has been perfected. By this we know that we are in him; (6) the one who claims to remain in him ought also to walk just as he himself walked.
After addressing his readers as “my little children” (teknia mou) in 2:1, John tells them the reason for his writing as “in order that you might not sin” (hina mē hamartēte). The use of the aorist tense here (hamartēte) could be deliberate, to communicate that his purpose for writing is that the readers would not do an act of sin.80 Elsewhere in the epistle, John uses present tense verbs as he disassociates the believer from sin. In 3:6, using the present tense hamartanei, he says, “Everyone who remains in him does not sin” (pas ho en autō menōn ouch hamartanei), and in 3:9 uses both the present tenses poiei and hamartanein as he says, “Everyone who has been born of God does not do sin . . . is not able to sin” (pas ho gegennēmenos ek tou theou hamartian ou poiei . . . ou dunatai hamartanein). As it will be shown when these passages are discussed below, John is asserting that a believer cannot sin as a matter of habit. In his use of aorist tense in 2:1, he is seeing the goal of obeying God’s word as freedom from sin. However, John cannot by this assertion be denying that even the believer has the inherited sinful nature. If he said this, he would be denying his own statement in 1:8. The point rather is that the believer and sin belong to two different spheres. This is in view of who God is (light, and in him there is no sin—1:5) and who believers are (persons in fellowship with God—1:3). Sin is, therefore, not to be perceived as mere disobedience to some set of rules, but a failure to respond in any given situation in a manner that corresponds to God being light.81
John hastens to acknowledge that total freedom from sin may not be a possible experience in this life and so pronounces provision for that act of sin, which a believer may find it to be his or her experience from time to time. He states, in 2:1b, “and if anyone should sin, we have an advocate with the Father” (kai ean tis hamartē, paraklēton echomen pros ton patera). His work as our advocate82 is that he stands in our place so that we are not consumed by the holy God. He stood for us on the cross, and on the basis of the blood he shed to cleanse our sins (1:9) he stands even now when we sin and confess that sin.83 John identifies this advocate as “Jesus Christ the righteous.” The use of the adjective “righteous” (dikaios) here is important. It is because he has no case of his own84 to answer before the court of heaven that he can serve as our advocate. At a secondary level, the quality of being righteous can also be applied to the manner in which he dispenses his services. He does not only qualify before God who is light, but also serves his clients (us) faithfully. We at times hear of advocates who have not passed on to their clients whatever the courts of justice awarded to them. Not advocate Jesus Christ! As Yarbrough puts it, “There is no chance that what he urges in God’s presence will be rejected” and “those who look to him for advocacy can be assured that he will do the right thing.”85
In 2:2 John further describes Jesus as “propitiation for our sins” (hilasmos . . . peri tōn hamartiōn hēmōn). The meaning of the term hilasmos is debated. It is, for example, translated propitiation here (also, NKJB and NASB), expiation (NRSV), or sacrifice of atonement (NIV). The basis of the debate is that the word propitiation focuses on the fact that God is appeased (and by implication he was wrathful), while expiation focuses on sins’ removal, tying it especially with the function of the mercy seat86 within the Old Testament’s economy of redemption. The NIV’s choice (sacrifice of atonement) could be influenced by the fact that both ideas are facts, in view of Scripture. God’s wrath against sin is real (Rom 1:18) and removal of sin (1:9) is the act by which God’s attitude changes from one of wrath to that of fellowship with the believer. While the context here seems to favor more the act of appeasing God (it goes well with his work as advocate) the idea of expiation should not be totally lost. It is because sins have been removed that God is appeased. These intertwined functions make Yarbrough translate the term (hilasmos) as “expiatory propitiation.”87 One of them (expiation) is basis of the other (propitiation) and the other is a guaranteed outcome of the first.
John says that the sins in question here is not only our (believers’) but peri holou tou kosmou (“for the whole world”). Jesus died for me in particular and for everyone else in general. As commonly put in theology, the death of Jesus was and is sufficient for every sin, but only efficient for sins that are confessed. It is the basis upon which God has extended, and continues to extend, “patience and forbearance to those who merit his rejection.”88 It satisfied the demands against everyone who comes by faith to accept him as hilasmos (basis for removal of sin and restoration of fellowship with God).
With the matter made clear who Jesus is to us as believers (that is, paraklētos and hilasmos) John goes on to state how our knowledge of him may be tested. It is “if we keep his commandments” (ean tas entolas autou tērōmen, 2:3). In fact, John continues and says that the one who claims this knowledge and does not keep his commandments “is a liar and the truth is not in him” (pseustēs estin kai en toutō hē alētheia ouk estin, 2:4). This is because the commandments are rooted in the will of God and the provision of Jesus as advocate and propitiation is part of that will. To know Jesus means that we will seek to do the will of God, which in summary is to be like Christ. The knowledge spoken of here is not just “knowledge about” but “knowledge in experience.”89 One cannot have close experience with God through Jesus and still disregard the importance of keeping his commandments. This may not mean perfection, but the heart’s determination to please God. Such determination causes us to confess any imperfection that sets into our lives. It is such determination that makes the Scriptures describe David as a man after God’s heart (Acts 13:22, quoting 1 Sam 13:14) even when we know that he failed miserably at some point (2 Sam 11). God does not deal with us in wrath when we have not achieved perfection, so long as our hearts strive for perfection because he is our God.
On the other hand is the one who keeps the commandments (2:5a). John uses “whoever” (hos an) to imply that God does not shut anyone out of the blessings that go with the act of keeping the commandments. Concerning such a person, John says, “truly in him the love of God has been perfected” (alēthōs en toutō hē agapē tou theou teteleiōtai). While the genitive tou theou (of God), describing love, could be the love that God has toward such a person (subjective genitive90) or even a love like that which God exercises (qualitative genitive91), it is better to treat it here as the love the person who keeps God’s commandments has toward God (objective genitive).92 Later on (see under 2:15) John contrasts our love for the world and our love for the Father (using another genitive, hē agapē tou patros—“the love of the Father”) and is in order to treat it here (2:5) in the same way. At least, there is nothing within the context here that makes that choice unviable. Using human illustration here, when one tells another person “I love you” it is appreciated. However, it is not complete until the statement has been applied in actual life situations. In the same way also, the one who says he or she loves God. That claim must be made full or perfect by pleasing God, the object of that love.93 It is by loving God that we can be assured that we remain in him (2:5b). Our mystical union with God is based on clearly set conditions: keeping his commandments94—a natural outcome of knowledge, and appreciation of who Jesus is.
John finishes the section with a specific instruction (2:6) for anyone who claims to remain in this fellowship with God and Jesus Christ. He says that such a person “ought to walk95 just as he himself walked”96 (opheilei kathōs ekeinos periepatēsen kai autos [houtōs] peripatein). This is a clear statement of our need to pursue Christlikeness. Jesus conducted himself before the Father and in relationship to human beings in a manner that was all pure. Remaining in this fellowship means conducting ourselves in the same manner. Should this be achieved, it would be a life of sinlessnes (which John, in 2:1, said was his goal for writing). Since our experiences tell us that we still have to wait for glorification of our beings before we attain perfection, what we can confidently affirm is to seek to be like Christ. When we fail, Jesus is our advocate and we will be given a second chance. Perfection, however, is our goal and the march must always be on.
Christ’s walk of perfect obedience was crowned with death, on our behalf, on the cross. This was the highest degree of expression of love (John 10:11; 15:13; 1 John 3:16). It is not surprising, therefore, that this statement ushers in the theme of love among followers of Christ.
The Ageless Commandment—Old Yet New (2:7–17)
(2:7)