1 John 1:9 New Living Translation

Diakonos, I also looked at my NA27 and it has no variant reading for "him."

But I don't see it as a problem.

"Him" becomes the indirect object and is even seen in the fact that the one we're confessing to "He is faithful and righteous."

The NLT is just doing its thing but good. :thumbs:

 

On a side note, for those holding to limited atonement, if atonement = fogiveness as I see argued here on the BB...what do you do with this passage in 1 John?

 

Webdog, "we" seems to be referring only to believers.

 

I realize that, but if atonement = forgiveness, why do "we" need to ask forgiveness if Christ already forgave the sins of the "elect"?

 

Whether a person holds to unconditional election or not, the question must be answered.

And I believe it has to do with maintaining a good fellowship with God as v. 7 points out.

While the spirit of a believer has been redeemed and renewed, the flesh hasn't, so we still deal with sin.

We are awaiting the redemption of our bodies (Rom 8:23).

If I'm not mistaken, I believe you believe this too about the body.

 

So you are saying the atonement does equal forgiveness? I'm not clear on your view. If the text is dealing with fellowship, why does it state "He will forgive us of our sins and cleanse us..."?

It is falsely stated that if universal atonement is true...everyone is saved, because the atonemnt is forgiveness. I don't see how the "L" crowd can reconcile this verse with their belief that the atonement is automatic forgiveness.

 

Christ as our atoning sacrifice has satisfied the wrath of God by removing our sin that condemned us before God.

Yet we still need to ask forgiveness. I believe for the believer that this asking of forgiveness is only in relation to God as our Father and not Judge.

Sin messes up the fellowship, so we need to get it out of the way through confession.

 

Rob, I don't see the NLT's use of "him" as an "insertion."

"Him" is clearly implies by the use of homologew and its object, so that "him" become the indirect object.

Whether a translator wants to bring out that sublety, is a judgment call on readability.

 

The phrase is quite awkward: "To us our sins"

 

Now I got you!

When you isolated the phrase like that, I didn't get it.

In that case hemin would be used for allelwn, which is used in v. 7.

Why didn't John stick with allelwn?

 

1 John 1:9 is a third class conditional sentence. It is the idea that if we keep on confessing our sins to God and to one another as stated in both 1Jn 1:9, James 5:16, and Mark 1:5. It is a statement of a probable future.

The final subjunctive of purpose clause introduced by hina is used to introduce a purpose clause. It is the idea of confessing your sins so that you can be forgiven.

 

A dittographic error indeed!