Forgiveness and Cleansing according to 1 John 1:9

By Ed Glasscock

[Ed Glasscock is Executive Director of Xdoulos Ministries, Talladega, Alabama.]

First John 1:9 promises that God will forgive and cleanse all who confess their sins. The recipients, nature, extent, and application of this promise have long been debated. Does the verse offer initial salvation from sins, or is it intended for Christians who sin? What is the extent of the forgiveness and cleansing? If one is forgiven and cleansed, does this open up all avenues of ministry or do restrictions still apply as to one’s vocation in God’s service? What is the relationship between God’s forgiveness and cleansing and the responsibility of believers in dealing with a sinning saint?

For Whom Is the Provision Made?

The promise in 1 John 1:9 of forgiveness and cleansing from sin relates to Christians and not to the unsaved. As Lightner aptly states, “Since John makes it clear by the description of his readers as ‘children,’ ‘little children,’ and ‘beloved,’ application of verse 9 to nonbelievers as a means of salvation is totally without basis in fact.”[1] Others, however, see John’s argument as presented to both Christians (John and his readers) and false teachers (unsaved but who boast of fellowship with God), with the apostle’s chief concern being that “all believers need to be alert to the danger of entertaining false views about sin.”[2] However, John was not warning the unsaved about their denial of sin; he was addressing believers who were taught incorrectly or were misled by their own sense of righteousness. John’s inclusion of himself (first-person verbs occur throughout 1:6-10) and his addressing his readers as “little children” (τεκνία, 2:1) certainly implies that Christians are the intended audience. The noun τεκνία is vocative neuter plural for τεκνίον, a diminutive form of the more common τέκνον. Interestingly only John in the New Testament used this late word. It occurs once in Jesus’ address to His disciples in the Upper Room Discourse (John 13:33); and all the other occurrences are in John’s first epistle. Statements in 1 John that are used with τεκνία clearly indicate believers: “your sins are forgiven” (2:12); “abide in Him” (2:28); “you are from God” (4:4). Oepke points out that the word is a “nursery term for ‘little child’ ” and that “it appears in the NT only in the vocative plur. as an affectionate address of Jesus or the apostles to their spiritual children.”[3] Thus it would seem strange to assume that John shifted his audience in 1:9 and was encouraging unbelievers to confess their sins in order to receive salvation.

The Provision in Context of False Claims

In 1 John 1 the apostle challenged his readers by pointing to three false claims: claiming to have fellowship with the God of light but walking in darkness (v. 6); claiming not to have sin (noun, v. 8); and claiming not to have sinned (verb, v. 10). Each of these false claims is introduced by ἐάν with the aorist subjunctive verb εἴπωμεν. In the midst of these false claims John inserted in verse 9 another hypothetical proposition using the same formula (ἐάν plus a subjunctive verb), but here he used the verb ὁμολογῶμεν. This conditional proclamation provides great hope for those who are honest enough to acknowledge their struggle with sin.

The apostle’s flow of thought in 1:5-10 may be outlined as follows:

v. 5, Theological proposition—The message of John and the other witnesses: God is Light with no darkness at all

v. 6, First false claim—Fellowship with God yet walking in darkness

Consequences

Lying

Not doing the truth

v. 7, True to confession—Walking in God’s light

Outcomes

Fellowship with other Christians

Jesus’ blood continually cleansing

v. 8, Second false claim—Not having sin

Consequences

Self-deception

Truth not resident

v. 9, True response to sin—Confess sins

Outcomes

God is faithful

God is just

To forgive the sin

To cleanse from unrighteousness

v. 10, Third false claim—Have not sinned

Consequences

Make God a liar

His Word not resident

God’s light is the standard by which these claims are to be measured. The fact that God is light (ὄτι ὀ θεός φῷς ἐστιν, v. 5) bears a dual significance. In His essence He is the source of true knowledge and is the ultimate standard of righteousness. In the Old Testament both concepts (true knowledge and righteousness) are conveyed by the word “light.” The New Testament offers a similar use.

Akin offers a lengthy discussion on John’s use of φῶς in the Gospel and then imposes his conclusion on the first epistle. “ ‘God is light’ means that God has the quality of being a Source of life.”[4] Akin argues that the connection of “light” with “life” is based on John’s statement about the eternal λόγος in John 1:4 and subsequent passages related to the incarnate Logos. However, Akin’s view seems forced because the connection with John’s discussion in the first epistle does not follow contextually. Hodge is more in harmony with John’s argument in 1 John 1:5-10. “ ‘God is light,’ points also to the revelatory aspect of His being and nature. God reveals Himself in and to His creation, but in doing so He also reveals the wickedness that is found in creation. Thus, it is in the very nature of what God is that man is inevitably exposed as fall-ing far short of His moral glory.”[5] In 1 John, sin, not life or death, is the focus. Thus ὁ θεός φῶς ἐστιν is a statement of God’s nature to be used as the standard of behavior for God’s creatures. Any claims of fellowship with God (v. 6) must be evaluated by God’s own nature.

In the same way but antithetically God, not having any darkness in Himself (empahtic, οὐκ ἔστιν οὐδεμία), is also a standard of measurement for behavior. The analogy of light and darkness contrasts those who live in harmony with God’s nature and those who live inconsistently with it. Darkness (σκοτία)[6] is the absence of light or figuratively speaking the absence of moral insight. To “walk in darkness” (v. 6) is to conduct one’s life in contrast to God’s standard. This becomes the crux of John’s focus on false claims in verses 6, 8, and 10.

The focus of this study is not to delineate the differing aspects of the three false claims but to observe the significance of God’s provision for those who honestly recognize (“confess”) their sins (v. 9). John’s statement is first conditional, “if we confess,” and then propositional, “God is faithful and just.”

The Provision of Forgiveness and Cleansing

In contrast to the denial of one’s sin nature (v. 8) or sinful actions (v. 10), John offered another alternative. He wrote, “if we confess our sins,” then God will forgive and cleanse. To “confess” (ὁμολογέω) etymologically means, “to say the same thing,” and it implies that one recognizes the truthfulness of God’s testimony about sinfulness in contrast to denying it—implying that a person acknowledges or says the same as God says. In other words, if one declares God’s testimony about him or her to be true, then God responds in grace by forgiving and cleansing the one who has confessed sin.

The word ὁμολογέω is used twenty-six times in the New Testament (including five in 1 John), and in each instance it is a public or at least verbal confession or declaration before someone. Westcott comments that believers are “not only [to] acknowledge them, but [also to] acknowledge them openly in the face of men.”[7] Perhaps the best English translation is “acknowledge” or “admit to” some truth or fact. Thus John the Baptist “confessed” or admitted that he was not the Messiah (John 1:20), and the Pharisees threatened any who “acknowledged” Jesus as the Messiah (9:22; 12:42). Luke explained Paul’s attempt to divide his accusers by pointing out that unlike the Sadducees, the Pharisees “acknowledged” (ὁμολογοῦσιν) the Resurrection, angels, and spirits (Acts 23:8); and in Paul’s defense before the governor in Caesarea, he “admitted” (ὁμολογῶ) that he was a follower of the “sect” of Christians (24:14). Thus the most logical translation for ὁμολογέω in 1 John 1:9 is “acknowledge.” This is consistent with John’s use in 2:23, where the verb contrasts with “deny” (ἀρνέομαι, “to renounce, deny, disown, or refuse”).[8] Rather than make a false claim not to have sin or not to have sinned, one must acknowledge, that is, admit his or her sinfulness and sins. But ὁμολογέω is even more precise in the context of the false claim of having fellowship with God but not living in accord with His nature. To acknowledge sin is to recognize the falseness of such claims and to admit that one’s sins disallow fellowship with God (1:6). Beeke correctly notes, “Confession of sins makes us see ourselves in light of the living God and his holy law. We stop comparing ourselves to others. We stop commending ourselves. We stop excusing ourselves, or blaming others. Instead, we confess that we are sinners and deserve to be punished.”[9]

In the Septuagint ὁμολογέω and its cognate noun translate the Hebrew נָדָר, “votive offering” (Jer. 51:25 [Eng., 44:25]; Lev. 22:18), which implies more than a cursory agreement with a truth. According to Rabbi Blumenthal repentance (Teshuva) in Judaism requires five elements, the first being recognition of one’s sins as sins. “Recognition of one’s sins as sins is an act of one’s intelligence and moral conscience. . . . It also involves realizing that such acts are part of deeper patterns of relatedness and that they are motivated by some of the most profound and darkest elements in our being.”[10]

Confession of sin is far more than just offering assent to the reality of sin. It certainly includes agreement with God about the offensiveness and unacceptability of the sin. As Lightner points out, “Children of God are called upon to agree with God’s viewpoint of their sin . . . it is to be viewed as a horrible offense against the very character of God.”[11] The present tense verb “confess” implies a continual process of confessing, which indicates the continual potential of sin in a believer’s life. John used the plural “sins,” which indicates that this may be a regular or repeated process. As Kruse observes, “He portrays authentic Christian living as involving honest and ongoing acknowledgment of one’s sins.”[12]

Though no specific method is given as to how, when, or where confession should occur, the innate significance of the word and its use in the New Testament clearly point out that acknowledging sin is to be more than a personal, inward recognition. A general rule for confession might be that public sins, those sins that are known in a broad context, should be confessed in the same context—publicly. And private sins should be dealt with privately. However, this does not imply that a person can always “confess” secret sins just to himself or herself, because often “secret sins” do have an impact on others and will eventually become exposed. Certainly at times individuals are to confess their sins only to God for forgiveness, and yet believers are to bear one another’s burdens (Gal. 6:1-2).[13] In a close Christian fellowship these “private” sins should be confessed to other believers. James encouraged Christians to “confess your sins to one another, and pray for one another, so that you can be healed” (James 5:16). The prayers and encouragement, as well as timely warnings and rebukes of these intimate fellow Christians, can protect the confessor from judgment and help prevent further occurrence of the sin.

The Roman Catholic Church says confession is to be offered to a priest who has the prerogative to assign penance and offer consolation and forgiveness. Heenan, a Roman Catholic priest (formerly Bishop of Leeds), defends this practice by pointing to Matthew 16:19 and John 20:21-23.[14] But he fails to deal fully with the grammar of the text. Jesus said, “If you should forgive the sins of some [those sins] have been forgiven them” (John 20:23). The perfect tense, passive voice verb “have been forgiven” (ἀφέωνται) indicates a condition that was accomplished in the past with the results still remaining. Thus the most probable interpretation of this text is that the apostles were proclaiming what had already been accomplished; they were not removing sin by their pronouncement.[15] In other words the apostles were spokesmen for heaven, declaring what had already been determined by divine decree.

The same is true of Matthew 16:19, where Jesus said that heaven has already “bound or loosed” what the apostles would declare on earth. Canon Ripley focuses on the future tense “will be”: “it will be ratified in heaven.”[16] However, this is not consistent with the text which indicates a prior standing of heaven’s binding or loosing. Ripley argues that to take away the apostles’ power to forgive sin is to “do violence to both the text and the context.”[17] However, Christ did not say, “What you forgive on earth will be forgiven in heaven,” but rather, “What you forgive on earth has been forgiven.” Another assumption of the Roman Catholic Church is that their priests have the same authority as the original apostles, an assumption without valid foundation. In discussing John 20:22 Ripley states, “Christ was giving His Spirit to the Twelve, and to their successors.”[18] The alleged authority of the Roman priests to forgive sins is directly linked to the tradition of apostolic succession, which is without any New Testament authority.

A believer’s confession of sin is to be done within the context of the Christian community, but not to any human with power to forgive or retain the sins of the one confessing. Three appropriate venues of confession are to be noted. First, some sins that are public and detrimental to the testimony of Christ are to be publicly acknowledged. Second, other sins should be confessed to a smaller body of fellow Christians. Third, in one’s daily self-examination any sin (of thought, word, or action) that would disrupt one’s fellowship with God should be confessed privately to the Lord. A believer’s confession of sins to other members of the body of Christ assumes that these fellow Christians should pray for and encourage change in the sinning believer (Gal. 6:1-2; James 5:16). “As a member of the Christian brotherhood, the confession of any act of sin should be as wide as the knowledge of the sin.”[19] Gossip or self-righteous judgment are not proper responses to a sincere confession and in fact are sins in themselves. Confession of one’s sins clears the way for God to respond by His grace and according to His own provisions for sin. This serves as a testimony to all who know of it that God restores and offers victory over any sin.

Why is confession of sin not a common practice in churches? Some reasons may be fear of rejection, gossip, and exposure to public disgrace. The human tendency is to protect oneself, and the fact that some are judgmental is not conducive to the practice of public confession. However, the sense of community, the intimacy of being a part of the body of Christ, the trust of church leaders as divinely appointed representatives of Christ, and the authority of the church to deal with sins of its members (in discipline and/or in restoration) should encourage public confession. The church’s responsibility to “restore” Christians overtaken by sin and to pray for and strengthen each other in their struggles with sin (Rom. 15:14; Gal. 6:1; 1 Thess. 5:14; James 5:16) is often missing in contemporary churches. Believers should recognize and appreciate the dynamic of spiritual strength within the community of believers and trust their leaders and fellow Christians to respond in humble, loving concern for their struggle with sin. Since God made provision for dealing with sin, believers must appropriate that provision by following God’s direction.

God’s Character as the Basis of the Provision

First John 1:9 affirms that if a believer confesses his or her sins, God is faithful and just to forgive and cleanse the confessing believer. Revealed here are two aspects of God’s character, “faithful and righteous,” and two works of God, “forgive and cleanse.” These four elements constitute the heart of the promises in the provision.

The adjective πιστός (“faithful”) is used sixty-seven times in the New Testament.[20] It may be defined as being “trustworthy, faithful, dependable, inspiring trust.”[21] John was assuring believers that their confession will not be ignored or denied, because God can be trusted to do what He has promised. God is worthy of trust because He acts authentically in regard to His word. The Septuagint uses πιστός to describe God in His dealings with His covenant people. Deuteronomy 7:9 refers to Him as “the faithful God who keeps covenant and mercy . . . for a thousand generations.” In Isaiah’s promise to Israel that God would restore them, he explained that the Lord is faithful (Isa. 49:7). Understanding God’s acts in light of His character is essential. He is faithful, and that faithfulness is seen in His forgiving and cleansing repentant sinners.

God is also “just” or “righteous.” Δίκαιος is an adjective that typically implies living up to a standard. The Septuagint uses δίκαιος of those who pleased God by living according to the standards set before them. Those who do God’s will are δίκαιοι, not in the sense of being sinless but in the sense of faithfully following God’s instruction.[22] In the New Testament this word is used of Joseph (Matt. 1:19) and of Zacharias and his wife Elizabeth (Luke 1:6). Thus being righteous involves doing what is right or what conforms to a standard set by God. God Himself is righteous in that He always acts in perfect conformity to His own standards.

How can God be “righteous” in forgiving those who confess their sins? He is righteous in doing so because compensation for the offense against God has already been fully paid through Christ’s shed blood. God is not ignoring sin or excusing the sinner. He is accepting His own divine provision as adequate for forgiving sin. His acknowledgment of Christ’s sacrifice for sin allows Him to forgive the repentant sinner and remain perfectly righteous Himself. “Only God could meet the demands of God, so the second person of the Trinity became one of us in order to pay the price of sin, freeing God up to offer forgiveness of sin to the lost.”[23] As Hodge observed, “There is no compromise of God’s righteousness when He forgives.”[24] God requires the sinner to acknowledge his or her guilt, and once the confession is sincerely offered, He is free to forgive and cleanse the confessor based on Christ’s work on the cross. Beeke views the issue of God’s justice from a slightly different angle. “Indeed, if Jesus took our sins to the cross of Calvary and God did not forgive us, God would no longer be just. He would be demanding a double payment for our sin.”[25] That is, if He does not forgive sins when the proper criterion has been met (i.e., sincere confession), then He would be violating His own standard. God is a just God, righteous in all His acts; therefore the confessor is forgiven without further payment being required.

God’s Two Works in Response to Confession

John’s next statement is that God is both righteous and faithful “to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” This clause is introduced by the subordinate conjunction ἵνα, which normally indicates purpose.[26] However, purpose does not make sense in this context (God is faithful and righteous for the purpose of forgiving). Boyer suggests that “the ἱνα clause is epexegetic to the two adjectives.”[27] However, the classification of epexegetical is not sufficient in helping to understand the text. Wallace points out that ἵνα plus a subjunctive can express result, though this classification is rare in the New Testament, and he lists 1 John 1:9 as one of those possible uses.[28] This verse could be understood as beginning with a condition (“if we confess,” ἐάν ὁμολογῶμεν), moving to a proposition (“is faithful and righteous,” πιστός ἐστιν καὶ δίκαιος), and concluding with a result (ἵνα ἀφῇ ἡμῖν τὰς ἁμαρτίας καί καθαρίσῃ ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ πάσης ἀδικίας; “if we . . . He is . . . result is . . .”). In response to the condition being met, the result (ἵνα) is forgiveness and cleansing. God’s character (being faithful and righteous) guarantees that the result will occur.[29]

The first of the two results is forgiveness. The word ἀφῇ (“forgive”) is an aorist subjunctive verb,[30] from ἀφίημι, which means “to leave behind” (as in Matt. 4:20-22 and John 4:28) or “to permit” (as in Mark 1:34) and perhaps “set free” (as in John 11:44). It is often appropriately translated “forgive” as in Luke 17:3.[31]

The idea of “leave behind” or “let go of” is a proper rendering of ἀφίημι. In Luke 11:4 Jesus instructed His disciples to pray, “Forgive us our sins [τάς ἁμαρτίας ἡμῶν] for we ourselves also forgive everyone who is indebted to us [ὀφείλοντι ἡμῖν].” The idea is to release someone from a debt or to let go of what is owed.[32] Thus when a believer confesses sin, God releases the confessor from the debt owed from that sin. Again God is not overlooking the sin or ignoring the guilt of the sinner, but, based on Christ’s payment for all sin, God is faithful and just to release the sinner from the payment that that sin incurred. As with all other aspects of Christ’s redemptive work, no other payment is to be made and His sacrifice fully satisfies God’s demand. There is no “purgatory,” either present[33] or future, and no other sacrifice can be made to compensate for sin (Heb. 10:10, 14, 18). Based on God’s grace, Christ’s sacrifice, and the believer’s obedience in confessing sin, the sin is forgiven and no additional payment need be made.

John clearly stated that forgiveness results from confession, but his wording here is interesting. Literally the clause reads, “that He should forgive us the sins.” The pronoun “us” (dative plural) includes John himself and is consistent with his terminology throughout 1 John 1. Thus John apparently assumed his own responsibility to confess sin (“if we confess”). The accusative τάς ἁμαρτίας is the object of the verb “forgive.” The definite article is the “article of previous reference,” identifying which sins, namely, those confessed.

Though the problem of “unconfessed sin” is not fully discussed in Scripture, some verses address God’s plan in dealing with a believer’s unwillingness to flee sin. First Corinthians 11:30-32, for example, indicates God’s severity in dealing with believers who “do not correctly discern the body.” If one of the Corinthian believers had recognized his sin and confessed, God would have forgiven and cleansed that person. Hebrews 12:5-8 also warns that God disciplines (παιδεύω and μαστιγόω) all His children. God does not discipline without reason, and it is consistent with Scripture to understand that confession of sin often prevents that discipline. Other passages state that God does not ignore “unconfessed” sin; He deals with it in the lives of His children. The warning of the accountability of all believers before the judgment seat of Christ (2 Cor. 5:10) also indicates that believers will “receive back” (κομίσηται) for things done in the body “whether it is good or bad” (εἴτε ἀγαθὸν εἴτε φαῦλον). First Corinthians 3:11-15 explains that believers will “suffer loss” (ζημιωθήσεται) based on God’s evaluation of their works. Some may argue that this deals with works and not sins, but what is sin if not a work that dishonors God?

The finished work of Christ is the basis of forgiveness. Christ’s death freed believers from the curse of Adam’s condemnation; but to fellowship with God and to avoid His discipline, believers must be aware of any sin that offends Him and must be willing to deal with it appropriately.

God’s second work in 1 John 1:9 is His cleansing of the confessor. Cleansing (καθαρίσῃ, “to cleanse,” aorist subjunctive) is God’s dramatic response to confession in the Septuagint. The terms καθαρός (“clean”) and ἀκάθαρτος (“unclean”) have both a cultic and a moral sense. Anyone who came in contact with the unclean object was barred from communion with God and the camp of Israel and with participation in cultic ritual.[34]

“For Judaism Levitical uncleanness is something which clings to the unclean man or thing and which can be transferred to others.”[35] Being unclean separated one from participation with the community of God’s people because of the danger of contamination, and it disqualified him from service to God because anything profane must be kept from the sacred. The Pharisees looked to outward means of purification such as the “washing of water.” This was consistent with the Old Testament, but it failed to recognize the difference between external ritual and inward efficacy of cleansing (Matt. 23:25). Christ spoke of the need for inward cleansing if one is to serve Him and commune with Him (v. 26).

Cleansing often refers to God’s work in removing defilement. In the physical realm Christ cleansed diseases, making those formerly defiled free from defilement (8:2-3; Mark 1:40-42). And regarding unclean animals God revealed to Peter that what was “cleansed” should not be called “unholy” (κοινὸν, “common”) or “unclean” (ἀκάθαρτον, Acts 10:14). This indicates God’s right and power to take something unclean by His own standards,[36] and through His own gracious provisions to make it clean.

The message of the gospel is that those who were by nature sinners and defiled are transformed and made new by spiritual birth and thus are acceptable to God. Believers are clean by their union with Christ. Christ sanctifies His church, “cleansing her” (Eph. 5:26), and He is purifying (καθαρίσῃ) a people for Himself (Titus 2:14). Thus the essence of the believer’s relationship with Christ is that, though once sinners by nature and enemies of God (Rom. 5:8, 10), He has purified those who believe and they are acceptable to God. This is the cleansing power of Christ’s blood.

However, a believer’s fellowship with God is based on perpetual cleansing by that same blood (1 John 1:7). As Christians “walk in the light,” that is, live in accord with God’s own nature, they are continually being cleansed (καθαρίζει, present tense) from “all sin.” Harmony with God produces cleansing. What happens to a believer when he or she does not walk in the light of God? When a believer sins and becomes defiled, what happens to his or her relationship with God? The consistent testimony of the New Testament is that a believer cannot lose or forfeit the everlasting life Christ bestowed on him at conversion.[37] So if a believer sins, communion with God is disrupted, but that person is still God’s child. Scripture also teaches that believers who continue in sin are to be denied fellowship with the community of believers and cannot participate in ministry. The question then becomes, How does one apply 1 John 1:9 with regard to sinning believers?

Extent and Application of the Provision

If God forgives (releases from guilt and debt) and cleanses (removes defilment) a believing sinner, then does any payment or defilement remain? If none remains, what limitations restrict the believer’s communion with the church or service to Christ?

Some Christians say that some sins are beyond forgiveness and cleansing. True, some sins carry a heavy burden of consequence and have devastating impacts on the individual and others. If one murders another person, he or she may find forgiveness and cleansing from God, but the accountability before human government, which God Himself established for the sake of punishing crimes (Rom. 13:1-5), remains. But what about sins that are not criminal offenses and that secular governments do not prosecute (e.g., lust, greed, immorality, anger, strife, etc.)? In those cases to what degree is God’s forgiveness and cleansing to be exercised? Or can a believer who has committed sexual sins, whether lust, pornography, homosexuality, fornication, or adultery, ever be forgiven and cleansed enough for that person to be accepted in Christian fellowship and service? The arguments and emotive reactions to these questions can become divisive and dishonoring to God.

Certainly 1 John 1:9 is not the basis for someone to claim that he “confessed” his sin to God while continuing to commit that sin. Confession is not a religious exercise merely to clear a sinner’s conscience. “In 1 John too we find, as in Sirach, a caution against the misuse of the tradition along with the demand to be serious about sin and the warning that forgiveness is no excuse to continue in sin.”[38] As if to emphasize this, John added, “My children, I am not writing these things in order that you should sin” (2:1). Certainly true “confession” (ὁμολογέω, “to say the same thing about sin as God Himself says”)[39] means that the sinner is repulsed by his sin and is taking action to cease from the sin. Simply saying words will not deceive God.

On the other hand, if God has forgiven and cleansed the confessor, how can any human dare continue to condemn and judge that person whom God has forgiven and cleansed. To understand how some vile sins can be eradicated by confession may be difficult, but the issue remains—God is faithful and righteous in applying Christ’s blood in forgiving and cleansing anyone who truly confesses those sins to God.

David, who had committed adultery, plotted murder, and committed several other offenses against God, declared, “As far as the east is from the west, so far has He removed our transgressions from us” (Ps. 103:12). David wrote of the blessedness of the one “whose transgression is forgiven [ἀφίημι, Septuagint], whose sin is covered [ἐπικαλύπτω, ‘covered over’)” (32:1). And he added, “How blessed is the man to whom the Lord does not impute [λογίζομαι, ‘count, calculate, take into account’] iniquity” (v. 2). David committed adultery and to cover his guilt he ordered that Bathsheba’s innocent husband be killed. Yet when David confessed his sin (v. 5), he received forgiveness and his sin was not counted against him. He remained king of Israel, the only theocratic kingdom on earth, and Solomon, the offspring of David and Bathsheba (the adulterous wife), became a type of the promised Messiah who would come through David, the adulterous king.

A distinction must be made between an act of sin and one’s ongoing character. Paul made this clear in listing qualifications for spiritual leaders. He wrote that an elder “must be” (character). He did not simply say, “he must not have done” (act). If immorality, greed, or any other sin is typical of a believer’s character, then he or she is to be denied fellowship and is disqualified from service.

This approach to dealing with sinning believers is complicated and requires more than simply having a rule that automatically and permanently disqualifies one from service based on a failure.

Sin is a great destroyer of a Christian’s testimony, joy, and harmony with God. But is there no hope, no victory over sin? Satan certainly delights in the failure of God’s people and particularly God’s servants. God, however, receives the glory and praise in restoring a repentant one who has failed.

Churches should seek to restore the one “caught in any trespass” (Gal. 6:1). When one confesses his or her sin, then God’s people are to accept His forgiveness and cleansing of the sinner. In Romans 8:33-34 Paul reminded Christians of God’s authority and power over the accusers of Christians. “Who will bring a charge against God’s elect? God is the one who justifies; who is the one who condemns? Christ Jesus is He who died, yes, rather who was raised, who is at the right hand of God, who also intercedes for us.”

Notes

1. Robert P. Lightner, The Epistles of First, Second, and Third John and Jude, Twenty-first Century Biblical Commentary Series (Chattanooga: AMG, 2003), 21.
2. D. Edmond Hiebert, The Epistles of John (Greenville, SC: Bob Jones University, 1991), 60. See also Gary M. Burge, The Letters of John, NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 82.
3. Albrecht Oepke, “παῖς,” in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. Gerhard Kittel and Gerhard Friedrich, trans. and ed. Geoffrey W. Bromiley, vol. 5 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1967), 619.
4. Daniel L. Akin, 1, 2, 3 John, New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2001), 69.
5. Zane C. Hodges, Epistles of John (Irving, TX: Grace Evangelical Society, 1999), 58.
6. Matthew and Luke each used σκοτία only once, and John used it fourteen times. Most New Testament writers preferred the cognate σκοτός, but John used this neuter form only twice (John 3:19; 1 John 1:6).
7. B. F. Westcott, The Epistles of John (reprint, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974), 23.
8. Greek-English Dictionary of the New Testament (Stuttgart: United Bible Society, 1993), 25.
9. Joel Beeke. The Epistles of John (Darlington, UK: Evangelical, 2006), 46.
10. David R. Blumenthal, “Repentance and Forgiveness,” in Cross Currents (online journal).
11. Lightner, The Epistles of First, Second, and Third John and Jude, 21.
12. Colin G. Kruse, The Letters of John (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000), 68.
13. Galatians 6:1-2 addresses believers who have been “caught in any trespass” and are self-deceived.
14. John C. Heenan, Confession (New York: Sheed and Ward, 1937), 15. Heenan argues from Old Testament passages that confessions were to be made to God and to priests (ibid., 145). See also John Painter, 1, 2, and 3 John, Sacra Pagina (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical, 2004).
15. If this had been the intent of the verse, it would have read, “whatever [sins] you have forgiven, they will be forgiven.”
16. Francis J. Ripley, This Is the Faith, rev. ed. (Rockford, IL: Tan, 2002), 284.
17. Ibid.
18. Ibid. (italics added).
19. Hiebert, The Epistles of John, 66.
20. Gerhard Barth makes the indefensible statement, “It is striking that John uses it only with the meaning believing” (“πιστός, πίστις,” in Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. Horst Balz and Gerhard Schneider, vol. 3 [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993], 97). But in this context it can hardly mean “believing.” Instead it is certainly attributive, in describing God’s character of faithfulness. The noun πίστις (“faith,” “trust”) is used over 240 times in the New Testament but only five times by John (in 1 John 5:4; Rev. 2:13, 19; 13:10; 14:12).
21. Walter Baur, William F. Arndt, and F. Wilbur Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979), 664.
22. Gottleb Schrenk, “δίκαιος,” in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, vol. 2 (1964), 189.
23. Walter A. Elwell, “Forgiveness of Sins,” in EvangelicalDictionary of World Missions, ed. A. Scott Moreau (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2000), 369.
24. Hodge, The Epistles of John, 65.
25. Beeke, The Epistles of John, 48.
26. Wallace, Greek Grammar beyond the Basics, 472.
27. James L. Boyer sees a “very close correspondence between the infinitive and the ἵνα clause” (“Classification of Subjunctives: A Statistical Study,” Grace Theological Journal 7 [spring 1986]: 16).
28. Wallace, Greek Grammar beyond the Basics, 473.
29. J. E. Huther’s comment that the verse “states what is the aim of the divine faithfulness and justice” is interesting but not convincing (“The First Epistle of the Apostle John,” in Meyer’s Commentary on the New Testament [reprint, Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1983], 489).
30. John MacArthur argues that “the aorist tense of the verb . . . carries a past connotation and further demonstrates that God’s forgiveness derives from a historical event” (1-3 John [Chicago: Moody, 2007], 39). But this is unjustified since the aorist apart from the indicative mood (or in a participle) does not reference time (Wallace, Greek Grammar beyond the Basics, 555). The aorist simply asserts the actuality of the event. But MacArthur is correct in noting that the forgiveness is based on a historical event, namely, Christ’s death and resurrection.
31. For an extensive discussion on the many possible uses of this verb see Rudolf Bultmann, “ἀφίημι,” in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, vol. 1 (1964), 510-12.
32. This same concept is presented in the parable of the ruler who released a slave from a debt he could not repay (Matt. 18:27-35).
33. Though most Protestants reject the concept of purgatory, some Christians believe that sinning believers must somehow suffer for their failures. Whereas there may or may not be natural consequences to one’s sin, to impose human judgment when forgiveness is given is to usurp God’s prerogative of forgiveness.
34. The books of Leviticus and Numbers offer several examples.
35. Rudolf Meyer, “καθαρός,” in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, vol. 3 (1965), 418.
36. All animals in the sheet in Peter’s vision were unclean according to Mosaic Law. God removed the contamination so that what was once unacceptable was now to be accepted.
37. John 6:37-40 is only one of numerous passages that state that Christ will not lose anyone whom the Father brings to Him.
38. J. M. Lieu, “What Was from the Beginning: Scripture and Tradition in Johannine Epistles,” New Testament Studies (1993): 464. Lieu is referring to a warning in Sirach 16:11, “Do not say, ‘I have sinned yet nothing happened to me,’ it is only that the Lord is slow to anger. Do not be so confident of pardon that you sin again and again.”
39. “Confession is our heartfelt response to what God has shown us by the Word and Spirit. When we confess our sins, therefore, it means we have the same kind of view as God” (Beeke, The Epistles of John, 46).