"By this we know that we have come to know him," if we keep His commandments; whoever keeps His word has God's love perfected in him. By this we may know that we are in Him: whoever says he abides in Him "ought to walk in the same way in which he walked" (a paraphrase of 1 John 2:3–6).

2015 is upon us. The other day I had eight children sitting before me, from five years old to eighteen — my daughter, my nephews, and my niece — wishing me a blessed new year. What word of counsel could I give them?

All the other parents gave the standard encouragements to live well and "obey your parents," but I could think of only one truly meaningful thing to impress on them: to know God and to serve Him in every way. I sounded awkwardly "spiritual" in what was a lighthearted moment, especially with my raspy, quiet voice from a lingering cold. Yet of all the hours of conversation that day with various family members, those few words to those children were the only spiritual thing I said all day.

The apostle John wrote his letter to encourage his readers to grow in their knowledge of God. He warned them against being led astray by false teaching. He warned them against the enticements of the world. He warned them against bitterness toward their brothers. His stated purpose was that they might not sin (cf. 1 John 2:1).

This is a good word for us as we look into a new year. Is there a greater resolution than growing in our knowledge of God? Is there a greater purpose than keeping ourselves from sin? Is there a greater goal than living as Jesus lived? "whoever says he abides in him ought to walk in the same way" Jesus walked (1 John 2:6).

So, dear friends, in this year let us make it our goal to please Him in every way. Let us live with an eternal perspective, so that we are not entangled again in temporal affairs, concerns, pursuits, interests, and distractions. Let us live as though Jesus were living through us, always considering what He would do, so that our decisions are shaped by the will of God.

If you are considering resolutions for this year, I hope that chief among them is to begin or continue to be daily in God's Word — to read it, meditate on it, share it, memorize it, and obey it. Then be also daily in prayer, for God has given us this privilege to help align our will with His. And as you pursue these things, I pray the Lord will encourage the progress of your faith.

AI-Expanded Reflection

1 John's tests of genuine faith are often summarized in three strands, and the comment's passage contains one of them: obedience ("if we keep his commandments"), alongside love for fellow believers (2:9–11; 3:14) and right belief about Jesus (2:22–23; 4:2). John's purpose in giving these tests is assurance rather than anxiety — "I write these things to you... that you may know that you have eternal life" (5:13). And he is careful to guard against despair: "if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous" (2:1).

The comment's small moment with the children is a good picture of what 1 John 2:6 asks — "walk in the same way in which he walked." Jesus regularly welcomed children and blessed them, telling the disciples not to hinder them (Mark 10:13–16). A grandfather figure's awkward but sincere word about knowing God may well be remembered long after the polished advice is forgotten. Deuteronomy 6:7 envisions faith passed on in exactly such ordinary moments, "when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way."

Whoever says he abides in Him "ought to walk in the same way in which he walked" (1 John 2:6).

Peter gave a similar instruction: to this you have been called, because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, so that you might follow in His steps (cf. 1 Peter 2:21).

John's emphasis is to walk as Jesus did by loving one's brother. Peter's emphasis is to walk as Jesus did by faithfully enduring suffering. In both, the point is to follow Jesus' teaching and example. In this way we can be said to abide in Christ, because Christ abides in us.

In 1 John 2:12–14, John writes to "little children," "fathers," and "young men": their sins are forgiven for His name's sake; they know Him who is from the beginning; they have overcome the evil one; they know the Father; they are strong, and the word of God abides in them (a paraphrase of 1 John 2:12–14).

Through closely parallel statements, John is declaring to his readers, young and old, that they are saved. Only the saved can say their "sins are forgiven." Only the saved truly know the Father and the One "who is from the beginning" (Jesus Christ). Only the saved "have overcome the evil one." Only the saved can be said to have "the word of God" abiding in them. This affirmation of salvation appears throughout the letter, alongside unequivocal commands to hold fast to true doctrine and to practice love toward Christian brothers and sisters. It is as though John were saying, "You are certainly Christians; therefore I fully command and expect you to live like it."

"Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits," for many false prophets have gone out into the world. We are from God; whoever knows God listens to us, and whoever is not from God does not listen to us; by this we know the Spirit of truth and the spirit of error (a paraphrase of 1 John 4:1, 6).

Some respected continuationist teachers seem to treat "test the spirits" as something less than a clear distinction between believers and unbelievers, true prophets and false. In other words, they add an element of "gray," so that there are not simply true and false prophets but also "mature" and "immature" ones.

I believe the problem with this view is that there is no biblical warrant for it. John's language makes clear that the testing is not to discern levels of maturity among believers but to expose "false prophets" among the true. These false prophets are not immature believers but those who are "from the world" and "not from God."

Now, I'm not saying that every Christian today who claims to have a prophecy and is proven wrong is an unbeliever. As I've argued before, John often writes in very absolute terms. He writes that Christians do not and cannot sin (cf. 1 John 3:9). This is true in our inner being, but our daily bodily experience is full of struggle and failure. I think the same is true of certain self-proclaimed prophets today. They are, I believe, deluded, misguided, and leading many astray, yet it is possible that they are saved. Nevertheless, I would not simply label them "immature Christians" because they are sometimes right and sometimes wrong. They need to be told gently but firmly to stop, and if they do not, I believe the Christian community should withdraw from them.

AI-Expanded Reflection

1 John was written to a community shaken by a painful departure: some who had been part of the fellowship had left and were teaching that Jesus had not truly come in the flesh (2:19; 4:2–3). John's letter is therefore full of tests — of doctrine (do you confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh?), of obedience (do you keep His commandments?), and of love (do you love your brother?). Scholars often note that these three tests run throughout the letter, and that John's purpose in giving them is assurance: he writes to those who believe in the name of the Son of God, "that you may know that you have eternal life" (5:13). The comment is right that 2:12–14 is an affirmation, not a warning.

On the question of prophecy today, Christians differ (see #1843 and #1789). Continuationists who speak of "immature" prophecy generally distinguish between false prophets who deny Christ — John's concern in 1 John 4, since his test is confession of Jesus come in the flesh (4:2) — and believers whose sincere impressions may be mistaken, which Paul says must be "weighed" (1 Corinthians 14:29). Cessationists, like the comment, reject that distinction for prophecy. All agree with John that every claim must be tested, and with the comment that persistent false claims should be confronted.

This is how we know that we love the children of God: by loving God and carrying out his commands. In fact, this is love for God: to keep his commands (1 John 5:2–3).

Do you follow the logic here? How do you love the children of God? By loving God and keeping His commands. How do you love God? By keeping his commands. Therefore, both love for God and love for His children come down to this one thing: keeping God's commands.

This sounds very much like Solomon's conclusion in Ecclesiastes 12:13,

Now all has been heard; here is the conclusion of the matter: Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the duty of all mankind.

The whole duty of mankind, especially believers, is to fear God and keep His commandments. Put another way, it is to believe and obey God.

Friends, as you begin this New Year, and you consider what resolutions to make, I hope that chief among them will be to make it your top priority to more perfectly trust and obey God this year. I hope that this resolution will rise above considerations like losing weight, spending more time with family, being more frugal, enjoying life more, etc. As "good" as these may seem, they are really peripheral details, the best of which will naturally flow from trusting and obeying God. After all, Jesus taught,

So do not worry, saying, ‘What shall we eat?’ or ‘What shall we drink?’ or ‘What shall we wear?’ For the pagans run after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them. But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well. Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own (Matthew 6:31–34).

And in your endeavor to trust and obey God this year, I can think of nothing more practical and helpful as lengthening and deepening your time in God's Word. If you got off track in 2012, get back on track in 2013. This is one of those resolutions that ought not to be sidelined because of difficulty, frustration or failure. It is like eating, drinking, and breathing for our spirit. It cannot be long neglected without doing serious damage to our souls. Therefore, I encourage you to drink deeply from the Word of God, for in so doing, you will have all the tools you need to fully trust and obey God:

All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work (2 Timothy 3:16–17).

AI-Expanded Reflection

The relationship between love and obedience in 1 John 5 is more intimate than a list of duties attached to religious affection. John begins with new birth and faith in Jesus as the Christ. Love for the Father extends to those born of him, and love for his children is expressed through obedience to God. These connections prevent us from defining love simply by how agreeable an action feels. A response may be pleasant while neglecting another person’s true good; conversely, a difficult act of truthful, patient service may express profound love.

The immediate context also explains why God’s commandments are not presented as an intolerable burden. John connects obedience with the faith that overcomes the world (1 John 5:3–5). He does not mean that discipleship never costs us anything or that mature believers never struggle. The commands belong to a relationship established by God’s life-giving action. Obedience is therefore the response of children who have received love, rather than a payment offered to persuade a reluctant Father to accept them. First John 3:23 gives a particularly useful center: believe in God’s Son and love one another.

This helps relate the original’s emphasis on Bible reading to the rest of the letter. Scripture equips us to recognize what God actually commands, correcting the tendency to confuse personal preferences with divine requirements. Yet John repeatedly makes obedience concrete. Someone who has material resources and closes his heart to a needy brother cannot claim that an impressive devotional routine is sufficient (1 John 3:17–18). Reading should open our eyes to people and responsibilities, not become an achievement that excuses us from them.

The New Year setting makes this reflection especially practical. A renewed reading schedule can restore neglected attention to God’s word, but the schedule serves discipleship rather than measuring a person’s worth. Missing a day need not lead to abandoning the year. Resuming with humility, attending carefully to a manageable passage, and acting on its instruction can be more fruitful than hurriedly recovering a numerical target. Second Timothy 3:16–17 connects Scripture’s teaching and correction with being equipped for good work, so the intended outcome reaches beyond completed pages.

The original rightly challenges competing priorities, though family care, responsible spending, and physical stewardship need not be merely peripheral concerns. They can become particular settings in which obedience takes shape. Matthew 6 addresses anxious preoccupation and the priority of God’s kingdom, not indifference to ordinary needs. A helpful resolution is therefore to ask both what place Scripture occupies in the day and what difference its teaching will make in that day’s relationships. The two questions belong together: receiving God’s word and practicing love are mutually reinforcing features of life with him.

Another good question from a member, about 1 John 5:16–17: John says that if you see a brother or sister commit a sin that doesn't lead to death, you should pray and God will give them life — but there is a sin that leads to death, and John says he isn't telling us to pray about that one. What sin is this?

My response: on a straightforward reading, it appears John is counseling against praying for the dead. In other words, pray for the sinner while they're living, not after they've died — consistent with Hebrews 9:27, that people are destined to die once, and after that comes judgment. If their sin kills them, no amount of prayer afterward will help. Recall David praying and fasting for his infant son while the child lived, then ceasing both once he learned the child had died (2 Samuel 12:15–23). Others have looked for a more spiritual reference here, since John often speaks of "death" in a spiritual sense, which is possible — but the immediate, present-tense language of seeing a brother or sister who is committing a sin seems to argue for the more literal reading.

AI-Expanded Reflection

This passage is one of the genuinely unresolved cruxes in 1 John, and interpretations have ranged widely across church history — some reading the "sin unto death" as apostasy, some as the blasphemy against the Spirit described in the Gospels, some as a physical death brought on by persistent sin (as in 1 Corinthians 11:30), and some, as here, as a caution against prayer for those already dead. The reading offered here has the advantage of fitting the verse's present-tense framing, though it's worth holding loosely given how little John explains. What's clear regardless of which reading is right is the instruction John does give plainly: intercede for a brother or sister you see struggling, in the confident expectation that God gives life.

One of our members asked a thoughtful question about 1 John 2:2, which says Christ is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but for the sins of the whole world: did Jesus die for the sins of the whole world, or only for the sins of the elect?

My response: excellent question. Much of the difficulty here comes from how hard it is to read a verse like this without the lens of a later theological controversy — specifically, the debate over the extent of the atonement. But consider John the Baptist's declaration, "Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world" (John 1:29). Do we imagine Jesus actually removed the sin of every person who ever lived? I'd argue John was speaking of the sufficiency of Christ's death to take away sin, rather than saying it effectively removed everyone's sin. A similar construction appears in 1 Timothy 4:10, which describes God as the Savior of all people, especially of those who believe — Jesus is sufficient Savior for unbeliever and believer alike, but only the believer actually receives the benefit, because only the believer has trusted Him.

A harder verse is 2 Peter 3:9, where the Lord is described as patient, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance. Does that mean God wants every single person saved? In context, Peter is answering "scoffers" who deny God will judge them (2 Peter 3:3–4). Notice that the ungodly are consistently referred to in the third person — "they," "them" — while Peter's patience language is directed toward "us." The "any" and "all" modify that "us." A contextual reading would be: not willing that any of us should perish, but that all of us should come to repentance. The contrast is between believers and unbelievers.

AI-Expanded Reflection

This comment argues for a limited or particular view of the atonement's intent while affirming its unlimited sufficiency — a position with a long, serious pedigree in Reformed theology, often summarized as "sufficient for all, efficient for the elect." It's worth noting plainly that other faithful Christian traditions read these same verses differently, taking 1 John 2:2 and 2 Peter 3:9 at their apparent face value as describing a genuinely universal divine intention, with the benefit applied only to those who believe. Careful, honest interpreters land on both sides, and the disagreement turns less on whether anyone is taking Scripture seriously than on how much weight to give the immediate epistolary context versus the plain sense of the universal-sounding language. What both traditions agree on is this comment's actual bottom line: no one receives the benefit of Christ's death apart from trusting Him.

Friends, 1 John is one of those books that will encourage a light reader, confuse a careful one, and enlighten anyone who perseveres further still. It's to that third group I want to speak today. You may be confused reading verses like 1 John 3:9, saying that no one born of God keeps on sinning, since God's seed remains in them, and they cannot go on sinning, because they've been born of God (a paraphrase) — or 1 John 5:18, that no one born of God continues to sin, since the One born of God keeps them safe, and the evil one can't touch them (a paraphrase). You might think, "I still sin, even often — does this mean I'm not born of God?" There seems to be a real disconnect between these verses and our actual experience. It's made harder by verses earlier in the same letter, like 1 John 1:8–10, which say that claiming to be without sin deceives ourselves and denies the truth; that confessing our sins means God, faithful and just, forgives and cleanses us; and that claiming we haven't sinned at all makes God out to be a liar (a paraphrase).

These verses suggest believers genuinely do sin, and anyone claiming otherwise is lying, or worse, calling God a liar. So what do we make of all this?

Let's move from careful readers to those who persevere further to understand. John isn't contradicting himself, nor denying our actual experience — he's fulfilling his own stated purpose, writing so that his readers wouldn't sin (a paraphrase of 1 John 2:1). He's already clarified in chapter 1 that believers do sin, that sin disrupts their fellowship with the Father, but that fellowship can be restored through confession, since God remains ready and willing to forgive based on His own faithfulness to His promises in Christ.

But from chapters 2 through 5, John's focus shifts from forgiveness to the righteous life that should characterize every believer — and here he speaks in commands without exception or qualification, giving no excuse for sin. There's a reason he addresses his readers as "my little children" — he's teaching them the way you'd teach children, not with intricate nuance, as you might with the mature, but with clear-cut commands and black-and-white categories that leave no exceptions. That's why we find such strong language, that believers "do not sin" or even "cannot sin."

Paul makes similarly stark, black-and-white statements at times too — asking rhetorically whether believers should keep sinning so grace can increase, and answering emphatically no, since believers have died to sin and can no longer live in it (a paraphrase of Romans 6:1–2). And in Romans 8:1, he writes that there's now no condemnation for those in Christ, who walk not according to the sinful nature but according to the Spirit (a paraphrase).

But just before that, Paul spends an entire chapter honestly describing his own ongoing struggle with that very sinful nature (Romans 7:21–25), and elsewhere argues the Spirit and the sinful nature remain in constant conflict within a believer, so that believers don't always do what they want (Galatians 5:17). So what does Paul mean saying believers "do not walk according to the sinful nature"? The same thing John means in 1 John 3:9 — that whoever is born of God does not, and cannot, sin, because God's seed remains in them (a paraphrase).

There will come a point when a believer's sinful nature — often called "the body of death" (Romans 7:24; 8:10, 13) — will be fully redeemed, transformed completely into a sinless nature like Christ's (1 John 3:2–3; Romans 8:23; Philippians 3:20; 1 Corinthians 15:50–58). This is the believer's hope of resurrection. John speaks of this future hope of complete redemption as though it were already a present reality, tied to a believer's new birth by the Spirit and connected to the gospel's promise, which guarantees not only justification but ultimate glorification too (Romans 8:29–30). So within every believer exists an incorruptible spiritual side that "does not sin" and, in that sense, "cannot sin."

John's exhortation, like Paul's, is that believers live in keeping with this hope of sinless perfection — as "citizens of heaven" in incorruption, rather than merely corruptible citizens of earth. Paul makes the same appeal, urging believers to count themselves dead to sin but alive to God in Christ Jesus, refusing to let sin reign in their mortal bodies, refusing to offer themselves as instruments of unrighteousness, but instead offering themselves to God as instruments of righteousness (a paraphrase of Romans 6:11–13).

In other words, even though we haven't yet become perfect, and still live with real, frustrating conflict against our sinful nature, we hold an incorruptible hope — the Holy Spirit Himself, living within us as the guarantee of our redemption (Ephesians 1:13–14), through whom we're already accounted perfect, righteous, and holy before God. Yet precisely because of this, we should persevere in living according to the Spirit, who has already secured this righteous standing for us in Christ. So Paul writes that if we live by the Spirit, we should also walk by the Spirit (a paraphrase of Galatians 5:25) — he could just as easily have written, "since the Spirit lives in us, let us walk in the Spirit," as he does elsewhere, describing believers as not in the flesh but in the Spirit, since God's Spirit dwells in them; and if Christ is in us, our body is dead because of sin, but the Spirit is life because of righteousness; and if the Spirit who raised Jesus from the dead lives in us, He will also give life to our mortal bodies through that same Spirit — meaning we're debtors, not to the flesh, since living by the flesh leads to death, while putting the body's deeds to death by the Spirit leads to life, for all who are led by God's Spirit are His children (a paraphrase of Romans 8:9–14).

Notice two natures at work in the believer — one sinful (the "body," counted as dead), the other the Spirit, representing life. Both the death of the one and the life of the other are accomplished by Christ, who was made sin for us, though He knew no sin, so we might become God's own righteousness in Him (a paraphrase of 2 Corinthians 5:21). We're therefore counted as perfect in Christ.

Since we're already perfect in Christ, we're now, in a sense, indebted to live according to that perfect standard, daily putting to death the deeds tied to our sinful nature (Romans 8:13). Paul says something similar elsewhere — that Christ's love compels us, since if One died for all, then all died, and He died for all so that those who live would no longer live for themselves, but for Him who died and rose again on their behalf (a paraphrase of 2 Corinthians 5:14–15).

Friends, we're already perfect in Christ — a perfection that will be fully realized at our bodily resurrection, when our corrupt sinful nature is entirely swallowed up by Christ's incorruptible, glorious nature. Until then, though we still live with that sinful nature, we're inwardly compelled by the Spirit to struggle and strive toward Christlike maturity.

God is glorified in that very struggle against our sinful nature. In our inward groaning for the redemption of our bodies, God is glorified. Even in acknowledging our helplessness against sin, and our unceasing gratitude for our hope in Christ, God is glorified. Until Christ returns, our daily, unceasing testimony will remain something like Paul's own — calling himself a wretched man, asking who will rescue him from this body of death, and thanking God it's through Jesus Christ our Lord (a paraphrase of Romans 7:24–25).

All praise and glory to God our Father, and to our Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ. Amen!

AI-Expanded Reflection

The "already-perfect, still-struggling" tension this long reflection works so hard to reconcile is sometimes summarized by theologians with a simple phrase worth adding here — believers are simul justus et peccator, simultaneously righteous and sinner, a formulation that captures exactly the two-natures framework this comment builds toward at length. That doesn't resolve every remaining question about how "cannot sin" language in 1 John should be balanced against ongoing sin in a believer's actual experience — a genuinely debated point among careful interpreters, some reading 1 John's language as describing the believer's new nature exclusively, others reading it as describing a settled pattern of life rather than sinless perfection — but it does show this tension has been recognized and wrestled with by careful theologians for centuries, not something this comment is inventing a novel solution for on its own.