The Epistles of John, Part 23: To Die or Not to Die

Any teacher worth his or her salt knows that examples are instructional gold.  The most complex subject in the world can be understood and applied in the mind of a student with far greater precision and clarity if the instructor is able to provide a concrete illustration of the concept they are teaching that is relevant to the lives of their pupils and is clear enough to be easily understood and processed on the fly.  You have probably heard the phrase “a picture is worth a thousand words.”  This may be an old cliché, but like most old clichés, it is old because it has survived and stood the test of time.  And it has stood the test of time because it is true.

Those that know me well know that I love to play board games.  The types of games I enjoy are typically deep, rich, and complex strategy games.  I am equally delighted to play a strategic recreation of Operation Barbarossa (the German invasion of Russia in 1941) as I am a political simulation of The Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union from the mid-1940s to the late-1980s.

In these types of games there are often many pages of rules, usually double columned, in smallish print, with few pictures.  The voluminous instructions are provided in an attempt to recreate the complex situations being modeled by the game in question.  So the rules are intricate by both design and by necessity.  But without question the games that are easiest to learn are the ones that, in addition to the main rule book, provide a play book of sorts with detailed examples of play, including photos of the board, positioning of pieces, and hypothetical moves by real or imaginary players.  It is these samples of game play that elevate the learning experience to a thing of beauty and enjoyment.

This principle, of illustrated instruction, is nowhere more helpful and necessary, than it is in Bible education.  The plan of salvation that God has provided to mankind is extraordinarily simple.  But the rich and majestic theologies and doctrines which lie beneath the surface of the Scriptures are the stuff of years to understand and lifetimes to master to any great degree.  This should hardly be a surprise, because the word of God is nothing less than a partial revelation of the mind and nature of an infinite Being who is endlessly complex in His character.  Because of this, the best Bible teachers are the ones who are capable of presenting the truth of Scripture through not only sound exegesis (or pulling from the text what is really there), careful interpretation, and deep meditation.  But they are also possessed of the ability to bring the characters, situations, places, settings, and concepts of the Bible into razor sharp focus and relevance through interesting and clear illustrations and examples.

In fact, such teachers are really just mirroring the Scriptures themselves when they do this.  Anyone who is at least passingly familiar with the ministry of Jesus is probably aware of His preferred method of teaching; the parable.  The word in Greek is “parabole” (pah-ru-bo-lay’).  It means literally to place one thing by the side of another.  It is a comparing, a simile, or similitude.  Jesus was a master of taking the Old Testament Scriptures and bringing them directly and immediately into a first century context by communicating them through stories that His audience clearly understood.  These stories were filled with cultural connotations and physical object lessons.  And although in many cases He was intentionally obscure because He did not want casual observers to understand His message, at other times He was frighteningly precise with a razor wit and piercing comprehension that skewered the sinful hearts and minds of those in earshot.

The Apostle John, as one of the Lord’s best and brightest students, must have learned everything he knew about teaching from his Master.  Here in chapter 5 of his first letter, he is going to take Christ’s principle of teaching via illustration, and use it to great effect.  You see, in verses 14 and 15, that we examined previously, John has taught us that we are blessed with an extraordinary privilege of coming before God in prayer.  Not only are we both allowed and encouraged to do this, but John says that when our prayers are according to the will of God He guarantees that He will hear us.  And the perks don’t stop there, because we are also guaranteed to be given that which we have asked for if it is according to that perfect will of the Lord’s.  This is truly a marvelous reality for the disciple of Christ to understand and live by.  But John is not content to leave the subject alone quite yet.  In the next two verses, 16 and 17, he is going to present us with an example scenario of how this process of requesting, hearing, and granting works in actual practice.

But when we first consider John’s example, we might be inclined to conclude that he either did not learn the teaching methods of Jesus very well or he is going for the latter style of parable that Jesus taught; that of the mysterious and difficult to grasp illustrations.  This particular passage of Scripture ranks as one of the most difficult to interpret and understand in the entire New Testament.  Scholars, priests, theologians, pastors, and professors have debated John’s meaning in these two verses for centuries.  It is truly what some theologians call a “crux interpretum”.  This is a Latin phrase.  “Crux” means a vital, basic, decisive, or pivotal point.  Alternatively, it refers to something that torments by its puzzling nature.  “Interpretum” means what it probably sounds like; to interpret or translate.  So a “crux interpretum” is a passage of Scripture that is of exceeding importance, only matched by its exceeding, indeed maddening, complexity and difficulty to understand.

From a personal standpoint, I can state without any hesitation whatsoever that 1^st John 5:16-17 has been the most difficult work of interpretation and understanding that I have ever attempted in a teaching capacity.  In fact, in the process of straining to understand what John is communicating here I turned to the work of two eminent and learned men, much more so than myself; Irvin Busenitz, professor of Bible and Old Testament at The Master’s Seminary, and W. Hall Harris III, professor of New Testament Studies at Dallas Theological Seminary.  And here’s the thing; neither of them completely agree with each other and in fact come to rather different conclusions about certain aspects of the text.  And to top it all off, I find myself in the unenviable position of not entirely agreeing with either of these men who are unquestionably more skilled at Bible exegesis than I am.

Allow me to try to illustrate the thorny problems this passage presents.  First let us look at the actual text itself: If anyone sees his brother committing a sin not leading to death, he shall ask and God will for him give life to those who commit sin not leading to death. There is a sin leading to death; I do not say that he should make request for this.  All unrighteousness is sin, and there is a sin not leading to death.

I think there are three critical questions that we must answer as we search for an understanding of these verses.  One, who is the brother that John is referring to?  Is he an authentic believer or is he a false Christian?  Two, what constitutes the “sin unto death” that this brother apparently does not commit in John’s example?  Is John talking about any general sin or does he have in mind something specific and possibly even of greater degree than the “average” sin, such as the unforgiveable sin Jesus spoke of in Matthew chapter 12?  Three, how are we to understand the nature of the death itself?  Is it a physical or a spiritual death?

Now then, with only two possible answers to each question that I will be considering, and a total of eight possible combinations of answers, you might think this shouldn’t be that difficult.  But the trouble is that these are neither black and white questions or answers.  Frankly, it is difficult to see a clear and obvious answer in each situation.  And to make matters worse, every single one of the combinations of answers presents its own set of problems.  Consider:

• If brother refers to a Christian, the “sin leading to death” refers in general to any sin, and death is spiritual death, then why would we ask God to give life to one who already has life?
• If brother refers to a non-Christian professing to be a Christian, the “sin leading to death” refers in general to any sin, and death is spiritual death, then how can he be committing a sin not leading to death, since all unsaved sin leads to death?
• If brother refers to a Christian, the “sin leading to death” refers to something specific such as the “unforgiveable sin”, and death is spiritual death, then how can a Christian even be capable of committing such a sin in the first place?
• If brother refers to a non-Christian professing to be a Christian, the “sin leading to death” refers to something specific such as the “unforgiveable sin”, and death is spiritual death, how are we supposed to know when they are beyond hope?
• If brother refers to a Christian, the “sin leading to death” refers in general to any sin, and death is physical death, then how are we supposed to know when a brother commits a “death worthy” sin so that we know whether to pray for them or not?
• If brother refers to a non-Christian professing to be a Christian, the “sin leading to death” refers in general to any sin, and death is physical death, then why would we pray for their physical life when we should be praying for their spiritual life?
• If brother refers to a Christian, the “sin leading to death” is something specific such as the “unforgiveable sin”, and death is physical death, why would the issue of physical death even be on the table alongside such matters of eternal significance?  And as already stated, how can a Christian even be capable of committing such a sin in the first place?
• If brother refers to a non-Christian professing to be a Christian, the “sin leading to death” refers to something specific such as the “unforgiveable sin”, and death is physical death, then why would we pray for them since they are doomed anyhow?

Is your head spinning yet?  It should be.  I don’t include that list of bullet points with the intention of delaying or avoiding the actual exegesis.  Nor do I expect you to go through them carefully and analyze each one in detail.  I merely want to illustrate the logical interpretive challenges in these verses so that you come to the text with a healthy respect for it.

With that ridiculously long preamble out of the way, let’s get right to the meat of the issue; our three questions.  I will begin with what I think is the easiest question to answer; number three.  In verse 16 John mentions a sin not leading to death twice.  He follows this with the inverse; a sin that does lead to death.  Again in verse 17 the apostle calls to attention this sin that does not lead to death.  We will consider the sin itself shortly.  But what kind of death is John talking about; physical or spiritual?  If we can establish an answer to that question as a baseline it will aid in our analysis of the other two questions.

It will be helpful for us to consider the words that John chose to use here; specifically, death as well as its opposite, life.  The purpose in examining the type of life John has in mind is because these two words form a sort of symbiotic relationship with each other when they are used together like this.  The one is the antithesis, or opposite, of the other.  Therefore, when John writes of physical life alongside death he is most likely referring to physical death as well.  Conversely, if it is spiritual life in view then it is almost certain to be spiritual death also.

There are three words for life that John primarily uses in his writings: “zoe” (zo-ay), “bios” (bee-os), and “psuche” (p-soo-kay).  “Bios” very simply means life, or that by which life is sustained.  It appears twice in 1^st John.  One is in 2:16: for all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the boastful pride of life, is not from the Father, but is from the world.  This corresponds to the first definition given above.  The other is in 3:17: but whoever has the world’s goods, and sees his brother in need and closes his heart against him, how does the love of God abide in him?  Here John is describing the material goods that facilitate continued life (i.e. the second definition).  In both cases the contextual meaning is clearly a form of physical life.  Either worldly life that is enmeshed in the principles of the world, or a more neutral depiction of life as a simple process of breathing, eating, sleeping, etc. and the physical items that serve to assist in these endeavors.

“Psuche”, on the other hand, usually refers to the breath of life that fills living beings and demonstrates their quality of being alive.  John uses this word only once in his letter, in 3:16.  In this verse he writes the following: We know love by this, that He laid down His life for us; and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren.  It goes without saying that it was not His spiritual life that Jesus gave up for our sake.  It is impossible for Him to die spiritually, since He is God.  Rather, it was the breath of physical life in His lungs that suffered death and defeat and endured the grave.

But neither of those two words is what John used in 5:16. In that verse he wrote “zoe”, one of ten occurrences in 1^st John.  Without exception, John chose this word when he wanted to convey the idea of spiritual life.  Let’s look at two other places where John used “zoe”.  1^st John 1:1-2 reads: What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have looked at and touched with our hands, concerning the Word of Life – and the life was manifested, and we have seen and testify and proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and was manifested to us.  1^st John 2:25 tells us: this is the promise which He Himself made to us: eternal life.

It is obvious what the type of life is that John has in view when he uses “zoe”.  It is the life that is possessed by the Father, Son, and Spirit of the godhead.  It is the quality of spiritual life God has promised to us via the blood of Christ on the cross.  And in 5:16 it almost certainly references that same quality of life.

So if John is talking about spiritual life in verse 16, he is undoubtedly talking about spiritual death in the same verse.  To back that up even further, consider the lone other use of “thanatos” in 1^st John; in 3:14: we know that we have passed out of death into life, because we love the brethren.  He who does not love abides in death.  When John describes passing from death to life in this verse he can be talking about nothing other than spiritual birth, or salvation. 

Because of this evidence it is best to understand the death and life of 5:16-17 as having a spiritual rather than a physical meaning.  This interpretation will assist us when we seek to answer question number one.  Namely, who is the brother that John is talking about in this hypothetical scenario?  Is this person a Christian or a non-Christian? 

The first point to make is that throughout the New Testament, the word brother (“adelphos” in Greek), almost always points to fellow Christians.  John’s own work bears this out.  1^st John 3:10 draws a sharp dividing line between two sets of children: by this the children of God and the children of the devil are obvious: anyone who does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor the one who does not love his brother.  This verse is clearly phrasing “adelphos” in the context of a family situation.  And it is the family of God that is in view.  The only possible meaning for brother in this situation is that of a fellow believer.

Adding to that is 3:16: we know love by this, that He laid down His life for us; and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren.  In Ephesians 5:25 Paul is instructing husbands in how they ought to love their wives.  He says that they are to love them as Christ loved the church and: gave Himself up for her.  The physical life that Jesus surrendered on the cross was specifically for authentic believers who would come to populate His church.  Those true Christians are the “brethren” spoken of in 3:16.

However, the evidence given above is solid, but inconclusive.  Just four verses prior to 3:16 John gives us the example of Cain and Abel.  His point is that we ought not to be evil as Cain was.  Instead, we ought to love our brother rather than murder him.  And although it is likely that John intended that biological sibling relationship to point to the church and the spiritual sibling relationships within it, the illustration does muddy the waters a bit.

It gets even dirtier when we consider 2:9: the one who says he is in the Light and yet hates his brother is in the darkness until now.  John cannot possibly be talking about a Christian here because he actively hates those who are supposed to be his brothers, thus confirming the darkness as his place of residence.  Or how about 3:15: everyone who hates his brother is a murderer; and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him.  I hardly think John would refer to real followers of Christ as murderers and those who are devoid of eternal life.

So we have a conundrum.  It is safe to say that someone completely outside the church is not in view with John’s use of brother.  There seems to be only two possibilities; either the brother is an authentic disciple of Christ or he is a false disciple who only professes the name of Christ.  Let’s examine both of these possibilities.

If the brother is a Christian then Scripture, including John’s writings, exclude him from the possibility of sinning to the point of spiritual death.  This would seem to fit with John’s description of someone committing a sin that does not lead to death.  But it does not resolve all of our difficulties.  Because this same Christian brother, while being incapable of spiritual death, is also possessed of spiritual life.  Why then would John tell us to request that God grant him life?

On the other hand, if the brother is a non-Christian in the church why would John call him a brother?  One likely possibility is that this could be one of the antichrists John spoke of in chapter 2.  These are people who profess to be Christians but who are really wolves in sheep’s clothing.  However, this still does not answer all possible objections.  Because while such a person would certainly be in need of God to grant him life, how can we possibly make the claim that his sin does not lead to death?

The solution that I believe makes the most sense is a melding of these two disparate elements.  Consider John’s illustration from the perspective of the one observing the sin (i.e. you).  Your assumption is that those who are in the church with you are fellow Christians.  While it is true that given enough evidence to the contrary we may come to doubt the salvation of some within our fellowship, that is not the normative manner in which we conduct ourselves.  No, we operate under the assumption that a man’s testimony of salvation is accurate and honest.

Therefore, when we observe them sinning, we already have the belief that they are our brother.  It would follow then that, being a brother of ours and of Christs as well as a child of God’s, that their sin will not result in spiritual death because God has promised to hold them fast.  However, we do not ever truly know for sure what is in the heart of another man.  Only the man himself and the Lord are privy to that information.  Thus, while we may believe them to be saved the possibility exists that they are not.  And if they are not then they are in huge trouble because they are not covered under the blood of Christ, meaning that the sin they just committed most definitely does lead to ultimate spiritual death.

The unifying thread through all of this is our lack of clarity on our perceived brother’s spiritual status.  Because of this fog that shrouds our vision, what should our default response be?  John says we should pray.  We should ask God on behalf of our sinning brother, that if he is not truly born again that God would grant this spiritual life to him, causing him to be our brother in truth rather than word only.

To put it succinctly, I believe the brother John is referring to is one whom we believe to be our brother.  However, due to our lack of perfect knowledge we may be in error about his spiritual status.  This interpretation of brother leads me straight to my answer to the final question remaining; namely, what constitutes the “sin unto death” spoken of here?  In other words, what kind of sin is it?

The first part of the answer has already been alluded to.  If we understand the death as spiritual death and the brother as a perceived Christian, then it naturally follows that any sin committed by such a one would also be assumed to stop short of death.  In this view, the sin would be non-specific.  It is any general sin that any Christian is capable of committing at any time.  However, if that is the case then why does John insert the additional sentence at the end of verse 16: There is a sin leading to death; I do not say that he should make request for this.

I think our beloved apostle’s intention here is one of encouragement.  John recognizes that he has presented us with a pattern for prayer and a real-life example in which the very supplication before the Father that John is exhorting us to may never see the results we anticipate.  Think about it like this.  What is likely to happen to our mental fortitude if the brother we observe in sin, and then subsequently pray for, continues to repeat that sin and maybe others as well?  If we see, over a period of time, that our prayers on his behalf are apparently resulting in no change, then wouldn’t it be likely that we, in our frail humanity, would begin to doubt God or grow frustrated with Him?

John wants to guard against that potential.  So he brings up a truth of Scripture.  One example of it is taught by John’s fellow apostle, Paul.  In Romans chapter 1 we find Paul describing the consequences of sin.  He outlines a process of judgment that grows progressively harsher and more absolute.  It culminates in verse 28 with the following judicial sentence: and just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper.  The issue seems to be that there is a certain point past which God will no longer choose to absolve the continued, hardened, intentional, and unrepentant sinning of a person.  Although He could save them from themselves He decides not to do so.  At this point He removes His restraint of common grace from their lives, opening the door to further and further debauchery.

Jesus seems to teach a similar principle in Matthew 12:31-32: “Therefore I say to you, any sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven people, but blasphemy against the Spirit shall not be forgiven.  Whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come.”  This is a challenging passage to interpret in its own right and it is beyond the scope of this essay to attempt to do so.  And I do not think John is referring to this “unforgiveable sin” back in his epistle.  But suffice to say that for our purposes in 1^st John, Jesus is teaching about a similar principle as Paul is in Romans. 

That is, the possibility exists for a sinner to be so embroiled in sin, for such a prolonged period of time, and with an obstinate and intractable disregard for repentance, that God deliberately alters His position toward them.  He therefore condemns this person to remain in spiritual death.  Given this circumstance, all the prayer in the world we might do on their behalf, will ultimately, in the grand scheme of things, amount to nothing.

So to our point in 5:16, I think John is reminding us of such truth.  He wants us to be aware of this potential.  But he also does not want us to think that we are wrong to continue to pray for someone even after all apparent hope of salvation has been lost.  Notice what he says: There is a sin leading to death; I do not say that he should make request for this.  John is not telling us that we cannot continue to pray for our wayward brother.  He is simply letting us off the proverbial hook by assuring us that he is not commanding prayer in such a case.  And given our aforementioned inability to know with certainty, the best practice is probably to go ahead and keep on praying with the awareness that our prayers might be in vain if they are not in accordance with the will of God in our brother’s life.

Then John moves to verse 17 in order to give us a warning.  He recognizes the all too likely human response to his example here.  That is, we may be prone to think to ourselves that the sin of a believer is of low or no consequence because it is not to death.  And therefore we may tend to undervalue the heinous nature of our own sins as well as the sins of others.  So he clarifies for us that any sin, whether committed by believer or unbeliever, in any circumstances, with any level of motivation, containing all degrees of ignorance, is unrighteous.  Meaning, it is opposed and contrary to the perfectly righteous character of God.  So, John says, remember that all sin is evil and worthy of condemnation before the Lord.  But the sins of a believer do not lead to death because there is no such thing as a loss of genuine salvation.

Allow me to attempt to summarize what we have covered to this point.  If you see a fellow Christian sin, his sin is not to the death because he is already possessed of life; but you don’t know that for sure, he could be one of the antichrists of chapter 2, so you ask for life on his behalf.  On the other hand, there is sin that leads to death.  This is the sin of the unregenerate.  And sometimes that unregenerate person has been abandoned by God, unbeknownst to us.  Nevertheless, continue to pray that the sinner would repent thus having the sin you observed plus all others covered by the blood of Christ.  In the meantime, don’t forget that all sin is equal to unrighteousness, therefore all men are capable of sin, even Christians.  But there is sin, among Christians only, that does not lead to death.

You might be thinking that my interpretation is rather ambiguous.  I have to admit there are an awful lot of unknowns in the previous paragraph.  But I think that actually strengthens my argument because I think God has purposely left this example vague.  In the preceding teaching (vv.14-15) on praying according to God’s will, we must admit to ourselves that we will not always, or perhaps rarely, or possibly even never, fully and clearly perceive what God’s will is.  The point in those verses is not to give us specifics about the day-to-day, humdrum, decisions of ordinary life on earth as they relate to what God’s will is.  Rather, the point is to pray that His will be accomplished in the situation you are facing.

Therefore, when we come to verses 16 and 17 John presents us with a scenario that is similarly almost or completely impossible to have a full and clear understanding of.  We have a brother, either practicing or professing (i.e. authentic or false), who commits a sin that we observe.  Barring evidence to the contrary we must assume the brother is genuine.  Therefore, we must also implicitly assume that his sin will not lead to death because he has been raised into new life with Christ. 

However, we don’t really know for sure, do we?  So John instructs us to pray for that brother, that God would grant him life.  Meaning, we pray in two different directions.  First, that he is genuine and that his sin that we have observed will not lead to death.  Second, if he is not genuine that God would grant him repentance therefore leading to life.  This may feel ambiguous and undefined to you.  But honestly it meshes perfectly well with the preceding verses about praying according to God’s sovereign will.  The whole point is that we don’t know all the details.  The crux of the issue is that we lack the foresight and perspective of the Lord.  It is critical for us to bear in mind that only with His guidance can we possibly have any hope of success in life and practice.  In this light, the ambiguity present in John’s puzzling example is actually a strength because it blatantly directs us straight to God.

And there is a second powerful element that I think John is conveying with his teaching here.  That is, the need and the power and the value of prayer.  Consider the following.  You are at church.  You observe a fellow Christian being rude or obnoxious.  Or perhaps they are not managing their children well.  Maybe they are gossiping with others.  They may even be talking bad about the leadership of your church.  Whatever the sinful action is that you observe, it stands as unrighteous behavior before the Lord and in front of anyone who happens to be witnessing it.

Now, what is your typical response?  Do you think negatively about your brother in a self-righteous mental high five to yourself?  Are you offended personally and you quickly sequester that offense away in your heart for safe-keeping, ready to be unveiled at a future time and place in a supreme act of bitterness and resentment?  Maybe you find yourself in a conversation later with someone else and you exclaim, aghast at the corruption in your church, about how so and so did such and such and can you believe it?

There could be many more responses to finding oneself in such a situation.  But how often has it crossed your mind to ensure that the first meaningful response to the sin you have observed is prayer?  As soon as you are home or in private somewhere do you fall on your knees and plead for God’s intervention in the life of your brother?  Do you intentionally and lovingly intercede for them before the Lord?  Is your primary mentality that of restoration and unity?  Or is it divisiveness and judgment?

I think that is the second major take-away from this passage for us.  The first has already been stated; that we must simply trust God and pray that His will would be accomplished, whatever it may be and regardless of whether His will is our personal first choice of outcome in a given situation.  The second major point is simply to pray unceasingly for our fellow Christians.  This does not necessarily exclude the possibility and requirement of confrontation.  The Scriptures are quite clear on the proper biblical process of restoring a brother caught in sin via a loving and restorative act of Christ-like confrontation.  But I think John’s point here is that our very first, immediate, instinctive response should be to drop to our knees in humble supplication before the Lord, crying out to Him for wisdom and for life for our wayward brother.

I leave you with Ephesians 6:18 and the words of Paul: With all prayer and petition pray at all times in the Spirit, and with this in view, be on the alert with all perseverance and petition for all the saints.