1 John 2:2
Pardon
me for my bluntness, but if you easily get offended reading material you don’t
doctrinally agree with one bit, this post may not be for you. You have been
warned. If however, you know me personally
and typically agree with my thoughts concerning the Word, or you’re just
curious about what I’m about to say, by all means, please continue. I must
admit half the reason I’m writing this is because I have to wait on the fire in
my fireplace to go out (using water leaves a bad mess) and I have nothing
better to do, so I will exercise my right to free speech and be less concerned
with considering others’ opinions.
My
classmates and I are currently translating 1 John from the Greek text to close
out the semester for the class. Thus far, I have thoroughly enjoyed the class
and the language and genuinely look forward to continuing my education in Greek
(and Hebrew eventually) as I continue my studies. I also really like 1 John, so
I was thrilled to see we would be translating most of it before the end of the
semester. To give a brief summary of how translation goes down in the class,
our teacher will normally allow us to split up into groups of two or three,
then he will assign each of us a verse to work on. Once we are all finished, we’ll
go through all of them as a class while he makes comments/corrections when
needed. The group I was in just so happened to get 1 John 2:2- “He [Jesus
Christ] is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for
the sins of the whole world.” I haven’t read or considered this verse in quite
some time, but I’m certainly aware of the controversy surrounding it.
When it
was our turn to share what we got, our professor quickly approved of our
translation and proceeded to go on about a 5 to 10 minute rant on how
Calvinists love to presuppose their theology into this text. He explains how
the Greek commonly translated as “whole world” cannot possibly mean only a
certain elect number of people; it literally means the whole world and we have
to accept it as such. He also took time to explain how he prefers not to
particularly take sides in the Calvinist/Arminian debate, but that we should
always be careful to not read our theology into the text and let the text
create our theology instead; he then challenged us to take care to consider
all Scripture before allowing our theology to be formed. Before I continue any
further, I want to make sure it is known that I have a tremendous deal of
respect for my professor and I know he has an extraordinary amount of knowledge
concerning the Greek language, much more than I do. That said, I decided to
take him up on his challenge.
Firstly, I think it’s safe to say that a good number of scholarly theologians who
lean more on a Calvinistic/Reformed way of thinking do not automatically think “elect” when they read “whole world” in 1
John 2:2. What they, and I, do see, however, is a particularly huge problem
when people automatically understand “whole world” as “every single person who
ever did and ever will exist.” Here’s why.
If we
take a close look at the first part of this verse (autos hilasmos estin /He is the propitiation), we notice a few
things. First, this is a strict indicative statement, meaning it is a matter of
fact. Jesus absolutely is the
propitiation, not, “Jesus might be,”
or, “Jesus could be,” or even, “Jesus
will be if…” There are subjunctive
conjugations for the verb “is” that John could have easily used. It is also
clear that John uses the subjunctive mood numerous times just before writing
this sentence. “… so that you may have
fellowship with us” (1 John 1:3); “…so that our joy may be complete” (1 John 1:4); “If
we say we have fellowship…” (1 John 1:6); “…if we walk in the light…” (1 John 1:7); “If we say we have no sin…” (1 John 1:8); “If we confess our sins…” (1 John 1:9); “If we say we have not sinned….” (1 John 1:10); “…. I am writing
these things to you so that you may not
sin. But if anyone does sin….” (1 John 2:1). By my count, John uses the
subjunctive mood nine times in the
mere eleven verses of his opening statement, two of which are used in the verse right before 1 John 2:2. There
is no doubt that John intentionally used the indicative mood in verse two here.
Secondly,
we see what John is definitively saying Jesus is - the propitiation (hilasmos). What exactly does that word
mean? “Propitiation” isn’t necessarily thrown around in the average Christian’s
vocabulary nowadays. Instead of giving
the definition of the English word, however, I think it’s better to define what
the Greek word (hilasmos) ,often
translated as “propitiation,” means. Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New
Testament defines this word, in the context of 1 John 2:2, as “the means of
appeasing.”[1] Simply
put, this word is referencing Jesus completely satisfying God’s punishment for
sin. If, then, we say that Jesus is the propitiation
of sin, we are saying Jesus completely takes care of all punishment
required for sin such that only innocence and right standing remain.[2]
Perhaps
you have already pieced the puzzle here, but the problem we get when we say the
“whole world” is referencing every
single person that ever exists and will exist is that, by admitting such, we have
just claimed that no one deserves any
more punishment, because Jesus has already taken care of every one’s sin! Now, unless you’re a Universalist, I doubt you
would be willing to admit that. But there is no wiggle room in
translation/interpretation of that verse if we say that the “whole world” HAS
to mean absolutely everyone. What, then, does the “whole world” mean? I’m
glad you asked.
In
order to get an idea of what John could have meant in this verse, we need to
get some more historical-cultural context. I highly recommend getting The IVP Bible Background Commentary if
you have ever had any sort of questions about what certain expressions meant
back in the time the Scriptures were written. Craig Keener, author of the New
Testament volume, notes that 1 John is probably “meant to encourage Christians
expelled from the synagogues, some of whose colleagues have returned to the
synagogue by denying Jesus’ messiahship.”[3]
That said, John’s targeted audience was a group of believing Jews. This
audience, being Jew, would have had a presupposition that the death of Jesus,
being the fulfillment of the necessity for sacrifice on the Day of Atonement,
would have only had the intention of
covering the sins of Israel.[4]
This is why John’s statement in 1 John 2:2 is so profound- “He is the
propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the world.” Jesus did not die only for the nation
of Israel; He died so that every tribe, nation and tongue would profess Him as
Lord and believe on Him for salvation! This was an extremely radical and
difficult idea for Jewish Christians to understand at the time, but the
Scriptures are clear that Gentiles (any non-Jewish nation) have been grafted
into the community God’s chosen people.[5]
The weight of this text is so much stronger when we view this passage of
Scripture in such a manner:
1. Jesus Christ fully accomplished the salvation of
God’s people by His own merit, NOT by anyone else’s.
2. God has guaranteed that no matter what nation we
travel to, what tribe we interact with, every
single distinct ethnic group is guaranteed to have at least some follow
Christ. This should embolden us to do everything we can to reach those groups
of people who have never heard the gospel before; we must do our part to bring
them to Christ.[6]
I wholeheartedly agree with my
professor’s statement about letting the text of Scripture challenge and shape
our theology and thinking. It is crucial, however, that we take the time to diligently
study the Scriptures in order to understand the authors’ (both man’s and God’s)
intent, lest we form a totally incorrect and non-glorifying theology based on a
simple misunderstanding of a verse. But with careful examination of the Word (a
few study tools always help) and a humble dependency on the Holy Spirit’s
illumination, we will, Lord-willing,[7]
understand more and more the “depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of
God”[8]
and be drawn to our knees in worship, giving “All glory to the One in
existence.”[9]
[1] Joseph
Thayer, Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of
the New Testament: Coded with Strong's Concordance Numbers, Rei Sub ed.
(Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1996), page 301.
[2]
Some may argue that hilasmos has a
subjunctive idea in its definition, meaning that this word only suggests that
Jesus provides a means, or potential, of appeasement for sin. While this
definition does not seem to fit the author’s intent (the prepositional phrase “for
our sins” appears right after the predicate phrase; it would be ludicrous for
John to say Jesus only is a means or potential of sin covering for those who
are saved), even if it truly did mean that, the Arminian’s use of this text to
argue against election would be moot: Calvinism fully supports the idea that
Christ’s death has the potential to
save every individual; in fact, Charles Spurgeon goes even further and says it
has the potential “to have saved not only all in this world, but all in ten
thousand worlds, had they transgressed their Maker's law.” (http://www.spurgeon.org/calvinis.htm)
[3] Craig
S. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament (Downers
Grove, Ill.: IVP Academic, 1994), page 735.
[4]
Ibid.
[5]
See Romans 11, Ephesians 2:11-22.
[6]
John 10:16- “And I have other sheep that are not of this fold. I must bring
them also, and they will listen to My voice.”
[7]
Hebrews 6:1-3.
[8]
Romans 11:33.
[9] The
Devil Wears Prada, Assistant to the
Regional Manager.
