Sin leading to death

[FFC]

Can somebody help me understand what is being said here in Ist John in the NASB. what is the sin leading to death or the sin not leading to death? Why shouldn't we pray for someone who is committing the sin leading to death? I never have understood this.

1Jo 5:16 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.
1Jo 5:17 All unrighteousness is sin, and there is a sin not {leading} to death.

[B. W.]

Can somebody help me understand what is being said here in Ist John in the NASB. what is the sin leading to death or the sin not leading to death? Why shouldn't we pray for someone who is committing the sin leading to death? I never have understood this.

1Jo 5:16 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.
1Jo 5:17 All unrighteousness is sin, and there is a sin not {leading} to death.

I'll have to look into this as I do not know
-
-
-

[Canuckster1127]

FFC,

This is a difficult passage and there are several different understandings of it by good Biblical Scholars.

Most of them distinguish between whether this is physical death or spiritual death and whether this is directed with regard to a believer or an unbeliever.

First, it's always best to start with the context of the entire passage.

If you go back and read I John 5:13-21 as a whole, this should be what is established that will assist.

Starting in verse 13 it is established again (from the beginning of the book) that who is being written to here are believers and what he is doing is seeking to encourage them and firm them up in the knowledge of their faith and confidence in their salvation.

vs 14 and 15 translates this confidence into a more effective prayer life.

vs 16 and 17 further clarify that this effectiveness in prayer extends from the Christian who is praying to the "brother" that is being prayed for.

It is argued by some as to whether brother here means a fellow believer or whether it is in the broader sense of of a "neighbour" in which case it could be seen as a non-believer.

It become a little easier to deal with if we see it as a non-believer because then the "sin leading to death" is seen as the only real sin that leads to death for anyone, and that is rejecting Jesus Christ.

I tend to reject this explanation because it seems out of place to me in the context of the passage and the letter itself. This is a letter written to believers which abounds with encouragement to love one another and I think the whole theme of the letter focuses on the Church and relationships between believers.

That makes the explanation tougher but I think it puts it better in context.

There is a contrast in verse 16 and 17 about praying for a brother in a sin leading to death or a sin not leading to death. It's OK to pray for either, but John contrasts between the sin leading to death and states that a in the case of a sin leading to death that one should necessarily pray for this (although he doesn;t prohibit either.)

I think John goes on to clarify in the following verses just what he is talking about.

For the believer he speaks of the new birth putting us in a position where we do not sin and how God keeps us from the evil one. That is true positionally. We know from other passages of Scripture that we still continue to wrestle with individual sins so evidently John, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit is speaking of something else here. He's speaking of something that by its very nature would put us outside of that protection and into the power of the evil one. We could perhaps try and guess what that may be, but maybe he'll be clearer later in the passage.

vs 20 does make it clearer. We're reminded that Jesus has come and given us understanding (I see this along to the lines of a renewed mind) so that we can know (and here knowledge is in the broader sense than just intellectual knowledge, it is in the sense of interaction and relationship)) Christ and God, whom Christ points us toward.

So he's talking about something that is not just a habitual sin or action on our part, he is speaking about something that goes to the very basis of our relationship with God through Christ.

Just in case there is any doubt, he makes it clear and is blunt in vs 21.

"Little children, guard yourself from idols"

That's what he's talking about. Idolatry is more than a sinful act. It strikes at the very tendons that hold our relationship with God.

There's a great deal of controversy about this because on the one hand we believe that it is God who saves us and God who holds us in relationship to Him and there are many who would argue that apostasy of this nature is not possible because that would put the power of salvation into our hands and not Gods. I understand the sensitivity of those who look at it that way.

That however is superimposing a framework onto the text and I think we need to let this text speak for itself first and then work with reconciling other passages against it.

The sin that leads to death, as I read this passage is pretty clear to me.

It is idolatry.

Inherent within that idolatry and along the same lines, you can see as well that apostacy is tied into it.

I hope this helps. As I said there are competent scholars who see this differently, but I believe you have to allow the text to speak for itself first and then reconcile it. You don't come to the text deciding what it can mean or not mean and then force it into that mold.

[FFC]

Thank you, Bart, for taking the time to go over that with me. I did wonder why John put that line about idolatry at the very end. It's definately something to think about.

[phoney]

I thought it was referring to [Bible]matt 12:31-32[Bible]
31 Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.
32 And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world or the world to come.
Isure missed something.

[Canuckster1127]

I thought it was referring to [Bible]matt 12:31-32[Bible]
31 Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.
32 And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world or the world to come.
Isure missed something.

If you see the original passage as speaking to unbelievers then you could make that connection and some do.

I think you have to interpret a passage to be internally consistent within its own context before you seek to apply outside passages in this manner, but as I said earlier, there are good Bible scholars who rejct the explanation I offered (in part because they do not believe that apostasy is possible.)

[B. W.]

I thought it was referring to [Bible]matt 12:31-32[Bible]
31 Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.
32 And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world or the world to come.
Isure missed something.

The next question is how one does this?

Here are some clues found in answering these questions:

What work does the Holy Spirit do?

What was the chief sin in Genesis chapter 3?

Why does humanity, we, seek to dominate instead of love?
-
-
-

[YLTYLT]

Can somebody help me understand what is being said here in Ist John in the NASB. what is the sin leading to death or the sin not leading to death? Why shouldn't we pray for someone who is committing the sin leading to death? I never have understood this.

1Jo 5:16 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.
1Jo 5:17 All unrighteousness is sin, and there is a sin not {leading} to death.

Here is some ideas on this from the Strand Sudy Bible.

According to the Bible, there are three kinds of sins:
1. Sins committed “unknowingly” (called a “weight” - Heb 12:1 and/or a “trespass” - Lev 5:15,17-18)
2. Sins committed “knowingly” (called “besetting sins” - Heb 12:1 and Lev 4:2 & 5:2-4)
3. Sins committed “against great light” (a sin unto death) — this sin is not determined by what you sin, but rather “why” you sin what you sinned. In other words, when a child of God sins after having been given great light (such as, the Israelites - Num 14:23,29, Achan - Josh 7:19-26, King Saul - I Sam 15:35-16:1, the people of God during Ezekiel's day - Ezk 14:12-21, and Ananias and Sapphira - Acts 5:1-11), it puts God to an open shame (Heb 6:4-6 & 10:26-31).

ONE FINAL NOTE — The “sin unto death” is not the same as “blasphemy against the HOLY GHOST” (i.e., the unpardonable sin - Mt 12:31). Whereas saved people are the only ones who can commit the “sin unto death,” unsaved people are the only ones who can commit “blasphemy against the HOLY GHOST.”

It seems to make sense to me:
When Ananias and Sapphira lied about how much money that sold there property for and that it differed in how much they gave the church. This was a sin under great light because they had witnessed many of the miracles and had great evidence to believe.

[FFC]

Can somebody help me understand what is being said here in Ist John in the NASB. what is the sin leading to death or the sin not leading to death? Why shouldn't we pray for someone who is committing the sin leading to death? I never have understood this.

1Jo 5:16 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.
1Jo 5:17 All unrighteousness is sin, and there is a sin not {leading} to death.

Here is some ideas on this from the Strand Sudy Bible.

According to the Bible, there are three kinds of sins:
1. Sins committed “unknowingly” (called a “weight” - Heb 12:1 and/or a “trespass” - Lev 5:15,17-18)
2. Sins committed “knowingly” (called “besetting sins” - Heb 12:1 and Lev 4:2 & 5:2-4)
3. Sins committed “against great light” (a sin unto death) — this sin is not determined by what you sin, but rather “why” you sin what you sinned. In other words, when a child of God sins after having been given great light (such as, the Israelites - Num 14:23,29, Achan - Josh 7:19-26, King Saul - I Sam 15:35-16:1, the people of God during Ezekiel's day - Ezk 14:12-21, and Ananias and Sapphira - Acts 5:1-11), it puts God to an open shame (Heb 6:4-6 & 10:26-31).

ONE FINAL NOTE — The “sin unto death” is not the same as “blasphemy against the HOLY GHOST” (i.e., the unpardonable sin - Mt 12:31). Whereas saved people are the only ones who can commit the “sin unto death,” unsaved people are the only ones who can commit “blasphemy against the HOLY GHOST.”

It seems to make sense to me:
When Ananias and Sapphira lied about how much money that sold there property for and that it differed in how much they gave the church. This was a sin under great light because they had witnessed many of the miracles and had great evidence to believe.

That makes sense to me. Thanks, YLTYLT.

[Charlie Brown]

3. Sins committed “against great light” (a sin unto death) — this sin is not determined by what you sin, but rather “why” you sin what you sinned. In other words, when a child of God sins after having been given great light (such as, the Israelites - Num 14:23,29, Achan - Josh 7:19-26, King Saul - I Sam 15:35-16:1, the people of God during Ezekiel's day - Ezk 14:12-21, and Ananias and Sapphira - Acts 5:1-11), it puts God to an open shame (Heb 6:4-6 & 10:26-31).

Ok, now I have a question about this. Let's assume I've been saved and I sin again would that fall under this rule? Would I then lose my salvation?

Let's assume my previous sins were anger and lust. I've been forgiven for these sins and commit them again, would that be a sin unto death?

[Canuckster1127]

Ok, now I have a question about this. Let's assume I've been saved and I sin again would that fall under this rule? Would I then lose my salvation?

Let's assume my previous sins were anger and lust. I've been forgiven for these sins and commit them again, would that be a sin unto death?

Charlie Brown,

No. That is not what this passage is talking about.

None of us becomes without sin practically when we are saved. Positionally, God attributes to us the righteousness of Christ and on that basis we are declared redeemed or bought back based upon what Christ has done.

We were not saved based upon anything we did. We do not maintain our salvation based upon anything we do or don't do. We cannot sin, away our salvation. If we could, that would mean that our righteousness is what saved us in the first place.

The main thrust of this passage relates to apostasy. There are differing views upon it and what the death spoken of equates to.

As I stated above in my more detailed post going through the entire passage, I believe that the passage is directed to believers and it is speaking of prayer for fellow believers. The issue is idolatry which is equated as a sin unto death. The question then becomes whether it is speaking of spiritual death, which would equate to a loss of salvation, assuming that were possible, or it can equate to physical death.

While as believers we cannot, I believe, sin away our salvation, that doesn't mean that there are not serious consequences for sin. Acts 5:1-11 as has been mentioned earlier in this thread gives an example of this sort of thing, I believe in the case of Annanias and Sapphira. Their sin was lying to the Holy Spirit and to the congregation by seeking to receive praise for their generosity while secretly holding back a portion of the money they received for the sale of their property. They had the right to do what they wanted with that money. That is not why they were struck dead. They lied about it not just to men, they lied directly to God. As a result, they lost their lives. I don't believe they necessarily lost their salvation, but the consequences were high.

The question of apostasy is a very difficult one. There are passages, such as this one, as well as some in Hebrews which appear to indicate that it is possible for a believer to turn their back on God and walk away from their salvation.

They are difficult passages to deal with, but in general, the traditional ways of viewing them fall pretty much into these categories:

1. Apostasy is not possible. God saved us apart from any action on our part and therefore no action on our part can take us from His hand. Sin may and does have serious temportal consequences. God may take the physical life of a believer who is in rebellion in order to limit the damage their rebellion causes to themselves and the rest of the body.

2. Apostasy is possible, however it is a one time decision every bit as radical as conversion in which a person does a 180 degree turn from God away from God and places their trust faith and allegiance in something other than God, which is in essence idolatry. This passage in I John is often used as a proof text for this concept. Once a person does this, they are spiritually dead and unable to return to God. The blood of Christ, no longer has any affect upon them, nor can it, as they have received their pardon and in turn have turned away and counted the blood of Christ an unholy thing.

3. Apostasy is possible, and in fact someone can move in and out of salvation multiple times based upon their current relationship and whether or not their is unconfessed sin or active rebellion in their life.

Personally, I believe option 3 to simply be contrary to the Gospel. If this were true, the classic illustration is that as Christians, the kindest thing we could do for a new convert would be to baptize them and then hold them under so that they don't put their salvation at risk. What a miserable existence it would be to worry from moment to moment whether we were in a state of grace or not.

Between 1 and 2 there is a lot of dispute among believers, with supporters of both positions who are sincere and orthodox. I tend toward position 1 myself. But, as I read this passage in context, I have to confess that there is much here that gives me pause and makes me aware of the seriousness of sin.

Romans 1 - 8 is very important in forming a framework to understand this.

Again, this is a 30,000 foot fly over and you'll find a great deal of discussion about this on some other threads. It's an important issue to consider.

BUt in terms of individual sins such as you mention with Lust and Anger, we were not saved based upon our ability to maintain a perfect standard. Our salvation is not maintained on that basis. To attempt or believe otherwise would in fact, be stating to God that our righteousness is as good as His. We are saved by Grace and maintained by God, not ourselves. Nevertheless, Sin has very serious consequences that for the believer can extend right up to the loss of our physical lives.

Hope this helps,

Bart

[Charlie Brown]

Ok, now I have a question about this. Let's assume I've been saved and I sin again would that fall under this rule? Would I then lose my salvation?

Let's assume my previous sins were anger and lust. I've been forgiven for these sins and commit them again, would that be a sin unto death?

Charlie Brown,

No. That is not what this passage is talking about.

None of us becomes without sin practically when we are saved. Positionally, God attributes to us the righteousness of Christ and on that basis we are declared redeemed or bought back based upon what Christ has done.

We were not saved based upon anything we did. We do not maintain our salvation based upon anything we do or don't do. We cannot sin, away our salvation. If we could, that would mean that our righteousness is what saved us in the first place.

The main thrust of this passage relates to apostasy. There are differing views upon it and what the death spoken of equates to.

As I stated above in my more detailed post going through the entire passage, I believe that the passage is directed to believers and it is speaking of prayer for fellow believers. The issue is idolatry which is equated as a sin unto death. The question then becomes whether it is speaking of spiritual death, which would equate to a loss of salvation, assuming that were possible, or it can equate to physical death.

While as believers we cannot, I believe, sin away our salvation, that doesn't mean that there are not serious consequences for sin. Acts 5:1-11 as has been mentioned earlier in this thread gives an example of this sort of thing, I believe in the case of Annanias and Sapphira. Their sin was lying to the Holy Spirit and to the congregation by seeking to receive praise for their generosity while secretly holding back a portion of the money they received for the sale of their property. They had the right to do what they wanted with that money. That is not why they were struck dead. They lied about it not just to men, they lied directly to God. As a result, they lost their lives. I don't believe they necessarily lost their salvation, but the consequences were high.

The question of apostasy is a very difficult one. There are passages, such as this one, as well as some in Hebrews which appear to indicate that it is possible for a believer to turn their back on God and walk away from their salvation.

They are difficult passages to deal with, but in general, the traditional ways of viewing them fall pretty much into these categories:

1. Apostasy is not possible. God saved us apart from any action on our part and therefore no action on our part can take us from His hand. Sin may and does have serious temportal consequences. God may take the physical life of a believer who is in rebellion in order to limit the damage their rebellion causes to themselves and the rest of the body.

2. Apostasy is possible, however it is a one time decision every bit as radical as conversion in which a person does a 180 degree turn from God away from God and places their trust faith and allegiance in something other than God, which is in essence idolatry. This passage in I John is often used as a proof text for this concept. Once a person does this, they are spiritually dead and unable to return to God. The blood of Christ, no longer has any affect upon them, nor can it, as they have received their pardon and in turn have turned away and counted the blood of Christ an unholy thing.

3. Apostasy is possible, and in fact someone can move in and out of salvation multiple times based upon their current relationship and whether or not their is unconfessed sin or active rebellion in their life.

Personally, I believe option 3 to simply be contrary to the Gospel. If this were true, the classic illustration is that as Christians, the kindest thing we could do for a new convert would be to baptize them and then hold them under so that they don't put their salvation at risk. What a miserable existence it would be to worry from moment to moment whether we were in a state of grace or not.

Between 1 and 2 there is a lot of dispute among believers, with supporters of both positions who are sincere and orthodox. I tend toward position 1 myself. But, as I read this passage in context, I have to confess that there is much here that gives me pause and makes me aware of the seriousness of sin.

Romans 1 - 8 is very important in forming a framework to understand this.

Again, this is a 30,000 foot fly over and you'll find a great deal of discussion about this on some other threads. It's an important issue to consider.

BUt in terms of individual sins such as you mention with Lust and Anger, we were not saved based upon our ability to maintain a perfect standard. Our salvation is not maintained on that basis. To attempt or believe otherwise would in fact, be stating to God that our righteousness is as good as His. We are saved by Grace and maintained by God, not ourselves. Nevertheless, Sin has very serious consequences that for the believer can extend right up to the loss of our physical lives.

Hope this helps,

Bart

Thanks for the reply. This helped a lot.