Austin Binkley

1 John 2:2

2012-04-17T12:18:00.000-07:00

1 John 2:2

Pardon me for my bluntness, but if you easily get offended reading material you don’t doctrinally agree with one bit, this post may not be for you. You have been warned. If however, you know me personally and typically agree with my thoughts concerning the Word, or you’re just curious about what I’m about to say, by all means, please continue. I must admit half the reason I’m writing this is because I have to wait on the fire in my fireplace to go out (using water leaves a bad mess) and I have nothing better to do, so I will exercise my right to free speech and be less concerned with considering others’ opinions.

My classmates and I are currently translating 1 John from the Greek text to close out the semester for the class. Thus far, I have thoroughly enjoyed the class and the language and genuinely look forward to continuing my education in Greek (and Hebrew eventually) as I continue my studies. I also really like 1 John, so I was thrilled to see we would be translating most of it before the end of the semester. To give a brief summary of how translation goes down in the class, our teacher will normally allow us to split up into groups of two or three, then he will assign each of us a verse to work on. Once we are all finished, we’ll go through all of them as a class while he makes comments/corrections when needed. The group I was in just so happened to get 1 John 2:2- “He [Jesus Christ] is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.” I haven’t read or considered this verse in quite some time, but I’m certainly aware of the controversy surrounding it.

When it was our turn to share what we got, our professor quickly approved of our translation and proceeded to go on about a 5 to 10 minute rant on how Calvinists love to presuppose their theology into this text. He explains how the Greek commonly translated as “whole world” cannot possibly mean only a certain elect number of people; it literally means the whole world and we have to accept it as such. He also took time to explain how he prefers not to particularly take sides in the Calvinist/Arminian debate, but that we should always be careful to not read our theology into the text and let the text create our theology instead; he then challenged us to take care to consider all Scripture before allowing our theology to be formed. Before I continue any further, I want to make sure it is known that I have a tremendous deal of respect for my professor and I know he has an extraordinary amount of knowledge concerning the Greek language, much more than I do. That said, I decided to take him up on his challenge.

Firstly, I think it’s safe to say that a good number of scholarly theologians who lean more on a Calvinistic/Reformed way of thinking do not automatically think “elect” when they read “whole world” in 1 John 2:2. What they, and I, do see, however, is a particularly huge problem when people automatically understand “whole world” as “every single person who ever did and ever will exist.” Here’s why.

If we take a close look at the first part of this verse (autos hilasmos estin /He is the propitiation), we notice a few things. First, this is a strict indicative statement, meaning it is a matter of fact. Jesus absolutely is the propitiation, not, “Jesus might be,” or, “Jesus could be,” or even, “Jesus will be if…” There are subjunctive conjugations for the verb “is” that John could have easily used. It is also clear that John uses the subjunctive mood numerous times just before writing this sentence. “… so that you may have fellowship with us” (1 John 1:3); “…so that our joy may be complete” (1 John 1:4); “If we say we have fellowship…” (1 John 1:6); “…if we walk in the light…” (1 John 1:7); “If we say we have no sin…” (1 John 1:8); “If we confess our sins…” (1 John 1:9); “If we say we have not sinned….” (1 John 1:10); “…. I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. But if anyone does sin….” (1 John 2:1). By my count, John uses the subjunctive mood nine times in the mere eleven verses of his opening statement, two of which are used in the verse right before 1 John 2:2. There is no doubt that John intentionally used the indicative mood in verse two here.

Secondly, we see what John is definitively saying Jesus is - the propitiation (hilasmos). What exactly does that word mean? “Propitiation” isn’t necessarily thrown around in the average Christian’s vocabulary nowadays. Instead of giving the definition of the English word, however, I think it’s better to define what the Greek word (hilasmos) ,often translated as “propitiation,” means. Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament defines this word, in the context of 1 John 2:2, as “the means of appeasing.”[1] Simply put, this word is referencing Jesus completely satisfying God’s punishment for sin. If, then, we say that Jesus is the propitiation of sin, we are saying Jesus completely takes care of all punishment required for sin such that only innocence and right standing remain.[2]

Perhaps you have already pieced the puzzle here, but the problem we get when we say the “whole world” is referencing every single person that ever exists and will exist is that, by admitting such, we have just claimed that no one deserves any more punishment, because Jesus has already taken care of every one’s sin! Now, unless you’re a Universalist, I doubt you would be willing to admit that. But there is no wiggle room in translation/interpretation of that verse if we say that the “whole world” HAS to mean absolutely everyone. What, then, does the “whole world” mean? I’m glad you asked.

In order to get an idea of what John could have meant in this verse, we need to get some more historical-cultural context. I highly recommend getting The IVP Bible Background Commentary if you have ever had any sort of questions about what certain expressions meant back in the time the Scriptures were written. Craig Keener, author of the New Testament volume, notes that 1 John is probably “meant to encourage Christians expelled from the synagogues, some of whose colleagues have returned to the synagogue by denying Jesus’ messiahship.”[3] That said, John’s targeted audience was a group of believing Jews. This audience, being Jew, would have had a presupposition that the death of Jesus, being the fulfillment of the necessity for sacrifice on the Day of Atonement, would have only had the intention of covering the sins of Israel.[4] This is why John’s statement in 1 John 2:2 is so profound- “He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the world.” Jesus did not die only for the nation of Israel; He died so that every tribe, nation and tongue would profess Him as Lord and believe on Him for salvation! This was an extremely radical and difficult idea for Jewish Christians to understand at the time, but the Scriptures are clear that Gentiles (any non-Jewish nation) have been grafted into the community God’s chosen people.[5] The weight of this text is so much stronger when we view this passage of Scripture in such a manner:

1. Jesus Christ fully accomplished the salvation of God’s people by His own merit, NOT by anyone else’s.

2. God has guaranteed that no matter what nation we travel to, what tribe we interact with, every single distinct ethnic group is guaranteed to have at least some follow Christ. This should embolden us to do everything we can to reach those groups of people who have never heard the gospel before; we must do our part to bring them to Christ.[6]

I wholeheartedly agree with my professor’s statement about letting the text of Scripture challenge and shape our theology and thinking. It is crucial, however, that we take the time to diligently study the Scriptures in order to understand the authors’ (both man’s and God’s) intent, lest we form a totally incorrect and non-glorifying theology based on a simple misunderstanding of a verse. But with careful examination of the Word (a few study tools always help) and a humble dependency on the Holy Spirit’s illumination, we will, Lord-willing,[7] understand more and more the “depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God”[8] and be drawn to our knees in worship, giving “All glory to the One in existence.”[9]

[1] Joseph Thayer, Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Coded with Strong's Concordance Numbers, Rei Sub ed. (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1996), page 301.

[2] Some may argue that hilasmos has a subjunctive idea in its definition, meaning that this word only suggests that Jesus provides a means, or potential, of appeasement for sin. While this definition does not seem to fit the author’s intent (the prepositional phrase “for our sins” appears right after the predicate phrase; it would be ludicrous for John to say Jesus only is a means or potential of sin covering for those who are saved), even if it truly did mean that, the Arminian’s use of this text to argue against election would be moot: Calvinism fully supports the idea that Christ’s death has the potential to save every individual; in fact, Charles Spurgeon goes even further and says it has the potential “to have saved not only all in this world, but all in ten thousand worlds, had they transgressed their Maker's law.” (http://www.spurgeon.org/calvinis.htm)

[3] Craig S. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament (Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP Academic, 1994), page 735.

[4] Ibid.

[5] See Romans 11, Ephesians 2:11-22.

[6] John 10:16- “And I have other sheep that are not of this fold. I must bring them also, and they will listen to My voice.”

[7] Hebrews 6:1-3.

[8] Romans 11:33.

[9] The Devil Wears Prada, Assistant to the Regional Manager.

False Expectations

2011-11-15T08:09:00.000-08:00

I grew up in a private Christian school that had a major influence in the way my peers and I believe and perceive life. Often we had several chapel services and Bible classes that dealt a lot with relationships with the opposite sex and sexual purity. My school was very conservative in their approach, meaning that they believed dating at a young age is ridiculous and it is best to save even a first kiss until marriage. I'm not necessarily condemning this approach, but I think what was subtly taught and understood among the students there was that if we remained sexually pure and even saved their first kiss until marriage, we should not only expect, but deserve a partner who also held the same standards morally.

This could not be further from the truth.

Did we really not understand how self-righteous and prideful that statement really sounds? Who are we to say that we deserve anything, much less a spouse that has somehow known and adhered to the exact same standards we chose for ourselves? It's as if we really believe that we are more pure than others because we were able to refrain from doing certain things that they weren't! This is a gross misunderstanding of two things: the devastating effect of sin and the glorious effect of the cross.

James 2:10-11 says this in regards to sin: "For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become accountable for all of it. For he who said, 'Do not commit adultery,' also said, 'Do not murder.' If you do not commit adultery but do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law." The whole point of this passage is that it doesn't matter what sins we did and did not do, but that we sinned in the first place, and as a result, we are all wicked and vile and completely unworthy of any good thing, especially a spouse who held the same moral standards as us. To put things into perspective, sure, I personally have never had sex before. But my sins of lust are just as disgusting and vile as if I really had. Furthermore, my sins of pride, lying, deceit, and any other number of sins are just as horrific as sex before marriage in God's eyes. Until we realize the wickedness of our own sin, it will be easy for us to believe that we deserve a spouse who followed our preset expectations.

Secondly, this idea that we can have a certain moral expectation of our spouse totally undermines the purpose of the cross. Romans 5:18-21 says "Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men. For as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man's obedience the many will be made righteous. Now the law came in to increase the trespass, but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, so that, as sin reigned in death, grace also might reign through righteousness leading to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." We should be eternally grateful that the cross of Christ makes all of us righteous. No believer is declared to be more or less righteous than the other; Jesus' sacrifice has the same everlasting benefits for every single person who believes in Him. Sin had made us all equal in our wickedness in the eyes of God, but the cross is the great equalizer that puts us all on the same plane of righteousness before Him.

So let's humble ourselves before the Lord and before our brothers and sisters in Christ and stop playing the pharisee by pretending to be righteous in our own merit. It's time to stop hurting our Christian family by throwing people out the window simply because they have "had a past" or have made a mistake earlier on in their life. And when we learn to bestow love and grace the way Jesus did for us, boy, will our marriages be so sweet.

Feel free to comment or contact me with suggestions, critiques, criticisms, disagreements, or requests for future posts. Thank you, and God bless.

Steve Jobs and the Glory of God

2011-11-07T23:46:00.000-08:00

I had some excellent conversation with old friends and new acquaintances over coffee this evening. We discussed topics ranging from football teams to music interests and even the philosophy of truth. Perhaps the most interesting discussion of the evening occurred when a close friend of mine posed to us a serious question: "How is it that a person who simply accepts Jesus as Savior but does nothing in his life to make an impact on society gets to go to Heaven, while a man like Steve Jobs, who had worked tirelessly until his death to change the world through innovation and creativity suffer eternally simply because he didn't accept Jesus?"

Naturally, we look at an instance like that and cry out at the injustice and unfairness of such a statement. It just doesn't seem right. But are we really having a proper understanding of what is fair and just in God's eyes? Or are we judging what is fair and just through the scope of a culturally influenced world-view?

The Bible is clear on the totality of human's failure to uphold God's expectations. Romans 3:10-12 says, "None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God. All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one." Paul continues in verse 23- "...for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God." Ephesians 2:1-3 says this, "And you were dead in the trespasses and sins in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience- among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath." Every single person, regardless of how much they have or haven't done, has horribly fallen short of the expectations God has given them. It is impossible for someone to outweigh their mishaps with good deeds, because God demands perfection; anything aside from perfection is disgustingly vile in His sight, and by nature He must punish the sin.

In reality, the only "fair" thing for God to do is punish every. single. person. No one deserves any grace whatsoever. In fact, no one even deserves a second of life on earth for the terribly dishonoring, sinful lives we have. If we get fair, we get hell. Forever. What an unnerving and unsettling thought.

Yet, 1 John 1:9 says that "If we confess our sins, He (God) is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." Wait. What? How can God be just to forgive our sins? How is that fair? How is that right? Look no further than the cross.

"For our sake He (God) made Him (Jesus) who knew no sin to be sin, so that in Him we might become the righteousness of God." (2 Corinthians 5:21) Jesus Christ, in the ultimate act of love, literally took on and bore all of our sins as His own and bore the full punishment from God on the cross. All of our sins, past, present and future, were thrown on to Jesus at that moment, such that it "pleased the Lord to crush Him." (Isaiah 53:10, NASB). God was able to perfectly appease His desire to punish sin and still show forgiveness, grace, mercy and love to us- even though we have done absolutely nothing to deserve it.

Looking back at our question now, we can see that the man who chose to live his life quietly to himself is a terrible sinner. He has dishonored and disgraced God in an innumerable number of ways, and deserves not one iota of grace, even if it be temporal. The same is true of the man, in this case Steve Jobs, who chose to live his life in pursuit of leaving an impact in the world. Thus, there is only one true difference in the eyes of God: one's sins has already been paid for. This truth should evoke several responses from us as a Christian body:

1. We should be humble. "You don't see anyone complaining about the unfair God who saved their soul." -Matt Chandler. Let's walk in humility and stop acting like we deserve any bit of grace or reward in life because we've done something.

2. We should be thankful. This point could NOT be stressed enough. Praise the Lord for His mercy, without which we would have no hope. Every moment we breath is a grace from God, be thankful that you even have that, much less the sweetest gift of all- salvation.

3. We should be earnest.That is, earnest in our desire and our pursuit for others to experience the joy in Christ that we do. Agreeing to disagree is ultimately saying that either we don't care enough about someone experiencing true eternal happiness in God like we do, or we don't have strong enough convictions in what we believe.

I want to close with a reminder that I am definitely not condemning people who have a desire to make a major impact in society today. In fact, I encourage and support it. My only request is that they consider the words of 1 Corinthians 10:31 as they pursue their dreams- "So, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God."