1 John 3 - IVP New Testament Commentaries

A Rift in the Family

A recent story in a popular magazine gave some suggestions for "How to Heal a Family Feud." It was sprinkled with anecdotes of families torn apart by petty squabbles, carefully nursed grudges, perceived and real hurts, and substantial doses of anger. But there were also stories of happy endings as old wounds were healed and divided families were reconciled. The story included practical advice for bringing about such happy endings--prompt action, candidness, clear ing the air, moving ahead step by step and so on. It sounds simple enough. Why is it, then, that rifts and feuds in the family we know as the church are so seldom resolved with such clean and happy endings? And, more to the point for our discussion, why is it that John's own church could not settle its dispute and restore the bonds of fellowship?

To interpret the rift in his church family, the Elder uses the story of the first family and its two sons, Cain and Abel. This story does not have a fairy-tale ending with everyone living happily ever after. But two fea tures of the story make it useful. First, the story of Cain and Abel is not the story of a two-sided feud, like the fabled Hatfields and McCoys, but the account of the evil actions of one brother, Cain. In his evil actions, Cain showed that he was no true brother to Abel. Second, Cain's evil act created such a great rift in the family that we can longer even speak of a break in the family: it created two entirely separate families.

Typical of the epistle, the contrast between these families is spelled out in absolute terms. Abel represents the children of God, who are characterized by righteousness (v. 12), life (vv. 12-15), love and pity (vv. 13-14, 17), righteous conduct (vv. 16-18) and fellowship (vv. 13-15). Cain represents the children of the devil (v. 10), who are known by evil (v. 12), death and murder (vv. 12-15), hate (vv. 13-14, 17), unrighteous conduct (vv. 16-18) and hostility to the children of God (v. 13). These descriptions do not mean that Abel never did anything wrong or that Cain never did anything right. Rather, John's dualistic language points both descriptively and prescriptively to the identifying characteristics of those in the light and those in the darkness. John now picks up one of these identifying marks as he speaks of the children of God as those who are to love each other.Disobeying the message (3:11-13)

The command to love each other is the message you heard from the beginning (compare 2:7, 10). Indeed, it was given by Jesus himself (Jn 13:34; 15:12, 17). But earlier the Elder had summed up "the message we have heard from him" (1:5) as "God is light." There is clearly a close connection between these statements (Haas 1972:87). For love originates with God. Those who are then born of God and live in the light must and will reflect God's love to others in the family (2:9-10), just as they reflect his righteousness (3:4-10).

Cain provides a negative example at two points. First, he does not manifest love for his brother, and so shows that he belongs to the world and the sphere of death (3:12-14). But even worse, he is guilty of an act that robbed his brother of life; he is a murderer (v. 15). And although this is a story about two brothers, it is really Jesus, and not Abel, who provides the positive example for the Johannine Christians (v. 16). For where Cain hated, Jesus loved and gave the command to love. Where Cain murdered, Jesus granted fullness of life, for he himself is life (1:2; 3:16; 5:11-12, 20; John 10:10; 11:25; 14:6).

But the secessionists' actions of false teaching and creating schism in the church mirror those of Cain, not of Jesus. For those who follow them and their teaching leave the sphere of life for the sphere of death (3:14). The Johannine Christians are to be on their guard against those who would rob them of life. But they must also take heed lest in their own actions they fail to live out the love that was commanded and modeled by Jesus himself (compare v. 16).

Does the Elder's choice of Cain and Abel, a pair of brothers, to illustrate the hostility of the secessionists indicate that he still regards them as "brothers" to the Johannine Christians? Some commentators argue that brother really means neighbor, whether that neighbor is in the world or the church (Bultmann 1973:28-29; Schnackenburg 1963:195). This seems unlikely, for it contradicts the epistle's family imagery (3:4-10), where children belong either to one family or the other and are therefore siblings to those in that family. Cain and Abel are chosen because Cain should have acted as a brother: with love and pity. But instead he showed that he was no true brother at all, not a child of God (3:12, his own actions were evil; compare 3:6, 9).

Likewise, the secessionists may have appeared to be brothers, but that was a lie whose truth in the end was exposed (2:18-23). Cain, in fact, belonged to the evil one. In his behavior he showed himself at enmity with God. But he was no puppet of the evil one. Cain murdered Abel not because of any predetermined role or inescapable urge but because his own actions were evil and his brother's were righteous. Children of God will reflect the righteousness of God; those who are not children of God reflect the sinfulness that characterizes the realm of evil. As Jesus said, "A tree is recognized by its fruit. . . . The good [person] brings good things out of the good stored up in him, and the evil [person] brings evil things out of the evil stored up in him" (Mt 12:33, 35). While for John it is inevitable that one's actions will manifest one's inner character, those actions are neither predetermined nor automatic. Cain made a choice: he disobeyed God. And he forsook his responsibility to his brother.

The same is true of the secessionists. In breaking fellowship with the Johannine church and separating themselves from the community, they have manifested what the author calls "hatred"--a strong term indeed! Hatred connotes fundamental opposition to the values and commit ments of others (Grayston 1984:68, 112; Smalley 1984:187). This is the way the world responds to God's children. But the world's hostility should not surprise the Johannine Christians (v. 13). They would surely remember the words of Jesus that the world will hate his followers just as it hated him (Jn 15:19-21).

Sometimes this passage is understood to imply that if Christians were to live truly in obedience to God's commands, the church would feel the full wrath of the hatred of the world. So Christians begin to wonder what is wrong if they are not being persecuted. But the Elder does not say that the more righteous we are and the more we live as the children of God, the more the world will hate us, as if the quantity of our obe dience determined the world's response to us. Rather, he states a simple fact: there is hostility between the world and thje children of God. They have conflicting loyalties and values (2:15-17), and the world attempts to dissuade Christians from their commitments (2:26; 3:7). The chal lenge to the present-day reader is to discern when the church is truly experiencing the hostility of the world. Not everything that the church undertakes necessarily comes from God, nor does all opposition to the church necessarily come from evil. While the world's hostility is to be expected, it is not to be made a badge of the quality of our Christian life. True assurance of who we are comes in a more positive way.Hearing the Message (3:14-15)

The Johannine Christians can be assured of their relationship with God by their continuing love for each other. Love for each other shows that we have passed from death to life, because it shows that we have experienced God's love for us, and un derstood the character of God. Love also shows that we are following the model of Jesus' own self-giving love and living in obedience to Jesus' commands. Love is an expression of the transforming power of God at work in us and in the church. And just as love for others is the expression of knowledge of the God who is love (4:16), so hate expresses the death and darkness that come from lack of knowledge of God.Jesus' Example: Love That Brings Life (3:16)

By now the reader is well aware that love is a central theme and concern of 1 John. But with 3:16 we come to the first of several statements in the epistle that state explicitly, This is . . . what love is (compare 4:8-10, 16). And it is the voluntary self-giving of Jesus to others, in life and death, that constitutes the epitome of God's love (4:9-10). Not only do we see the fullness of God's love in Jesus' death, we see also the essence of love itself.

With the statement This is how we know what love is, John points to two things important for us to remember. Jesus' voluntary giving of life is both an example for us to emulate and a revelation of the extent of God's love (Smalley 1984:194; Stott 1988:147). As an example, Jesus shows us that true love is concrete and active, not merely felt or thought, but lived out. As a revelation of God's love, Jesus shows us that God was active in sending the Son so that we might know God, have life and live within the circle of love. But in saying that the sending of the Son is a revelation of God's love, we do not mean that we admire it as we might a display in a museum or art gallery. Nor does God put the Son on parade as we might celebrate a hero, president or winning sports team or figure, so that we can cheer and applaud.

God's love is not simply a thing to be admired. It is, rather, the power that transfers those who have faith from death to life, from the realm of hatred to love. Imagine that a friend is standing at the end of a pier and throws a life-preserver out in the water. If he then turns to you and says, "See how much I love you?" the action will seem odd at best. If you are safe on the pier, how does your friend's action embody love? But if you are drowning in the water and your friend throws you the life-preserver and pulls you to safety, you would not need idly speculate about his motivation, and he would not need to say, "I love you." Because your life has been saved, you know you are loved (see Marshall 1978:193). Similarly, for people to know of the reality and greatness of God's love they must experience it as a love that is active for them.Jesus' Action: Life That Brings Love (3:17)

Jesus' death and love creates the community of life and love. Those within that community ought to manifest a love for others that serves the end of nurturing community (v. 16). And one does not strengthen community by speech alone, but by actions and in truth.

But what is self-giving love? To lay down one's life for another sounds noble and heroic, but this concept is often misunderstood and misused. To tell the woman or child who is being abused that they are manifesting "self-giving" or sacrificial love is bad advice and poor theology. Sacrificial love that models itself after Jesus' example does not enable the destruc tive behavior of others, but encourages them in actions that lead to love and life, and to healing and wholeness.

We may note at least four features of Jesus' self-giving love as we seek to implement truly sacrificial love in our relationships. Jesus voluntarily chose to lay down his life. He had a choice, and he could have chosen differently. Second, the results of his death are life-giving for others (Jn 10:11, 15, 17-18). Third, true love is always accompanied by truth and never by deception or lies (3:7-10). It lives fully in the light, and does not have to hide its actions. Fourth, we are to give out of our abundance, from what we have, to those who have not. Jesus gave the life he had from the Father to be our life: he gave from his strength to our weakness. Self-giving love gives out of what we are and have to the weakness or lack of others.

Specifically, the Johannine Christians who have material possessions (echein ton bion tou kosmou) are instructed to give to those who are in need (echein chreian). Although this may seem far less demanding and heroic than the willingness to sacrifice one's life for another, it is surely difficult enough! It is sobering to be reminded that the average American church member gives about 2-3 percent of their annual in come to various charities and causes--including the church. The prin ciple of conduct John gives here is simple: we ought to be willing to give up what we have in order to enrich the lives of others. And while it is commendable when this is done out of a free and generous spirit, it is more important to do the right thing than to wait for the right motivation. Often willingness and motivation to do right can be nour ished by the actual action of doing what is right.

Since John has just laid down a principle for conducting ourselves in love toward one another, we come back to the question with which we opened this section: Why is it that John's own church could not settle its dispute and restore the bonds of fellowship? In fact, the choice of Cain and Abel portrays in the strongest possible imagery the dualism between death and life and between hate and love. The unremitting dualism and the absolutely negative terms in which the Elder interprets the actions of the secessionists is a bit disconcerting.

But it is important to remember that we do not know everything we would like to know. For example, we do not know what measures the Elder or his adherents took to bring the secessionists back to the fold. This letter was probably written after the break, since it seems to look back and interpret what has happened and why it happened. What went on before this point is not known to us. Clearly the Elder would not have considered compromising his understanding of the person and work of Jesus. But what else he might have done to try to heal the rift, or how he acted, or what was said, remains lost to us. By the time this letter was written the categories are fixed in the Elder's mind, and he speaks in absolute, dualistic terms. It is important to remember how "dualism" and dualistic language functions. When the author speaks of the truth, life and love of the church, he refers not to the church's moral superiority so much as to its commitment to these realities and to the one who ultimately is truth, life and love. And it is incumbent upon the children of God to be as persistent in love as God was in seeking each of them out.

The Confidence of the Children of God (3:18-24)

Probably no human relationship is so characterized by boldness and confidence as that of young children before their parents. With complete trust a child comes to a parent and asks for help, for attention, for companionship. When my daughter comes to me with a request, my answer is sometimes "yes," sometimes "not now" or "later," and sometimes even "no." She knows that at times I may refuse a request, but she also knows that she can come again and again and have her needs tended to, her requests granted, and find a friend who will spend time with her.

Precisely that relationship of children to their parents, that relationship of implicit trust, of confidence and willingness to ask again and again, characterizes the stance of the believer before God. Here are strong words of assurance to believers who doubt the status of their own re lationship with God.An Unsettling Lack of Confidence (3:18-20)

This next short section begins with a pastoral exhortation that Christians live out their love. In the contrast between words or tongue on the one hand and actions and in truth on the other, the Elder urges his readers to live in conformity to what he knows to be the truth, the revelation of God's love in Jesus himself (Kysar 1986:85).

In verse 19 there is an implicit promise that believers can know that [they] belong to the truth, a promise closely linked to the exhortation of verse 18 to love . . . with actions and in truth. Love for one another gives us assurance that we belong to the truth, because love is a visible man ifestation that we know the God who is truth and love (4:8, 16). Because we know that we are of the truth, we set our hearts at rest in [God's] presence. The Elder previously has spoken of coming to God in confes sion (2:1), of having confidence before God at the coming of Christ (2:28) and at the judgment (4:17), and later he will speak of the con fidence believers have with God when they pray (5:14-15). In the pre sent passage, however, John does not have in view a specific time or instance when we come into God's presence, for whenever believers come before God, they come with confidence rather than fear (compare 4:17-18), anxiety or self-incrimination. Confidence before God springs from our relationship with God, and that kind of confidence is as natural in God's children as the confidence of children in their human parents.

While the epistle promises that we can have assurance that we belong to the truth, as evidenced by our deeds of love, there may be times when we feel we have not lived this out, and so our hearts incriminate and condemn us (3:19b). In those times, the Elder reminds us, we are to remember that God is greater than our hearts, and he knows everything. The twin affirmations that God is greater than our hearts and knows everything imply that the human heart is not the final standard of judgment or mercy: rather, God is, and God's power keeps believers from the onslaughts of the world. God's greater power insures the faithfulness of the Johannine Christians (compare Jn 10:29; 14:28; 1 Jn 4:4; 5:9). They need not fear even if their hearts were to condemn them, for God knows those who belong to the flock. The ultimate basis of our relationship to God and confidence with God is not the steadfastness of Christians but the greatness of God. As Jesus said, "My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father's hand" (Jn 10:29).

We may see here the Elder's concern to strengthen discouraged indi viduals in the face of challenges hurled at them by the secessionists. Despite the secessionists' claims to belong to the truth, John argues that when their claim is tested against the standard of genuine love, they come up short. The Johannine Christians need not be anxious that it may in fact be their own claim to know God that is defective: they can know that they belong to the truth, because they have committed themselves to loving the children of God by remaining steadfast in fellowship.Reassuring Confidence in Prayer (3:21-22)

But, in fact, the Elder expects that their hearts will not condemn them. He does not want Christians to dwell in the realm of anxiety and doubt, but rather to be assured of their relationship with God and so to be instilled with con fidence. The words if our hearts do not condemn us do not imply that Christians never fail or fall short, much less that they are unaware of such failings. Indeed, the necessity of confession (1:8, 10) implies their full awareness of sin. But sin is no barrier to our having confidence if we come to God in confession, and even at those times, when our assurance is perhaps lowest, we can come confidently, since our advocate is Jesus Christ himself (2:1-2).

Just as boldness and confidence characterize children who make re quests of their parents, so too boldness and confidence are to distinguish the children of God as they approach God in prayer. The Elder speaks of this boldness in the strongest possible language when he states that we receive from [God] anything we ask. Similar promises are found in 5:14-15 and in the Gospel of John (14:13; 15:7, 16; 16:23, 26). Typically these promises have some sort of qualification: asking in Jesus' name (Jn 14:13; 16:23, 26) or according to God's will (1 Jn 5:14), abiding in Jesus (Jn 15:7, 16) and keeping the commandments (1 Jn 3:21). In some sense, certain "conditions" must be met for us to be given anything we ask. But what is the nature of these conditions?

What all these "conditions" (praying in Jesus' name, doing God's will, abiding in Jesus) have in common is that they are expressions in the life of the believer of an already existing relationship of love between God and the believer. They are not conditions that one must strive to meet with the hope of getting a hearing with God. Thus to pray "in Jesus' name" means that prayers are offered through the mediation or interces sion of Jesus (2:1-2). Prayer according to God's will (5:14) is prayer that understands what is pleasing to God (3:20) and makes its petitions accordingly. The present verse assures us that our prayers are answered because we obey his commands and do what pleases him. And by now it is apparent in 1 John that "obeying his commands" is not a prerequisite to fellowship with God, but rather the manifestation of that fellowship.

We do not come to God as strangers pleading for special favors, but as those whom God calls "children." Just as requests and petitions com prise much of the language of children to their parents, so petitionary prayer constitutes much of the address of Christians to their heavenly Father. When we are told that we receive . . . anything we ask, we are not promised that every item on our wish list will be granted to us. We are, rather, reminded of the intimate bond that we have with God, a bond that makes it possible for us to bring our petitions to God at all. For petition does not bring about intimacy, confidence and trust; rather, intimacy and trust elicit petition. We can bring our requests to God with confidence because we indeed belong to the truth: we belong to God.Confidence from Obeying God's Command (3:23-24)

In verse 22 we read that we receive what we ask for in prayer because we obey [God's] commands and do what pleases [God]. The plural (commands) of verse 22 now becomes a singular (command) in verse 23, but the one command has two aspects: to believe in Jesus and to love one another. Throughout the epistle the Elder has separated these commands, some times emphasizing the command to love one another (2:8; 3:11-18; 4:7-8, 19-21; 5:1-5) and sometimes the command to believe in Jesus (2:22-25; 4:1-3, 13-15; 5:5-12). But love and belief are not two separate com mands one must keep in order to be a child of God. They are two different expressions of the indwelling of God in us, for God is love and as perfect love sent Jesus the Son to give us life. Thus the two commands are really one, since the pre-eminent expression of God's love for us is the giving of Jesus Christ to us. (The implicit relationship between belief and love is developed at greater length in 4:7-21.)

When John writes that those who obey his commands live in him, and he in them, he does not mean that obedience to the commands is a prerequisite to God's dwelling with us. One cannot justly claim a rela tionship to God without that obedience, for a child of God will naturally seek to do what pleases God. But becoming a child of God does not come about by our efforts; the very image of being born of God suggests otherwise. The relationship is established first, by God; our part is ma nifested in obedience to God's commands. Thus there is mutual indwelling: we can be said to live out our lives in the sphere of obedience and love for God, and in turn God cherishes, protects and lives with us.

Further evidence of God's presence with us is the Spirit, which has been given to us. Here John is not likely referring to an "inner testimony" or conviction that the Spirit gives us, a sort of feeling that we are indeed in relationship with God. To reduce the Spirit's witness to a purely internal experience or feeling would grant too much ground to the secessionists, who could easily make the same claim. The Elder's way of writing implies that the Christian belief that God dwells in them can be verified (Houlden 1973:106-7). As always in 1 John, the author points to the tangible manifestation and visible expression of claims to know God. As will become clear in the following chapter, we know that we have the Spirit because only God's spirit inspires true confession of Christ (4:1-6) and empowers us to love one another (4:7-21). Because the Spirit is present with us, we keep the command of verse 23: to believe in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ, and to love one another.