(Text Only)
Title: A Subtle Rebuttal
One of the neat things about John’s writing is that John often talks, particularly in I John about the idea of “abiding”, to remain. I’ve found, in the year that we have been studying I John that the more I “remain” in the study of this letter, the more “theological treasures” I come across.
Because John is very philosophical in his writing, it can sometimes be challenging to find the pragmatic, the direct application, without being redundant week after week with these sermons.
For example, how many times have we talked about the issue of abiding, or that loving God means loving each other, and how many times has John said, “My little Children”?
In breaking down the original language for this text, I think I found something very interesting, and very subtle, and that is what I’d like to share with you today.
- “Born of God”
John uses some very interesting language here to describe the relationship between God the Father and Christ the son. Let’s take a look at the Greek word “gennao” that we translate as “begot.”
It literally means “to be born from.” I think there are three implications that can be drawn from John interesting language here:
- You can’t love the Father and not love the Son.
- Is this a theological criticism aimed at the Jews? Is John reminding his listeners that belief in Yahweh, obedience to Yahweh, love of Yahweh is all for not if you don’t also accept Yahweh’s chosen method and mode of salvation, which is not the Law, but rather the Law fulfilled through the spilt blood of the son?
- You can’t love the Son and not also love the Father.
- Who does this apply to? In John’s time, I’m not totally sure if there is a specific people group that was minimizing the “sonhood” of Jesus Christ to Yahweh, but there were some tensions between the Gentile believers and the Jewish believers. Some of those tensions revolved around the fact that some Gentile believers were “flaunting” their Christian Liberty in the face of the Jewish Christians who still practiced the Law while also acknowledging Christ as the Messiah.
- This came into play in: Food Laws, Circumcision, Observance of the Sabbath, etc.
- Who does this apply to? In John’s time, I’m not totally sure if there is a specific people group that was minimizing the “sonhood” of Jesus Christ to Yahweh, but there were some tensions between the Gentile believers and the Jewish believers. Some of those tensions revolved around the fact that some Gentile believers were “flaunting” their Christian Liberty in the face of the Jewish Christians who still practiced the Law while also acknowledging Christ as the Messiah.
In our time today, who might this criticism apply to? You can’t love the Son and not also love the Father?
- Christians who attempt to minimize the importance of the O.T. covenant.
- Christians who downplay the wrath of Yahweh and focus solely on the Mercy of Christ.
- Christians who minimize that fact that Christ himself said, “I and the Father are one” (Therefore, it was also Jesus who is full of wrath and indignant toward sin.)
- A Slight Adjustment
We have heard John use the refrain over and over, “By this we know that we love God, if we keep his commandments.”
And here, John ads a slight twist to his already familiar statement. He says that “By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and keep his commandments.”
What’s the difference? Well, here John is telling us that
By this: The confession that Jesus is God’s son
we know: is the proof
that we love the children of God: that we have fellowship with other believers.
when we love God: We abide in Him
and keep his commandments: when we obey ALL that he has for us.