This is a brief paper to address particular difficulties that arise when considering the “if…then” clause of verse 9. Tension arises because confession seems to be the condition which must be met in order for one to be forgiven. It is a conditional clause – “if confession…then forgiveness.” In this paper I will address the historical context; mainly focusing on the identity the recipients. Does the author (John) write to believers or unbelievers? This question is important with regards to the text at hand. If they are unbelievers it would seem very appropriate for the apostle to call them to confession and repentance in order to receive forgiveness. However, if they are believers, it seems odd that the apostle would lead them to believe that they may not be forgiven until they confess their sins. The text may imply that continual forgiveness is needed – or, that forgiveness is withheld until they perform the “work” of confession (this sparking the question of legalism).
Historical Context: Purpose and Recipients. It is commonly held by most conservative scholars that the apostle John penned both the Fourth Gospel and the First Epistle of John. We know that the Gospel was written mainly to unbelievers in order that they might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing they may have life in his name (Jn 20:30-31). The first epistle on the other hand was written to believers. It is a pastoral letter that was written to congregations across Asia Minor, who had been around long enough to now be threatened by positive heresy.
The main heresies that were being introduced were Gnosticism (or pseudo-Gnosticism) and Docetism. These gnostic “false prophets” claimed to have a special illumination by the Spirit (2:20, 27), that was imparted to them the true gnosis theou (knowledge of God). Through this spiritual illumination, the schismatics claimed to have attained a state beyond ordinary Christian morality in which they had no more sin and attained moral perfection (1:8-10). This led to spiritual pride and haughtiness that caused them to despise ordinary Christians who did not claim to have attained the same level of spiritual illumination as had the Gnostics (See Ladd, A Theology of the New Testament, 657-658).
If Gnosticism is mainly moral, Docetism is christological. Docetists denied the incarnation (2:22; 4:1). They held to the typical Greek contrast between spirit and matter, and thought that since matter was evil, God could not possibly have come into direct contact with the phenomenal world in Christ. They either denied the incarnation in general terms, or else taught that the body of Christ was only an appearance and not real (See Ladd).
In order to confront these heresies and protect these churches, John writes very pastorally and practically. Many verses throughout the letter would give clear indication that the letter was written to believers that were under John’s authoritative care. They would have known him and felt secure under his teaching. Perhaps the most convincing verse for identifying the recipients is 5:13, “I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God that you may know that you have eternal life.” Verses like 2:1 and 2:7, when John calls them “My little children” and “Beloved,” along with many others would make an address to unbelievers unlikely. It may be argued that the pericope of 1:5-10 is isolated and specifically written with unbelievers in mind. However, 2:1 could easily rule this out: “My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin.” The “these things” being referred to is not only what comes after, but also what comes before.
Again, The Gospel of John was written so that people might believe and receive eternal life (Jn 20:30-31); whereas the letter 1John was written to those who already believe so that they may have assurance of their eternal life (1Jn 5:13). Carson and Moo comment, “The Johannine epistles make an important contribution to the doctrine of assurance. If other NT writings make it clear that the objective grounds of our confidence before God are in Christ and his death and resurrection on our behalf, such that Christian assurance is not much more than a concomitant of genuine faith, these epistles insist that a distinction must be made between genuine and spurious faith. Spurious faith does not have the right to assurance before God; genuine faith can be authenticated not only by the validity of its object (in this case, the belief that Jesus is Christ come in the flesh) but also by the transformation it effects in the individual: genuine Christians learn to love one another and obey the truth. Christian assurance is not, for John, an abstract good; it is intimately tied to a continuing and transforming relationship with the covenant God, who has revealed himself in Jesus Christ (Carson and Moo, 685).”
Literary Context: Verses 1:5-10 confront gnostic heresy of perfection. There is a clear dualistic structure to this passage. We see the distinction between light and darkness. God is light and there is no darkness in him at all. Everything about the Christian life stands in relationship to this truth. If one says that he has fellowship with God while walking in darkness, is lying and is not practicing the truth (1:6). Similarly, if one says that he has no sin, he deceives himself and the truth is not in him (1:8). Clearly here the apostle is identifying lives (particularly confessions or statements) that are either in line with the truth or not in line with the truth. In short, one can know by what they confess whether or not they are in light or in darkness.
We must keep the author’s purpose in mind to help us here. He is writing to give believers assurance. Assurance is not to be given to those who do not live in accordance with the truth. This is very practical and pastoral. It is very difficult for a person to know whether they have fellowship with God or not. God is spiritual and unseen. Our love for him is unseen. We therefore know of our love for him, by looking and reflecting upon our lives and actions. This is the thread that runs through the entire epistle. John wants his hearers to KNOW that they are in the faith. Consider the following passage:
“Little children, let no one deceive you. Whoever practices righteousness is righteous, as he is righteous. Whoever makes a practice of sinning is of the devil, for the devil has been sinning from the beginning…By this it is evident who are the children of God, and who are the children of the devil: whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God, or is the one who does not love his brother (3:7-10).”
There are many other passages like this in the epistle. The purpose and the message is clear – we can know if we are in Christ by paying attention to what we say and do. Similarly, we can make a reasonable assessment of others are as well by what they say and do. Now, with this in mind, lets consider the passage at hand:
“If we say we have fellowship with him while we walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth. But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin. If we say 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 our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.”
Reflections on 1:9: What is the verse saying and what is it not saying. With the historical and literary context in mind, here are some reflections on the passage. I feel it is important to understand that the apostle is not specifically educating his audience on the doctrine of salvation. The question is not how one has come to be in Christ, but how one knows whether or not he (or another; namely those who are professing heresy) is in Christ.
Reflection 1: Grace and humility are implied in the phrase “confess your sins.” In regards to the text, we must understand what it actually means, not what some (who remain in their sins) make it out to mean. The same action is performed by both the legalist and the true Christian – they confess sins. However, one desires a much different end. The Christian desires a restored relationship with His Lord. The one who remains in sins confesses to relieve himself of penalty only. The verse can be taken legalistically, albeit unjustly. A person who is truly confessing sin is not focusing on their works but depending on the grace and mercy of God. That person would be quite aware of the insufficiency of their merit to cover their offence, and would therefore understand the required payment to come another way. A person who was once impenitent but now finds themselves in confession would see and give praise for the work of Another who changed their heart to do such.
Reflection 2: The Scripture nowhere implies that confession of sin is meritorious of grace. It does however, repeatedly affirm the simple and profound truth that our God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is one who gives pardon to those who are contrite and confess their sins. Though we are justified and forgiven, the conscience not being yet glorified, is still weak and fragile. It stands in constant need of repair and relief. It is true that sin no longer has dominion in the Christian, but it does still dwell. The believer therefore, having fallen into sin needs constant reminders of assurance and pardon. The promise of forgiveness in this passage is not necessarily an objective one; but one that is very subjective. When a person sins, it is comforting to know that they have a Father who is ready to forgive and cleanse that sin. Sin and darkness would desire us to keep sins hidden – their existence wholly unseen. This was the gnostic heresy. The believed they had been completely rid of sin.
Reflection 3: This passage encourages confession by emphasizing God’s gracious character – purchased by Christ. It is a fearful thing to bring one’s offence to the one they have offended. Fear alone keeps many from confessing sins. Why? B/c they are afraid that they will not be accepted. Many are afraid that their sins keep them from having a relationship they so desire. Here, John, gives wonderful assurance of the character and nature of our Lord. It is safe to confess. He will pardon. He will cleanse.
Reflection 4: Notice that the passage implies that forgiveness is founded on the Cross, not confession. The Lord will forgive “on account of” the Cross (1:7), and according to the confession. The distinction between the prepositions “according to” and “on account of” are significant, especially in reference to verses like Romans 2:6, “He will render to each one according to his works.” One implies merit, while the other implies a simple truth, not based on merit. God does respond to the works and lives of Christians. He does bless “walking in the Spirit.” He does so according to such walking – but on account of the work of Christ.
Reflection 5: On a similar note. Notice the passage says “if you confess,” not “because you confess.”
Reflection 6: Understanding the Accomplishment of Christ and the Application of His work. The Work of Christ (especially his passive obedience – or passion on the Cross) is the basis for our forgiveness (Acts 2:38, 5:31; Eph 1:7; Col 1:14). Though the forgiveness of sins was accomplished at the Cross with the shedding of His blood (Matt 26:28; Eph 1:7), a moment in history; there is another moment in history when the forgiveness is applied. The distinction is important. This verse follows 1:7, which clearly gives the foundation for forgiveness and cleansing (1:9)
Reflection 7: One of warnings. The Scripture, even Christ Himself, gives repeated warnings to those (who call God, “father”) who do not confess (Jn 20:23; Matt 6:14-15). It would do God a great injustice among the unbelievers (Gentiles) if he were to justify and not sanctify. The pardoned life is always a life of piety. Faith alone saves, but faith which saves is never alone (Calvin).
Summary. The apostle is saying that children of God walk in light. He is encouraging such a life. Walking in light does not mean walking in perfection; but rather walking in confession. A life lived concealing sin is a life lived in the darkness. A life lived confessing sin is a life lived in the light. But now that the man, the sinner, is encouraged to confess his sin, it is only right to assure that sinner that he will be accepted and pardoned; and that his sin will be cleansed by God. Nowhere in the passage does the apostle give the indication that the sin is pardoned based on the merit of the sinner or the act of confession. Rather, he explicitly gives such a foundation in 1:7. What follows in 1:9 must be read and understood through the lens of 1:7.
John’s point is pastoral and practical. A person who is being encouraged to come forward with his/her sins must be assured that they will be pardoned and cleansed. The true believer, when doing so, sees no merit in the act all-the-while seeing great benefit in the act. He asks, “How can such a holy God forgive and pardon me?” The answer is clear. The blood of His Son, Jesus Christ was shed. “How can this be?” Grace.
This paper is in no way exhausts the truths that could be mined in this passage. It is simply my thoughts over the past few days. I have referenced Bruce, Calvin, Ladd, Marshall, Kistemaker, and Carson/Moo. I am more than willing to be challenged on any point in order to know my Lord better and achieve the unity that Christians have in Christ. I would gladly welcome any comments/criticisms.
May the Lord bless this work.
