant and offensive of all the false theories. “To go to the length of denying past sin and present guilt, is not only to becloud ourselves with sophistry but to give the lie to God himself.”[41] God gave his only begotten Son upon the cross that man might be saved from sin, a salvation that was impossible for any man apart from God’s redeeming act. If man had not been sinful and utterly helpless to achieve salvation for himself, all of the heavenly outpouring of God’s merciful visitation in the person of his Son was unnecessary; the crucifixion was a useless murder; and every promise of the gospel is essentially a lie. John’s language here is certainly not too strong. People who deny their need of redemption from sin, through the pretense of not ever having sinned, are of all people most guilty and contemptible. “To say that we have not sinned is not just to tell a deliberate lie, or to be self-deceived, but actually to accuse God of lying, to make him a liar.”[42]
His word is not in us … Characteristic of John’s writings is his use of such words as “word” and “truth” to stand for the whole body of gospel teaching. Moreover, “the truth” or “the word” in John’s view was not some indefinite and nebulous goal pursued by the Christians seeking to know it; it was something which they already knew, already had, already walked in, already obeyed. The reference, of course, is to the basic gospel of the New Testament which is perfect, complete, final, and sufficient. It is not to be added to nor taken from. Such is the Johannine conception of the message which he and other apostles delivered to people that they might be saved.
[41] Amos N. Wilder, op. cit., p. 225.
[42] John R. W. Stott, op. cit., p. 79.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
Righteous Forgiveness
If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.1Jn 1:8-9.
1. These words sum up the great characteristic aim which distinguishes Christianity from every other system and institution on earth. The object of education is to get rid of ignorance. The object of medicine is to get rid of disease. The object of Socialism (at least, according to many of its advocates) is to get rid of poverty. But the object of Christianity is to get rid of sin. The Gospel lays its finger on moral evil as the real mischief and misery of the world. Compared with the supreme curse of human selfishness, nothing else seriously matters. And accordingly the Gospel proposes to cure this inward malady of the soul. Herein, it stands apart from other religions. As Amiel said, The prayer of the Buddhist is, Deliver us from existence; the prayer of the Christian is, Deliver us from evil.
I
Contradicting God
1. If we say that we have no sin, we not only deceive ourselves, but we make God a liar. St. John warns us against three false views which a man is tempted to take of his condition: He may deny the reality of sin, or his responsibility for sin, or the fact of sin in his own case.
For the history of Christian faith shows how Christian enthusiasts have been found to maintain, in a strange and perverse way, that Divine communion had lifted them above the common distinctions of right and wrong. And in our own day, when people are persuading themselves, in the name of religion, that pain and disease are illusions, we need not wonder if they persuade themselves that duty is an illusion too. The Apostle confronts such men with a strong, blunt declaration. They lie: they are false to their own knowledge of right and wrong.
And experience of our own hearts, and of our own friends, explains how religious men can yet excuse themselves for wrongdoing by saying, We have no sinthat is to say, we are not responsible, we cannot be blamed. But to argue thus is to deceive ourselves, to confuse and corrupt our own consciences, to pervert our moral sense.
Again, it is still possible for men who recognize the reality and the ruin of moral evil to deny that they themselves are personally guilty. The Apostle confutes these men by appealing to Gods estimate of their condition, as shown in His redemption: to deny that we need to be redeemed is to make God a liar.
When asked whether he had made his peace with God, Thoreau quietly replied that he had never quarrelled with him. He was invited by another acquaintance to enter into a religious conversation concerning the next world. One world at a time, was the prompt retort.1 [Note: H. S. Salt, Henry David Thoreau, 210.]
Mr. D. L. Moody says that once he visited a prison in New York to hold a service with the prisoners. Afterwards he spoke to each of the prisoners privately. He said, I never found such an innocent lot of men in my life as in that place. Each man explained that somebody else was to blame.2 [Note: S. D. Gordon, Quiet Talks about the Tempter, 127.]
2. Already in the days of John there were Christians for whom the word sin was beginning to lose its meaning.
(1) It would seem that some thought it must be unworthy of God to vex Himself about the right or wrong doings of men. They pictured Him as so great and comprehensive that He contained within Himself darkness as well as light, and looked with equal complacency on the evil and on the good, so that what men call wrong-doing was not sin against Him, and therefore on a large view of creation deserved no condemnation. St. John knew that such a being had nothing in common with the Father of his Lord Jesus Christ, who had suffered and died to put away the sins of the world. On the strength of his fellowship with the very life of God, which had made itself known in his own spirit through the Person of Jesus, he declares that God is light without any mixture of darkness, and that men can be partakers of His life only by refusing to do the works of darkness.
(2) It was said by others that fellowship between men and God is impossible till men are sinless, for there is always darkness mixed with their light. Not so, the Apostle says; these spots of darkness on the human spirit are not indelible; the blood of Gods own Son has power to wash them out. In the virtue of that sacrifice lies the only possible abolition of sin. But do not imagine, he adds, that you have yet got clear of sin. That were self-deception. We must not only refuse to say that we have no sin, we must press forward to confess our sins, to carry them with shame before God for Him to abolish. And that He will surely do, both towards Himself and towards us. As sins in the proper sense of the word, offences against a loving Father and Maker, He will send them away, forgive them, allow them to make no breach between Him and us. As unrighteousness, as stains and injuries to our own natures, which He created for righteousness, He will cleanse them away and enable us to go forth in newness of life. Let us have no fears about His will to do this; it rests upon His very faithfulness and righteousness; in doing it He is not indulgently breaking in upon the strict law of His nature, but is acting as His external nature requires Him to act; He is but perfecting what He began, refusing to despise the work of His own hands, carrying out the purpose for which He sent His Son to die. And if, after all, in spite of the revelation of God as the destroyer of sin, we say that for our part we have committed no sin, we do more than deceive ourselves, more than refuse to receive the truth within us; we set ourselves directly against God in person, making Him a liar, smothering His voice within us.
II
Confessing Sin
1. What is confession? To confess sins is to own up to them before God, to say to ourselves and to Him that, however dark the way has been and however stiff the fight, however heavy the handicap has been, nevertheless, in the inner secret of our being, we know that at the last resort and the final analysis those sins would never have darkened the face of Gods heaven had we not chosen so to live.
That is confession in its first aspectThese deeds are mine. But there is a deeper aspect. We have to remember that these sins of ours, these separate and individual acts, come from a fountain which John calls sin. These sins, transgressions, are all of them the result of that in us which is a root and a source of evil. They are the result of that sin which is part of our character, part of our make-up. They have not come uncaused; they have not come out of nothing, but out of our own being; and because of the strain of bad blood, because of the strain of evil, because of the open source of wrong that there is in us, in our own choice and will, they have come forth to poison earths atmosphere. They are ours. That is confession.
(1) It is not confessing sin to admit the fact that you are a sinner; it is not confessing sin to admit the fact that it is an evil state; it is not confessing sin to admit that it is a base thing; it is not confessing sin to admit, when you contrast a holy state with an evil state, that the holy state is the better state. To confess sin is to come to the conclusion in your heart, and freely, with your lips, to make this admission, that your breach of Gods law, and your not loving God with your whole heart, soul, mind, and strength, and your not loving every human being as yourself, is an awful thing, justly charged against you as your guilt, and in respect of which, neither the force of example, nor the influence of education, nor circumstances, nor a corrupted nature, furnish any apology whatever. The Bible says expressly, The lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world; and everywhere God is at great pains to separate between Himself and mans sin, and to exonerate Himself from all responsibility for mans sins. To confess sin is to take Gods word in the matter; it is to stand upon Gods side in the question; it is joining God against myself; and it is to feel that the fact that this sin is my sin, that this corruption is my corruption, does in no respect interfere with the sternness with which I recognize that this sin is a thing in which the guilty person is righteously held guilty.
I wish to call to remembrance my past vileness, and the corruptions of my soul; not because I love them, but that I may love Thee, O my God! I do this for the love of Thy love, calling to mind my most evil ways, that when I feel the bitterness of my own sin, then I may also feel how sweet Thou art.1 [Note: Augustine, Confessions.]
(2) What St. John insists on is that we be candid: that we be willing to be reproved and convicted, to have the cancer of evil excised by that Word of God, which is sharper than any two-edged sword. If we will not submit to this, is it not evident that the cancer will spread? If, however, there is candour, there will be confession to God. There will be confession also to man. St. John would not be unmindful of his Masters teaching on confession, and his words here, If we confess, are wide enough to include confession to man as well as to God. Let there, then, be confession to the fellow-man we have wronged, if our sin has specially wronged any. No other confession to man is enjoined in Scripture. But this is enjoined, and is too seldom practised. When we have sinned against our fellow-man, let us measure the reality of our confession to God by our confession to man. If pride keeps us from this latter, of what worth is the former? If I regard iniquity in my heart, the Lord will not hear me. Such confession to man has its place as a means of deliverance from sin.
Suppose any one ill in body, in pain and distress, lying awake at night, refusing his nourishment or finding that it does him no good, his spirits low, his heart full of anguish, feeling as if all his good days were gone, and not knowing what to do, what medicine to take, how to live in order to obtain health and strength again. What are men used to do when such trouble as this comes upon them? Finding they cannot cure themselves, they go to some one whom they think more likely to cure them. They go to the physician: and having come to him, do they leave him to find out what is the matter by merely looking at them, or do they tell him their case themselves, and answer all his questions? Of course they tell him: it is their only chance to be cured; for how else is he to know what is the matter with them? And if he does not know, how can he prescribe for them? As, then, the way of bodily cure is to tell ones ease fully to the physician, so the way of spiritual cure is to confess our sins to the physician of our souls: that is, to Almighty God, for He alone can heal the soul.1 [Note: J. Keble.]
2. Confession implies the reconstruction of the principles of our life. A good deal of so-called repentance is only sorrow at being punished. That is not repentance at all. And in such a state of mind no man can partake of Christs atonement. We cannot share in our Lords atonement until we copy His penitential character. Christ felt sin for all humanity. Christ confessed sin for all humanity. We, like Him, have to realize that the worst thing in sin is not its punishment, physical, mental, moral, but the alienation from God which it brings. It was that which broke the heart of the Sinless upon the cross. Christ has made atonement by His sinless life of obedience, leading, just because it was sinless, to the cross. But that atonement is of no use to us, we cannot subjectively participate in it, till we repent of sin and hate it, as the accursed thing which nailed the Sinless to the Holy Rood.
Among the hard-working Labrador fishermen was a rich man who had oppressed them, but whom they believed to be strong enough to defy them. Dr. Wilfred Grenfell, the medical missionary, who is also a magistrate, went to the offender and told him that he must confess his sin and pay back to the fishermen a thousand dollars. He cursed the missionary. At the next church service the doctor announced that a sinful man would confess his sin that night. They couldnt believe that the rich sinner would yield. At the evening service, Dr. Grenfell asked them to keep their seats while he went after the sinner. He found the man at a brothers house on his knees in prayer, with all the family.
Prayer, said Grenfell, is a good thing in its place, but it doesnt go here. Come with me.
He meekly went, and was led up the aisle, where all could see him, and, after the doctor had described the great sin of which he was guilty, he asked, Did you do this thing? I did. You are an evil man of whom the people should beware? I am. You deserve the punishment of man and God. I do.
At the end of it all the doctor told the man that the good God would forgive him if he should ask in true faith and repentance, but that the people, being human, could not. For a whole year, he charged the people, they must not speak to that man; but if, at the end of that time, he had shown an honest disposition to mend his ways, they might take him to their hearts.
In the inland territories of Arabia there are orchards and fruit trees, green tablelands and springing fountains of water; it is indeed one of the richest and most beautiful countries in the world. But it is difficult to believe that, as we watch its sterile, forbidding coasts. The port of Aden, touched at by most travellers to the East, gives an idea of what Tartarus itself must be like. The normal temperature is torment, even to those inured to the great heat of the tropics. Not a blade of grass is to be seen upon the hillsides, rain falls perhaps once in three or four years, verdureless rocks tower towards the molten heavens like pitiless rivals. And yet these sterile, forbidding, fire-scathed rocks are the gateway into a country fair as Eden and flowing with milk and honey. So is it with this hard, inexorable, repugnant duty of confession. It is the grim gateway leading on to green pastures and still waters, to sabbatic rest and abounding blessedness. The more specific and outspoken our confession the better for our health of soul and for the rapidity and completeness of our spiritual restoration.1 [Note: T. G. Selby, The God of the Frail, 102.]
3. Why should we confess, if God already knows our sin? The answer is that confession is not meant to inform God, but to train us into a personal relation with Him. Think of any human relationship, the relation of a father or a mother to their children. Supposing the child, the son we will say, has done something wrong, has outraged and done violence to his home. He has set out upon a bad career. The father or mother would wish for, pray for, seek for, his amendment; but yet we know that, they could not, ought not to be satisfied by any mere amendment in the outward routine of life. It would be felt by all right-minded people to be superficial. We shall say if his heart is changed then there must be sorrow too, there must be regret, and the expression of regret and sorrow and penitence for the hearts he has wounded, for the lives that he has outraged, for the love so freely lavished upon him that he has scouted.
It is recorded of Leonardo da Vinci that while painting his famous picture representing the Last Supper, he quarrelled violently with a former friend. In order to injure this man in a lasting manner he painted for the face of Judas the face of his old friend with whom he had quarrelled. But when endeavouring to portray the face of the Saviour, Da Vinci utterly failed to do justice to the ideal face, and arose from every attempt with feelings of despair. When some time had passed by, Da Vinci relented in his harsh treatment of his friend and wiped out the face of Judas. And it is recorded that on the night following the day on which he did this outward act of forgiveness, he saw in vision Christ standing before him. Da Vinci saw the face of Christ more vividly than he ever saw it in his supreme moments of exalted inspiration, and so lasting was the impression that he was able on the next day to transfer to the picture that face of Christ which we see in the picture to-day.
4. Confession of sins, as distinct from the vague acknowledgment of sin, is a partial security against the further spreading of sin within the soul. There are some poisonous fungi which grow only in the dark, and sin is such a growth. The contagion, to use another illustration, is lessened the moment you open the windows of the soul and let in the fresh air of heaven. If you shut the soul up within itself, you will only harbour fresh seeds of transgression within the heart. No one can have gone to God in penitent confession and prayer without being conscious that the act of confession has made it harder, and not easier, to sin again.
In all literature there can hardly be a nobler instance of confession, and the glorious results which follow, than that which Dante made of his own sinfulness, by the terrific condemnation which he puts into the mouth of Beatrice when she comes to him on the top of the mountain of Purgatory. It seems as though in the Convivio he tried to explain away the moral confusion and delinquency into which he fell after the death of Beatrice. But he found it could not be done. No skill in allegorizing, no subtlety of philosophy, would make it any other than moral failure. So Dante decided on a nobler course. He left the Convivio unfinished, and took the way of open confession, by making Beatrice condemn him in the most scathing language when he meets her on the mount, and by admitting that to her stinging reproofs he had no reply. Overwhelmed with shame he swooned away; but in that moment of uttermost exposure and disgrace he was set free. When he awoke he had been washed in Lethe, with the remembrance of the sin gone for ever. Then, and only then, was he ready for the blessed companionship of Beatrice and the ascent to heaven. There in the heart of his immortal Comedy he has set his own confession, telling all who read it that there is but one way to get free from sinthe humiliating way of confession; telling us also that without confession there can be no fellowship with the pure and good, or any heaven in the presence of God.
III
Commanding Forgiveness
1. Forgiveness is a free gift.That is, it affords the same revelation of love as we find in a childs or a friends or a lovers pardon, and indeed in all self-sacrifice. It does not spring from any merit, anything done. Like all the beauties and graces of life, it is not based on necessity or justice but is an unbought gift of that heart of the Eternal which is most wonderfully kind. For the world of spirits lives on the rich generosity of God. And of all its instances none is comparable to that of pardon; none so dear and wonderful as that grace of forgiveness for which His Son once died upon the Cross, that men, the worst and the weakest, might live unto Him for ever.
Guizot once wrote in an album, I have learned in my long life two rules of prudence: the first is to forgive much, and the second is never to forget. Under this Thiers wrote, A little forgetting would not detract from the sincerity of the forgiveness. Then Bismarck added the words, As for me, I have learned to forget much, and to ask to be forgiven much.1 [Note: J. R. Miller, Devotional Hours with the Bible.]
It is said that only once in his career did Napoleon give way to pity. It was in October 1806. Three weeks before, in the battle of Jena, he had laid Prussia submissive at his feet. He was now busy with the spoliation of Berlin. But the Prince of Hatzfeld had proved a traitor to him. He was arrested. The death warrant had been signed. For two days he had languished in prison, awaiting the execution of the decree. His wife believed him innocent. For five hours she had stood without in the street, waiting for an audience with the Emperor. At last he came. With tears and entreaties she pleaded that her husband might be spared, for she knew that he was innocent. Napoleon gazed with those terrible grey-blue eyes upon her tear-stained faceand said nothing. The suspense was awful. At last he turned to Talleyrand and held out his hand. Talleyrand placed in his hand a letter. He handed it to the kneeling princess. Whose writing is that, Madame? The princess eagerly scanned the lines, and as her eyes recognized the signature, she let the paper fall with a pitiful cry. Is that your husbands writing, Madame? But sobs were the only answer. Then for once Napoleon softened into pity as he said, Talleyrand. Sire. What other evidence have we of the Prince of Hatzfelds treachery? None other, sire. Princess, said Napoleon tenderly, put that letter in the fire yonder, and then we shall have none. The tell-tale sheet fluttered into the fire, and the last bit of evidence against the prince had perished for ever.
2. Forgiveness is founded on the nature of God: it is the outcome of His justice. He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins.
(1) In forgiving us God is faithful to Himself. The supreme truth about God is that He is our Father, and if God is to be faithful He must be faithful as a Father; and when one who is meant to be His child in likeness and in truth places himself in the position of penitent, and stands in the light of true confession, God would be untrue to His Fatherhood did He not forgive. Gods forgiveness is the ever-present breath of His Fatherhood. God is a living God, Fatherhood His very inner life, and it flames all through this universe. It is no cold and merely stately thing; it is the burning breath of His life; and that breath comes to us first and last on this earth as the play of His Spirit in that pardon which takes us, imperfect as we are, and gives us room to live, in His presence and in His love.
(2) In forgiving our sins God is also righteous. When a man confesses his sins in the genuine sense, he has the right to be forgiven. Confession makes him another man. He is not the man he was before. Before, he was one with his sin, and his sin was the truth about him; but now that he has used that strange power of repentance which God has made part of our beingthe repentance which means changing your mind and turning right roundhe has put his sin from him, and it is, in the sight of the perfect truth, his no longer. God would not be righteous did He not recognize the truth about that man. And this is the message which we have heard from him, and announce unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. Therefore no one on earth can gauge or recognize the truth about the penitent as God does; and, if we confess our sins, God is righteous to forgive us.
Take the case of some human act of forgiveness. A man does me a wrong. The act being once done is irremediable, and the loss or injury of it must be borne by some one. If he makes me amends, though the evil originally done is not annihilated, yet the sentiment of justice is satisfied. In some cases of wrongdoing, however, he cannot make amends, or he may entirely refuse even to try to make amends. Thereupon I forgive him, that is to say, I virtually take upon myself the penalty which he ought to have suffered. We see clearly that this is what forgiveness means in the case of a money debt: where the creditor forgives the debt, he suffers the loss himself. And so it is with forgiveness of other kinds of injury. By freely forgiving the wrong-doer I do not undo his act, but I consent to suffer the injury and waive my right to compensation. If I go beyond this and refuse all his offers of satisfaction, I voluntarily take upon myself the wrong-doers burden, and set him free from every obligation except that of gratitude.
From human forgiveness to Divine forgiveness is a long step, but they both seem to be regarded as on the same footing in the Lords Prayer, where we are taught to say, Forgive us, as we forgive. May we not therefore believe that up to a certain point the analogy holds, and that Divine like human forgiveness involves vicarious suffering? Man has duties towards God which he has not fulfilled. God forgives him. God thus willingly takes the loss upon Himself. Without this there can be no forgiveness, for even God, so far as our finite intelligence is able to conceive the matter, cannot annihilate the past. God has been despised and rejected by His creatures. How can they be forgiven? Only by Gods consenting to be despised and rejected. That they may escapesooner than that they should sufferGod foregoes His right. Men deny His existence: He consents to be denied, in order that He may forgive. Men do all kinds of evil against Him: He submits to them, not because He must, but of His own will. He endures everything because He forgives. It is only by enduring that He can forgive. His last prayer is for the forgiveness of His murderers.1 [Note: H. G. Woods, At the Temple Church, 226.]
When a few years ago, a Mohammedan convert at Calcutta came to Lal Behouri Sing for baptism, the missionary asked him what was the vital point in which he found Mohammedanism most defective, and which he found that Christianity satisfactorily supplied. His prompt reply was, Mohammedanism is full of the mercy of God; and while I felt no real consciousness of guilt as the breaker of Gods law this satisfied me; but when I felt my guilt I felt that it was not with Gods mercy, but with His justice, that I had first to do. Now to meet the claims of Gods justice Mohammedanism had made no provision, but this is the very thing that I have found fully accomplished by the atoning sacrifice of Christ on the cross; and, therefore, Christianity is now the only adequate religion for me, a guilty sinner.1 [Note: C. Stanford, Symbols of Christ, 301.]
Weigh all my faults and follies righteously,
Omissions and commissions, sin on sin;
Make deep the scale, O Lord, to weigh them in;
Yea, set the Accuser vulture-eyed to see
All loads ingathered which belong to me;
That so in life the judgment may begin,
And Angels learn how hard it is to win
One solitary sinful soul to Thee.
I have no merits for a counterpoise:
Oh vanity my work and hastening day,
What can I answer to the accusing voice?
Lord, drop Thou in the counterscale alone
One Drop from Thine own Heart, and overweigh
My guilt, my folly, even my heart of stone.2 [Note: Christina G. Rossetti.]
IV
Ensuring Cleansing
1. God is faithful and just, not merely to forgive us our sins but to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. We need something else besides forgiveness. Forgiveness of sins is much, but cleansing from the defilement of sin is more. Yet this spring of evil in the heart may be dried up, and what was once the sepulchre of living death transformed into a sanctuary of Divine life. The essence of the Gospel is not the remittance of condemnation, but the sanctification of the soul.
The germs of disease may lurk in our system and necessitate care, yet be so controlled by a healthy constitution as not to overcome us, just as an enemy who has invaded a country may be practically dispossessed, though he may retain a stronghold here and there, and make destructive sallies into the surrounding districts. So, sin may be in us, though it may not have dominion over us; and though it have no dominion it may yet enfeeble, obstruct, and distract us. In fact, not to struggle against sin is the direct evidence of our being completely under its subjection, as there is no slavery so abject as that which tamely acquiesces in its servitude. To struggle against it, but unsuccessfully, betokens an awakened conscience, but a heart not yet strengthened by the grace of Christ. To struggle against it successfully, though with a certain measure of loss and damagelike an army which conquers though at the cost of many wounded and slainis the case of the Christian who knows sin is always present with him, to be watched and fought against, and imposing the constant necessity of confession and prayer for forgiveness and cleansing.1 [Note: C. Moinet, The Great Alternative, 172.]
Since succour to the feeblest of the wise
Is charge of nobler weight
Than the security
Of many and many a foolish souls estate,
This I affirm,
Though fools will fools more confidently be:
Whom God doth once with heart to heart befriend,
He does so till the end;
And having planted lifes miraculous germ,
One sweet pulsation of responsive love,
He sets him sheer above,
Not sin and bitter shame
And wreck of fame,
But Hells insidious and more black attempt,
The envy, malice and pride,
Which men who share so easily condone
That few even list such ills as these to hide.
From these unalterably exempt
Through the rememberd grace
Of that divine embrace,
Of his sad errors none,
Though gross to blame,
Shall cast him lower than the cleansing flame,
Nor make him quite depart
From the small flock named after Gods own heart,
And to themselves unknown.
Nor can he quail
In faith, nor flush nor pale
When all the other idiot people spell
How this or that new prophets word belies
Their last high oracle;
But constantly his soul
Points to its pole,
Even as the needle points and knows not why
And, under the ever-changing clouds of doubt,
When others cry,
The stars, if stars there were,
Are quenched and out!
To him, uplooking tward the hills for aid,
Appear, at need displayd,
Gaps in the low-hung gloom, and, bright in air,
Orion or the Bear.1 [Note: Coventry Patmore.]
2. The Divine faithfulness and justice are pledged to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. The discovery of ineffaceable spots on the soul would be a fatal reflection on the spiritual perception and sanctifying power of the Divine Redeemer. We are told that a New York lapidary submitted a diamond to the grinding machine for the space of three months. At the end of that time the stone was found to be absolutely unaffected by the ordeal, and the lapidary gave up the task in despair. But the revolutions of the wheels of redemption will never fail to polish and perfect the believers soul. God can heal, not only the putrifying sores of flagrant vice, but also the unrealized wounds of the deadly bacilli of evil that secrete themselves in the deepest inwardness of our being. The electric beams of His righteousness reveal the hidden blights that taint the motive and pollute the springs of thought. Sin knows no law of protective colouring by means of which it can escape the detection of God. God discerns iniquity in its microscopic inception, and cleanses the soul from the faintest stains.
O Foolish Soul! to make thy count
For languid falls and much forgiven,
When like a flame thou mightest mount
To storm and carry heaven.
A life so faint,is this to live?
A goal so mean,is this a goal?
Christ love thee, remedy, forgive,
Save thee, O foolish Soul!2 [Note: Christina G. Rossetti.]
Righteous Forgiveness
Literature
Barrett (G. S.), Musings for Quiet Hours, 19.
Campbell (J. M.), Responsibility for the Gift of Eternal Life, 56.
Challacombe (W. A.), The Souls Wardrobe, 26.
Darlow (T. H.), The Upward Calling, 62.
Davies (D.), Talks with Men, Women and Children, vi. 324.
DuBose (W. P.), The Reason of Life, 169.
Farrar (F. W.), Truths to Live By, 47.
Figgis (J. N.), The Gospel and Human Needs, 92.
Goulburn (E. M.), Occasional Sermons, i. 1.
Hort (F. J. A.), Cambridge Sermons, 98.
Ingram (A. F. W.), The Love of the Trinity, 162.
Jones (T.), The Divine Order, 206.
Jones (W. B.), The Peace of God, 311.
Joynt (R. C.), Liturgy and Life, 16.
Keble (J.), Sermons for the Christian Year: Lent to Passiontide, 63, 73.
Lewis (F. W.), The Work of Christ, 122.
MacNeil (J.), The Spirit-Filled Life, 11.
Martineau (J.), Hours of Thought, i. 102.
Maurice (F. D.), Sermons in Country Churches, 206.
Moinet (C.), The Great Alternative, 170.
Neale (J. M.), Sermons Preached in Sackville College Chapel, ii. 308.
Newton (J.), The Problem of Personality, 253.
Price (A. C.), Fifty Sermons, iii. 393.
Selby (T. G.), The God of the Frail, 90.
Skrine (J. H.), Sermons to Pastors and Masters, 1.
Sowter (G. A.), Trial and Triumph, 34.
Waugh (T.), Mount and Multitude, 149.
Woods (H. G.), At the Temple Church, 213, 222.
Fuente: The Great Texts of the Bible
say: 1Jo 1:6, 1Jo 1:10, 1Jo 3:5, 1Jo 3:6, 1Ki 8:46, 2Ch 6:36, Job 9:2, Job 14:4, Job 15:14, Job 25:4, Psa 143:2, Pro 20:9, Ecc 7:20, Isa 53:6, Isa 64:6, Jer 2:22, Jer 2:23, Rom 3:23, Jam 3:2
we deceive: 1Co 3:18, Gal 6:3, 2Ti 3:13, Jam 1:22, Jam 1:26, 2Pe 2:13
the truth: 1Jo 2:4, 1Ti 6:5, 2Jo 1:2, 3Jo 1:3
Reciprocal: Gen 12:12 – will kill Gen 18:15 – denied Gen 32:10 – not worthy of the least of all Lev 5:5 – confess Lev 13:12 – cover all Lev 26:40 – confess Num 5:7 – confess Jos 7:19 – make Jdg 10:15 – We have sinned 2Sa 12:13 – I have sinned 2Ki 20:15 – All the things 1Ch 15:13 – for that Ezr 10:1 – when he had Job 9:3 – he cannot Job 9:30 – General Job 31:33 – covered Job 33:27 – I Psa 32:5 – acknowledged Psa 119:29 – Remove Pro 28:13 – whoso Pro 30:12 – that are Isa 39:2 – there was Jer 2:35 – I will Jer 3:13 – acknowledge Dan 9:4 – made Dan 9:20 – confessing Mar 1:5 – confessing Luk 7:41 – the other Luk 11:4 – forgive us Luk 15:18 – I have Luk 15:29 – Lo Luk 18:13 – a sinner Luk 23:41 – we indeed Joh 1:9 – the true Joh 9:41 – If Joh 14:6 – the truth Rom 3:10 – none Rom 5:12 – all Rom 7:15 – what Gal 2:11 – because Gal 3:11 – that Gal 5:17 – so Gal 6:7 – not Eph 2:3 – we Phi 3:9 – not 1Jo 2:1 – And if 1Jo 3:19 – hereby
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
CONFESSION AND FORGIVENESS
If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
1Jn 1:8-9
The world which is around you hides from your eyes the world which is withinand when you think of sin at all, you do but remember some wrong thing which you have done, and you forget this dark and deadly poison which is hidden deep within. You remember that you have committed certain sins, but you forget that deep within your heart is the dwelling-place of sin. And so it is that the awfulness of eternity passes out of sight. Men do not know their deep disease, and not knowing this they cannot feel the might of Gods forgiveness. This deadly sin is in you all. They are the words of the Beloved Disciple, the Friend of Jesus. He dared not dream that even he could be an exception. If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves. And then he goes on to add words of a different kind: If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive. He had said just before that the blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth from all sin. Now he gives you one of the links in the chainif we confess our sin, then we are cleansed, then we are forgiven.
I. How can we confess our sin?What is confession? Is it to allow honestly that we have done wrong? Is it to take shame and confusion to ourselves because we have committed sin? Is it to say in sorrow and bitterness of heart, I have left undone the things which I ought to have done, and done the things which I ought not to have done, and there is no health in me? We may utter our confession in words like these, just as that royal penitent poured out his whole soul in still fewer words, when he only said in his misery, I have sinned against the Lord.
(a) True confession is deeper than all words. That pit of darkness in the heart must be opened, that the Light of God may shine into it. You must show Him not what you have done, but what you are. You must tear away every veil by which you hide yourself from the eyes of your fellow-men, and be content to kneel in all your shame before Him to Whom all hearts are open, and feel the eye which is as a flame of fire searching your heartshowing up in that bright light all your confusion, all your folly, all your sindragging into sight the selfishness, the vanity, the falsehood, which lay so close to the root of the actions which you had thought so fair and good. All things, even the dark heart of man, are naked and open to the eyes of Him with Whom we have to doand in true confession, face to face with God, the secrets of the heart are made manifest. When a man has stood before the Holy One and unbosomed himself to God, when he has torn away the mask from his guilty soul in the presence of his Maker, and owned that his burden is too heavy for him to bear, his disease too deep for him to cure, he has taken the first step in that true confession which leads to salvation. The first step, not the last.
(b) It remains not merely to own your weakness, but to lay hold on Strengthto lay down that burden at the foot of the Crossto put away that shame and sin that it may be blotted out and destroyed for everto gaze on, in hope and humble trust, upon the Lamb of God Which taketh away the sin of the world, until your sin has melted away before His atoning love; until that which was as scarlet has become white as snow, that which was red like crimson has become as wool.
II. He is faithful and just to forgive.The Son of Righteousness will scatter the darkness of the heart which will but open itself to receive His light. He will turn that hidden seat of sin into a throne of righteousness. The dark fountain, from which all your misery flowed, shall become a well of water springing up into Everlasting Life. Only kneel on and let that deep confession be without ceasing. Never be content that a ray of His Light should once penetrate your heart, but let it shine more and more unto the perfect day. When we say I believe in the forgiveness of sins, we speak not of a momentary forgiveness, but of a perpetual mercy. And as His forgiveness is without ceasing, so must be your confession. The heart which has once been opened must never be closed, or else the darkness will return and the Light which is in you be quenched. Let the way between your heart and God be always clear and free. Oh! never go out of His presence, never turn your eyes away from His bright Light.
Illustration
Faithful and just to forgiveif we confess. Yes, this the true meaning, accordant with reason and revelation, that there is pardon only for the penitent. The great World-Atonement only cancels the guilt of the world provisionally; it still remains for each one, by the way which Christ has opened, humbly to approach his God. And then? Then Gods whole nature is pledged to pardon us! This is what we want: a coming to ourselves; a loving acknowledgment of the claims of the God of our life. And He? a Father Who stoops to raise us, and so tenderly, from our fall! And shall He not raise us? Shall He not lift us into purity and health and blessedness? Man cannot do this for us; God can do all. Humble yourselves therefore under the mighty hand of God, and He shall lift you up (1Pe 5:6; Jam 4:10).
Fuente: Church Pulpit Commentary
1Jn 1:8. This verse does not contradict the preceding one or the comments made on it. To say we have no sin would be like saying we do not have any need for the blood of Christ. Hence even a faithful disciple should admit his weaknesses and understand his dependence upon the blood of Christ for his cleansing.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
1Jn 1:8-9. If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. Another if we say, strictly co-ordinate with the preceding; the phrases here being variations upon those contained in the former, but, after St. Johns manner, with some additional points of force. What is falsely asserted by the anti-christian spirit is the absence of that which renders an atonement necessary in order to walking in the light. Sin has been for the first time introduced, as that within us which answers to darkness, its external sphere: it is wrong, therefore, to interpret it as meaning that we may no longer walk in the darkness, although we have remaining sin within us. The two are synonymous: they who say that they are without sin are by that very token in the darkness; for the light of Gods holiness cannot be diffused through the soul until it has first revealed its evil. The rebuke runs parallel with the former, with appropriate change of phrase. Instead of lying simply, we are now self-deceivers, with strong emphasis on this: not without great violence could the perverters of the Christian system have brought themselves to deny the sinfulness of their nature. In fact, none who have ever been Christians could assert this; at least, the Christian revelation as truth cannot have remained in them, even if it had ever entered. The truth is not in us, nor we in it.
If we confess our sins: here we have the universal preamble of the Gospel. This confession is the consenting together of the soul and the law in the conviction and acknowledgment of sin. It is the antithesis of the saying that we have no sin; but, as the antitheses are never strictly coincident, this confession may include, and indeed must include, more than a mere internal sentiment. Two things are to be remembered here: first, that the confessing of sins, not sin, is the expression used in the New Testament for the true repentance that precedes the acceptance of the Gospel; and, secondly, that the word is used by St. John only in two senses, for the fundamental confession of sin and need, and for the fundamental confession of Jesus the Saviour from sin and need. He speaks of confessing sin and confessing Christ: he alone has this combination, and save to express these two he does not employ the word. Accordingly, St. John now introduces in the most full and solemn manner the whole economy of the Gospel as a remedy for sin: in an enlarged statement, and including now another idea, that of righteousness.
He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. The two attributes of God, the Administrator in Christ through the Spirit of the redeeming economy, correspond to each other and to the blessings which they guarantee. He is faithful to His holy nature, as it is revealed in His Son, and to the covenant which in Him pledges forgiveness and renewal, and to the express promises of His word: the covenant of peace came to St. John from the Old Testament, and is as much his as St. Pauls, though he never introduces the idea. Hence its antithesis is the making Him a liar; and its counterpart in us is our faith, not here expressed but implied. He is righteous also: this term regards the holiness of God under a new aspect, that of a lawgiver; and declares that His universal faithfulness is pledged in a particular way, namely, as He imparts righteousness to the faith of those who trust in Him. St. John does not adopt the Pauline language, though he implies the Pauline teaching, when he says that God is righteous in order that He may forgive our sins. We receive this release from condemnation from His righteousness; for He is just, and the justifier. He also imparts righteousness,that point St. John keep stedfastly in view throughout the Epistle,but as to that he changes the phrase; and, blending the holiness and righteousness of God in one sentence, declares that He is faithful and righteous also that He may cleanse us from all unrighteousness. This is a remarkable combination: the cleansing is strictly from pollution; but here its meaning is enlarged beyond that of 1Jn 1:7, and it is a cleansing from the very principle in us that gives birth to sin, our deviation from holy right or our unrighteousness.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
If we say, we apostles, we cannot say we are free from sin; much less can the proud Gnostics say so, who suppose and assert themselves to be in a state of perfection; and observe, he doth not say, If we say we had no sin, we deceive ourselves; but that if now we say we have none; intimating, that Christians, as as well after as before conversion, continue sinful persons; a perfect freedom from all sin being altogether unattainable in this life, not only by ordinary Christians, but by the most eminent saints.
The church of Rome will have it that this is magis humiliter quam veraciter dictum, rather spoken humbly than truly; but the apostle doth not say, humility is not in us; but, the truth is not in us; he saith not, we extol ourselves, and there is no lowliness 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 he has made his heart clean?
We can neither ascribe what purity we have to ourselves, nor yet attribute perfection to our purity; and if so, how should we long for the day of redemption, when no sin shall affect us, no sorrow afflict us; when we shall be clothed with unspotted purity, perfect felicity, and that to all eternity.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
The Christian and Sin
However, those who willingly confess their sins can find forgiveness. Thayer says the word “confess” means, “to say the same thing as another, i.e. to agree with, assent…to admit or declare oneself guilty of what one is accused of.” It is as if God listed the various wrongs one has committed and he admits his guilt. The confession here is to God just as the forgiveness is from God. Again, the word “confess” is in the present tense which would suggest the necessity of continuing to confess individual sins to keep on being cleansed. God has promised to forgive confessed sins and will be faithful in keeping that promise ( Psa 143:1 ). He is justified, or righteous, in forgiving sins because Jesus’ blood paid the price. When God forgives, all guilt is removed.
Verses 6, 8 and 10 of 1Jn 1:1-10 begin with “if we say.” The apostle appears to have been identifying himself with those who held to false doctrine to soften the blow of saying they were in error. In verse 8, it appears sin is considered abstractly, while in verse 10 John is speaking of specific sin as brought up in verse 9. When one says he is guilty of no specific sin, he makes God a liar. In Jesus’ death on the cross, God acknowledged man’s sin and sought to give him a means of pardon. God’s word is the whole of the gospel ( Joh 5:36-38 ; Joh 8:37 ; Joh 12:44-50 ).
Fuente: Gary Hampton Commentary on Selected Books
1Jn 1:8-10. If we say Before Christs blood has cleansed us; that we have no sin To be cleansed from; or if, even after we have experienced the cleansing virtue of his blood, and are acquitted through the merit of it from all past guilt, and saved from all evil tempers, words, and works; if, even after this, after we are both justified, regenerated, and sanctified, we say we have no sin, but are perfectly sinless, and that our spirit and conduct can bear the scrutiny of Gods holiness and justice, as exhibited in his spiritual and holy law; we deceive ourselves And that in a very capital point; and the truth is not in us Neither in our mouth nor in our heart; we must be destitute even of that self-knowledge which, in the nature of things, must necessarily precede every other branch of experimental and practical religion. If we confess our sins With penitent and believing hearts; he is faithful Having promised this blessing by the unanimous voice of all his prophets; and just Surely then he will punish: no; for this very reason he will pardon. This may seem strange, but, upon the evangelical principle of atonement and redemption, it is undoubtedly true. Because when the debt is paid, or the purchase made, it is the part of equity to cancel the bond, and consign over the purchased possession; both to forgive our sins To take away all the guilt of them, and to give us peace with himself, and peace of conscience; and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness From all iniquity of heart and life, and to purify our souls from all vile affections and unholy dispositions, from every thing contrary to the pure and perfect love of God. Yet still we are to retain, even to our lives end, a deep sense of our past sins: still, if we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar Who saith, all have sinned; and his word is not in us We give it no place in our hearts.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
1:8 {5} If we say that we have no sin, we {e} deceive ourselves, and the {f} truth is not in us.
(5) There is none but need this benefit, because there is none that is not a sinner.
(e) This fully refutes that perfectness of works of supererogation (doing more than duty requires, the idea that excess good works can form a reserve fund of merit that can be drawn on in favour of sinners) which the papists dream of.
(f) So then, John speaks not thus for modesty’s sake, as some say but because it is so indeed.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
This second claim (cf. 1Jn 1:6) is more serious, and its results are worse: we do not just lie, but we deceive ourselves.
If a Christian claims to be enjoying fellowship with God, he may think he is temporarily or permanently entirely sinless. Yet our sinfulness exceeds our consciousness of guilt. We have only a very limited appreciation of the extent to which we sin. We commit sins of thought as well as deed, sins of omission as well as commission, and sins that spring from our nature as well as from our actions.
Some have interpreted the phrase "no sin" to mean no sin nature or no sin principle. [Note: E.g., Smalley, p. 29.] However this seems out of harmony with John’s other uses of "to have sin" (cf. Joh 15:22; Joh 15:24; Joh 19:11). Rather, it probably means to have no guilt for sin. [Note: Robert Law, The Tests of Life: A Study of the First Epistle of St. John, p. 130; Robertson, 6:208.]
God’s truth, as Scripture reveals it, does not have a full hold on us, is not controlling our thinking, if we make this claim. "In us" suggests not that we have the facts in our mental grasp but that they have control over us. They are in us as a thread is in a piece of cloth rather than as a coin is in a pocket. The same contrast exists between intellectual assent and saving faith.