John Wesley considered 1 John to be the deepest part of Holy Scripture, where sublimity and simplicity are combined together, the strongest sense and the plainest language.((Wesley, Journal, 18 July 1765.)) Because the Apostle John was the last of the inspired writers, Wesley regarded 1 John as “that compendium of all the Holy Scriptures.”((Wesley, Journal, 9 Nov 1772; “Christian Perfection,” Sermon #40, 2.20.)) Franz Hildebrant recognized the special place of 1 John in Wesley’s thought:
Above all, 1 John, which held him forever in its grip—here is the perfect love which casteth out fear; here are the comfortable words for those who confess their sins and the uncomfortable texts about the incarnate Christ and the love that serves Him in the brethren; here is the Wesleyan note of assurance in the repeated “hereby we know”; and here again, as in John’s Gospel, the end of it all is “that your joy may be full.”((Hildebrandt, “Can the Distinctive Methodist Emphasis Be Said to Be Rooted in the New Testament?” London Quarterly and Holborn Review 184 (1959): 238.))
Paul Chilcote noted that the biblical book that Wesley prized most for its affirmation of the ideal of perfect love was 1 John.((Wesley, BE Works, 13:7.)) Sangster observed that a full third of the texts on which Wesley chiefly relies for his doctrine of Christian Perfection are taken from 1 John.((Sangster, The Path to Perfection, 48.)) Thus, the final ten texts we will examine are all located within these five chapters.
This is the message we have heard from him and proclaim to you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. If we say we have fellowship with him while we walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth. But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin. (1 John 1:5–7)
John uses the metaphor of darkness and light to contrast the lifestyles of sinners and Christians. First, to walk in darkness is to walk in sin. Westcott identified three lies about sin that were held by Gnostics:
- Sin does not break fellowship with God (v 6).
- I am not a sinner (v 8).
- My actions are not sinful (v 10).
They denied the reality of sin, responsibility for sin, and the fact of sin.((Westcott, The Epistles of St. John, 18.))
Second, John says to walk in light is to obey the truth. As a result of walking in light, we have forgiveness, deliverance, and fellowship.
John addresses Gnostics who do not believe they are sinners. His emphasis is on the reality of sin. According to John, joy, assurance, and victory do not come by denying sin, as characterized by the three denials of 1:6–10, but they come when we acknowledge and confess our sin.
As we keep walking in light, which means that we continue to obey the truth, the blood of Christ keeps washing. His blood cleanses us moment by moment. Even the holiest Christians need this constant cleansing. The timing of the forgiveness and cleansing are relative to the main verb confess. Forgive and cleanse are aorist active subjunctives. When we confess, God is faithful to forgive and cleanse us. When we receive a deeper revelation of our sinful nature and confess that, God is faithful to cleanse us from all iniquity. But this goes beyond the promise to forgive. According to Alfred Plummer, it is a second and distinct result of our confession. We both are absolved from sin’s punishment and are freed from sin’s pollution.((Plummer, The Epistles of St. John, 84.))
Howard Marshall explained that most commentators regard the two terms, forgive and cleanse, as synonymous; but he said it is possible that purification signifies the removal not only of the guilt of sin but also of the power of sin. Marshall suggested that John may be thinking of the destruction of sinful desires which define us in God’s sight.((Marshall, NICNT, 114.))
Henry Alford held that cleansing is distinguished from forgiveness as sanctification is distinct from justification and that the sanctification referenced is to sanctify wholly and entirely.((Alford, Alfred’s Greek Testament, 4:428; 430.))
According to Thomas Summers, there is no question that 1 John encompasses entire sanctification as well as justification. “We have a sinful nature—we have all sinned; but upon given conditions we may be cleansed from all sin—be purified as well as pardoned, and retain both our purity and our pardon.”((Summers, Treatise on Sanctification, 47.))
John McClintock declared, “If there be any text in the whole Bible that declares the doctrine of Christian purity, this does it.”((Crooks, Life of John McClintock, 161.))
And so, John teaches an initial sanctification when we are cleansed from the guilt of sins committed and breaks the power of cancelled sin. He also describes a progressive sanctification that delivers us from the actual practice of sin. But he also teaches an entire sanctification that cleanses us from the nature of sin.
We also have fellowship with God and our fellow believers. George Findlay wrote:
There is a deep meaning in that “and.” Christian fellowship and Christian perfection are things concomitant. Our social and individual salvation must be wrought out together. The goal is one to be sought for the Church, not the mere self—for us, not simply for me.((Findlay, Studies in John’s Epistles, 120.))
Sermon Suggestions
The old gospel song, “Are You Washed in the Blood?” was written by Elisha A. Hoffman in 1878. There is a washing or initial sanctification connected with regeneration (Titus 3:5). And there is the continual cleansing of progressive sanctification that keeps our garments spotless and white as snow. But the cleansing needs to be as deep as the nature of sin. We need a cure that is as radical as the disease.
The Apostle John writes that we can be cleansed from all unrighteousness. He uses the general word for sin, hamartia, three times in this chapter. But when he says that we can be cleansed from all sin, he uses the word adikia. This word appears only in 1:9 of this letter. If John is trying to emphasize something with this word, what is he saying? Adikia refers to an inward orientation toward sin. It normally occurs in the singular and thus does not focus on individual acts. It is composed of the typical word for justice or just with the negation of the a privative. Undoubtedly, John is making a contrast in verse 9 between God, who is just (dikaios—the adjective form), and us, who are unjust (adikia—the noun form). But God wants to restore his image and likeness in us.
We are not right. However, the atoning work of Christ, through his shed blood, goes “bone” deep. While some commentators may treat these two words for sin as synonyms, this could be consistent with Marshall’s explanation cited above. Thus, their interpretation is consistent with their presuppositions—that sanctification is not entire. However, good exegesis must also deal with the adjective all. How deeply has this cleansing penetrated your heart?