C. H. Spurgeon was preaching in a conference in which another preacher was teaching that Christians could attain sinless perfection in this life and that he had humbly attained this sinlessness. The next morning at breakfast, Spurgeon snuck up behind the sinless preacher and dumped an entire pitcher of milk on his head. Guess what happened? He sinned.
We are going to examine a text that seems to support the sinlessly perfect preacher until he lost his perfection. I get my title for this post from John’s declaration concerning Christians in 1 John 3:6, “Whosoever abides in him sins not” and 3:9, “Whosoever is born of God does not sin,” and 5:18, “We know that whosoever is born of God sins not.” There you have it, not only was Christ impeccable or not able to sin, but according to John so are Christians sinless.
Obviously, this declaration is greatly disputed. I. Howard Marshall in his commentary on 1st John goes in-depth in analyzing the different opinions on these verses. Colin G. Kruse also compares additional views in The Pillar New Testament Commentary. Robert Thomas examines nine different interpretations of 1 John 3:6 in “Exegetical Digest of 1 John” 253-261. Before examining the diverse views, we must first notice that John appears to contradict himself in 1:8-2:2. John clearly states that Christians do sin. John adds to say otherwise is heretical (1:8) and hypocritical (1:10). We will resolve these apparent contradictions.
I would like to summarize some of the views on these verses that Marshall, Colon, and others critique.
Contradiction in First John View
Raymond Brown argues for a contradiction in First John: “No other NT author contradicts himself so sharply within such a short span of writing…. No matter how one modifies or relativizes the 1 John claims to sinlessness and impeccability, the truth in those claims comes from the divine principle that begot Christians and that remains active in them” (Raymond E. Brown, The Letters of John. Downers Grove: InterVaristy Press, 1992, 413, 415-416, 430). This view cannot hold up to the inerrancy and infallibility of Scripture.
Christian Sinless Perfection View
One interpretation of what some call Christian impeccability is the Christian Sinless Perfection view of John Wesley. In a sermon on 1 John 3:6, Wesley defined sin as “an actual, voluntary transgression of the law; of the revealed, written law of God; of any commandment of God, acknowledged to be such as the time that it is transgressed” (Sermons on Several Occasions, London, 1944, 178). So, Wesley’s view of sinless perfection really did not mean the total eradication of the sin nature but only not deliberately sinning against God or His Word.
Andy Naselli, in his book Let Go And Let God? A Survey and Analysis of Keswick Theology, gives a history and analysis of the Christian Perfection Movement as well as the debate between the Reformed and Dispensational views of sanctification including the Warfield/Chafer debate. Naselli strains hard to identify dispensationalism with Keswick theology. You can read my review of Naselli’s book in my next post.
Marshall in his commentary on 3:6 refutes Wesley’s view saying, “that it is notoriously difficult to distinguish between voluntary and involuntary transgressions.” Furthermore, John is discussing all sin not a limited definition of sin. Marshall is correct because all sin is voluntary. When Adam blamed Eve for his sin and Eve blamed the serpent for her sin, God blamed them both. When we sin, we give our consent. We can’t go through life shifting the blame for our sins and problems to others. We must take full responsibility and confess our sins to receive forgiveness.
Christians Don’t Habitually Sin View
The next view is the most common interpretation of these verses. This is the view found in the NIV: “No one who lives in him keeps on sinning.” Marshall explains this translation: “The explanation is thus that the believer does not sin habitually. He may sin on occasion; indeed, advocates of this view note that in 2:1 the aorist tense, which can express a single act is used. But he will not make sin his deliberate habit. This is the most popular understanding of the passage among British commentators (Marshall mentions in his footnote Westcott, Stott, and Morris as examples). It has the merit of providing a view of the life of the believer which is consistent with New Testament teaching generally: the Christian is a person whose heart is set on pleasing God and who therefore cannot make sin his way of life, even if he lapses from his high intent.”
Zane Hodges challenges this view in his commentary on 1st John in Bible Knowledge Commentary: A widely held explanation of this verse is that a believer “does not sin habitually,” that is, sin is not his way of life. However, the Greek text has no words to represent phrases such as “keeps on” or “continues to” or “habitually.” These phrases are based on an understanding of the Greek present tense which is now widely in dispute among New Testament scholars (see, e.g., S. Kubo, “1 John 3, 9: Absolute or Habitual?” Andrews University Seminary Studies 7. 1969:47–56; C.H. Dodd, The Johannine Epistles, pp. 78–81; I. Howard Marshall, The Epistles of John, p. 180). It cannot be shown anywhere in the New Testament that the present tense can bear this kind of meaning without the assistance of other words. Such a view is invalid for this verse and also for 1 John 3:9.
Disagreeing with Hodges, NET Bible on 1 John 3:6 refers to B. Fanning (Verbal Aspect [OTM], 215-17) who concluded that the habitual meaning for the present tense cannot be ruled out, because there are clear instances of habitual presents in the NT where other clarifying words are not present and the habitual sense is derived from the context alone. This means that from a grammatical standpoint alone, the habitual present cannot be ruled out in 1 John 3:6 and 9.
But then NET Bible admits that, “It is still true, however, that it would have been much clearer if the author had reinforced the habitual sense with clarifying words or phrases in 1 John 3:6 and 9 if that is what he had intended.”
This is the view normally held to but not exclusively by Reformed theologians to support their tenet of perseverance of the saints. Perseverance of the saints, or the P in TULIP, is different from eternal security as heard in Jesus’ words in John 10:28. Perseverance of the saints is the view that true believers persevere to the end in truth, love, and holiness. If a person does not persevere then that person was never born again. Therefore, according to the doctrine of perseverance of the saints, Christians cannot practice sin. For example, B. B. Warfield in his book Studies in Perfectionism goes so far to argue for the eradication of the old sinful nature: [The seventh chapter of Romans] depicts for us the process of the eradication of the old nature. Dr. Thomas reads it statistically and sees it merely a “deadly warfare between the two natures”; which, he affirms, “does not represent the normal Christian life of sanctification.” . . . What is really in the chapter is Divine grace warring against, and not merely counteracting but eradicating, the natural evil of sin. (Warfield, Studies in Perfectionism, 370). Therefore, Christians certainly persevere to the end in holiness because their sinful nature is recreated instead of a new nature created to battle the old existing sinful nature.
Marshall also points out that supplying additional words such as “keeps on” or “practices” are not consistently used as in 5:16 where John writes: “If any man sin (present active participle) a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death.” The present tense of the Greek verb must describe Christians who habitually practice sin for two reasons in 5:16. First, according to John in 5:16, Christians practicing sin should be prayed for by other Christians and second, it is possible for Christians to practice sin which results in premature deaths. Apparently, God shaved 10 to 20 years off the Corinthians in 1 Corinthians 11: 30 for abusing the Lord’s Supper. This verse which teaches Christians can practice sin even to the point of premature death contradicts the teaching in 3:6 when Christians who “sin not” is interpreted as Christians who “do not keep on sinning.”
C. H. Dodd raises the same objection: “It is legitimate to doubt whether the reader could be expected to grasp so subtle a doctrine simply upon the basis of a precise distinction of tenses without further guidance…the apparent contradiction is probably not to be eliminated (though it may be qualified) by grammatical subtlety” (C. H. Dodd, The Johannine Epistles. The Moffatt NT Commentary: New York: Harper & Row, 1946, 79-80).
Thomas Constable at lumina.bible.org also rejects the view that Christians cannot habitually sin: Suppose we translated the present tense in John 14:6 the same way: “No one continually comes to the Father except through Me.” This would imply that occasionally someone might come to God in another way. No orthodox translator would offer that as an acceptable rendering of John 14:6, and it is not acceptable in 1 John 3:6 either. Constable on 1 John 2:19 wrote, “Perseverance of the saints in faith and good works is normal for a Christian, but it is not inevitable.”
Sinners Only Habitually Sin View
Another view, goes to 5:16 where John differentiates between a “sin that is not unto death” and a “sin that is unto death.” Some like the late John R. W. Stott would say only unbelievers could commit a sin unto death because John has been teaching that Christians don’t practice sin. The problem with view is that John prefaced these two different sins by admonishing “his brother” not to commit them. John makes no distinction so neither should we. Paul wrote many of his letters to individuals and churches who were practicing sin. That is why he wrote the letters. In 1 Corinthians, Paul confronts 10-11 sins that the carnal Corinthians were practicing. In 1 Corinthian 3:3, Paul accused the carnal Corinthians as walking or living “like men” that is unsaved people. As already noted, some of the Corinthian believers did not persevere to the end but died because of habitual sin in 1 Corinthians 5. They apparently sinned the sin unto death.
Christian Ideal View
Another view which is getting closer to the truth, is the view of Dodd (78-81) that John is describing the ideal Christian life which is in direct contrast to the unbeliever which can be seen in 3:10: “In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever does not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loves not his brother.” Sakae Kubo in his article “1 John 3:9: Absolute or Habitual?” explains that in 3:9 the Christian in contrast with the Gnostic who claimed sinlessness but practiced sin. Kubo explains that John is teaching that Christians do not sin in the absolute since and that John is not teaching that Christians do not sin habitually. He defends the view that John is describing the stark contrast between Gnostics and true Christians in ideal terms: In the idealistic context of I Jn 3:9, the Christian cannot sin, but in the realistic context of 2:1, he may (Sakae Kubo, “1 John 3, 9: Absolute or Habitual?” Andrews University Seminary Studies 7. 1969: 50). Marshall adds, “They are statements of what Christians ought to be, and are thus injunctions to them to approach the ideal.”
Christian in Fellowship with God View
The view that is the most consistent with the theme of 1st John (stated in 1:3) which is Christians who “abide” in Christ or live in fellowship with Him manifest the following evidences: They believe the truth about Christ (5:1a), love the brethren (5:1b, 2a), and live obediently to God’s Word (5:2c). These three evidences are cycled throughout the epistle. In other words, believers living in fellowship with Christ “sin not” (3:6; 5:18). John in 3:6, wrote, “Whosoever abides (or fellowships) in Him sins not.” Marshall notes that this is good pastoral advice here. The best counsel for a person who is faced by temptation to sin may well not be, “Don’t do it,” which directs the person’s mind toward the temptation itself, but rather, “live in Christ,” which turns the person’s attention positively toward his Savior and diverts it from the temptation. It is as our hearts are filled with love by the Spirit that they become incapable of harboring sinful desires.
This is Thomas Constable’s view at lumina.bible.org: The key to understanding this statement, I believe, lies in the other terms that John used in the verse: “abides,” “has seen,” and “knows.” John used these words throughout this epistle to refer to a believer who is walking in intimate fellowship with God (1:7; 2:3, 10). Still does this view not contradict what John said about the depravity of sinners, even Christian sinners (1:8)? I believe John was claiming that when a Christian walks in close fellowship with God he does not sin. The abiding believer never repudiates God’s authority over him by doing anything that resists God’s law or will while he is abiding in Christ. If he does, his fellowship with God suffers; He no longer “knows” God in that intimate sense. He no longer “sees” God because he has moved out of the light into darkness.
Constable quotes Smalley as holding to the same interpretation: “John is thus saying that (translating the Gr. literally) ‘everyone who lives in him (Jesus) does not sin’; and by this he means that an intimate and ongoing relationship with Christ (ho en auto menon, ‘the one who lives in him,’ using the present tense) precludes the practice of sin” (Smalley, Stephen S. 1, 2, 3 John. Word Biblical Commentary series. Waco: Word Books, 1984).
Thomas Constable also compared the impeccability of Christ to the impeccability of Christians: There was no sin whatsoever in Jesus Christ (3:5). He consistently abode in (obeyed) the Father (cf. John 14:9). The Christian who consistently “abides” in a sinless Person does not sin (3:6). If we could abide in Christ without interruption, we would be sinless. Unfortunately, we cannot do that.
That is why obviously the impeccability of Christians is only realistically enjoyed while in fellowship with Christ while in Christ it was and is a constant reality.
The impeccability of the Christian is dependent on his/her fellowship with Christ and when sin inevitably breaks that closeness with Christ, we flee to 1 John 1:9 and “confess our sins” and “He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” Charles Spurgeon was crossing a street in London, when he stopped in the middle of the street, took off his hat, and paused briefly. When he reached the other side, he was asked why he stopped in the middle of the street. Spurgeon replied that as he was crossing, he had a sinful thought and needed to immediately confess that sin to God. That is getting close to Christian impeccability.