 |
 |
||
To Sin or Not to SinPreached at St. Barnabas Church, Bellville, TX Twenty-fifth Sunday after Trinity, 2008 by The Rev. Stephen E. Stults
I John
3:9 Whosoever
is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: From our Epistle selection for the day, we are indeed privileged to hear the words of a true 1st century Apostle and Saint, St. John the “beloved disciple.” All of the classical biblical commentators agree that the Last Gospel, that of St. John, and the 1st Letter of John were penned by the same hand. The linguistic style, the patterns of speech and the doctrinal points are essentially the same in both documents. This is good, for it lends a degree of simplicity to our instruction from the Word of God, and it is amazing in that it is unusual for Biblical scholars to agree on very much at all, at least when to comes to modern Biblical scholarship. When one retreats to classical Biblical commentary, however, one finds a much greater degree of unanimity. This may be because the older commentators were more interested in revealing the truth contained in Holy Scripture, rather than making a name for themselves in academia. The men were not pressured so much by the “publish or perish” standard so prevalent in modern scholarship. With that thought in mind, allow me to share with you some general thoughts on this letter and its place in early Christian literature, quoting from the commentators, Jamieson, Faussette and Brown. They say: “NEANDER distinguishes three leading tendencies in the development of the Christian doctrine, the Pauline, the Jacobean (between which the Petrine forms an intermediate link), and the Johannean. John, in common with James, was less disposed to the intellectual and dialectic cast of thought which distinguishes Paul.” “He had not, like the apostle of the Gentiles, been brought to faith and peace through severe conflict; but, like James, had reached his Christian individuality through a quiet development: James, however, had passed through a moulding in Judaism previously, which, under the Spirit, caused him to present Christian truth in connection with the law, in so far as the latter in its spirit, though not letter, is permanent, and not abolished, but established under the Gospel. But John, from the first, had drawn his whole spiritual development from the personal view of Christ, the model man, and from intercourse with Him. Hence, in his writings, everything turns on one simple contrast: divine life in communion with Christ; death in separation from Him, as appears from his characteristic phrases, "life, light, truth; death, darkness, lie."”1 That is indeed a mouthful. Unpacking it, we probably can draw some conclusions, at the risk of grossly oversimplifying what this great scholar said. First, that there are generally three “streams” of classical Christian teaching: those of Paul, those of James, with a subset by Peter, and the teaching of John, each with their own wonderful and distinctive characteristics. Paul’s doctrine, under the extreme impetus of the Holy Ghost, was formed by stress. First, being knocked off his horse, literally, Paul was called to the service of Christ. He then received a myriad of revelations from the Holy Ghost, which he brought forth in his epistles. Under-girding all of this was his doctrinaire and disciplined knowledge of the Law. Saul, then Paul, was, after all, “a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee” (Acts 23:6). He understood Judaic legalism and had a finely trained mind. Thus, perhaps we can better understand the “intellectual and dialectic cast of thought which distinguishes Paul.” James’ Christian development, according to Neander, was more peaceful and less stressful, yet it too had a firm foundation in legalism and an unbending commitment to obedience to the Law; first, that of Moses, then that Law baptized into Christ. James’ Epistle, one of my personal favorites, is very straight-forward and direct, packed full of admonitions and instruction. It too shares the flinty quality of obdurate truth contained in the Law, but fulfilled and completed in Christ. These two streams contrast with the transformational quality of John’s writings. John stresses so much the life-giving change that happens when man meets Christ in open-hearted affirmation of His truth. Repentant sinful Man, his heart moved by the example of sinless human Jesus, and his soul touched by the grace given by the Divine Christ, must recognize that change is not only possible, but required. When Man has communion with Christ, he will live, and that more abundantly. When Man separates himself from Christ by sin, he will die. Life, true life, according to John, is impossible without Christ. In fact, according to John, sin is impossible for those who live in Christ: “Whoever has been born of God does not sin, for His seed remains in him; and he cannot sin, because he has been born of God” (I John 3:9) This is a most difficult statement, because all of us sin daily, in both the things we do and the things we leave undone. Yet, St. John goes on: “In this the children of God and the children of the devil are manifest: Whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor is he who does not love his brother.” On first glance, this seems impossibly hard. Was St. John writing to a special class of “super Christians” that had found a way to live in this world without sin? Was he himself one of this special class? The answer to this is a loud “no”, for we know from Romans 3:23 that “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God”. Christ Himself told us in Matthew 19:17, during his interview with the rich young ruler: "Why do you call Me good? No one is good but One, that is, God.” Thus, the answer to this should be clear: despite our regeneration in Christ, despite our weekly feeding with the Blessed Sacrament, and despite our best intentions, we all still sin on a regular basis. This brings us back to our original quandary. How can St. John say that he who lives in God does not and cannot sin? It is patently obvious to any mature Christian who has lived on Earth for any length of time, even for a few hours, that this is just not so. Thus, what can St. John mean? One clue may lie in John’s use of language, in this case, Koine Greek, in which the New Testament was originally written. When John uses the Greek word for “sin” as a verb, he invariably uses the present indicative tense and case. Not the past tense, as in “those who have sinned”, or even the future tense, “those who will sin”, but John speaks of “He who sins”, as in the current or present tense. In other words, John is focusing on those who are living in a current or present state of sin, and/or those who have a sinful disposition. This type of person may be totally unaware of sin in their life, in fact they probably would deny that sin even exists. Again, from Romans, Paul tells us that these people do have some sense of right and wrong, but they seek to suppress their innate knowledge of God and of sin. After all, if one pretends something doesn’t exist, one can avoid thinking about it. Thus, in 1 John 3:6, we hear: “Whoever abides in Him does not sin. Whoever sins has neither seen Him nor known Him.” Even for those who pretend to be unaware of sin, John hammers home the point when he says, “Little children, let no one deceive you. He who practices righteousness is righteous, just as He is righteous. He who sins is of the devil, for the devil has sinned from the beginning” (1 John 3:7-8). From the timeless wisdom of Christ Himself in Matthew 7:20 20 "Therefore by their fruits you will know them.” The point is this: we will, or should, know the difference between a Christian and a non-Christian by their deeds. Unfortunately, this is not always the case, as we are all painfully aware. Yet, there is hope. St. John concludes our selection by saying, “For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that He might destroy the works of the devil” (1 John 3:8). Our hope, despite our current sinfulness, is to trust in Christ, that He will destroy our inclination to sin. Our hope is to trust in Christ, that He will cause a real change in our hearts and natures. It is to this hope that we cling, in faith and trust. We come, then, to one of the core teachings in John: the possibility of real, transformational change in our lives. Recently, we have heard an awful lot about “hope” and “change.” These are good and worthy aspirations, and quite frankly, I am proud that America could, once again, pass the baton of power without bloodshed, violence or upheaval. Contrast this to the passage in 2 Samuel 3:1: “Now there was long war between the house of Saul and the house of David: but David waxed stronger and stronger, and the house of Saul waxed weaker and weaker.” Whether or not you agreed with the outcome is not really the chief issue so much as the fact that we can do it without violent revolution. This is a testimony to our Republic’s excellent founding and the fact that God still sheds His Grace on us, despite our unworthiness. If Christ was manifested to destroy the works of the devil, as John tells us, this also tells us that we can have real, meaningful change in our own lives as well. A big difference here is simply the source. The change we seek as Christians is not so much self-help, although many of us still seek help in that way. Rather, our calling, according to St. John is to be called the children of God. This calling occurs because of the “manner of love” that God has bestowed on us. Because of His Love, we can be called Children of the Most High. Because of His Love, we can love ourselves and one another. Because of His Love, we can know true Hope and Change; not because we put our confidence in man, but in God. This Hope and Change is not transient; it is not subject to alteration or diminution. Rather, as St. John tells us, it is real, it is genuine, and it is trustworthy. 1 John 3:1 Behold what manner of love the Father has bestowed on us, that we should be called children of God! [1] Jamieson Faussett Brown, “Commentary on 1st John “ www.ewordtoday.com/comments/1john/jfb/1johnintro.htm
|
|||
|
All material on this site is copyright © 2010 St. Barnabas Anglican Church, except where an author is named. In such cases, the author retains all rights. |
|||