Assurance Of Salvation In 1 John

1
ASSURANCE OF SALVATION IN 1 JOHN1
This paper will seek to establish the doctrine of assurance as the interpretive
key to understanding 1 John. While there are several broad ways to understand “Christian
assurance,” I will be following the narrow definition set forth by D. A. Carson who
defines assurance as “a Christian believer’s confidence that he or she is already in a right
standing with God, and that this will issue in ultimate salvation.”2
The writer of this
epistle, then, seeks to assure his readers of their salvation by the cycling of three “tests”μ
the truth test (right belief about Christ, viz., his humanity), the moral test (manifest
obedience to the commands of Christ), and the social test (evident love for the brethren).
I will seek to prove that each of these tests is meant by the writer to assure his readers.
While in the course of this paper the tests will be examined individually, these tests are
inextricably linked together so as to produce a forceful and indissoluble means of
assurance for John’s readers.3
1
At the outset, I wish to state that I stand heavily indebted to Christopher D. Bass in his fine
study of this same topic in That You May Know: Assurance of Salvation in 1 John, NAC Studies in Bible &
Theology, vol. 5 (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishing Group, 2008). His work on assurance in 1
John is a refreshing contribution to a subject that has sadly been overlooked in much of the church today.
The pastoral implications of such an exegetical study are indeed rewarding and needed for pastor and
scholar alike.
2
D. A. Carson, “Reflections on Assurance,” in Still Sovereign: Contemporary Perspectives on
Election, Foreknowledge, and Grace, ed. Thomas R. Schreiner and Bruce A. Ware (Grand Rapids: Baker
Books, 2000) 248.
3
Due to obvious space constraints, I will limit my focus to these three “tests” whereby
believers may gain assurance. For a helpful discussion on how John grounds assurance in the atoning
sacrifice of Christ, see Bass, That You May Know, 55-97.

2
2 John’s Purpose in Writing
Since the publication of Robert δaw’s thematic study of 1 John in 1909,4
there
has been a dominant understanding that the epistle provides the three aforementioned
“tests of life.”5
These “tests” are neither arbitrary nor do they appear in a vacuumν they
are written by the elderly apostle John6
to a flock in need of careful pastoral care. We are
not given an explicit account of what took place in the church, but a cautious “mirror
reading” of the letter leads us to believe that the church had recently been rocked by a
substantive schism and exodus of some if its church members (2:19). Near the end of the
letter, a lot like in his Gospel, John summarizes his pastoral purpose in writing: “These
things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may
4
R. Law, The Tests of Life: A Study of the First Epistle of St. John, 3rd
ed. (Edinburgh: T. & T.
Clark, 1914).
5
Bass rightly notes that “[a] perusal of the literature since δaw’s book demonstrates that the
vast majority of commentators have followed this nomenclature of ‘tests.’ This is not to say that all
interpreters who speak of tests in 1 John follow Law across the board. To be sure, each writer is nuanced in
his or interpretation of the tests” (That You May Know, 120 n. 1). For a detailed discussion on the various
proposals on the structure of 1 John, see R. E. Brown, The Epistles of John: Translated with Introduction,
Notes, and Commentary, AB vol. 30 (New York: Doubleday, 1982), 116-29.
In the last twenty years or so this understanding has been rejected by a small number of
scholars who view assurance of salvation based solely on the accomplished work of Christ Most notably of
these was Zane Hodges, The Gospel Under Siege: A study on Faith and Works, 2nd
ed. (Dallas: Redencion
Viva, 1981), 143: “Basically we insist that the New Testament Gospel offers the assurance of eternal life to
all who believe in Christ for that life. The assurance of the believer rests squarely on the Biblical promises
in which this offer is made, and on nothing else” (emphasis his). See also his Grace in Eclipse (Dallas:
Redencion Viva, 1985), and his Absolutely Free! (Dallas: Redencion Viva; Grand Rapids: Zondervan,
1λκλ). Although somewhat diminished in influence now, the “Grace εovement” has been the most vocal
proponents of this teaching (see their Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society edited by Bob Wilkin). The
most substantive, though at times overstated, response was by John F. MacArthur, Jr. in his The Gospel
according to Jesus (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1988) and his Faith Works: The Gospel According to the
Apostles (Dallas: Word Publishing, 1993).
6
Questions of Johannine authorship are beyond the scope of this paper. For our purposes I will
simply assume John the son of Zebedee as the author of 1 John. Cf. D. A. Carson and Douglas J. Moo, An
Introduction to the New Testament, rev. ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005), 670-75.

3
know that you have eternal life” (ημ13). First John ημ13, then, serves as John’s overall
purpose statement for the letter.7
John’s goal in writing is primarily to assure the
believers who remain of the genuineness of their faith via the “three tests.” Therefore
assurance of salvation is the interpretive key to understanding 1 John.8
In addition to providing assurance to those who remain,9
1 John is also written
with an underlying polemical tone intended for those who remain to discern those who
had fallen away and were thus never part of the true children of God.10
While I agree with
Rockwell that John’s “primary concern is the spiritual wellbeing of those who remain
within the Johannine community,”11
I am not convinced with his view that needlessly
rules out any polemical intent to the epistle.12
I see no reason to minimize or eliminate an
7
So also Bass, That You May Know, 52, 54; Craig Blomberg, From Pentecost to Patmos: An
Introduction to Acts through Revelation (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2006), 489; Daniel L. Akin, 1, 2,
3, John, NAC, vol. 38 (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2001), 32μ “The parallel of ημ13 with the purpose
statement of John’s Gospel (20μ31) is too apparent to be merely coincidental. First John ημ13 brings
together the other purpose statements in a unified theme. Whereas the Gospel of John is written with an
evangelistic purpose, 1 John is penned to provide avenues of assurance whereby a believer can know he has
eternal life through the Son.”
8
So Stephen Rockwell, “Assurance as the Interpretive Key to Understanding the εessage of 1
John,” The Reformed Theological Review, 69:1 (April, 2010): 17-33. Contra Hodges (The Epistles of John:
Walking in the Light of God’s Love [Irving, TX: Grace Evangelical Society, 1999], 34) who views John’s
overarching purpose centered around “fellowship” (1 John 1μ3)ν idem, “1, 2, 3, John,” in The Bible
Knowledge Commentary: New Testament, ed. John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck (Wheaton: Victor Books,
1983), 881-915. According to D. A. Carson (“Johannine Perspectives on the Doctrine of Assurance,” in
Explorations: Justification and Christian Assurance, ed. R. J. Gibson [Adelaide, South Australia:
Openbook, 1996], 81) the earliest proponent of this is Guy H. King, The Fellowship (London: Marshall,
Morgan and Scott, 1954).
9
For a helpful study of John’s motif of the remain (abide) language as a motivation for his
readers to persevere, see Christopher D. Bass, “A Johannine Perspective of the Human Responsibility to
Persevere in the Faith through the Use of Mένω and τther Related εotifs,” WTJ 69 (2007): 305-25.
10
So Bass, That You May Know, 122, 1θ3ν Carson, “Johannine Perspectives on the Doctrine of
Assurance,” ιη-6; John Painter, I, 2, and 3 John, Sacra Pagina, vol. 18 (Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical
Press, 2002), 16-17; Blomberg, Pentecost to Patmos, 489.
11
Rockwell, “Assurance as the Interpretive Key,” 20.
12
Ibid., 19-21.

4
underlying polemical tone in 1 John. The “tests” that John provides not only assure his
readers but also serve as a foil of those who defected. It is precisely because of the
underlying polemical tone against the secessionists that the remaining believers could
find assurance. While we should note the primary emphasis on assurance (1 Jn. 5:13), we
should steer clear of an either-or dichotomy in John’s purpose. After all, as we read
elsewhere in Scripture, the elder has a twofold task to teach sound doctrine and refute
error (Tit. 1:9). The apostle John, an elder himself (cf. 2 Jn. 1; 3 Jn. 1),13
accomplishes no
less than this as he writes to bolster the assurance of his readers by counteracting the false
claims of those who had departed from the church.14
John Stott rightly states this double
emphasisμ “[John’s] purpose is to destroy the false assurance of the counterfeit as well as
to confirm the right assurance of the genuine.”15
3 The “Three Tests” of Assurance16
3.1 The Truth Test: Belief
3.1.1 Denying that Jesus is the Christ (2:18-27). John affectionately addresses
his readers as “children,” yet at the same time with the sober realization that it is the
eschatological “last hour” (v. 18). He notes that while there is still an antichrist to come,
many antichrists have already appeared. Indeed these antichrists “went out” from the
13
For the understanding that the “elder” of 2 and 3 John is the apostle John (son of Zebedee),
see John R. W. Stott, The Letters of John: An Introduction and Commentary, TNTC, rev. ed. (Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964; reprint, 2000), 38-43.
14
So Colin G. Kruse, The Letters of John, PNTC (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000), 188; Stott,
Letters of John, 43-44; Smalley, 1, 2, 3 John, xxviii.
15
Stott, Letters of John, 57.
16
Due to space constraints, I will be unable to examine all the relevant passages in each of the tests: the
truth test (2:22, 23; 4:2, 3; 5:5); the moral test (2:3-6; 3:4-10); and the social test (2:9-11; 3:10-20; 4:7ff).

5
fellowship “so that it would be shown that they all are not of us” (v. 1λ). While their
departure might have unsettled some who remained, it is made evident that they were
never truly part of the flock. John encourages his readers to beware the lure of deceptive
lies by reminding them that they have an anointing from the Holy Spirit and thus the
truths he rehearses to them are only meant to “confirm them in the truth they already
know.”17
The believers are guarded and are thus able to discern truth from error.
It is within this context that John asks a rhetorical questionμ “Who is the liarς”
(v. 22). The transition might appear somewhat unexpected, but one can quickly
understand the pastoral urgency with which John writes.18
Perhaps it is significant to note
that only here does John use liar with the article to indicate the title or designation of a
known figure.19
Shifting from the lie in verse 21 to the liar, John minces no words in
stating that the liar par excellence is the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ.20
This
liar is none other than the antichrist, which should be taken not as the one and final
antichrist but as one who comes in the spirit of the antichrist (cf. v. 18).21
Some have
understood this as a rebuttal of the claim that Jesus was not the OT Messiah.22
But as
most scholars point out, the second part of the verse indicates the denial in view is of
17
18
Robert Yarbrough, 1-3 John, BECNT (Grand Rapids: Baker, 200κ), 1ηιμ “The sudden segue
from 2μ21 to 2μ22 may be literarily abrupt, but the reader sympathetic to John’s Christological convictions
can probably intuit the psychological justification for the direction in which he veers and the bluntness of
his rhetoric.”
19
Akin, 1, 2, 3, John, 120.
20
Stott, Letters of John, 115; cf. Smalley, 1, 2, 3, John, 111
21
So Stott, Letters of John, 57.; Yarbrough, 1-3 John, 157; Akin, 1, 2, 3 John, 122.
22
So Teresa Okure, The Johannine Approach to Mission: A Contextual Study of John 4:1-32,
WUNT 2nd
ser. 31 (Tubingen: J.C.B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1988), 273-81.

6
Jesus being the Son.23
This, moreover, is corroborated by the reciprocity between the
Father and the Son stated in v. 23: the one who denies the Son does not have the Father
and the one who confesses the Son has the Father also.24
To truly have the Father is to
have the Son, and to truly have the Son is to have the Father. While there is an
interrelated connection between Father and Son, Christ nonetheless plays a primary
revelatory role since it is he who makes the Father known (cp. 5:12; 2 John 9; John 17:3).
As Painter notes, “confession or denial of the Son is the touchstone of faith.”25
As will be
noted with below, it appears the specific nature of the denial was a rejection of the
incarnation of Jesus.26
John’s readers are not to be surprised by the recent exodus of leaders. They
came in the spirit of the antichrist and they sought to deceive them (2:26). But these
believers have received an “anointing” 27
that abides in them. Consequently they have no
need for teachers since the anointing teaches the about all things (2:27). Of course John is
not disparaging the role of teacher within the churches—after all, John is in effect writing
as a teacher—but he is reassuring their unsettled hearts that the ultimate teacher is none
other than Christ himself who is the incarnate Son. Rather than doubt, these readers have
23
So Bass, That You May Know, 154; Stott, Letters of John, 114; Painter, 1, 2, and 3 John,
206; Stephen Smalley, 1, 2, 3, John, WBC, vol. 51 (Waco: Word Books, 19840), 276; I. Howard Marshall,
The Epistles of John, NICNT (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978), 157; Gary Burge, The Letters of John,
NIVAC (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 129-130.
24
Painter, 1, 2, 3 John, 122.
25
Ibid., 207 (emphasis added).
26
So Bass, That You May Know, 154-155; Stott, Letters of John, 114-5.
27
Burge (Letters of John, 128) points out an interesting play on words: while the antichrists
(ἀ χ ο ) sought to deceive, the believers who remained have an anointing (χ ῖ α) that confirms them
in the truth.

7
the internal witness—the “anointing”—that confirms the truth of Christ’s incarnation to
them. They are to “abide” in the truth they heard from the beginning, most likely from the
apostle John himself, and they will then truly abide in the Son and in the Father (2:24).
The confession or denial of the Son thus determines whether or not they “have” the
Father (v. 23); without a correct understanding of the Son they cannot have the Father.
John’s readers are not to follow the false teachers and deny that Jesus is the incarnate Son
of God, but instead they are to persevere in the apostolic truth they were established in,
the truth that confesses both the Father and His Son Jesus Christ (cf. 1:1-3). As they do so
they will assure their hearts of the irrevocable promise Christ made to themμ “eternal life”
(2:25; cf. Jn. 17:2-3).
3.1.2 Confessing that Jesus Christ Has Come in the Flesh (3:24b-4:4). John
here exhorts his readers to not believe every spirit but instead to test the spirits to see
whether they are from God (4μ1a). They are to do this because “many false prophets have
gone out into the world (4:1b). While this could be a general call to discernment, it makes
more contextual sense to interpret this in light of the previous pericope examined in 2:18-
27.28
In this passage John circles again around the “truth test,” not merely repeating
himself but adding nuance to his previous thought. He wants his readers to have a true
knowledge of Jesus and has no qualms over covering familiar ground, especially since
one’s conclusion on this point has eternal ramifications.
28
Note the similar vocabulary: “antichrist” (2:18, 22ν 4:3)ν “went out” (ἐ ῆλθα ) and “have
went out” (ἐ ελ λύ ασ ) (2:19ν 4:1)ν “truth” and “lie” (2:21ν 4:1, θ)ν “confessing” and “denying” (2:22-
23; 4:2-3). Cf. C. Clifton Black, The New Interpreter’s Bible, ed. Leander Keck, vol. XII (Nashville:
Abingdon Press, 1998), 426.

8
If indeed the doctrinal challenge was incipient Gnosticism, Docetism, and
Cerinthianism,29
then we can more clearly understand John’s concern in providing this
test. John’s readers know they have the Spirit of God “by this”:30
whether or not they
confess Jesus has come “in the flesh.” While in chapter 2 the issue is salvific possession
of the Father, here the stress is on a salvific possession of the Holy Spirit.31
It is not
merely the publicity of the confession but the very substance of it.32
The false teachers
denied that Christ had come in the flesh, perhaps even arguing that it was the Spirit of
Christ that came upon the man Jesus and then left at his crucifixion. If this is so, then one
can understand why John brings in the Spirit at this point to testify to the believers of the
reality of the incarnation.33
The Spirit is not a stand-alone witness conferring assurance of
salvation apart from knowledge of Christ, but it is precisely the Spirit (given to believers
by Christ according to 3:24b) who gives testimony of Christ having come in the flesh.34
29
So Rudolf Schnackenburg, The Johannine Epistles: Introduction and Commentary, trans. by
Reginald and Ilse Fuller (New York: Crossroad, 1992), 23; Blomberg, Pentecost to Patmos, 487. I agree
with Bass (That You May Know, 39-40) and Carson and Moo (Introduction to the New Testament, 680) in
not overstating the similarities between the false teachers in 1 John and the later full-fledged heresies of
Gnosticism, Docetism, and Cerinthianism. While external evidence is useful, we must beware of importing
a foreign doctrinal challenge that John simply did not address at the time, at least not in a full-blown sense.
All we can do is cautiously note the similarities and suggest that “John was combating a proto-gnostic
teaching that was an early form of one or a combination of these heresies” (Bass, That You May Know, 40).
30
It is best to see ἐ ού ῳ pointing forward rather than referring to what preceded. So
Marshall, 204; Akin, 172 n 76; Painter, 258; Kruse, 145; Yarbrough, 223. Contra Hodges, Epistles of John,
176.
31
Stott, Letters of John, 155-56.
32
Law, Tests of Life, 265.
33
See Stott (Letters of John, 155) who compares the perfect tense form of “come” (ἐ υ α)
in v. 2 and the present form (ἐ χ ο ) in 2 John ι and suggests from this that “the flesh assumed by the
Son of God in the incarnation has become his permanent possession.”
34
Brown, Epistles of John, 465-66, 483-84; Thomas R. Schreiner, New Testament Theology:
Magnifying God in Christ (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2008), 474-75; Graham A. Cole, Engaging with the Holy
Spirit: Real Questions, Practical Answers (Wheaton: Crossway, 2007), 77-8.

9
John’s readers are not to be surprised by those who oppose this orthodox understanding,
since many false prophets have gone out into the world (4:1) and it is only a symptom the
spirit of the antichrist already operating in the world (4:3).
Not surprisingly, John then turns to his readers and offers an assuring word:
“You are from God, little children, and have overcome them” 4μ4a). In other words, they
have intellectually overcome the spirits who denied the incarnate Christ.35
Those who
listen to the false teachers are “from the world” (v. ην cf. Jn. 1ημ1λ). However great those
spirits might be, they are to take comfort in the greater Spirit resident within them (v. 4b).
This Spirit is none other than the Spirit of truth who testifies to the Christ and guards
them from erroneous lies (v. 6; cf. 2:20, 27). Again, the Spirit is not apart from Christ but
confirm to believers a true knowledge of Christ. Those who truly belong to God listen to
John for he speaks the truth as a witness to Christ’s physical reality (cf. 1:1-3). In sum,
John’s readers are enjoined, in opposition to the false teachers who come in the spirit of
the antichrist, to confess Christ’s incarnation. As they do so, they will assure themselves
of possessing the Spirit of Truth and thus of their salvific possession of God.
3.2 The Moral Test: Righteousness
3.2.1 Coming to Know Christ Means Keeping His Commandments (2:3-6).
Most likely the secessionists argued that they had ceased to sin, at least since their
conversion or their having arrived at their supposed mystical knowledge. Earlier in letter
John countered these false theological claims directly by stating in no uncertain terms
that those who advocated personal sinlessness were self-deceived, liars, devoid of the
35

10
truth and devoid of God’s Word (1:8, 10). In this passage John turns his attention to the
believers who remained and presents a “moral” test by which they can assure their hearts.
In verse 3 John uses “know” in the perfect tense (ἐγ ώ α ) to signify a past knowledge
that has an ongoing effect.36
Over and against the secessionists who claimed an elevated
knowledge that supposedly freed them the reality of sin, John states his readers know
God if they keep “His commandments” (v. 3b). The most probable antecedent of “His” is
Jesus Christ, since both the verses prior and after clearly refer to Jesus (cf. 2:1-2, 5-6).37
John then makes the same point in the negative: the one who claims to know Christ and
yet does not keep His commandments is a “liar” and “the truth is not in him” (v. 4ν cf.
1:8).
It is interesting to note that in verse η John states that whoever keeps Christ’s
word proves that “the love of God has truly been perfected.” John here is not so much
describing believers’ love for God (objective genitive)38
or believers’ love that is like
God’s love (qualitative genitive)39
ν instead it is best to take “the love of God” as a
36
It is perhaps telling that John never uses, neither in his letters nor in his Gospel, the noun
form of “know” (γ ῶ ) and instead relies on the verb form of γ ώ ω. While one would not base an
argument on this point (since it might well be that John preferred the verb form than the noun), the
argument could be made that John intentionally steered clear from using γ ῶ for fear that in using the
noun form he might further arm the proto-Gnostics who claimed a personal knowledge hitherto unknown.
So Akin, 1, 2, 3, John, 90; Smalley, 1, 2, 3, John, 44.
37
Contra Kruse (Letters of John, 78) who suggests God the Father is the antecedent. Aside
from the immediate context, the larger context of 1 John (e.g., 1:1-3; 2:22-23; 3:23, 4:3-4; 5:1) seems to
indicate that at stake was not the understanding of God as Father but God as Son, although as we have
already noted one’s understanding of the Son has an undeniable and direct impact on one’s understanding
of the Father.
38
So Stott, 94; Kruse, 80; Burge, 98; Bass, 129; C. H. Dodd, The Johannine Epistles, MNTC
(London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1946), 31.
39
So Marshall, Epistles of John, 126; R. Schnackenburg, The Johannine Epistles: Introduction
and Commentary, trans. by R. Fuller and I. Fuller (New York: Crossroad), 97.

11
subjective genitive (i.e., God’s love for the believer).40
The use of ω α (“has been
perfected”), viewed as a “divine passive” (cp. 1 Jn. 4:12),41
helps us understand the direct
connection between God’s love for believers and their resultant holiness. In other words,
it is God’s perfected love for believers which inevitably results in them keeping Christ’s
word, or to state it John’s manner, the one who keeps Christ’s Word demonstrates God’s
love for him has been perfected. John’s point, therefore, is that his readers can gain
assurance of God’s saving love for them by their keeping Christ’s Word. τnce again this
is clearly stated in verse 6 as John employs the phrase “by this we know that we are in
him” to make clear that assurance comes as a result of the (professing) believer “walking”
(i.e., his pattern of life) in the manner of Christ, viz., in obeying God. It is those—and
those only—who obey Christ’s commandments and live the way he lived that may gain
true assurance.
Of course this is not to say that keeping the commandments in utter perfection
is the means by which believers come to know God. John, after all, pens the letter in
order that his readers might not sin; and moreover, he reminds them that Jesus is their
advocate before the Father when they do sin and that God is faithful and just to forgive
sin and cleanse from all unrighteousness (2:1; 1:9). John makes clear that assurance is
tied to the believer’s trajectory and life-pattern of obedienceν it’s not the perfection of
holiness, but the characteristic bent of life that aims toward both confession and striving
after greater holiness that produces greater and greater assurance.
40
So Yarbrough, 1-3 John, 86; W. Loader, The Johannine Epistles (London: Epworth, 1992),
17; B. F. Wescott, The Epistles of St. John: The Greek Text with Notes and Essays, repr. (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1966), 49; R. Bultmann, The Johannine Epistles, Hermeneia, trans. by R. P. τ’Hara et al., ed. R.
W. Funk (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1973), 25.
41
Yarbrough, 1-3 John, 86.

12
3.2.2 No One Born of God Practices Sin (3:4-10). John states that everyone
who practices sin also practices lawlessness (3:4a). He can say this so matter-of-factly
because “sin is lawlessness” (v. 4b). This simply means sin is living as if there were no
law (ἀ ο α) or law-giver; in effect sin is “an active rebellion against God’s known
will.”42
In the passage leading up to this one (2:28-3:3), John reminds his readers of
Christ’s eschatological appearing and how that reality should motivate holiness in their
lives. In the present passage, however, John shifts gears and looks backward to the reality
that Christ already appeared before in his incarnation and did so, while sinless himself, in
order “take away” individual sins (v. 5).43
Unlike the secessionists who claimed to “know”
a truth that eliminated the sin-problem from their lives, John reminds his readers that it is
they who truly “know” Christ, the one who came to deal with sin. It follows, then, that
those who abide in Christ do not sin; those who sin make evident that they have not seen
him or know him (v. 6; cf. 2:4).44
With tender affection, John once again warns his readers of those who are
seeking to deceive them (v. 7a). The same deceivers who questioned the person of the
Son in 2:26, are now reintroduced as those who propagate an erroneous understanding of
sin.45
It is most likely that the secessionists were claiming to be righteous all the while
42
43
So Akin, 1, 2, 3 John, 142.
44
Rightly Akin (1, 2, 3 John, 140 n 3θ0)μ “The contrast marks the distinct difference between
the child of God, whose life is distinguished by righteousness and self-purification, and the child of the
devil, whose life is marked by a habitual life of sin.” Cf. Brown, Epistles of John, 379.
45
Rightly Yarbrough, 1-3 John, 187; Kruse, Letters of John, 122. Contra Strecker, The
Johannine Epistles: A Commentary on 1, 2, and 3 John, trans. by H. W. Attridge (Minneapolis: Fortress),
97, who sees no connection between 2:26 and 3:7.

13
finding no need to practice righteousness.46
John holds nothing back and in stark contrast
lays out two different groupsμ the children of God and the children of the devil” (v. 10a).
They are to remember that the one doing (ὁ πο ῶ ) righteousness is righteous like Christ;
and, in severe terms, the one doing sin is of the devil who sinned from the beginning (vv.
7b-8).
At first glance it seems John contradicts himself from earlier in the epistle
where he says that sin is an undeniable reality. Some have wrongly argued that here in
chapter 3 John is presenting a higher level of Christianity that is above sin. But that
would go against John’s entire argument. After all, John goes at great length to oppose
the notion that one can be sin-free (1:8, 10; 2:1-2); it is unlikely that midway into the
letter he fell into apostolic forgetfulness.47
Others have understood John opposing the
same error with two different expressions among the secessionists.48
The first error,
which we see in chapter one, is a proto-Gnostic belief that led some to believe that they
had been freed and enlightened by the Son of God. To this error John presents the
universality of sin and how it plagues all, even the apostle himself. The second error,
which we see in chapter 3, led others to believe that it did not matter whether they sinned
since they had acquired an enlightened knowledge.49
In this view John is addressing this
latter group that is indifferent to sin—to them he exposits the incompatibility of sin in a
believer’s life. While such a proposal certainly appears plausible and would undoubtedly
46
So Stott, Letters of John, 127; Akin, 1, 2, 3 John, 141.
47
Bass, That You May Know, 140.
48
49
Ibid.

14
resolve much of the issue, it does not arise from the text. The most likely solution lies in
the grammarμ John’s use of the present tense verb signifies that he “is describing a way of
life, a character, a prevailing lifestyle.”50
While I agree with those who caution against
basing an entire interpretation on a verb tense,51
I believe the grammar argument makes
the most sense of the flow of John’s letter.
One must remember that John is writing to those who remained yet were
unsettled by those who had left the church (2:19), and as such John cannot ignore the
secessionists’ erroneous claims that put the assurance of the true believers in jeopardy.
With pastoral yet fearless determination, John tells his readers that the “Son of God
appeared to “destroy the works of the devil” (v. κb). Therefore those who are the true
“children of God” do not do sin and indeed are not able (v. 9). In contrast to the
secessionists, John’s readers are to confirm in their hearts that they truly have been “born
of God” and his “seed” abides in them.52
This begetting is evidenced not by perfection,
but by the fact that they do righteousness and not sin. It is the direction of their lives
toward righteousness that manifests that they are of divine parentage (v. 10). In short,
assurance of salvation is inextricably linked to the practice of righteousness.
3.3 The Social Test: Love
50
Akin, 1, 2, 3 John, 143.
51
So Schreiner, New Testament Theology, 587. Bass, That You May Know, 136-7. See Bass
(That You May Know, 134-42) who helpfully surveys the various views of this apparent exegetical impasse.
I am persuaded by his proposal of an “eclectic approach that begins with the overarching purpose of the
letter and incorporates some of the more helpful aspects” (140) of the other views. Cf. Brown, Epistles of
John, 412-15.
52
There is no need to over-interpret “seed” in this context. δaw (Tests of Life, 221) states the
point simplyμ “As the seed of physical generation stamps upon the offspring an ineffable character, and
nothing in after years can alter the inherited basis of life, so does the germ of spiritual life from the spiritual
Father set the impress of a permanent organic character upon the God-begotten.”

15
3.3.1 Loving One’s Brother as a Sign We Abide in the Light (2:7-11). John
addresses his readers as “beloved.” His entire letter is drenched with this affective term
(2:7; 3:2, 21; 4:1, 7, 11). It is on the heels of John’s exposition on keeping the
commandments of Christ (2:3-6), that he now turns to examine one commandment in
particular (2:7-11).53
In one sense this commandment is old (2:7), while in another sense
it is old (2:8). While John does not reveal what this commandment is, it is clear from the
immediate context that the commandment is to love others (vv. 9-11; cp. 2 John 5). John
first states it in the negative: the one who is saying he walks in the light yet hates his
brother is in the darkness (v. 9). This is most likely an allusion to the secessionists’ claim
to be in the light yet all the while tolerating, perhaps even flagrantly promoting, hatred
toward others in the fellowship.54
John forcefully denounces that belief and argues that
such a person is not only in the darkness and walks in the darkness but also has no idea
where they are going because he is blinded by the darkness (v. 11).
In contradistinction to the secessionists’ claim to be in the light while
indifferent to loving believers, it is the believer who loves the brother that truly “abides”
in the light and thus there is no cause for stumbling in him (v. 10). In other words, he who
loves fellow believers55
gives evidence that he abides in the light.56
When this is
interpreted in light of 1:7, it becomes clear that for believers to abide in the light entails
53
Painter, 1, 2, and 3 John, 178; Kruse, Letters of John, 82; Akin, 1, 2, 3 John, 95; Stott,
Letters of John, 97; Yarbrough, 1-3 John, 93, Smalley, 1, 2, 3 John, 53
54
Bass, That You May Know, 145 n 88.
55
From the context it is clear John is underscoring love for fellow Christians—for “your
brother” (ἀ φ αὐ οῦ). So Akin, 1, 2, 3 John, 98; Brown, Epistles of John, 273.
56
Painter, 1, 2, and 3 John, 180.

16
fellowship with other believers and the reality that Jesus’ blood cleanses them from all
sin. Taken all together, John’s readers may gain assurance as they examine their lives and
see the fruit of love spring in tangible ways toward other believers (cf. 3:16-18).
3.3.2 Everyone Born of God Loves (4:7-13). Once again John addresses his
readers as “beloved.” They are exhorted to love one another since love comes from God,
and therefore everyone who loves manifests that they are born of God and know him (v.
7). Stated negatively, the one who does not love does not know God for God is love (v. 8).
The clearest expression of this love is seen in God as he sent his Son to be the
“propitiation for our sins” (vv. λ-10). Experiencing such a love from God compels
believers to love each other (v. 11). Although God cannot be physically seen in the world,
when believers love each other God’s love57
is at that moment perfected ( ω έ )
in them (v. 12). So in a brief set of verses, John calls on those who remain to exhibit love
for one another. As they do so they confirm in their hearts that they both love and know
God.
4 Conclusion
As we have examined in this paper, true Christians have an unassailable
belief in the Son of God as both divine and, especially in John’s context, as incarnate (i.e.,
human). To believe in the Son is to have the Father and the Spirit; to not believe in the
Son is to neither have the Father or the Spirit. Moreover, true Christians are holy people.
While they retain the presence of sin, they nevertheless confess it and find forgiveness
57
It makes more contextual sense to see ἡ ἀγάπ αὐ οῦ as a subjective genitive. So Stott,
Letters of John, 165; Kruse, Letters of John, 162 n 184; Painter, 1, 2, and 3 John, 272. Contra Smalley (1, 2,
3 John, 247) takes it as an objective genitive; and Law (Tests of Life, 250) who appears to interpret it as a
qualitative genitive.

17
and cleansing through the blood of Christ; though sinners, they do not continue in sin as a
habitual manner of life. Those who deny the reality of sin or those who live in flagrant sin,
manifest that they are self-deceived and liars. And finally, true believers manifest love
toward others within the fellowship. They love because they were loved first: while
unlovely and unlovable, God displayed his love for them by the sending of his Son, the
Son who was incarnate and died as a propitiatory sacrifice for them. And thus we come
full circle with the three tests.
While we have examined these three tests individually, it quickly becomes
evident in the flow of 1 John that, especially in chapters 4 and 5, they overlap with one
another.58
The clearest example of this is in 1 John 5:1-5 where we note the indissoluble
link between faith, love and obedience: belief in Christ is seamlessly woven with love for
the Father and for his children (5:1), thus uniting the truth test and the social test; loving
God and obeying his commands confirms love for the children of God and ensures
overcoming the world, thus linking the moral test with the social test (vv. 2-4a); and
overcoming the world is a result of belief in Christ, thus linking the previous moral and
social tests with the truth test. These tests, therefore, are not intended to exist in isolation
from one another but together form “one composite description of the one who is born of
God.”59
58
So Bass, That You May Know, 161-2ν Carson, “Johannine Perspectives on the Doctrine of
Assurance,” ι0ν Stott, Letters of John, 57-58.
59
Bass, That You May Know, 162. John Stott (Letters of John, 1ι1) helpfully observesμ “What
John is at pains to show is the essential unity of his threefold thesis. He has not chosen three tests arbitrarily
or at random and stuck then together artificially. On the contrary, he shows that they are so closely woven
together into a single, coherent fabric that it is difficult to unpick and disentangle the threads.”

18
In summation, true Christians believe in Christ, keep his commands and love
all who belong to him. In a church rocked with schism and erroneous teachings on many
fronts, John skillfully employs the use of the three “tests” to reassure his readers. They
were no doubt tempted to question the validity of their salvation and were perhaps
uncertain as to how to process the departure of the false believers. Therefore the “tests”
served not only to reassure those in the truth but also to discern those who are not.

Assurance Of Salvation In 1 John

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Assurance Of Salvation In 1 John

Similar to Assurance Of Salvation In 1 John (10)

More from Deja Lewis

More from Deja Lewis (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Assurance Of Salvation In 1 John