1 John 2.2 and 4.10. It is of considerable significance that John, the writer who spoke so warmly about the love of God, could also speak about propitiation. Propitiation, as we have seen, is intimately connected with the wrath of God. It is the apostle who is so associated with love who is the one to use the actual word propitiation most, twice, and do so in a single short letter. And that is not all. John was not squeamish. He did not avoid the sterner note in his first letter. In a passage, 1 John 4, 16 to 21, dealing with love, God's love for his elect and the consequent love of the believer for his fellow believers, John used the word 14 times in those six verses, he did not avoid talking about the day of judgment and punishment. True, as John argued, the believer has no need to fear God's punishment in the day of judgment. Why not? Because of love. God's love to him primarily, and as a consequence, the believer's love, both Godward and believerward in response. The believer has no need to fear God's wrath. As John had just explained, in this the love of God was manifest among us, that God sent his only son into the world so that we might live through him. In this is love, not that we have loved God, but that he loved us and sent his son to be the propitiation for our sins. I will come back to this passage, but before I move on, please let it register that John saw no conflict whatsoever between God's wrath and his love. Indeed, he saw them concentrated and resolved in the person and work of Christ as propitiation. As he had already stated, my little children, that is, fellow believers, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. But if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ, the righteous. He is the propitiation for our sins. not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world, that is, not just for Jews. Let us look at the context of that passage. The chapter division is appalling, but it is easily rectified. How did John come to say this about Christ as the propitiation for our sins? What was his purpose in saying it here? Having laid out the historical background to his letter and its purpose for writing, John plunged straight into the man's plight, the great dilemma. This is the message we have heard from him that is from God through Christ by the Spirit, and proclaim to you that God is light and in him is no darkness at all. If we say we have fellowship with him while we walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth. God is all holy and all-seeing. That is fact number one. How can sinners be reconciled to God? No fudge is possible. No half measure will do. We have to be holy, perfect. There is only one way. But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus, his son, cleanses us from all sin. It is at this point that we have to keep in mind John's linguistic style. John repeatedly set out his argument back to front, beginning with the conclusion and ending with the original premise. It is essential to read him in this sense. I have fully argued this elsewhere. Let me just give three examples at this point. Christ came to his own, that is the Jews, and his own people did not receive him. But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become the children of God, who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. It is not that those who believe are regenerated, quite the reverse. The truth is the passage is a classic example of John's style. For emphasis, he deliberately spells things out in the wrong order, making the original premise the climax of his sentence. Being regenerated by the Spirit, sinners receive Christ. And this is how we must read him. Again, everyone who practices righteousness is born of God. This does not mean that the practice of righteousness leads to or produces regeneration. Rather, the practice of righteousness is the proof, the evidence, the demonstration that a sinner has been regenerated, back to front once again. And that is how we must read him. and he who practices righteousness is righteous just as he is righteous that is progressive sanctification is a sure sign of justification not the cause of it as before back to front so But if we walk in the light as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin. It does not mean that God will wash away a sinner's sin if he walks in the light as a kind of reward. Rather, being cleansed from sin, the sinner will show the fact by his progressive sanctification. John continued, If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us. Obviously John was writing to believers, but take first of all these words as applying to unbelievers. How can an unbeliever be rid of his sin and be right with God? It's worse than useless for him to pretend that he doesn't sin. He does. And as a guilty sinner, he has to face the all-holy God. It's useless to deny it. No. He has to face his sin, fair and square. By looking to Christ, trusting Christ, turning from sin to Christ, the sinner will find full salvation through the blood sacrifice of Christ. God will never turn aside any sinner who appeals to Him on the basis of the merits of Christ's sacrifice on the cross. That is the remarkable, amazing thing about the Gospel. God will never reject any sinner who, turning from his sin, turning from his own efforts, trusts Christ and his finished work. But do not rush over the key phrase in John's argument. God is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. Faithful and just? What a staggering turn of phrase. Kind, loving, merciful would be relatively understandable. But faithful and just? God is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness? Whatever could John have been thinking of? God is merciful to forgive sins, loving, yes, amazingly so. But John stresses that God is faithful. and just in forgiving his elect. Why? Because Christ has pacified God's wrath towards them. I've already quoted one of Toplady's hymns in which he addresses Christ, but his words bear repeating here. If thou hast my discharge procured, And freely in my place endured The whole of wrath divine, Payment God cannot twice demand, First at my bleeding surest his hand, And then again at mine. It is precisely as Paul stated. God put forward Christ Jesus as a propitiation by his blood to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. This was to show his righteousness at the present time so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. Here it is, God is just and the justifier, faithful and just. That's all very well, but John did not talk of Christ as a propitiation, did he? Although, Top Lady might sing a bit, and I might later bring in Paul. Where's John? Listen on. As I've said, the chapter division is so appalling. I have applied 1 John 1.8 to 10 to 1 Believers, but of course, John was writing to believers, and John was clear. Believers are lost sin. They constantly need mercy. They constantly need forgiveness. And while John was at pains to urge believers not to sin, he assures them that when they do sin, they have a remedy. And it's the same remedy that saved them in the beginning. They have an advocate. Christ is his people's advocate. Jesus Christ, the Son of God, became a real man, as opposed to the teaching of the Gnostics, see the entire letter, lived a righteous life under the law in order to be offered as the one and only perfect sacrifice to propitiate the Godhead on behalf of the elect. He was not merely the one who propitiated God. He himself is the propitiation. He himself is the propitiation for our sins. He himself satisfied the justice of God. and appease God's righteous anger. When did he do that? On the cross, of course. How did he do it? By dying in the sinner's place. My little children, that is fellow believers, I'm writing these things to you so that you may not sin. But if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. He is the propitiation for our sins and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world. That is not just for the Jews. pause, don't rush on. John wrote to encourage believers in a life of holiness so that you may not sin. The significance of this passage lies in how John makes that encouragement. It must be one of the most amazing new covenant arguments in all Scripture. He encourages himself and all believers to a life of spiritual transformation by obedience to the law of Christ by the Spirit. How does he do that? By reminding them that we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. In other words, He wants believers to be holy. He tells believers not to sin, but does it by saying, but if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. Remarkable. Calling for saints to be saints by telling them that when they sin, they have a sure advocate. The new covenant is breathtaking. How different an approach is John's compared to those teachers today who cannot resist reaching for the most halo or a severely pruned and edited portion of it and nagging believers about it, driving them to conformity by fear. And the crux of John's staggering argument is that since God has sent Christ, be the propitiation for our sins. Since Christ has appeased the wrath of God, thus dealing once and for all with all the consequences of Adam's fall for the elect, for every single one of them there is no doubt that God in Christ will forgive the believers' daily sins. Christ as propitiation is the major premise in the argument covering all the rest. It is as we saw in the previous chapter, he who did not spare his own son, but gave him up for us all. How will he not also with him graciously give us all things, including help in trials and forgiveness when we sin and seek for mercy. John's case is that God, having through the sacrificial death of his own son, dealt with the sins of the elect, his wrath having been appeased in the blood of Christ, is there anything good and evil that he will keep back from them? Believer said, They should not. But when they do, Christ's propitiatory work, which meant their salvation in the beginning, still avails for them. They never need fear the wrath of God. Nuff said. Just in case the answer is in the negative, I quote Gill commenting on the passage. Christ as advocate on behalf of his elect allows, that is admits in court, the place of trial, verdict, sentence, judgment, all there, that is the elect's sins, with all their aggravated circumstances, nor does he go about to excuse or extenuate them, but he is an advocate for the non-imputation of them and for the application of pardon to them. He pleads in their favour. There stands Christ before his Father, ever pleading for his elect, pleading for their pardon on what grounds? Why should God not punish the elect? After all, they were born in sin under the wrath of God, so why should they be released? And after they are released, they sin, why should God not visit them with his wrath? Because as Gil said, These sins have been laid upon Christ, and he has borne them. His blood has been shed for the remission of them, and he has made full satisfaction, that is, the satisfaction of the wrath of God for them. And therefore in justice, see above, they ought not to be laid to their charge, but that the forgiveness of them should be applied unto them for the relief and comfort of their burdened and distressed consciences. And for this he is an advocate with the Father for his poor sinning people. And it goes without saying that this plea is all availing. Charity Lise Bancroft spoke for every believer. Before the throne of God above, I have a strong, a perfect plea. A great high priest, whose name is love, whoever lives and pleads for me. My name is graven on his hands. My name is written on his heart. I know that while in heaven he stands, no tongue can bid me thence depart. When Satan tempts me to despair and tells me of the guilt within, upward I look and see him there, who made an end of all my sin. Because the sinless Saviour died, my sinful soul is counted free. For God the just is satisfied to look on Him and pardon me. Behold Him there, the risen Lamb, my perfect spotless righteousness, the great unchangeable I am, the King of glory and of grace. One with Himself I cannot die. My soul is purchased by His blood. My life is hid with Christ on high, with Christ my Saviour and my God. Having stated that the Lord Jesus Christ is his people's propitiation, John did not leave the subject there, but as already noted, he stressed the point again. In this, the love of God was made manifest among us, that God send his only Son into the world, that we might live through him. In this is love, not that we have loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins. God, in his love, sent his Son into the world in order that he might manifest his love for his elect. In what way? Did God send his Son to teach men about God's love? to encourage sinners to follow his example and show love to their fellows? Is that why God did not spare his only son? Far from it, Jameson Fawcett Brown, that God spared not, withheld not, kept not back, this expressive phrase. as well as the whole thought, is suggested by Genesis 22, verse 12, where Jehovah's touching recommendation of Abraham's conduct regarding his son Isaac seems designed to furnish something like a glimpse into the spirit of his own act in surrendering his own son. Take now, said the Lord to Abraham, your son, your only son, whom you love, and offer him for a burnt offering. And only when Abraham had all but performed that loftiest act of self-sacrifice, the Lord interposed, saying, Now I know that you fear God, seeing you have not withheld your son, your only son, from me. In light of this incident, then, and of his language, our apostle Paul in Romans 8.32 can mean to convey nothing less than this, that in not sparing his own son, But delivering him up, or surrendering him, God exercised in his paternal character a mysterious act of self-sacrifice, which though involving none of the pain and none of the loss which are inseparable from the very idea of self-sacrifice on our part, was not less real, but on the contrary, as far transcended any such acts of ours as his nature is above the creatures. But this is inconceivable if Christ be not God's own or proper Son, partaker of his very nature, as really as Isaac was of his father Abraham's. In that sense, certainly, the Jews charged our Lord with making himself equal with God. which he in reply forthwith proceeded not to disown, but to illustrate and confirm. Delivered him up not to death merely as many take it, for that is too narrow an idea here, but surrendered him in the most comprehensive sense. Compare John 3.16. God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son. God sent His Son to be the propitiation for His wrath, that He might give full reign to His love for His elect. John's statement is so clear that only somebody like Wright, who is determined to impose his own ideas on Scripture, cannot, will not see it. John's thought. It cannot be emphasized too strongly that God's love is the source, not the consequence of the atonement. God does not love us because Christ died for us. Christ died for us because God loved us. It is God's wrath which needed to be propitiated. It is God's love which did the propitiating. John Calvin. But John again points out the cause of Christ's coming and his office when he says that he was sent to be a propitiation for our sins. At first, indeed, we are taught by these words that we were all through sin alienated from God. and that this alienation and discord remains until Christ intervenes to reconcile us. We are taught, secondly, that it is the beginning of our life when God, having been pacified by the death of his Son, receives us unto favour. For propitiation properly refers to the sacrifice of his death. We find then that this honour of expiating for the sins of the world and thus taking away the eminence between God and us, belongs only to Christ. But here some appearance of inconsistency arises. For if God loved us before Christ offered himself to death for us, what need was there for another reconciliation? Thus the death of Christ may seem to be superfluous. To this I answer, that when Christ is said to have reconciled the Father to us, This is to be referred to our apprehensions. For as we are conscious of being guilty, we cannot conceive of God otherwise than as of one displeased and angry with us, until Christ absolves us from guilt. For God, whenever sin appears, would have His wrath and the judgment of eternal death to be apprehended. It hence follows that we cannot be otherwise than terrified by the present prospect as to death, until Christ, by His death, abolishes sin, until He delivers us by His own blood from death. Further, God's love requires righteousness, that we may then be persuaded that we are loved. We must necessarily come to Christ. in whom alone righteousness is to be found. We now see that the variety of expressions which occurs in scripture according to different aspects of things is most appropriate and especially useful with regard to faith. God interposed his own son to reconcile himself to us because he loved us. But this love was hid because we were in the meantime enemies to God, continually provoking his wrath. Besides, The fear and terror of an evil conscience took away from us all enjoyment of life. Thence, as to the apprehension of our faith, God began to love us in Christ. And though the apostle here speaks of the first reconciliation, let us yet know that to propitiate God to us by expiating sins is a perpetual benefit proceeding from Christ.