Sin

As you know, Pastor Matt is now preaching through the book of 1 John. As he acknowledged Sunday, while 1 John first appears to be a relatively easy book – and in some ways on an immediate level it is – it is often quite challenging. Matt’s sermon this week covered vv. 5-10 of chapter 1. It was vv. 8-10 and the words “sin” and “sins” that engendered his remarks regarding the challenges of 1 John:

NAS 1 John 1:8-10 If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving 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.

Matt articulated the fact that there is a seemingly insignificant but most important difference between sins plural and sin singular. Hopefully what I am about to immediately add to that statement will not be too confusing, for “sins,” while a plural word, actually is describing singular sins, and “sin,” though a singular word, is really relating to a condition built upon an array of different classifications of sins. Concisely, the word “sins” in the Bible refers to individual acts of sin, and “sin” refers to the sinful nature of man. It is the intention of this blog to briefly speak to these two dimensions of sin and emphasize some of the essential facts about both, and in doing so call to our attention the seriousness of the subject. Regarding this premise, the following words from Gary M. Burge’s NIV Application Commentary should add to your understanding:

The Greek literally says (in v. 8), “We do not have sin” and no doubt should be carefully distinguished from verse 10, where another citation reads, “We have not sinned.” In the first case, sin is described as a quality, an active principle within us. In the second case, the verb employs a perfect tense (indicating a completed action in the past with results that are ongoing) verb, suggesting a reference to specific sins that spring from a preexisting condition of sinfulness. In the Johannine literature, the verb “to have” is frequently followed by an abstract noun to represent a general quality: to have fellowship (1 John 1:3, 6-7), joy (John 17:13; 3 John 4), confidence (John 2:28; 3:21; 4:17), hope (1 John 3:3), and life (John 3:15; 5:12-13). In John 15 the Jewish leadership is told that “they have sin,” not because of some deed they have done but because Jesus has spoken to them. Their inherent status has changed. Yet deeds are not always separate from a state of being. Thus in 1 John 1:8, “to have sin” likely refers to a quality of personhood, an active principle at work in someone’s life. It is a disposition of heart that lives in rebellion and constantly exhibits evil deeds.

Verse 9 is one of the towering truths in all of Scripture and demands more time than I can give it in this blog. Yet another explanatory section from Burge’s excellent commentary should suffice for now:

John gives a stern warning that these people may be dubious Christians. They may not even be Christians at all! They are in greater jeopardy than they think. Their only recourse is confession. The appeal to confession in verse 9 balances the citation of verse 8 with another “if” clause (cf. 6, 7, and 8). Yet it is not intended to be a mere condition; it is an exhortation, a warning, perhaps even a command. Sinfulness is inherent in our lives, and confession must be the Christian’s heartfelt reflex. Confession is successful (and this is critical to John’s argument) because of the character of God. His forgiveness is not an act of mercy, as if He were setting aside some usual disposition in response to a religious act of penitence. God’s character is to be faithful and just (cf. Deuteronomy 32:4; Psalm 89:1- 4; Romans 3:25; Hebrews 10:23). For the practice of confession in the Bible, see Leviticus 16:21; Psalm 32:5; Proverbs 28:13; Daniel 9:20; Matthew 3:6; Acts 19:18.

Finally, v. 10, the concluding verse in chapter 1. Because of his consistency and accuracy in handling this at times perplexing passage, I again turn to Burge for a brief summary:

Verse 10 introduces us to the third presentation of the error (see vv. 6, 8), and it is the most explicit yet. John’s opponents now say, “We have not sinned.” In his imagined debate, is John anticipating an objection to his exhortation about confession (“What have I done that I need to confess?”)? Is he expecting some argument about God’s purification (“Purified from what, I ask?”)? Perhaps this is one more slogan that is being hurled about by the perfectionists that John must confront. If verse 8 describes the pitiful sinful condition that plagues us, verse 10 describes specific deeds of sin that spring from that condition. Can someone (legitimately) claim that they have never committed any sins? Such a position impugns God’s character, making Him a liar (v. 10). It maligns the truthfulness of His Word, which makes the universal sinfulness of humanity a basic and pivotal tenet (Genesis 3:1; 1 Kings 8:46; Job 15:14-16; Psalm 14:3; Proverbs 20:9 Ecclesiastes 7:20; Isaiah 53:6; John 2:24-25; Romans 3:21-24). If this teaching were not true, God’s salvific efforts to save and retrieve His people recorded throughout the Bible would make no sense.

As practically every Christians should know, sin is indeed a major subject in the Bible. Proof of that reality is the considerable number of times the word “sin” and its synonymous terms are found in Scripture. A quick survey if these words in a Bible concordance reveals that these combined terms are found almost 1200 times spread equally throughout both Testaments. ‘Sin,” “sins,” “sinned,” and “sinning,” as could be expected, make up the largest number, almost 750. Some 28 of that number are found in the relatively little book of 1 John. Directly and indirectly, the subject of sin plays a big part in 1 John. We might say sin forms the dark backdrop against the light of God’s love and grace.

So the logical question is “what is sin?” Along with this blog dealing mainly with verses from 1 John, you are encouraged to study Romans 1:18-3:20 and James 4:17, as these passages deal with general descriptions of sin and its character and compulsions. Although ten of my blogs would not exhaust the attempts of man to define and discuss the tragic effects of sin, perhaps the simplest, most direct definition is found in 1 John:

ESV 1 John 3:4 Everyone who makes a practice of sinning also practices lawlessness; sin is lawlessness.

Simple and direct it is. That’s a positive. But it must also be acknowledged this definition is not the most comprehensive. What exactly is “lawlessness”? Simply and directly, God has a law and Satan, the evil angels, and man have broken that law, resulting in “lawlessness.” Here is a good example of how 1 John can often be challenging, where a seemingly simple statement can present difficulties. Let me quickly interject the important reminder that difficulties in Scripture should never defeat us but only drive us to deeper study. Here in v. 4 of chapter 3 we have what I believe most would agree is a simple and direct statement that “sin is lawlessness.” But in going on to simply and directly define “lawlessness,” we find there are complications that arise. The subsequent question of how exactly are we to understand lawlessness in this context is neither simple nor direct. “Lawlessness” here can be viewed in two ways.

One way to interpret “lawlessness” is to see it as a reference to the Old Testament Mosaic law, the law God gave to Moses on Mount Sinai (Exodus 19). Anytime we see the word “law,” it is only natural to think of the O.T. Along these lines,the definition of sin in the Westminster Shorter Catechism, the influential 17th century document that teaches the basics of the Christian faith, reads, “Sin is any want of conformity unto, or transgression of, the law of God.” Aside from instruction in right living, this reference to law shows how far short men fall from God’s standards.

On the other hand, as James Boice, the renowned Reformed theologian of the last century rightly noted, “What John says is actually more complete and therefore also more profound than this, for he does not say that sin is merely the breaking of a divinely revealed law. Rather, he indicates that sin is the spirit of lawlessness itself, which lies behind the rebellion.” One important fact that supports this view is that men and women died before the law was given. As Paul said, “the wages of sin is death” (Romans 6:23). So, rather than a reference to the Mosaic Law, John in 1 John 3:4 is more probably talking about the rebellious spirit of lawlessness that is fundamentally found in man’s human nature. It may be described as the selfish desire to have our own way, however that way may deviate from God.

My opinion is John’s definition in v.4 could be inclusive of both interpretations. Sin may be seen both as the breaking of God’s law and the spirit behind the act. We commit acts of sin because we are sinful people. I personally don’t see enough clear evidence in the passage to be able to say it is either/or, and I see no compelling reason to conclusively rule out a both/and understanding. But whether or not one way is more correct than the other in this context, I think it is abundantly clear that sin is contrary to God and His purpose for His creation. No matter how we define sin, it is obvious and inarguable that sin is bad, negative, opposed to righteousness.

The context of John’s words in v. 4 is helpful to fully understand this stark contrast. The Bible may be accurately described in its entirety as a book of contrasts that are all but impossible to miss. Take the white versus black disparity in vv. 7-8 as a good example:

NAS 1 John 3:7-8 Little children, let no one deceive you; the one who practices righteousness is righteous, just as He is righteous; 8 the one who practices sin is of the devil; for the devil has sinned from the beginning. The Son of God appeared for this purpose, that He might destroy the works of the devil.

How is Christ able to destroy the works of Satan? Not only is He omnipotent God, of course, but relating to this particular passage, He is the contrast, the sinless direct opposite, to Satan:

NAS 1 John 3:5 And you know that He appeared in order to take away sins; and in Him there is no sin.

The main Greek word for sin is ἁμαρτία (ha-mar-tee-ah). Bauer, Danker, Arndt, and Gingrich [BDAG], presently the world’s leading biblical Greek lexicon, defines ἁμαρτία as it is found in 1 John, “a departure from either human or divine standards of uprightness; referring to the action itself, as well as its result.”

At this point I would like to give you a few of the legion of definitions I mentioned before. Here are just several excerpts from notes I have collected from outstanding books over the years on sin:

• The origin of sin as it regards humanity began at the Fall:

NAS Romans 5:12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned—(the “one man,” of course, is Adam – TAR)

• “Sin is an essentially historical phenomenon. It has an event-character. To become real, it must happen. It is not an event within the Trinitarian activity within the godhead, an activity both necessary and (therefore) eternal. The historical is neither necessary nor eternal and sin, also being neither, is historical. Being real, sin happened once upon a The Fall recorded in Genesis is a historical reality.” – Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia

• “Original sin is a theological not a temporal concept and, therefore, throws no clear light on the origin of sin. Original sin refers neither to the first of all sins, nor to the first inhuman history, but to the first sin of Adam and only to that and not to the subsequent sins of Adam. In human history, Eve sinned first; nonetheless, it was by Adam’s (later) sin that ‘sin came into the world, and death through sin’ (Romans 5:12).” –Ibid.

• “Sin is always an act against the goodness and grace of God.” –Ibid.

• “Sin is what God says it is, and here human opinion and philosophy must bend to the testimony of the Word of God in which He declares the true nature of sin.” – Systematic Theology (L.S. Chafer)

• “Sin is sinful because it is unlike God.” –Ibid.

• “The presence of sin in the universe is due to the fact God permits ”

• “Sin will take you places where you don’t want to go. Sin will cost you more than you want to pay. Sin will keep you longer than you want to stay.” – Old saying

• “Sin is a violation of a relationship.” – John MacArthur

• “God has altered sin’s status in our lives. God in our salvation has reduced sin’s power and increased ours.” – Alistair Begg

• “Sin no longer reigns in our lives, but it still remains in our lives.” –Ibid.

• Although this is a brief study of a vast subject, any credible discussion of sin must include the word “imputation.” “The New Testament refers several times to imputation in the Old Testament. To impute means to attribute or reckon or ascribe something to someone. It is not mere influence but involvement that is at the heart of the concept.” – Ryrie’s Basic Theology

NAS Genesis 15:6 Then he believed in the LORD; and He reckoned it to him as righteousness.

“Paul states that sin is not imputed as a specific violation of a legal code when there is no law (Romans 5:13). He refers to the righteousness God imputed to Abraham when he believed and to the righteousness David knew when he confessed his sin (2 Samuel 12; Psalm 51). James also refers to Abraham’s imputed righteousness (James 2:23). The death of Christ enabled God not to impute man’s sins against him (2 Corinthians 5:19).” – Ibid.

• “Theologians have generally recognized three basic imputations: (1) The Imputation of Adam’s sin to the Human Race (Romans 5:12-21). (2) The Imputation of Man’s Sin to Christ (2 Corinthians 5:19; 1 Peter 2:24). (2) The Imputation of Christ’s Righteousness to Believers (2 Corinthians 5:21).” –Ibid.

A fundamental corollary we do well to always keep in mind that is featured in 1 John, as it is throughout the Bible, is “sin never pays.” Sin never pays; obedience always pays. It is my hope that this study on sin, featuring John’s words on the subject, will help us understand and appreciate even more Pastor Matt’s fine sermons in this fascinating, important, and instructive book.

-Professor Rohm