Practical Christianity – Introduction (3) – Freedom from the Law in the New Covenant of the blood of the Messiah to walk in the breath of God

When it comes to living a godly, clean life, why doesn’t the Apostle point Christians to Sinai Covenant Law such as the Ten Commandments? He explains the problem with trying to live a godly life by deciding to try to keep and obey external written codes, including divine Law, in his letter to the Romans. Divine Law says for example, “You shall not covet”, but the impetus and energy towards missing the mark that is inherent in our fleshly constitution, or old humanity, seizes the opportunity presented by the commandment and produces every kind of coveting within us. Thus, ‘when the commandment came these impulses sprang to life and I died. I found that the very commandment that was intended to bring life actually brought death. Because the energy and impulse of missing the mark within me, seizing the opportunity afforded by the commandment, deceived me and through the commandment put me to death’ (Romans 7 v 9b – 11). Divine Law itself is not at fault – it is God-given and pure. Rather it is a principle, impetus, energy or ‘drive’ within us that is leading us towards missing the mark and failure, an impulse that is inherent in our fleshly constitution. That is the problem. These raw energies at work within my fleshly constitution ‘take hold of’, gain further energy from and ‘use’ such external codes and regulations, even if they are pure God-given injunctions. These energies and impulses use such regulations as a ‘springboard’ or ‘launching pad’ so as to bring their impetus to completion in the form of ungodly, undesirable speech, attitudes and behaviour. This means that we are in error if we turn to divine Law as the means to live a godly life because it is through these very codes that the self-forfeiture earned as a result of missing the mark becomes exceedingly excessive, (Romans 7 v 13).

So what does ‘walking in the breath’ moment by moment mean in practice? Does it mean, as some Christian leaders suggest, that Christians aim to surrender all their efforts to work at living a practical Christian life? Does it mean that Christians surrender all their labour in trying to understand, analyse and reason through doctrine and theology so that they can then follow their inner impulses and inclinations as an expression of the breath of God and their Christian freedom? Christians do indeed express this kind of sentiment reasonably often. Some Christians say things like, ‘I felt the Lord calling me to….’, or, ‘I felt a burden from the Lord to…’; and we hear Christian preachers say, ‘Let go of all your daily concerns and anxieties so as to allow the Spirit to fill your heart…’. By surrendering their efforts in thought, analysis and reasoning things through and ‘letting go’ of making the effort to live a godly life, they instead focus on ‘felt experience’. Christians have become missionaries, church leaders, or began their own Christian or charitable projects by using this kind of approach. I am not completely dismissing such ‘burdens’ and ‘felt experiences’, but I am saying that this is not the means that the Apostle taught with regard to Christians living a godly life day-by-day.

Just as Paul did not exhort Christians to live a godly life by quoting Covenant Law to them and insisting that they make an inner resolve to follow its various regulations, neither did he encourage Christians to ‘let go’ and unquestioningly follow every ‘burden’ or ‘impulse’ that they ‘felt’. When it comes to such seemingly godly feelings and impulses that seem to be guiding and leading our behaviour, no matter how extraordinary, unexpected, involuntary, strong or apparently transcendent they are, the questions are these: How do Christians know that this or that particular impulse or inclination is from God? How do they know that they are not just following their own deceitful fleshly impulses or sub-conscious desires? I am asking, What was Paul’s approach in detail?

Practical Christianity – Introduction (2) – Walking in the breath of God

Rather than ‘getting busy and getting going’ in fellowship projects, the Apostles were concerned that Christians in general began and continued to live a life worthy of their calling, deliverance and adoption by God through the Messiah. Paul taught about Christians possessing and walking in the breath of God. He taught that the breath of God, dwelling in the deep inner core of Christians, provides spiritual insight, illumination, discernment and inclination towards godliness. He also taught that Christians are sometimes tempted away from cleanliness and godliness and that they sometimes quench, ‘grieve’, resist, ignore or oppose the illuminations and inclinations from the breath of God deep within their inner core. Persistence in such opposition and resistance leads to a ‘hardness of heart’, to insensitivity towards God. As we will see, this insensitivity to God leads to ignorance and to following the futility of our own darkened thoughts and reasoning. Along with this we follow the energies and impulses inherent in our fleshly constitution that work in opposition to what God approves of.

It is the illuminating, insightful discernment and (in the main) gentle, subtle impulse of the breath of God dwelling within the Christian’s deep inner core that the Apostle Paul taught as being the basis for the dynamic process of Christians living a godly life. Thus he exhorts Christians to ‘walk around in the breath’, to pay attention to the working energies of the breath of God within them and to work to bring these energies to fruition by bringing them forth in their practical day-by-day speech, attitude and behaviour, making the Messiah complete. ‘The fruit of the breath is love, joy, peace, patient forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness and self-control. Down from these sorts of things there is absolutely no law, 24 and the Messiah, Jesus, crucifies the flesh together with the focus on desires and strong emotions’, (Galatians 5 v 22, 23).

That is the dynamic process that Paul presents in his Epistles with regard to Christians living a godly life. He places this process in contrast to one that refers to external codes, regulations and resolutions to uphold them, even though these regulations or laws may have come down from God. The dynamic process of practical behaviour that the Apostle Paul teaches is for Christians alone, because only they possess the breath of God within. ‘Outsiders’ cannot put into practice the process that he teaches because they do not possess the means to do so. Thus Paul exhorts Christians to walk around day-by-day, moment by moment, within the sphere and influence of the Inner Light and impulse of the breath of God dwelling deep in their inner core. He explains that the New Covenant in the blood of the Messiah is ‘not of the letter [of external written codes] but of the breath, because the letter kills but the breath gives life’, (II Corinthians 3 v 6). He explains in his letter to the Romans that Christians ‘are being put to death to the Law through the body of the Messiah’, (Romans 7 v 4). Christians ‘have been released from the Law so that we serve in the new way of the breath and not in the old way of the written code’, (Romans 7 v 6).

Practical Christianity – Introduction (1)

Some Christians love to emphasise the practical side of Christianity. They like ‘doing things’ and sometimes downplay theology and doctrine in favour of getting involved and getting going in fellowship meetings and church projects such as evangelism or ‘outreach’, or any number of other related fellowship activities, projects and meetings. Important as these may be, in terms of practicalities, the Apostles primarily focussed on Christians living a godly life day-by-day, whatever Christians were doing, and that is the theme of this series of posts.

But how did the Apostles approach teaching the very practical theme of Christians living a godly, clean life when they are still living in the world of fleshly, ungodly values, traditions and habits? A little more specifically, how did the Apostles approach and teach the dynamic process by which Christians live a godly life? What approach did the Apostle Paul for example use to motivate and teach Christians to set themselves apart from the world in godly cleanliness in their daily lives? Did he use God’s Law, such as the Ten Commandments, as a ‘spur’ to drive Christians on towards a clean, godly life? Did he teach that Covenant Law points out their missing of the mark causing Christians to turn to Jesus in repentance and exercise greater resolve towards godliness? Or did he teach Christians to surrender to the Breath of God or Holy Spirit? Did he instruct Christians to ‘let go’ of their problems and inner conflicts so as to abandon their efforts at trying to understand and harmonise difficult aspects of teaching and allow the Breath of God to fill them with power? Did he instruct Christians to surrender all their efforts at trying to live a godly life so as to allow the Breath of God to fill them with an impulse that carried them along towards godliness? Perhaps the Breath of God would then give them spiritual gifts, mystical revelations and experiences of God’s presence or even of union with Himself. Did he say that by seeking and obtaining such heightened or transcendent experiences Christians would find the means and power to cause their wayward behaviour to ‘fall away’? Did he exhort Christians to listen to and cultivate a sense of the passionate inner feelings of their heart towards God, to stimulate, seek and encourage a ‘felt experience’ of abundant life deep within them that would then give them energy and power to live a godly life? Did he promote the idea that Christians withdraw from the world with all of its temptations, so as to live the solitary life of an ascetic recluse or hermit, or to join an isolated community in a monastery or a desert or deep in a forest? Did he advocate that Christians attend worship meetings with fellow Christians in order to obtain a regular ‘uplift’ or ‘boost of power and energy’? Did such ‘praising and celebrating of God’ help Christians obtain the experience of an emotional/spiritual ‘high’ that was the means to godliness? Did he teach that singing lilting or rousing spiritual songs and listening to passionate sermons about victory in Jesus and being on the road to glory leads to optimism, a sense of triumph and an emotional uplift that carried Christians to godliness for a while? I propose that the Apostle proposed none of these courses of action as a means to godliness day-by-day.

I John 5 v 20 – 21 Concluding remarks – Christians living in the worldly arrangement

‘In addition we know that the Son of God has come and is giving us movement from one side to the other to reach balanced conclusions, full breadth critical thinking that reaches across to the other side in order that we continue to know Him who is true, and are within Him who is true, within His Son, Jesus the Messiah. 21 Little children, guard and protect yourselves away from images used for worship. So let it be’ (I John 5 v 20 – 21).

In addition to Christians knowing that they are brought forth by God, and that they exist in contrast to the world, they also know that the Son of God has come and is giving them enlightened reasoning. This means that they think things through, they evaluate and weigh up various considerations that reach across to and take into account the other side – the unseen heavenly realm, the Kingdom of God and Jesus the Messiah. The purpose and completion of reasoning within this illuminated knowledge, insight and understanding and taking it through to its logical conclusion is that Christians ‘continue to know Him who is true; and we are within Him who is true – within His son, Jesus the Messiah’.

Finally, John gives one last practical caution to his Hebrew Christian readers to guard and protect themselves away from images used for worship. As he has explained, no one at any time has seen God and such images ‘bring God down’ by delimiting Him to created forms. In this way people worship and praise created things instead of the Creator. As Christians they know Whom they worship, honour and praise. Not a lifeless metal, wood and stone idol but the living God Who is delivering them from judicial condemnation and ultimately away from their present fleshly body with its impulses and energies that lead to death. They honour and praise God Who has sent His only begotten Son to secure their deliverance, and who in due course will establish and restore the Kingdom of God on earth. And with that caution John concludes his letter.

I John 5 v 16 – 18 – Praying for Christians who are falling into error

John continues his theme of Christians praying for fellow Christians who are falling into error. Having made an exception with regards to praying for someone who professes to be a Christian but who is clearly and persistently opposing God and bringing God, His purposes, and Christians into disrepute. Such a person is disowned, not identified with and excommunicated – handed over to Satan.

Then he says, ‘All injustice is missing the mark, and there is missing the mark absolutely not leading towards death. 18 We appreciate that everyone who has been born from out of God is absolutely not missing the mark, but the one procreated from out of God is watching over and guarding him, and the malicious absolutely does not touch him’ (I John 5 v 17, 18). John does not want his Hebrew Christian readers to fall into the mistake of Christian Perfectionism, nor does he want them to conclude that every kind of error leads to death. So whilst the sort of error that we have been looking at in recent posts can indeed lead to lifeless insensitivity and unresponsiveness to God, he says that this is not the case with every instance of unjust behaviour or error. In other words there are degrees of missing the mark.

John says that Christians appreciate that all of those who are brought forth from out of God are absolutely not missing the mark. I explored this theme in the discussion on I John 3 v 9. With regards to Christians, to those brought forth by God, ‘the one procreated from out of God is watching over and guarding him and the malicious absolutely does not touch him’. There once again, is a difference in the way that the original Greek is translated into English. Some translations present this verse as I have above, but others present it like this: ‘the one procreated from out of God is watching over and guarding himself’. So which is correct? A brief overview of different Bible Commentators reveals the following opinions. Matthew Poole says, ‘The great advantage is here signified of the regenerate, who, by the seed remaining in them, (as I John 3 v 9) are furnished with a self-preserving principle’. John Gill says, ‘the Vulgate Latin version reads, ‘the generation of God keeps or preserves him’. That is, that which is born in him, the new man, the principle of grace, or seed of God in him, keeps him from notorious crimes, particularly from sinning the sin unto death, and from the governing power of all other sins. But all other versions, as well as copies, read as we do, as follows: ‘keepeth himself’…..the sense is, that a believer defends himself by taking to him the whole armour of God, and especially the shield of faith, against the corruptions of his own heart, the snares of the world, and particularly the temptations of Satan’. However, the Pulpit Commentary proposes that, ‘The whole should run, ‘We know that whosoever is begotten of God sinneth not, but the Begotten of God keepeth him’.

It is not possible to make a firm decision between these two alternative translations and interpretations, but along with some other Commentators I prefer the version expressed in the Pulpit Commentary. I propose that John’s intention is to say that it is God Who watches over and preserves Christians. God has brought Christians forth through His only begotten Son and the Son watches over and preserves them. That is why it is within God’s purpose and desire that Christians pray to God with regards to a fellow Christian who is falling into error. The end result is that ‘the malicious absolutely does not touch him’. The person brought forth from out of God remains secure within the Messiah who watches over and guards them, with Christians expressing their practical beneficial love towards their fellow Christians in prayerful concern if they see them falling into error. In making such prayers Christians are in agreement with God’s desires and purposes. It is absolutely not possible that a person brought forth by God and made to stand within the Messiah can be condemned by God, or as it were be reclaimed by or brought back into self-forfeiture and loss of a share by the malicious. The malicious – the world, the flesh and the devil – absolutely do not touch such an individual such as to cause them to lose their deliverance and divine inheritance.

‘We appreciate that we are from out of God, and the entire world is placed and reclines within the malicious’ John returns to the polarizing dichotomy that he has introduced and referred to throughout his letter:

Christians appreciate that they are from out of God

Outsiders and the entire orderly arrangement of the world is situated and rests within the malicious

Throughout his letter John has been drawing strong demarcation lines between ‘outsiders’ and Christians and in doing so he has been identifying unique qualities that Christians possess but which ‘outsiders’ absolutely do not. These differences serve as marks of assurance. His conclusion is that Christians are aware and know in experience that that have been brought forth from out of God. They also know that the entire orderly system of the world is placed within that which is malicious, bad, and divinely disapproved of. In fact the worldly arrangement rests at ease and comfort within this sphere of maliciousness.

I John 5 v 16 – 18 – Christians missing the mark and in error (5) – Illness and death

Then there are instances and situations in which error or disobedience brings fatal disease upon the offender. There is an example of this in I Corinthians. ‘Whoever is eating the bread or drinking the contents of the cup of the master not to its real value and worth will be liable and held in by the Lord’s body and the blood. 28 A man should be scrutinizing himself to see that he is genuine and acceptable, and in this way be eating from out of the bread and be drinking from out of the cup. 29 Because the one eating and drinking not thoroughly and closely reasoning, separating out and distinguishing the body is eating and drinking a judgment on himself. 30 Through this, many within you are weak and infirm, and have reached falling asleep. 31 But if we are discriminating and scrutinizing ourselves we would absolutely not be picked out and separated’ (I Corinthians 11 v 27 – 31). Some Christians within the Corinthian fellowship were treating the fellowship meal and Lord’s Supper with disdain because those who had food were eating even whilst those who were poor and unable to afford food were going hungry. There was also disorder and a lack of proper self-examination when it came to the bread and the wine. The implication is that there were some ‘outsiders’ in the fellowship partaking of the bread and wine, and that there were some Christians who were wilfully engaged in fleshly or worldly behaviour and not coming to the Lord’s Supper with appropriate sober consideration. The result, says Paul, was that ‘many within you are weak and infirm, and have reached falling asleep’. In other words many of them were lacking in strength and good health, and some had died. The Apostle links these instances of poor health and death to their lack of reverence and self-examination with regards to the bread and wine. He says that ‘the one eating and drinking not thoroughly and closely reasoning, separating out and distinguishing the body is eating and drinking a judgment on himself’.

God’s Judgement is not entirely or solely reserved for some future date – we see the wrath of God being revealed from heaven even now at this present time. For ‘outsiders’ this judgement may lead to their death, and for Christians too, wilful persistence in error and disobedience may lead to such a degree of training and discipline from God as to lead to their illness or death.

But we cannot understand very much in the way of guidance from God’s providence. Job suffered various calamities yet he was counted as a righteous man. He suffered because of disputes in the unseen heavenly realm. Similarly the Psalmists complain that the wicked and the ungodly seem to prosper. In terms of guidance, providence – God’s arrangement of our circumstances and situations – remains a mystery, and without some kind of revelation Christians cannot assume that because a person is ill or facing adverse circumstances that they are therefore engaged in some sinful, erroneous activity. It is not as simple and formulaic as that. All that we can say is that in general terms there is a principle that Christians engaging in ‘serious’ error may incur discipline and strict training in terms of God arranging adverse circumstances for them, but adverse circumstances do not necessarily point to an individual being in error or disobedient.

Error that leads to death – summary conclusion

By way of summing up a conclusion with regards to ‘error that leads to death’ another Bible Commentator states, ‘It is possible [for an individual] to close [their] heart against the influences of God’s Spirit so obstinately and persistently that repentance becomes a moral impossibility….‘Sin unto death’, therefore, is not any [single] act of sin, however heinous, but a state or habit of sin wilfully chosen and persisted in: It is constant and consummate opposition to God.’ In the phraseology of John’s letter we might say that it is an individual’s deliberate preference for darkness as opposed to light, of falsehood to truth, of sin to righteousness, of the world to the Father, of spiritual death to eternal life, of wilfully, deliberately and persistently slandering the breath of God so as to declare the breath of God to be evil, mischievous or Satanic. It is willfully and persistently bringing God, His Messiah, His people and the gospel into scandalous public disrepute such that the individual’s path towards death – be it insensitivity and lack of response to God, or physical death and illness – is begun with excommunication, with being ‘disowned and dis-identified with by the fellowship, such that the individual is handed over to Satan and the worldly arrangement.

Such persistent opposition by a Christian in their speech and behaviour is clearly seen and clearly bringing God and His purposes, as well as Christians, into disrepute. Such a person is disowned and no longer identified with by the fellowship because if such an individual persists in their error then their persuasion to the point of obedience and their inclusion as an ‘adopted son’ in God’s house is no longer in evidence. Rather they evidence themselves to be ‘dead’, ‘lifeless’ ‘outsiders’.

I John 5 v 16 – 18 – Christians missing the mark and in error (4) – Covenant Law and behaviour demanding the death penalty

It is of course quite possible that a Christian can engage in serious error as defined under Sinai Covenant Law in the case of Jews, or as defined by Civil Law in the case of Gentiles. The purpose of Sinai Covenant Law was not to punish offenders but to instil Justice and lead offenders to repentance through paying the recompense that the Law prescribed. Even in some cases of a death sentence being prescribed, a substitution payment could be made to redeem the life of the offender. But this was not so in all cases – some errors demanded the death penalty with no opportunity for ruling officials to commute the sentence. We have also seen an example of this position of hopelessness in the New Testament with regards to constantly and wilfully slandering the breath of God. Similar situations can occur under Gentile Civil Laws. In some countries the death penalty is retained for what are considered to be serious crimes, and there may be no provision for a reprieve. All of these situations certainly portray a missing the mark leading towards death, but given the context of John’s letter, this is probably not what is in John’s mind. I think that he is more likely to be thinking of slandering the breath of God – the breath that he has just described as being an element of God’s testimony to His Son as the Messiah.

I John 5 v 16 – 18 – Christians missing the mark and in error (3) – Excommunication

In the previous post we saw that in Matthew 12 v 31, 32, Jesus indicated that there are degrees of seriousness of missing the mark and error. In terms of being under divine condemnation, all self-forfeiture and loss is serious, but it is logical to say that some errors have more serious consequences than others. God’s judgements are fair and proportionate. There are different degrees of debt incurred by different errors, as well as different degrees of reward leading to different allotments of the divine inheritance. Overseers who rule well are worthy of double honour, and martyrs in particular are singled out as deserving the highest of rewards.

In the light of this, the concept of the ‘seven deadly sins’ was created within the Christian tradition which grades sins such as murder and adultery as being at the more ‘serious’ end of this spectrum, serious enough to incur excommunication. Christians in general, and Overseers in particular, have to make evaluations with regards to grading errors when it comes to disputes occurring within the fellowship and the potential need to invoke excommunication. It is not that Christians are encouraged to walk around being critical of others, or finding fault – the Apostles speak against such an attitude. But because the breath of God enlightens Christians they are therefore considered to be well capable as a fellowship of making such evaluations correctly if necessary.

Roman Catholic theologians understood ‘missing the mark leading towards death’ to refer to the kind or degree of missing the mark that incurred the Christian’s excommunication from the fellowship – thus the concept of the ‘seven deadly sins’. If we look at examples of excommunication in the New Testament we can see that these errors were clearly observed behaviours that were bringing God, the fellowship and the gospel into disrepute amongst ‘outsiders’. Christians were behaving in such a way as to be acting like, or even worse than, ‘outsiders’, opposing God, His Messiah and the gospel. A Christian man in Corinth who was having a sexual relationship with his father’s wife is one example. His behaviour shocked ‘outsiders’. This Christian man was behaving worse than ‘outsiders’, causing God, the gospel and the fellowship to be the subject of negative gossip, criticism, contempt and opposition. Another example concerns two Christians who were in effect blaspheming – openly speaking about God with disdain and disrespect.

Excommunication is a disciplinary practice in which the fellowship removes such a professing Christian from their assembly. Such an individual is no longer identified with them. In effect such an individual is handed over to Satan. The bringing about of the undesirable results of such erroneous behaviour – the individual’s loss of health, loss of friends, loss of possessions, loss of reputation, loss of employment and so on, was seen by the Apostles as being the work of Satan as prosecutor. The Apostle Paul says that such people ‘are receiving back within themselves the absolutely necessary proportionate recompense of their wandering off course’ (Romans 1 v 27). The purpose of excommunication is not punishment, but that ‘they are trained, educated and disciplined not to be’ continuing to engage in such erroneous and ungodly behaviour that is clearly in opposition to God (I Timothy 1 v 20). If the excommunicated individual repents – if they turn around back towards God – then the fellowship is required to welcome them back.

In the light of this last consideration a Christian missing the mark in such a way and to such a degree that leads to their excommunication, is not necessarily a missing the mark leading towards death because in being excommunicated they are not placed into a position of being without any hope of restoration.

I John 5 v 16 – 18 – Christians missing the mark and in error (2) – Slandering the breath of God

John is saying that there is a degree of error and missing the mark that Christians can engage in such that they come to a position where they speak and behave like an ‘outsider’. John says that Christians should not implore God all around such error (verse 16). This kind and degree of error is ‘missing the mark leading towards death’

But when it comes to specifics, differences of opinion arise between Bible Commentators who are by no means unified and settled as to what ‘missing the mark leading towards death’ actually means. A list of their various opinions reveals that in their opinion, ‘missing the mark leading towards death’ is error that is

Slandering the breath of God
More serious error, such as murder
That which is punishable by death under Sinai Covenant Law
Behaviour that requires excommunication
A cause of fatal disease upon the offender
Behaviour that breaks a civil law that demands the death penalty where there is no power given to a Magistrate to pardon the offender

Each of these has been proposed as a definition of ‘error leading to death’. Some of these are quite similar, so we may be justified in reducing them to a smaller, more manageable list such that we say that ‘missing the mark leading towards death’ is

Slandering the breath of God
Behaviour that demands excommunication from the fellowship
Behaviour seriously condemned by Covenant or Civil Law – demanding the death penalty
Behaviour that brings fatal disease upon the offender

Missing the mark against the breath of God or ‘Holy Spirit’ is often a cause of concern for Christians who may ask themselves if they have somehow, inadvertently committed this error and as a result lost their deliverance. Because this is the one self-forfeiture and missing of the mark that Jesus says is unpardonable both in this age and the next (Matthew 12 v 31; Mark 3 v 29). Bible Commentator Matthew Poole says that ‘those who have missed the mark leading towards death have apostatized from their former weak, superficial and inadequate profession of faith. They have not only turned away from their former persuasion of the truth towards erroneous teaching, false understanding and fleshly behaviour, but they obstinately continue in this path, resisting and opposing all methods of recovery such that they are twice dead’.

Missing the mark against the breath of God involves this deliberate, willful and persistent opposition to the breath of God in which a person identifies the breath of God as being Satanic, mischievous and of bad intent. They persist in ascribing the breath of God to the ultimate opposite of God –Satan. This is not someone testing the breaths, speculating and reasoning to come to a conclusion whether the breath that they are experiencing is of God or not. Rather, it is a persistent, willful and deliberate conclusion that the breath of God is satanic. It was precisely within this context that Jesus makes this statement about ‘slandering the breath of God’. The Pharisees had seen Jesus heal a man who held an unclean breath and they then concluded, “It is only by Beelzebul, the prince of demons, that this fellow drives out demons” (Matthew 12 v 24). Jesus responded by correcting their mistaken thinking and he concluded by saying, ‘“I tell you, when it comes to calling something good that really is good, or slowness to identify something that really is bad as being bad, every kind of transgression and sluggishness will be sent away and discharged. However, the men who slander the breath will not be sent away and discharged. 32 Whoever says a word against the Son of Man will be discharged. But whoever continues to speak against the breath that is different and set apart will not be discharged and sent away, neither in this age nor in the age that is about to come”’ (Matthew 12 v 31, 32).

I John 5 v 16 – 18 – Christians missing the mark and in error (1)

‘If anyone should see his brother missing the mark or in error, an error not leading towards death, he will ask and will give life to him not missing the mark leading towards death. There is missing the mark and error leading towards death – I absolutely do not say that he should implore all around that. 17 All injustice is missing the mark, and there is missing the mark absolutely not leading towards death. 18 We appreciate that everyone who has been born from out of God is absolutely not missing the mark, but the one procreated from out of God is watching over and guarding him, and the malicious absolutely does not touch him. 19 We appreciate that we are from out of God, and the entire world is placed and reclines within the malicious.’ (I John 5 v 16 – 19).

John gives an example of a prayerful request that is away from God. He acknowledges that Christians can and do fall into error, that they sometimes miss the mark. We saw this earlier when I rejected the concept of Christian Perfectionism. It is clearly in accordance with God’s desire that Christians prayerfully make requests on behalf of a fellow Christian that they see falling into error.

But John adds a condition by making a distinction with regard to types or degrees of error. He says that fellow Christians can fall into some errors and their behaviour can be prayed about. But some Christians can fall into, or engage in, serious errors that lead towards death, and if this is the case, then Christians should not implore God all around such error. This may seem somewhat strange to us at first, so what does John mean? When Christians pray for a fellow Christian who is falling into error that does not lead to death, their prayerful requests will have a restorative effect and help to bring such a Christian away from ‘dead, unprofitable behaviour’, back to the path of life. But when it comes to a fellow Christian falling into error that is leading towards death, John says that Christians should absolutely not be asking and imploring all around this person and their error. In effect, they are cut off from fellowship.

The big question that we have to ask in the light of John’s statement is this: ‘What kind of errors lead to death?’ Scripture defines ‘death’ either as physical death, or as being ‘lifeless’ or ‘unresponsive’ with regard to God – as in someone who is ‘dead in sins and trespasses’. John is talking here about a lifeless unresponsiveness towards God and His Messiah. The Greek word translated into English as ‘error’ means ‘missing of the mark that leads towards death’, self-forfeiture that ‘terminates’ in death. So John is talking about a fellow Christian whose speech, attitude and behaviour is missing the mark and in such error that it is leading them towards, or displaying unresponsiveness to God, His Messiah, the breath of God and the gospel.

This goes beyond a Christian experiencing a period of anxious concern or conflict arising from doubt, uncertainty or inner conflict arising from pressure and opposition because of their faith. It goes beyond a Christian who is anxious or saddened by the persistence of and conflict with their fleshly impulses that work in opposition to God. John is talking about missing the mark to the degree that Christians are placed in a position of numbness and insensitive lack of response to God. This insensitive unresponsiveness may in turn lead this Christian to engage and indulge in fleshly behaviour that shows disdainful dismissal and opposition to God. Such a Christian may reach the point where they come to dismiss the gospel as a ‘trifle’, a ‘fad’, a ‘religious con trick’ and so on, and they may openly speak and act in opposition to God, His Messiah and the gospel. In effect they come to a position in which they speak and behave like an ‘outsider’. I think that this really says most of what we need to understand in general terms about what it means to be ‘missing the mark that leads to death’.