Distinction Between “Sin” (Singular) and “Sins” (Plural)–Part 5–First John

The Scriptures generally draw a qualitative distinction between "sin," in the singular, and "sins," in the plural. "Sin" is our inward attitude of rebellion against God. "Sins" are bad actions. This post gives examples from First John which paint a picture of the complete Christian life.

This post is the fifth in a series demonstrating the important qualitative distinction the Scriptures frequently draw between “sin” in the singular and “sins” in the plural. To review, “sin” in the singular, if not used in a context in which it obviously refers to a single discrete and countable act, usually refers to our rotten heart with its attitude and fixed dynamic of disbelief of and rebellion toward God. On the other hand, “sins” in the plural refers to an aggregation of discrete bad acts. The first post in this series discussed examples from Romans, First and Second Corinthians in which “sin” in the singular clearly refers to an inner dynamic rather than bad acts. The second post discussed similar examples from the Gospel of John and the remaining Pauline Epistles. The third post discussed similar examples from the anonymous Epistle to the Hebrews, and the fourth post discussed examples from James and First Peter. This article completes the New Testament examples of the concept of sin in the singular..

1 John 1:6-10

If we say that we have fellowship with him and walk in the darkness, we lie, and don’t tell the truth. But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus Christ, his Son, cleanses us from all sin. If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and righteous to forgive us the sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we haven’t sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.

1 John 1:6-10 (WEB)

This passage employs, for distinct purposes, both the singular and plural concepts of “sin”. It also uses “sin” as a verb. In verse 7, Jesus’ blood–Jesus’ life given for us–cleanses us out of, away from (apo) all “sin,” singular. Here, the singular concept is appropriate, because the focus is on the present power of sin to control us, not the guilt of past acts. Jesus’ life in us cleanses us the all of the power of sin away from us.

Verse 8 is a third-class conditional sentence of the present general condition variety. The protasis contains two connected active verbs, the first in the present tense and the subjunctive mood: “say” (eipōmen) and the second in the present tense and indicative mood: “have, possess” (echomen), negated (ouk). It is significant that the second verb in the protasis is “have” (echomen), not “do” or “commit.” The focus is on what we have within us, not what we do. The “sin” word in this verse is hamartian, accusative singular, and is the direct object of “not have.” Thus, the question posed by the first half of the conditional sentence is not whether we “have” “sin” within us–it is assumed that we do–but whether our words deny this. If we deny that we have sin within us, then we deceive ourselves. As long as we deceive ourselves, the truth is not in us.

In verse 9, the plural concept of sin–our sins (plural), literally, the sins of us–are in view–along with a singular concept, “unrighteousness” (adikia). This verse is often presented glibly as if it means only that if we tell God we know something we did, a “sin” (singular), was wrong, he will forgive the guilt of that act. But it says much more than this. If we agree with God about our sins, our wrong acts–if we agree with God that we have sinned because we have sin (v. 8) within us–God will forgive our wrong acts. But, at the same time, agreeing with God about our “sins” entails agreeing with him that they come from “sin,” rebellion, within us (see, Introduction: The Question of Confession), something only God can deal with effectively–we cannot. Once we agree with God about this, he not only forgives our “sins” but cleanses the “unrighteousness”–the injustice, the will to harm, the rebellious motivation that opposes his justice–out of us. This describes a process of cleansing out of us everything that opposes God within us. It describes the entire life of one who has been born of God! (On this point, see also Repentance, Confession and the Textual Variant in James 5:16).

Verse 10 is another third class conditional sentence, in which the main verb in the first clause is eipōmen, if “we say” (aorist subjunctive active), followed by the sin word hēmartēkamen, a verb (present indicative active), negated. The conditional in verse 9 references the same subject as verse 8–that is, what we are saying about our sin. The construction does not assume that I am saying “I have not sinned,” but asserts that if I say this, I am calling God a liar, and his word is not in me. This is written in contrast to verse 8–if I agree with God that I have sinned, done wrong acts, because I have sin within me, God is faithful to forgive those acts.

1 John 3:1-12

See how great a love the Father has given to us, that we should be called children of God! For this cause the world doesn’t know us, because it didn’t know him. Beloved, now we are children of God. It is not yet revealed what we will be; but we know that when he is revealed, we will be like him; for we will see him just as he is. Everyone who has this hope set on him purifies himself, even as he is pure. Everyone who sins also commits lawlessness. Sin is lawlessness. You know that he was revealed to take away our sins, and no sin is in him. Whoever remains in him doesn’t sin. Whoever sins hasn’t seen him and doesn’t know him.

Little children, let no one lead you astray. He who does righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous. He who sins is of the devil, for the devil has been sinning from the beginning. To this end the Son of God was revealed: that he might destroy the works of the devil. Whoever is born of God doesn’t commit sin, because his seed remains in him, and he can’t sin, because he is born of God.  In this the children of God are revealed, and the children of the devil. Whoever doesn’t do righteousness is not of God, neither is he who doesn’t love his brother. For this is the message which you heard from the beginning, that we should love one another;  unlike Cain, who was of the evil one, and killed his brother. Why did he kill him? Because his deeds were evil, and his brother’s righteous.

1 John 3:1-12 (WEB)

Everyone who maintains the hope that God is making us like himself, that when Jesus appears, we will be like him, purifies himself or herself. By contrast, everyone who does the sin–singular, with article–also does the disobedience or the lawless thing–anomía, singular, with definite article–because the sin is the lawless thing. “The” sin is our inward rebellion against God. “The” rebellion and “the” state of lawlessness, of not recognizing duties or restraints, are flip sides of the same thing. (See “Sin” Words: Lexical Definitions). This is the point of verse 4, and it uses the singular concept of “sin.”

The first half of verse 5 then switches concepts to plural “sins,” reminding us that Jesus came for the purpose of removing (arē) our bad acts. Verse 5 then switches back to the singular concept of sin, connecting Jesus’ purpose to remove our “sins” with the fact that emphatically there is no “sin,” singular, in Jesus. As the remainder of the passage explains, this removal of bad acts from our lives refers not to forgiveness of past bad acts but to our sanctification–the removal of bad acts from our present experience. Because there is no sin in Jesus, he must remove bad acts from our experience if we are to be one with him. This is his work, not ours.

Thus, verse 6, using forms of the verb hamartanō, “to sin”, rather than singular or plural nouns, first explains that anyone who is presently living, abiding (menōn) in Christ will not also simultaneously, presently, be rebelling against him, willfully missing the mark he has set (hamartanei, present indicative active). I cannot simultaneously be abiding in Christ and rebelling against him. The second half of verse 6 then switches to the present participle “sinning” (hamartanōn), affirming that anyone who is (pas ho) presently in rebellion, as normally translated, has not seen (heōraken, perfect indicative active) or known (egnōken, perfect indicative active) Jesus.

But here a little caution is in order, due to questions about the range of usage of the Greek perfect tense. The perfect tense usually refers to an action or event completed in the past which has effects up to the present time. But, depending on context, it can emphasize either the past event or its continuing consequences, sometimes one or the other almost exclusively. In verse 6, John used the perfect tense, rather than the present or the aorist, in saying that anyone who is presently in rebellion has not seen (perfect) or known (perfect) Jesus. Did John mean that anyone who is presently in rebellion never knew Jesus in the past? Or did John mean that anyone who is presently in rebellion, though they may have seen and known Jesus in the past, is not presently showing evidence of this, and, thus, the expected present consequences of the past relationship are absent? John’s use of verbs in the perfect tense leaves the verse ambiguous on this point. It is, at the very least, a warning that if I find myself in full rebellion, I should question whether I ever came to know Jesus at all.

On the other hand, read in context with the earlier passage of 1 John dealing with the forgiveness of sins (bad acts) that occur in our lives (1 John 1:6-2:3), it is clear that verse 6 is talking about “sin,” singular, rather than “sins,” plural. It does not assert that every time we stumble, committing a bad act or omitting something we ought to do, it means we never knew Jesus, or once knew him but lost our salvation when we sinned. Rather, the emphasis is on the rebellious heart.

John clarifies this in verses 8 and 9 by developing a contrast–the person who is doing, is practicing (present participle) the righteousness (singular, with the definite article)–that is, the righteousness of God–is righteous, just as Jesus is righteous. By contrast, the person who is doing, is practicing (same present participle as in verse 8, poiōn) the sin (singular, again with the definite article) is of the devil, because the Devil sins ap’ archēs. This is commonly translated “from the beginning,” which is a possible reading. Although one secondary meaning of archē is the “beginning,” in a temporal sense, its primary meaning is a “rule,” i.e., a “starting point,” what “comes first” and therefore has priority. Archē is also used with reference to the origin of something: “In the beginning (en archē) was the Word…” (John 1:1). Proud rebellion is the origin of the devil. So John is asserting not just that the devil sins from the temporal beginning of its existence, but also that the devil sins as a rule, as a matter of its internal priorities. People who are continually practicing sin show that they are of the devil, because they have the same starting point, rule of life or internal priorities as the devil does. “For this reason was the Son of God revealed, so that he might destroy the works of the devil.”

This leads into verse 9: Anyone that having been born (gegennēmenos, perfect indicative passive) from God, sin (singular) does not practice, because his seed in him resides and he is not able, inherently lacks the power (ou dynatai, present indicative middle voice) to sin (hamartanein, present infinitive active), to continue in rebellion, because of God he has been born (gegennētai, perfect indicative passive). In this verse, first take note of the verbs that are in perfect tense as opposed to the present tense. Being born of or from God is in the perfect tense, emphasizing that it happened in the past but has continuing effects in the present. By contrast, doing or practicing sin, acting in rebellion, is a present condition, not an act which is completed or the continuing consequences of such a completed act. Then note what is active, and what is passive. Acting in rebellion is active, a condition I choose and acts that I choose, whereas being born of God, having his seed placed within me, is passive, something that is done to me by God. Once these things are noted, the use of the present infinitive hamartanein makes sense. If God’s seed has been placed within me by God, and I am now living in the consequences of God’s choice, giving that divine choice its full effect, I will not have the power within me (middle voice) to engage in rebellion against him. Rebellion will be against my nature.

John then, in verses 10 through 12–and the remainder of chapter 3–develops the matter of outward conduct which clearly shows whether I am living in my new birth or in my old rebellion: do I love my brothers and sisters? John does not ask the questions church organizations normally ask when they want to answer whether I am doing righteousness–such as: Do I give the correct human organization a strict tithe with appropriately generous offerings in addition to it? Do I attend every time the doors are open? Do I give adequate time serving in church programs? Do I spend adequate time doing formal personal devotions? Do I practice sufficiently severe ascetic self-denial in all of the required parts of my life? Do I keep all of the church’s rules of public and private moral behavior? All of these questions by which organizations customarily determine a member’s “righteousness” are designed to control the person’s behavior in ways advantageous to the organization. For this reason, they are all designed to create guilt and bondage–it is anticipated that every member who is honest will have to answer “no”–I could (and should) do better, do more, and give more–so I am not yet doing righteousness. I must do more!

However, the question John asks–really the only question he asks–is tougher, but at the same time liberating: am I showing love to others? John first provides examples of what love is not–love is not envy of other people’s righteousness and the resulting hatred, like that of Cain. 1 John 3:12-15. More pointedly, though, love is not seeing another believer in need, feeling compassion toward them, and then closing my heart toward them and choosing to ignore the need. 1 John 3:16-17.

However, John does not stop there, with just another binding rule to give generously to every organizational appeal for charitable funds. Instead, the call to love is liberating. Instead of providing a list of rules and practices to observe, in my own strength, in order to do righteousness, it tells me only to love. On the one hand, love is laying down our own lives for those we love. But we are only laying down our lives in the same way Jesus laid down his life for us. 1 John 3:16. But, in the same context, John tells me that God is love. 1 John 4:7-8. So doing righteousness comes down to letting God express his nature through me. 1 John 4:11-19; John 17:25-26. God himself gives the love. Galatians 5:22; Romans 5:5. I must merely follow him–when I am moved with compassion, it is God moving, and I am to let him lead and not shut myself up to his compassion or toward those toward whom He gives me compassion. 1 John 3:17-18; James 2:14-16. If I doubt that I know how to show compassion, or to show it effectively, on any occasion, I can ask, and he will give me wisdom to exactly the degree I am willing to follow what he says (this is a type of test). James 1:5-8. It’s tough, but the righteousness all comes from God. I only need to let him live it through me.

And John also provides the reassurance that, if we are truly living in God’s love toward others, not merely in word but in deed and in truth, this will set our hearts at ease in whatever our hearts condemn us, and we will have confidence before God. 1 John 3:18-22. God doesn’t want our performance, motivated by guilt and fear, he wants our lives, motivated and empowered by his love. If he has that, there is no need for guilt or fear. There is no fear in love, but perfect love drives out all fear. 1 John 4:18.

So what really matters is not our “sins,” the defects in our performance, but whether we are still trapped in “sin.”

1 John 5:16-20

If anyone sees his brother sinning a sin not leading to death, he shall ask, and God will give him life for those who sin not leading to death. There is a sin leading to death. I don’t say that he should make a request concerning this.  All unrighteousness is sin, and there is a sin not leading to death.

We know that whoever is born of God doesn’t sin, but he who was born of God keeps himself, and the evil one doesn’t touch him. We know that we are of God, and the whole world lies in the power of the evil one. We know that the Son of God has come, and has given us an understanding, that we know him who is true, and we are in him who is true, in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life.

1 John 5:16-20 (WEB)

Verse 16 is clearly speaking of individual sinful acts. The first part of verse 16 is third class conditional sentence of the Future More Probable Condition variety (protasis in the aorist subjunctive, apodosis in the future indicative). It indicates that, if I should ever see a fellow believer sinning (present participle) a sin (noun without article)–and I probably will sometimes see another believer sin–I should pray for them. The result of my prayer will be restoration–God will give them life. John makes an exception for a particular sin that is “unto death” (pros thanaton), without making any effort to define what that sin is–likely with the implication that his readers will recognize it when they see it. Quite obviously, a sin which results in immediate physical death–for example, the sin of Ananias and Sapphira in Acts 5:1-11— is a “sin unto death.” Generically, all unrighteousness, anything which does not demonstrate God’s righteousness, is sin [singular], but most sin does not lead to immediate death (v. 17). So, if we see another sinning, and are moved to compassion or prayer, we are likely not dealing with the “sin unto death.” We should pray. God is fully able to let us know if we should stop praying. (See, for example, 1 Samuel 16:1; Jeremiah 7:16). But that will be rare.

Verse 18 uses “sin” as a simple present tense verb. But it presents a statement about salvation, not primarily about sin. It declares that the one who has, in the past, been born of God, with consequences continuing to the present–the usual implications of the Greek perfect tense fit perfectly here–is not presently in rebellion against God (is not presently sinning), because Jesus is watching over him, and the evil (or the Evil One) therefore does not fasten onto or lay hold of him. By contrast, while we are of God, the evil of the world (or the Evil One) has laid hold of the world, in fact, the whole world lies within, inside, (en) its evil (v.19). We are not told this to give us a test to apply judgmentally to other people–in the traditional manner, by watching their lives to see if they ever commit any particularly disreputable “sins” (in the plural sense)–but to give us reassurance that we may understand that, as people who do not live in continuous rebellion against God as the world does, “we are in Him who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life” (verse 20).

Next: What I Believe, stated simply.

Next in the Repentance Series: Foundational Repentance and Falling Away, Hebrews 6:1-6.