Biola Broadcaster - 1969-04

Verses 14 and 15. In verses 14-17 John moves to a second assurance enjoyed by the believing Christian, not now of eternal life, but of an­ swered prayer. This assurance is not so much a “knowledge” (as in verse 13, although it results in one, 15) as a confidence, a “freedom of speech” as parresia means literally, or “boldness . . . toward” God (RV; Gk. pros,). The preposition points to that active approach to God and fellowship with Him which are the expression of the eternal life of which John has been writing (11- 13). This Christian confidence be­ longs not just to the future, to the Parousia (2:28) and the Judgment Day (4:17), but to the here and now. It is a confidence both in the manner of our approach to God, free and bold (3:21), and in its outcome, namely that . . . “he heareth us.”

The qualification, however, is “if we ask any thing according to his will.” In 3:22 the condition of answered prayer; “I do not say that he shall pray for it,” that is, for one who is recognized as committing it. True, he does not explicitly forbid prayer, as God forbade Jeremiah to pray for the people of Judah (Jer. 7 :16, 11 : 14; 14:11; cf. I Sam. 2:25); but he does not advise it, for he clearly doubts its efficacy in this case. What, then, is the sin unto death? John’s readers were no doubt famil­ iar with the expression, but com­ mentators since the sub-apostolic fa­ thers have debated its meaning. It cannot refer to a sin punishable by physical death, as in Acts 5:1-11 and I Corinthians 5:5, 11:30, since the life with which it is contrasted is clearly spiritual or eternal life. In one sense all sin is “unto death” spiritually, for death is the penalty for sin (Rom. 5:12; 6:23; Jas. 1: 15) ; but here John distinguishes between sin which is unto death and sin which is not. We may divide the possible interpretations into three. 1.) A specific sin. In the Mosaic law certain sins were listed as capi­ tal offences, punishable by death (e.g. Lv. 20:1-27; Num. 18:22; cf. Rom. 1:32). Further, in the Old Tes­ tament generally a distinction was drawn between sins of ignorance, committed unwittingly, which could be cleansed through sacrifice, and wanton or “presumptuous” sins (Ps. 19:13), committed “with a high high,” for which there was no for­ giveness. The same distinction was “common among Rabbinic writers” (Westcott), and certain early Chris­ tian fathers carried it over into the gospel age. Clement of Alexandria and Origen both accepted that a line could be drawn between forgivable and unforgivable sins, but declined to classify them. Tertullian went a stage further and listed the grosser sins (including murder, adultery, blasphemy and idolatry) as beyond

Dr. Louis T. Talbot (right), chancellor of Biola, has the opportunity for fellowship with Dr. Charles L. Feinberg, dean of Talbot Theological Seminary. Al­ though Dr. Talbot's speaking engagements have had to be curtailed due to his health,he and his wife are faithful in attending special functions of the organization.

30

Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online