1

Can a Christian Sin unto Death?

Perseverance and 1 John 5:16

Dr. R. Bruce Compton

Professor of Biblical Languages and Literature

Detroit Baptist Theological Seminary

INTRODUCTION

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.1

John’s directives in 1 John 5:16 represent a well-known crux in New Testament interpretation.

The difficulties with this verse are found on at least two levels. The first level involves its

interpretation. What is this sin not leading to death, and how is it different from the sin that leads

to death? In addition, how is the expression “brother” being used, as a description of a true

believer or of one who has made a profession of faith but who is not saved? Finally, what does

John mean by the expressions “life” and “death,” and why is the one whose sin is not leading to

death promised life?

The second level of difficulty with this verse concerns its theological implications. What is the

relationship between the brother sinning in 5:16 and John’s declaration in 5:18 that one born of

God does not sin (cf. 3:6, 9)? In other words, how can a “brother” be sinning, as 5:16 states, and

still be described in 5:18 as not sinning? Ultimately, the theological tension involves

harmonizing what John says about the brother in this verse and what John and other New

Testament writers teach about the perseverance of the saints. Perseverance means that a true

believer, one who has been regenerated by God’s Spirit, will continue in the faith, i.e., continue

to believe the gospel (e.g., Heb 3:14). Perseverance also means that a true believer will

demonstrate some level of faithfulness to God’s word as evidenced in good works (e.g., Jas

2:14).2 Returning to the question, how can a “brother” be sinning and still be described as

persevering in faithfulness to God and his word?”

1All Scripture references are from the New American Standard Bible, 1995 edition, unless otherwise noted.

2See Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible, s.v. “Perseverance,” by A. H. Leitch, 4:709–10; New

Dictionary of Theology, s.v. “Perseverance,” by R. Kearsley, 506–7; Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible, s.v.

2

The approach to addressing these questions is, first, to place the passage in its literary context. In

view here is the identification of the purpose and structure of the letter in order to understand

how the verse fits within the immediate and larger contexts of the author’s theme and argument.

Next, the major interpretive options are presented and critiqued to arrive at the interpretation best

supported by the evidence. Following this, the theological implications of the verse are addressed

in an effort to resolve the tension between what John says here about a “brother” engaged in sin

and what John and others say elsewhere about the perseverance of the saints.

PURPOSE AND STRUCTURE OF 1 JOHN

John records at least four purpose statements in his first epistle, 1:3–4; 2:1; 2:26; 5:13.3

Combining these statements, John’s purpose appears two-fold. On the one hand, John’s purpose

is to counteract the influence of false teachers. This purpose is brought out most clearly in his

statement in 2:26, “These things I have written to you concerning those who are trying to deceive

you,” a clear reference to the false teachers (cf. 2:18; 4:1).

On the other hand, John’s purpose is also to establish or confirm his readers in the truth. This

purpose is expressly stated toward the end of the letter in 5:13, “These things I have written to

you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may know that you have eternal

life.” Here the emphasis is on linking doctrinal orthodoxy—“believe in the name of the Son of

God”—with assurance of salvation—“that you may know that you have eternal life.”4

John accomplishes both purposes by giving his readers a series of tests of eternal life by which

the readers can identify the false teachers and, at the same time, gain assurance of their salvation.

In other words, the tests John uses to expose false teachers are the same tests he uses to identify

genuine believers. John’s intentions in providing these tests are to ground the readers in the truth,

provide them with assurance of salvation, equip them to combat the false teachers, and exhort

them to godly living (cf. 2:1).5

“Perseverance,” by R. E. O. White, 2:1647–48; New Dictionary of Theology: Historical and Systematic, 2nd ed., by

A. T. B. McGowan, 666–667.

3In view here are those passages where John uses the combination “these things I have written,” addresses his

readers as the recipients, and follows this with an indication of the purpose or occasion for the letter.

4D. Edmond Hiebert, The Epistles of John: An Expositional Commentary (Greenville: Bob Jones University

Press, 1991), 19–22; D. A. Carson & Douglas J. Moo, An Introduction to the New Testament, 2nd ed. (Grand

Rapids: Zondervan, 2005), 677–81, 685; Colin G. Kruse, The Letters of John, Pillar New Testament Commentary

(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000), 27; Christopher D. Bass, That You May Know: Assurance of Salvation in 1 John.,

NAC Studies in Bible & Theology (Nashville: B & H, 2008), 40–54.

5Similarly, Robert Law, The Tests of Life: A Study of the First Epistle of St. John, 3rd ed. (reprint ed., Grand

Rapids: Baker, 1968), 1–24; Donald W. Burdick, The Letters of John the Apostle: An In-depth Commentary

(Chicago: Moody Press, 1985), 64–67; D. A. Carson, “Johannine Perspectives on the Doctrine of Assurance,” in

Justification and Christian Assurance, ed. R. J. Gibson, Explorations 10 (Adelaide, South Australia: Openbook,

1996), 75–76; Colin G. Kruse, “Sin and Perfection in 1 John,” Australian Biblical Review 51 (2003), 62–64.

Contra, among others, Judith M. Lieu, who limits John’s purpose to giving the readers assurance (The Theology

of the Johannine Epistles, New Testament Theology [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991], 22–23, 49–

51); and Zane C. Hodges, who denies that John’s purpose is to give his readers assurance of salvation, identifying

3

Identifying the structure of 1 John is particularly challenging. John repeats key topics throughout

his epistle, and his transition from one topic to the next is subtle at best. As well, 1 John does not

follow a standard epistolary format. There is no conventional epistolary introduction or

conclusion, nor is there an overall division between instruction and exhortation. Nevertheless, in

terms of its macrostructure, the consensus among interpreters is to see a threefold division: (1)

the introduction or prologue, 1:1–4; (2) the body of the letter, 1:5–5:12; and (3) the conclusion or

epilogue, 5:13–21.6

Our verse, 1 John 5:16, is located in John’s epilogue. Following the various tests by which

eternal life is evidenced and false teachers exposed, John concludes his letter by addressing the

issue of assurance. The conclusion is divided into four sections. John begins by restating his

purpose for writing in providing his readers assurance of salvation (5:13). Following this, he

addresses the confidence believers can have in God’s hearing and answering prayer (5:14–17).

Next, he briefly restates certain truths established in his letter as the basis for assurance (5:18–

20). He then finishes with a final exhortation to his readers (5:21).7

A corollary to believers having assurance of salvation and eternal life (5:13) is the confidence or

assurance believers can have in God’s hearing and answering prayer (5:14–17). John divides his

discussion on the believer’s confidence in prayer into two subsections. He first identifies the

conditions for answered prayer—asking according to God’s will, 5:14–15—and then he gives an

illustration of how God answers such prayer—God’s answering prayer for a sinning brother,

5:16–17.8

THE MAJOR VIEWS ON 1 JOHN 5:16

Taking into consideration John’s teaching on eternal security and, specifically, that salvation or

eternal life cannot be forfeited by those who receive it, there are roughly three views on the

interpretation of 1 John 5:16.9 As such, views that deny eternal security are excluded. Interpreters

John’s theme as the tests of fellowship rather than the tests of eternal life (The Epistles of John: Walking in the Light

of God’s Love [Irving, TX: Grace Evangelical Society, 1999], 34, 50, 94–95, 226).

6See, for example, Martin M. Culy, I, II, III John: A Handbook on the Greek Text (Waco, TX: Baylor

University Press, 2004), 13–16; Andreas J. Köstenberger, A Theology of John’s Gospel and Letters, A Biblical

Theology of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2009), 125–26, 171–73. In addition, the body of the

letter may be further divided into three sections, with each section composed of ethical demands followed by

doctrinal demands. See, among others, Burdick, The Letters of John the Apostle, 85–92; Georg Strecker, The

Johannine Letters, trans. Linda M. Maloney, ed. Harold Attridge, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996), xlii–

xliv. For recent surveys on the structure of 1 John, see Daniel L. Akin, 1, 2, 3 John, New American Commentary

(Nashville, Broadman & Holman, 2001), 37–47; and L. Scott Kellum, “On the Semantic Structure of 1 John: A

Modest Proposal,” Faith and Mission 23 (Fall 2005): 34–82.

7Among others, see Hiebert, The Epistles of John, 249–50.

8See, for example, John R. Stott, The Letters of John: An Introduction and Commentary, 2nd ed., Tyndale New

Testament Commentaries (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988), 188.

9For a survey of the various views on the interpretation of the passage, see Raymond E. Brown, The Epistles of

John, Anchor Bible (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1982), 610–19, and Akin, 1, 2, 3 John, 207–10.

4

in this category approach the passage with the understanding that a true believer can commit sin

that leads to the loss of salvation and eternal death.10

Thus, these views have been excluded in

that they appear to be in conflict with what John says elsewhere about the believer’s security.11

The underlying premise is that John cannot teach something in this passage that he denies

elsewhere in his writings. With that in mind, the three views are distinguished based on their

understanding of who can commit the two sins John mentions: the sin that does not lead to death

and the sin that does.

First View

Both Sins involve Unbelievers

The first view takes the one committing a sin not leading to death to refer to an unbeliever and

the giving of life to eternal life. The expression “brother” is interpreted in this context to depict a

nominal Christian. It is someone who has made a profession of faith but who is not saved.

Assuming this is the case, John is saying that, if a believer observes a professing believer

persisting in sin, he should pray for that individual and God will bring that individual to

repentant faith and eternal life.12

The sin that leads to death and for which the readers are not directed to pray is variously

understood. The options include one or more of the following sins: (1) high-handed sins (Num

15:22–31), (2) blasphemy against the Holy Spirit (Matt 12:31–32), (3) a conscious, willful

rejection of Christ and the gospel, and (4) apostasy or a following away from the faith by those

who at one time professed faith (Heb 6:4–6). In any case, the sin in view is often linked with the

false teachers John opposes in his letter (e.g., 2:22; 4:3). Furthermore, a common understanding

among proponents is that this sin brings divine hardening, that is, God’s withdrawing of common

grace, rendering certain the individual’s eternal condemnation and death.13

In support of this interpretation, John uses the terms “life” and “death” elsewhere in his letter to

refer to eternal life and death (1:2; 3:14–15; 5:11–12). Furthermore, John describes a true

believer as one who does not practice sin (1:6; 3:9; 5:18). Lastly, this view nuances the sin unto

death in light of the surrounding context to refer to the sin of the false teachers, John’s

opponents.

10

See, among others, I. Howard Marshall, The Epistles of John, New International Commentary on the New

Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978), 245–51; and Stephen S. Smalley, 1, 2, 3 John, rev. ed., Word Biblical

Commentary (Nashville, Thomas Nelson, 2007), 283–88. Both Marshall and Smalley argue that a true believer can

commit sin that leads to apostasy and eternal condemnation.

11

See, for example, John 10:27–29, “My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me; and I give

eternal life to them, and they will never perish….” The Lord’s expression, “they will never perish,” represents a

“subjunctive of emphatic negation,” the strongest form of denial. Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the

Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 468–69.

12See, for example, Stott, The Letters of John, 188–93; Irvin A. Busenitz, “The Sin unto Death,” The Master’s

Seminary Journal 1 (Spring 1990): 17–31.

13

For a discussion of divine hardening, see NIDNTT, s.v. “Hard,” by U. Becker, 2:153–56; Douglas Moo, The

Epistle to the Romans, NICNT (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), 110–11, 595–600.

5

With that in mind, there are several difficulties with this interpretation. The first is its

explanation that, other than a final rejection of the gospel, any sin an unbeliever commits does

not lead to eternal death. The problem with this is that Scripture appears to teach the opposite. In

other words, Scripture teaches that any sin an unbeliever commits leads to eternal condemnation

and death.14 As Paul declares “the wages of sin is death” (Rom 6:23; cf. Ezek 18:20).

Proponents of the first view counter. What John means is simply this. Assuming an unbeliever

has not finally rejected the gospel, any sin the unbeliever commits does not necessarily lead to

death in that God can intervene to save that individual. Assuming this is the case, John is

directing his readers to pray for this individual with the promise that God will save the lost

sinner.15 While this explanation resolves the theological tension—an unbeliever’s sin short of a

final rejection of the gospel not leading to death—this interpretation requires some measure of

reading into the text what John does not explicitly state.

Another, perhaps greater, difficulty with the first view is that it interprets “brother” to refer to an

unbeliever. This interpretation is problematic in that John uses “brother” consistently throughout

his epistle to refer to a believer (2:9–11; 3:10, 13–17; 4:20–21). The one exception to this is in

3:12 where Abel is described as Cain’s brother. In this case, John uses “brother” in the sense of

two males having the same biological parents.16

Proponents of the first view respond by pointing to those verses which describe the unbeliever as

hating “his brother,” where “brother” refers to a believer. For example, in 3:15, John states,

“Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life

abiding in him” (2:9, 11; 3:14). The argument is that the unbeliever in these verses is described

as hating “his brother,” implying that the one hating is understood in at least a nominal sense as a

brother.17

It must be granted that these verses do imply that the one hating has at least a nominal

relationship to believers, to those who are called his brothers. Yet the text does not explicitly use

“brother” to describe those who hate, those who are unbelievers. John uses the expression

specifically of the one hated, not of the one hating. Thus, the point still stands. John consistently

uses “brother” in 1 John to describe believers and never directly to describe unbelievers, as the

first view argues.

14

Even proponents of the first view acknowledge that every sin an unbeliever commits leads to eternal death.

Stott, for example, concedes that “In a sense all sin ‘leads to death’ spiritually, for death is the penalty for sin (Rom

5:12; 6:23; Jas 1:15)” (The Letters of John, 189).

15

Busenitz, “The Sin unto Death,” 29–31.

16

TDNT, s.v. “ἀδελφός,” by H. F. von Soden, 1:144; BDAG, 18.

17

Stott, The Letters of John, 192–93; Busenitz, “The Sin unto Death,” 25–26.

6

Second View

The Sin that does not lead to Death involves a Believer

The Sin that does involves an Unbeliever

The second view interprets the sin not leading to death as the sin of a believer. As such, the life

promised to the sinning believer refers to God’s confirming eternal life by restoring the sinning

believer to faithful service with its present and future rewards. In other words, God will answer

this prayer by bringing the sinning believer to repentance and restoration to spiritual service and

blessing, confirming the believer in eternal life.

The sin leading to death is the sin of an unbeliever and, in particular, the sin of apostasy, a

complete rejection of the gospel by those who at one time professed faith in Christ. It is the sin

John’s opponents, the false teachers, have committed. Such sin is viewed as irrevocable in that it

inevitably brings God’s hardening and, thus, the certainty of eternal condemnation and death.18

The strengths with this view include its interpreting “brother” to refer to a believer, consistent

with how John has used the term previously in his epistle (2:9–11; 3:10, 14–15; 4:20; 5:1). This

view takes “life” and “death” to refer to eternal life and death, also consistent with John’s use of

these terms elsewhere in the letter. And, it nuances the sin unto death in light of the larger

context as the sin of apostasy, that which the false teachers have committed.19

With these strengths in mind, the second view also faces difficulties. The first difficulty is its

interpretation of the statement “he will give him life.” In what sense does God give the sinning

believer life, if life means eternal life? John consistently depicts the believer throughout this

epistle as already possessing eternal life (3:14; 5:13).

Proponents respond by arguing that what is given the sinning brother is the confirmation of

eternal life by bringing the brother to repentance and restoring the brother to faithfulness with all

of its accompanying blessings.20 Again, while such a meaning for the statement “he will give him

life” is possible, this interpretation requires a measure of reading into the text what John does not

expressly state.

At the same time, perhaps the chief difficulty with the second view is its interpretation of the sin

that leads to death as the sin of an unbeliever. It is not clear from the context that such is the

case. John directs the reader to pray for a brother committing a sin not leading to death. John

18

Similarly, Burdick, The Letters of John, 401–4; Hiebert, The Epistles of John, 257–63; Kruse, The Letters of

John, 190–94; Akin, 1, 2, 3 John, 207–11. Kruse prefers defining the “life” given to the sinning brother as

confirmation of the resurrection life in the future rather than as confirmation of eternal life in the present, though he

acknowledges that “for the most part, the letter depicts eternal life as a present possession of believers” (ibid., 191).

19

Tim Ward, “Sin ‘Not Unto Death’ and Sin ‘Unto Death’ in 1 John 5:16,” Churchman 109 (1995): 226–37.

20

See, for example, David M. Scholer, “Sins Within and Sins Without: An Interpretation of 1 John 5:16–17,” in

Current Issues in Biblical and Patristic Interpretation: Studies in Honor of Merrill C. Tenney Presented by His

Former Students, ed. Gerald F. Hawthorne (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975), 240. As Scholer notes, “The matter of

the sinning brother’s being given ‘life’ is problematic since the believer has already been transferred out of death

into life (3:14) and thus possesses life (5:11–13). The ‘life’ that is given to the sinning brother, in the context of 1

John, must be understood as a renewal or reconfirmation (cf. 1:6–10) of the life already possessed (3:14; 5:11–13).”

7

adds that there is a sin that leads to death and he states that he is not directing the readers to pray

for such. At face value, John has the sinning brother in view with both sins. There is no explicit

reference to a second individual in the verse.21

Some proponents of the second view agree, arguing that John intended the designation “brother”

to be taken with both sins. In the case of the sin that does not lead to death, the “brother”

committing such refers to a true believer. However, in the case of the sin that leads to death, the

“brother” committing this sin is not a believer. He is one who has made a profession of faith, but

who in reality is not saved.22

However, resolving the tension in this way actually creates a further problem. In effect, this

interpretation gives two different meanings to the expression “brother” in the same verse. With

the sin that does not lead to death, the “brother” committing such is a true believer. But, with the

sin that leads to death, the “brother” committing this sin is an unbeliever. Giving “brother” two

different meanings in the same verse appears to violate the univocal nature of language and

single meaning. Thus, in order to maintain coherent hermeneutic, words should be given one and

only one meaning in a given context.23

Beyond this, John is not prohibiting prayer for the one sinning unto death. He simply says that he

is not directing the readers to pray for those in this situation.24 Yet if the sin in view is apostasy

and irrevocable, as the second view argues, how is it that John is not expressly prohibiting the

readers for praying for such?25

We would expect John to direct the readers not to pray for the one

committing this sin, if indeed the sin is apostasy and irrevocable.

21

John Painter, for example, asks, “Is it implied that a brother might commit such a sin [unto death]?

That…seems probable because reference to this sin is introduced by a clause about seeing a brother sinning. The

most obvious way to read this is: ‘if it is a sin not to death, then you will ask (God); but if it is a sin to death I do not

tell you to ask God concerning (the one who commits) that sin’” (1, 2, and 3 John, Sacra Pagina [Collegeville, MN:

Liturgical, 2002], 317).

22

Randall K. J. Tan, “Should We Pray for Straying Brethren? John’s Confidence in 1 John 5:16–17,” Journal of

the Evangelical Theological Society 45 (December 2002): 602–3, 606–9.

23For a traditional defense of single meaning, see Milton S. Terry, Biblical Hermeneutics: A Treatise on the

Interpretation of the Old and New Testaments (reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1974), 203–5. For additional

discussion, including the issues of authorial intent and figures of speech, see among others, E. D. Hirsch, Jr.,

Validity in Interpretation (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1967), 1–6; Charles C. Ryrie, Dispensationalism, rev.

and enl. ed. (Chicago: Moody Press, 1995), 80–81; Robert H. Stein, “The Benefits of an Author-Oriented Approach

to Hermeneutics,” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 44 (September 2001): 451–66; Walter C. Kaiser,

Jr., “The Meaning of Meaning,” in An Introduction to Biblical Hermeneutics: The Search for Meaning, ed. Walter

C. Kaiser, Jr., and Moisés Silva, rev. and enl. ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan 2007), 29–46.

24

See for example, Robert W. Yarbrough, 1– 3 John, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament

(Grand Rapids: Baker, 2008), 309–10; contra, among others, Marianne Meye Thompson, 1–3 John, IVP New

Testament Commentary (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1992), 141–45; Kruse, The Letters of John, 192–93.

Kruse offers several options for interpreting John’s statement and then gives support for it to be taken as a

prohibition (ibid., 193).

25See, for example, Gary M. Burge, The Letters of John, NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids:

Zondervan, 1996), 215.

8

Third View

Both Sins involve a Believer

The third view takes both sins, the sin that does not lead to death and the sin that does, as the sins

of a believer. Furthermore, the third view takes the statement “he will give him life” to refer to

the giving of physical life. As such, the sin not leading to death is any sin that a believer persists

in that has not reached the point where God determines to intervene and take the believer’s life.

In other words, the phrase “not leading to death” means that the sin has not come to the point

where God chooses to act and chasten the believer with physical death.

Correspondingly, the sin leading to death refers to a believer persisting in some sin to the point

where God determines to act and chasten the believer with physical death. In such a case, God

resolves to intervene to prevent the sinning believer from bringing further reproach on the name

of Christ. Physical death, in this instance, is the result of God’s disciplining the believer for

failure to repent of a persistent sin.

Assuming this is the intent, John is saying that if a believer observes another believer caught up

in some sin, the observer is to pray for the one sinning. In response, God will bring the sinning

believer to repentance, cleansing, and restoration to faithfulness. Thus, the individual is delivered

from physical death that would otherwise be the outcome of persistent disobedience and God’s

ultimate chastisement.26

The strengths with this view include its interpreting “brother” to refer to a believer, consistent

with how John has used the term elsewhere in his epistle (2:9–11; 3:10, 14–15; 4:20; 5:1). As

well, there are other New Testament parallels where a believer is disciplined with physical death

because of a failure to repent over some specific, ongoing sin (e.g., 1 Cor 11:30).

With the above in mind, this view too faces problems. One problem is with the statement “God

will give him life.” Advocates understand the promise of life to mean that God will intervene in

response to prayer and bring the sinning believer to repentance and forgiveness. In effect, God

gives life by deterring the sinning believer from continuing in sin and experiencing physical

death.

While such a reading is possible, it gives a meaning to the expression “God will give him life”

that requires a level of unpacking. God is giving the sinning believer life in the sense that God is

preventing the sinning believer from experiencing physical death. In other words, giving life

means delivering the sinning believer from physical death as the outcome of persistent sin.

Again, such an interpretation is possible, but requires some level of reading into the text what

John does not directly state.

Another, perhaps more serious, problem with the third view is that it interprets “life” and “death”

to mean physical life and death. The problem here is that John uses the same two expressions

26

See, for example, F. F. Bruce, The Epistles of John, (reprint of 1970 ed., Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1979),

124–25; idem, Answers to Questions (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1972), 134; John MacArthur, The MacArthur Study

Bible (Nashville: Word, 1997), 1974; Murray J. Harris, Prepositions and Theology in the Greek New Testament: An

Essential Reference Resource for Exegesis (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2012), 195–97.

9

elsewhere in the epistle to refer to eternal life and death. For example, John writes in 3:14, “We

know that we have passed out of death into life, because we love the brethren” (cf. 1:1–2; 2:25;

3:15; 5:11–13, 20). By describing something he and his readers have already experienced, John

is clearly describing their transition from eternal death to eternal life. Thus, if John intends a

different kind of life and death in 5:16, it is expected he would use different words or add

modifiers to make that meaning clear.

Weighing the Evidence and Choosing among the Three Views

Choosing among the three views is challenging. The first view, which takes “brother” as

referring to someone who is not a true believer, appears the easiest to harmonize with the

concept of perseverance. Previously in the letter, John has declared that a believer does not

practice sin (3:6, 9). Consistent with this, the one sinning in 5:16 is an unbeliever, not a believer.

Thus, there is no conflict between what John says elsewhere about believers’ not practicing sin

and what he says about the individual in 5:16 who is engaged or persisting in sin.

Having said that, John employs the illustration in this verse as an example of the kind of prayer

the readers can pray with confidence that God will hear and answer (5:14–15). That being true,

are the readers to have confidence when they pray that God will save the lost, as in the first

view? Or, are the readers to have confidence when they pray that God will restore wayward

believers, as in the second and third views?27

John’s teaching on the perseverance of believers actually points in the direction of the second

and third views. In other words, the readers can have confidence in God’s promise to restore

wayward believers so that they indeed persevere, both in faith and in faithfulness to God’s word.

There is little evidence in John or elsewhere in the New Testament that supports the first view,

viz., that God promises to save every lost person who becomes the object of a believer’s prayer

(Rom 10:1; 1 Tim 2:1–4; cf. 2 Pet 3:9).

Even more troubling with the first view, however, is that in 5:16 John refers to the one in need of

prayer as a “brother,” a term John consistently uses throughout the epistle of a brother in Christ,

a fellow believer. For that reason, it is difficult to imagine that John would use the term here to

describe someone who is lost and in need of salvation, as the first view argues. Thus, the

function of the passage within its context—to provide the readers with confidence in prayer—

and John’s use of “brother” elsewhere in the epistle—to refer to a fellow believer—render the

first view questionable, if not unlikely.

Choosing between the remaining two views is even more challenging. The major hurdle for the

third view is defending its interpretation of “life” and “death” as referring to physical life and

death. As mentioned above, John uses the expressions elsewhere in 1 John of eternal life and

death. With that in mind, proponents offer the following in response. The prepositional phrase

27

Although not stated, the subject of the assertion, “he will…give life,” is God, not the one praying. See, for

example, Rudolf Schnackenburg, The Johannine Epistles: Introduction and Commentary, trans. Reginald and Ilse

Fuller (New York: Crossroad, 1992), 249; Akin, 1, 2, 3 John, 207; Smalley, 1, 2, 3 John, 287; contra Stott, The

Letters of John, 188–89; Judith M. Lieu, I, II, & III John: A Commentary, New Testament Library (Louisville:

Westminster John Knox, 2008), 228. Both Stott and Lieu see the one praying as the subject.

10

“to death” in 5:16 is found only one other time in John’s writings, in John 11:4.28 There, when

told that Lazarus was seriously ill, Jesus responds by saying that this sickness is not “to death.”

Clearly, “death” in John 11:4 refers to physical death, the same meaning proposed by the third

view for 1 John 5:16.

Critics of the third view counter by arguing that the contexts of the two passages are distinct and,

thus, the meaning of the prepositional phrase in John 11:4 cannot be used to determine its

meaning in 1 John 5:16.29 It must be granted that the contexts of the two passages are not

parallel. In John 11:4, the combination “to death” refers to sickness: it is a sickness not to death.

In 1 John 5:16 the combination refers to sin: it is a sin not to death.

Furthermore, the combination in John 11:4 means that Lazarus’ sickness will not end in death.

Lazarus dies, but the Lord raises him back to life. Thus, to say in John 11:4 that the sickness is

not “to death” means that the sickness will result in physical death, but death will be reversed

and physical life will be restored. The meaning of the combination in 1 John 5:16, on the other

hand, means that the sin has not reached the point of no return, the point where God chooses to

intervene and take the believer’s life.

These differences notwithstanding, the point argued with the third view is that in both passages,

the noun “death” in the prepositional phrase “to death” carries the connotation of physical death.

In other word, the phrase “to death” in John 11:4, the only other time this combination is found

in John’s writings, refers to physical death. As such, John’s use of the phrase in John 11:4

supports the third view and its interpretation of the phrase in 1 John 5:16.

Stating the argument linguistically, the noun John uses for “death” in 1 John 5:16 has a semantic

range that includes the concepts of both physical death and eternal death.30 Whether or not the

noun has this range in 1 John is contested. The noun is used only six times in the epistle, and four

of these are in 5:16–17, the debated text. However, this semantic range—physical death and

eternal death—is attested in John’s Gospel and in Revelation and as such is viable in 1 John.31

Furthermore, as was mentioned above, the only other use of the prepositional phrase “to death”

in 1 John 5:16 is in John 11:4 where the phrase refers to physical death.

Assuming this to be the case, the other key hurdle with the third view is its interpretation of

“life” in 5:16 to mean physical life. John uses the noun “life” a total of thirteen times in 1 John.

In its twelve other uses, “life” refers to eternal life (1:1, 2 [twice]; 2:25; 3:14, 15; 5:11 [twice], 12

28

This assumes, of course, that the same author wrote both documents. For a recent discussion in defense of the

apostle John as the author of both, see Andreas J. Köstenberger, L. Scott Kellum, and Charles L. Quarles, The

Cradle, The Cross, and the Crown: An Introduction to the New Testament, 2nd ed. (Nashville: B & H, 2016), 293–

98, 783–90.

29

See, for example, Hiebert, The Epistles of John, 262.

30

TDNT, s.v. “θάνατος,” by R. Bultmann, 3:16–18; NIDNTT, s.v. “Death,” by W. Schmithals, 435–41; BDAG,

442–43.

31BDAG, 442–43. For a recent discussion and defense of John the apostle as the author of Revelation, see

Köstenberger, Kellum, and Quarles, The Cradle, the Cross, and the Crown, 811–14.

11

[twice], 13, 20). As well, when John refers to physical life in 1 John, he uses a different noun

(2:16; 3:16).32

Again, the argument can be stated linguistically. Since John consistently uses the noun “life” in

1 John of eternal life, and since John employs a different lexeme in 1 John for physical life, the

term in 5:16 should be interpreted as eternal life. In addition, the only other time John uses the

collocation “life” and “death” in 1 John, the terms refer to eternal life and death and not to

physical life and death (3:14).

In response, the substantive “life” has a semantic range that includes the concepts of both

physical life and eternal life.33 Furthermore, this semantic range is attested in both the Gospel of

John and in Revelation.34 The fact that John uses “life” in both senses elsewhere in his writings

allows for the interpretation of “life” in 5:16 as a reference to physical life. Furthermore, John

technically is not contrasting life and death in 5:16, as he does in 3:14. In 5:16, his contrast

specifically is between sin that does not lead to death and sin that does. Finally, the other uses of

“life” in 1 John either add the adjective “eternal” or describe this life in relationship to the Son to

make clear that eternal life is in view. Such is not the case in 1 John 5:16.

Returning to the question of the second versus the third view, the issue comes down to the matter

of probability. When all of the arguments are weighed, which interpretation appears the more

probable? In the majority of its uses in John’s writings, the noun “life” carries the meaning of

eternal life, a meaning that favors the second view.35 On the other hand, in the majority of its

uses elsewhere in John’s writings, the noun “death” carries the meaning of physical death, a

meaning that favors the third view.36

In addition, the prepositional phrase John uses in 5:16, “to

death,” is found only one other time in John’s writing, where it clearly refers to physical death.

Taking into considerations the strengths and weaknesses of both the second and third views, the

third view is preferred. John appears to be addressing only one individual in his discussion of the

sin that does not lead to death and the sin that does, and he calls him a “brother.” The second

view either introduces a different individual with the sin to death, something the text does not

make clear, or takes the “brother” committing this sin as an unbeliever, a meaning not attested

elsewhere in John’s writings.

RESOLVING THE THEOLOGICAL TENSIONS

The third view takes the brother committing a sin not leading to death as referring to a believer.

Yet in 5:18, just two verses later, John declares that the one born of God, a believer, does not sin.

How is it that, on the one hand, John can describe a believer engaged in sin and, on the other

32

I. Howard Marshall, ed., Moulton and Geden Concordance to the Greek New Testament, 6th rev. ed. (London:

T & T Clark, 2002), 457 (ζωή), 151 (βíος).

33

TDNT, s.v. “ζάω,” by R. Bultmann, 2:861–64; NIDNTT, s.v. “Life,” by, 2:480–81; BDAG, 430–31.

34See, among other references, John 3:16 (eternal life), John 12:25 (physical life); Rev 2:10 (eternal life), Rev

11:1 (physical life).

35Marshall, ed., Moulton and Geden Concordance to the Greek New Testament, 456–58.

36Ibid., 348–49.

12

hand, declare that a believer does not sin? Putting the question in its theological context, in what

sense can a believer be engaged in sin and still be persevering in faithfulness to God’s word?

In resolving the theological tensions, two pitfalls must be avoided.37 The first is that those

passages which speak of believers not sinning cannot be teaching some form of sinless

perfection. In other words, when John says that the one born of God does not sin (5:18) or is not

able to sin (3:9), John’s descriptions cannot to be taken as absolutes. John is not describing

believers in these verses as attaining a state of sinlessness.38 Elsewhere, John expressly denies

that believers are free from sin. In fact, John specifically declares elsewhere in his letter that

anyone who claims not to sin is self-deceived and devoid of the truth (1:8–10; cf. 2:1).39

The second pitfall that must be avoided is interpreting these passages as though they are

depicting the believer’s glorified state or as stating the ideal or hypothetical, rather than what is

real or actual.40 John’s purpose in writing is to identify certain tests of eternal life by which the

readers might gain assurance of their salvation (5:13). But if these verses describe something

other than what believers can presently experience, then believers will necessarily fail these tests

and be deprived of the very assurance John intends to provide.41

The best approach to solving the theological tension is to recognize the force of the tenses in

these passages. In the verses where John describes believers as not sinning, he consistently uses

the present tense. As such, the verbal aspect of the present tense is imperfective and, with

fientive verbs or verbs of action, the present tense depicts the verbal action as in progress.

Furthermore, with fientive verbs, imperfective aspect portraying action in progress is the default

force of the present tense, unless contextual factors override and point in a different direction.42

37

Similarly, Andreas J. Köstenberger, Benjamin L. Merkle, and Robert L. Plummer, Going Deeper with New

Testament Greek: An Intermediate Study of the Grammar and Syntax of the New Testament (Nashville: B & H,

2016), 253–54. For a survey of views on relieving the theological tensions, see Kruse, The Letters of John, 126–32;

Smalley, 1, 2, 3 John, 151–56; Christopher D. Bass, That You May Know: Assurance of Salvation in 1 John, NAC

Studies in Bible & Theology (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2008), 134–42.

38

Contra, among others, Marshall, The Epistles of John, 178–84.

39

See the discussion in Stott, The Letters of John, 129–30, 134–40.

40

See, among others, Sakae Kubo, “1 John 3:9: Absolute or Habitual?” Andrews University Seminary Studies 7

(January 1969): 47–56. Kubo argues that John is speaking of the absolute or ideal in these passages rather than the

actual or real (ibid., 50).

41See again Köstenberger, Merkle, and Plummer, Going Deeper with New Testament Greek, 253–54.

42

Wallace, Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament, 514–16; Köstenberger, Merkle, and Plummer, Going

Deeper with New Testament Greek, 229–41, 255. Contra, among others, Moisés Silva, God, Language, and

Scripture: Reading the Bible in Light of General Linguistics, Foundations of Contemporary Interpretation (Grand

Rapids: Zondervan, 1990), 116–17, who argues against resolving the tension in these passages based on the aspect

of the present tense.

Buist M. Fanning, Verbal Aspect in New Testament Greek, Oxford Theological Monographs (Oxford:

Clarendon Press, 1990), 198–240, describes the common aspect in the majority of the categories for the present

indicative as “progressive” or “in progress.” See also Constantine R. Campbell, Basics of Verbal Aspect in Biblical

Greek (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2008), 40, 63; Stanley E. Porter, Jeffrey T. Reed, and Matthew Brook O’Donnell,

Fundamentals of New Testament Greek (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2010), 81. Commenting on the present tense,

Porter and the others state, “it conveys the imperfective aspect and often is used to depict action in progress.”

13

No such contextual factors are evident in these texts that would counter the interpretation of the

present tense as describing something in progress.

At the same time, the contextual evidence in 1 John points to a more specific use of the present

tense. In 3:9, John states that the one born of God does not “practice” sin. The verb “practice”

has within its semantic range the idea of committing or carrying out some activity and, in the

present tense, it can describe this activity as regularly occurring or as an ongoing state.43 In terms

of pragmatics, the specific category is that of a customary or habitual present.44 Thus, the thought

is that the one born of God does not to practice sin on a habitual basis (cf. 3:8).

Putting the verse within the broader theological context of 1 John, what John is saying is that

believers do not continually engage in sin as the habit or pattern of their lives. John is not

denying in these passages that believers sin. That would contradict what he says elsewhere in the

letter. Rather, he denies that believers can have lives that are characterized by the habit and

practice of sin. Thus, John reinforces in these verses the fundamental distinction between

believers and unbelievers in their relationship to sin. According to John, the unbeliever is

unregenerate and enslaved to sin and, thus, “practices sin” as a habit and pattern of life (3:8; cf.

John 8:34). Conversely, the believer is regenerate, no longer enslaved to sin, and thus does not

and cannot practice sin in this way (3:9; 5:18; cf. Rom 6:1–11).45

Assuming this distinction is correct, the tension comes in harmonizing what John says about

believers’ not practicing sin with his statement in 5:16 about a believer “committing” or

engaging in sin. The expression “committing” (lit. “sinning”) is a participle in the present tense.

In the absence of contextual factors indicating otherwise, the present participle should be given

its normal imperfective aspect of an activity in progress.46 Furthermore, there is nothing in the

context to indicate the sin in view is of limited duration. So how can John assert, on the one

hand, that believers cannot practice sin and, on the other hand, describe a believer in 5:16 as

committing or engaging in sin, both statements involving the present tense?

43

BDAG, 840.

44

See, for example, A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical

Research (Nashville: Broadman, 1934), 880 (cf. 890, 1081), who uses the combined designation “iterative and

customary;” Köstenberger, Merkle, and Plummer, Going Deeper with New Testament Greek, 257–58, who use the

designation “iterative,” but with the same semantic force as “customary” or “habitual.”

In his discussion of the present tenses in 1 John 3:6 and 3:9, Fanning allows for a customary or habitual sense,

but prefers the gnomic and, specifically, the generic. He earlier defined the gnomic present as “similar to the

customary present in that they both express generalized continuing or repeated occurrence (this is the aspect-

meaning).” And, he includes the generic use within the gnomic category. However, when discussing the present

tenses in 3:6 and 3:9, he argues, “the sense of a generic utterance is usually an absolute statement of what each one

does once, and not a statement of the individual’s customary or habitual activity. This is true particularly when the

present verb is a bounded action…rather than an unbounded STATE or ACTIVITY…. These verbal expressions

[the present tenses in 3:6 and 3:9] seem most likely to be bounded actions (to commit sin), rather than ACTIVITIES

or STATES” (Verbal Aspect in New Testament Greek, 209–17). Why the present tenses in 3:6 and 3:9 are

“bounded” actions rather than the more common “unbounded” states or continuing and repeated actions, Fanning

does not say.

45

See, among others, Burdick, The Letters of John the Apostle, 244–46, 250–57; Akin, 1, 2, 3, John, 143–44;

148–50.

46

Fanning, Verbal Aspect in New Testament Greek, 408–13; Campbell, Basics of Verbal Aspect in Biblical

Greek, 122. Campbell states, “Imperfective aspect is a semantic feature of the present participle” (ibid.).

14

The solution is to recognize that in 5:16 the construction John uses, “committing a sin,”

identifies the believer as engaged in some specific sin. The construction involves an anarthrous

noun that is singular and, in this case, indefinite.47 John is not saying in 5:16 that this believer has

a life characterized by the habit and pattern of sin. That would directly contradict what John says

about believers both before and after this verse. What John is saying, and what the rest of

Scripture teaches, is that a believer can get caught up and persist in a specific sin, without having

his or her entire life characterized by sin (Gal 6:1).48

Furthermore, Scripture also teaches that the believer can persist in a specific sin to the point

where God intervenes to take the believer’s life. Paul, for example, affirms this in 1 Corinthians

11:30. Addressing the Corinthian believers, Paul says that some of them were sick and others

were asleep, that is, had died, all of this because of their ongoing abuse of the Lord’s Supper.49

Yet even in this instance the believer still cannot have a life that overall is characterized by the

habit and pattern of sin. As such, all of this is consistent with the third interpretation of 5:16 as

argued above.

The one passage that appears to contradict the above interpretation is 1 Corinthians 3:15. There

Paul describes a believer standing before the judgment seat of Christ, whose works are burned

up, and whom Paul describes as still saved, “he will suffer loss, but he himself will be saved, yet

so as through fire.” The impression from Paul’s description of the individual in this verse is that

a believer can have a life devoid of good works and still be saved. However, to describe a

believer’s life as devoid of good works is tantamount to describing the believers’ life as

characterized by the habit and pattern of sin. Stating it theologically, how is such a believer

persevering in faithfulness to God’s word, that is, in good works?

Here the analogy of faith is particularly helpful. Among others, James teaches that saving faith

must produce good works, not as a condition for salvation but as the necessary evidence of

salvation. Putting it differently, good works are the necessary fruit of genuine faith, not the root

of faith. For example, James declares in 2:14 that faith without works cannot save, that is, such

faith is not a true, saving faith.50 The converse, then, is that true, saving faith must necessarily

produce at least some good works.

That being true, what Paul declares in 1 Corinthians 3:15 must be understood as hyperbolic.51 In

effect, Paul overstates the case to make his point. Christ’s evaluation of the believer’s works at

47

Wallace, Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament, 243–54. Wallace lists three possibilities with anarthrous

nouns: indefinite, qualitative, or definite. He identifies conditions where an anarthrous noun can be definite, none of

which appear to apply with the construction in 5:16. The same may be said regarding the qualitative category which,

like a generic noun, emphasizes class traits. Finally, he defines an indefinite noun as referring “to one member of a

class, without specifying which member” (ibid., 244).

48

See, for example, 2 Sam 11:1–12:25 and David’s protracted sin with Bathsheba.

49Similarly, David E. Garland, 1 Corinthians, BECNT (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2003), 553.

50See, among others, Douglas J. Moo, The Letter of James, PNTC (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 200), 118–24.

51

See, for example, James E. Rosscup, “Paul’s Teaching on the Christian’s Future Reward with Special

Reference to 1 Corinthians 3:10–17” (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Aberdeen, 1976), 401–8.

15

the judgment seat does not jeopardize the believer’s justification or standing with God. Using

hyperbole, Paul states that, were it possible for a true believer to be without good works at the

judgment seat, that believer nevertheless will still be saved. Taking the use of hyperbole into

consideration, Paul is not suggesting that a believer standing before Christ at the judgment seat

can actually be devoid of good works. Elsewhere Paul argues for the importance and necessity of

good works in the life of every true believer (e.g., Eph 2:10). Paul is simply reinforcing the

security of believers when they stand before Christ and have their works evaluated.

CONCLUSION

In 1 John 5:16, John directs his readers to pray for a brother who is caught up in a sin not leading

to death. The readers can have confidence when they pray that God will hear and answer. John

says that God will give life to the believer not sinning unto death. God will bring that brother to

repentance and restore him to faithfulness. Moreover, all true believers will persevere, not only

in faith, but also in faithfulness or good works. At the same time, not all believers will persevere

in faithfulness to the same level or degree of success. Furthermore, it is possible for a true

believer to be caught up in some sin, even to the point where God takes the believer’s life. Yet,

even here, the believer’s overall life will not and cannot be characterized by the habit and pattern

of sin.