We are continuing our study of 1 John this morning. Let's start by you telling me something that we know about the recipients of this letter. The intended audience of this Epistle is believers. Unlike the Fourth Gospel that was written to bring people to faith in Christ this Epistle is written to those who have already trusted Christ, instructing them on how to have fellowship with Yeshua and the Father. I see the purpose of this letter as fellowship.
that which we have seen and heard we proclaim also to you, so that you too may have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Yeshua the Christ. 1 John 1:3 ESV
This verse introduces the purpose of the Epistle: "So that you too may have fellowship with us"—this is a hina purpose clause. The main theme of the Epistle is fellowship with God.
We see from this letter that fellowship is not an automatic thing. Simply because you are a Christian does not mean that you have fellowship with Christ. That needs to be made clear, for there are many who feel that it is almost automatic, and they take it for granted. But there is a key to fellowship, and the key is to walk in the light:
But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Yeshua his Son cleanses us from all sin. 1 John 1:7 ESV
We have to walk in the light in order to fellowship. What does he mean by walking in the light? "Walking in the light" is living up to what God shows us in His Word as His will. It's walking in obedience to His Word. Believers, we cannot walk in the light if we aren't confessing our sins.
If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 1 John 1:9 ESV
What does it mean to confess our sins? "Confess" is from the Greek homologeo, which literally means: "to say the same thing." Confessing, therefore, means saying about our sins what God says about them.
A comparison of verses 6-7 with verses 8-9 clearly shows us that denying our sin is part of what it means to walk in darkness, and confessing our sin is part of what it means to walk in the light.
John is combating the erroneous teaching and practice of some heretical group. He has introduced three sets of claims made by the opponents. Each of these three false claims in verses 6, 8, and 10 is a denial of the truth that immediately precedes it in verses 5, 7, and 9—respectively. They said, "We have fellowship with God," but John says that they are walking in the darkness, lying, and not practicing the truth (1:6). Those who experience true fellowship with God walk in the light, as He Himself is in the light (1:7). The heretics were saying that they had no sin and that they had not sinned. John says that they are deceiving themselves and making God to be a liar (1:8, 10).
Verse 10 contains the last of the three "If we say" clauses. These third class conditions are the only way to identify the assertions of the false teachers. Who appear to be early (incipient) Gnostics.
If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us. 1 John 1:10 ESV
The heretic's third claim was, "We have not sinned." This is the most serious as it puts God's revelation of sin aside, and makes man the authority for what is and what is not sin.
"If we say we have not sinned"—this is another third class conditional sentence. Here it is not the guilt resulting from sin that is being denied, but a denial of actual acts of sin. The opponents had apparently developed a version of perfectionism by which they were able to deny that they could be convicted of sin. It must refer to sins committed after a person has professed to be a Christian, that is, post-conversion sins.
Colin G. Kruse writes, "This probably does not mean they claimed absolutely to have never sinned. More likely it means that they claimed not to have sinned since they came to know God and experienced the anointing."
These Docetists were guilty of antinomianism, which means "anti-law."Because these Docetists believed that the spirit was the only pure thing, and the flesh didn't matter because it would be burned up by God in the judgment day, they thought: "Well, just use the flesh in whatever way you want! You don't need to obey the law in the physical sense." So they were committing all sorts of sin while saying, that's not sin, we don't sin. And in doing this they were making God a liar.
"We make him a liar"—the person who will not acknowledge as sin whatever God calls sin is calling God a liar. Robert Schuller, who died in 2015, redefined sin to mean something other than what Scripture declares. He said that to define sin as rebellion against God is "shallow and insulting to the human being." In saying this, he is making God a liar because God says that sin is rebellion.
And Samuel said, "Has the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to listen than the fat of rams. For rebellion is as the sin of divination, and presumption is as iniquity and idolatry. Because you have rejected the word of the LORD, he has also rejected you from being king." 1 Samuel 15:22-23 ESV
Schuller is wrong, sin is rebellion. God told Saul to wipe out the Amalekites:
Thus says the LORD of hosts, 'I have noted what Amalek did to Israel in opposing them on the way when they came up out of Egypt. Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.'" 1 Samuel 15:2-3 ESV
Saul disobeyed Yahweh, he rebelled against what Yahweh told him. He did what he thought was right, but it was sin. Whenever we go against God's revealed will it is sin.
"And his word is not in us"—this phrase parallels 1:8b, where the "truth" is not in such an individual. Some say that this essentially brands the opponents as unbelievers. But let's consider that John continues to use first person pronouns, we and us, just as he has done from verse 5 on. A Christian could make the claim to sinlessness if they had been taught wrong. The Arminian perfectionist movement believed you could come to a post conversion experience in which you momentarily became so totally surrendered that you never sinned again. They were wrong. So saying, "his word is not in us" is not saying we are not Christians, but that His word is not a controlling force within us.
Hopefully, you can see that this passage, 1 John 1:5-10, is fundamental to daily Christian living. In these few verses the "disciple whom Yeshua loved" has laid down for us the basic principles which underlie a vital walk with God.
As we come to chapter 2 John turns his attention away from the secessionists' claims, and addresses his readers directly:
My little children, 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, Yeshua Christ the righteous. 1 John 2:1 ESV
"My little children"—this is the Greek word teknion, which Thayer Defines as: 1) a little child 2) in the New Testament used as a term of kindly address by teachers to their disciples. Yeshua used the term "teknion" to refer to disciples in:
Little children, yet a little while I am with you. You will seek me, and just as I said to the Jews, so now I also say to you, 'Where I am going you cannot come.' John 13:33 ESV
Yeshua here calls His disciples teknion. Teknion occurs eight times in the New Testament and only in the writings of Lazarus. The affectionate reference occurs once in John and seven times in 1 John. I see John here following Yeshua's lead and referring to disciples as teknion. This reinforces my view that 1 John is written to believers.
I am writing to you, little children, because your sins are forgiven for his name's sake. 1 John 2:12 ESV
John is writing this Epistle to the teknion of Yahweh. Now notice what he says is a purpose of his writing.
"I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin"—up to this point in the letter John has consistently used the first person plural in self-designations, now he adopts the first person singular as he addresses his readers directly.
A purpose of John in writing this letter is: "that you may not sin." The purpose of the book is fellowship, and sin breaks fellowship. So he is writing that they may not sin and remain in fellowship with Yahweh. The implication is that John believes his letter can help them keep from sinning.
I would say that the "these things" refers to the message that God is holy (1:5) and to the importance of walking in the light, not in the darkness (1:6-10).
Think about what he is saying here, "I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin," in light of what he said in chapter 1.
If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. 1 John 1:8 ESV
If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us. 1 John 1:10 ESV
So, we can't say, "we have no sin" or "we have not sinned" but we are to "not sin." So even though we will never reach a point of sinlessness, we are to do all we can to keep from sinning. "I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin"—the construction that John uses is a construction that suggests just that you sin not at all. The goal of the believer is not sinning. And by God's help, as we are controlled by the Holy Spirit we seek to sin not at all.
This would be very discouraging if John stopped here, "you may not sin" but he goes on to say, "But if anyone does sin"—this is a third class conditional sentence which speaks of potential action. So, he says, "I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. But if anyone does sin" Wow, I am sure glad he said that. I know that damage that sin brings, I know that sin damages our fellowship with Yahweh, I know we are not to sin, and yet at times I do. So what happens when we do sin?
"We have an advocate with the Father, Yeshua Christ the righteous"—"we have" is a present active indicative which refers to Yeshua's ongoing intercession as our heavenly Advocate. "Advocate" is from the Greek word parakltos, that is transliterated, "Paraclete."
The word parakletos can have various meanings. It can mean advocate, intercessor, counselor, protector or supporter. The literal Greek entomology is from para, which means: "to the side of" and kaleo, which means: "to summon." Therefore, the word can be interpreted to mean to be called to someone's side in order to accompany, console, protect, or defend that person. There is really no equivalent English word to the Greek word parakletos. Some translate this as "counselor," which has problems if we understand it in its most popular form—that of someone who acts like a therapist. Or it could make us think of a camp counselor or a marriage counselor. And the word "Helper" can give us the idea of an inferior. This is not how the word was understood when John used it. It has more of the sense of a legal counselor, someone who acts like an advocate, who will present the case to you, and represent you to others when necessary. In secular contexts, parakletos often referred to a legal assistant, a representative in court. Lenski, on the ancient word for "advocate" says: "Demosthenes uses it to designate the friends of the accused who voluntarily step in and personally urge the judge to decide in his favor."
Parakltos is found only here in 1 John, and four times in the Gospel of John. It is found nowhere else in the New Testament, and not at all in the LXX. In the Gospel of John the word consistently denotes the Holy Spirit, who was to be sent to be with the disciples on earth when Yeshua returned to the Father. However, in 1 John parakltos is used of Yeshua Himself, and is used in connection with His function in heaven.
So, Yeshua said that the Holy Spirit was the Advocate and here John says that Yeshua is. Which is it? Look at what Yeshua says in:
And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper, to be with you forever, John 14:16 ESV
The word "another" is significant to understanding what Yeshua meant in this promise. The Greek language has two words for another, allos and heteros. Allos, means that something is numerically distinct from its antecedent, but of the same character. We could say, another of the same kind. Heteros, means that two things or people are qualitatively distinct or different in character. This would be another of a different kind. This is where we get our English word heterosexua, referring to a relationship between two people of the opposite sex.
We see this word heteros used in:
I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— Galatians 1:6 ESV
"Different" here is heteros, another of a different kind. But the word Yeshua uses in John 14:16 means another of the same kind, one just like Him. This is clear in our text in 1 John 2:1, where the parakletos is Christ.
So, since Yeshua is Yahweh and is equal to Yahweh the Father, and since the Holy Spirit is another just like Yeshua, what does that tell us about the Spirit? He is Yahweh! The New Testament teaches that the Holy Spirit is not an impersonal force, but rather a divine person.
In the Gospel of John parakletos consistently denotes the Holy Spirit, who was to be sent to be with the disciples on earth when Yeshua returned to the Father. However, in 1 John parakltos is used of Yeshua Himself, and is used in connection with His function in heaven.
How do you think of Yeshua when you fall into sin? Do you think of Him with a big stick ready to hammer the snot out of you? John says that Yeshua is our parakletos, our representative in court before the Father. The concept of Yeshua's intercession on behalf of believers is also seen in:
Who is to condemn? Christ Yeshua is the one who died—more than that, who was raised—who is at the right hand of God, who indeed is interceding for us. Romans 8:34 ESV
Consequently, he is able to save to the uttermost those who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make intercession for them. Hebrews 7:25 ESV
Yeshua our Advocate is not to be thought of as pleading our cause in the presence of a reluctant God, but as a throned King-Priest, asking what He will from a Father who always hears and grants His request.
As our Advocate Yeshua comes alongside at the very moment of our falling. He does not leave us, He does not condemn us, but He comes to help us in our time of need. Christ never condemns us!
"Yeshua Christ the righteous"—"righteous" here is dikaios, this is found in four other places in the letter (1:9; 2:29; 3:7, 12), and in each case the term is related to righteous behavior. Thus it would seem that it is used in the present context to indicate that it is the One who has acted righteously, who now stands in the presence of the Father to speak on behalf of those who have not acted righteously.
To be righteous Yeshua had to be "a lamb unblemished and spotless":
knowing that you were ransomed from the futile ways inherited from your forefathers, not with perishable things such as silver or gold, but with the precious blood of Christ, like that of a lamb without blemish or spot. 1 Peter 1:18-19 ESV
If He had sinned, He would have had to die for His own sins. But He fully kept God's law, in dependence on the Father. His righteousness is freely imputed to the one who trusts in Him. As Paul wrote:
For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God. 2 Corinthians 5:21 ESV
The characterization of righteous is used of Yeshua in 2:1 is used of God the Father in 1 John 1:9. New Testament authors use several literary techniques to assert the deity of Yeshua.
John here returns for the third time to the question of the forgiveness of sin. He had said in verse 7,
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. 1 John 1:7 ESV
In verse 9 he said,
If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 1 John 1:9 ESV
Now he says,
My little children, 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, Yeshua Christ the righteous. 1 John 2:1 ESV
Not only is Christ our righteous Advocate but:
He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world. 1 John 2:2 ESV
"He is the propitiation for our sins"—some of the older commentators used to render this intensive pronoun "he and he alone" because there's an emphasis upon it. "He, and he alone is the propitiation for our sins." All others ruled out.
Let's talk about Propitiation. Can anyone give me a definition of this word? "Propitiation" is one of those theological words that you probably don't hear too often in everyday conversation. But it's also a word that's well worth the work of understanding, because all of us are walking around working on some sort of plan for propitiation. The big question is whether our plan is a Christian one.
To understand propitiation is to understand the Gospel, and without it, you have no Gospel. The Greek word used here is hilasmos, which means: "the removal of wrath by the offering of a sacrifice." It is the turning of God's wrath away from the sinner by a sacrifice made to satisfy God. Propitiation is an ancient word, which we as Christians have in common with other world religions. To propitiate a god is to offer a sacrifice that turns aside the god's wrath.
Some critics say that propitiation is a pagan notion. Hilasmos and its cognate hilasterion, in their classical form, were used of the act of appeasing the Greek gods by a sacrifice. Prince Paris had carried off Princess Helen to Troy. The Greek expeditionary force had taken ship to recover her, but was held up half-way by persistent contrary winds. Agamemnon, the Greek general, sent home for his daughter and ceremonially slaughtered her as a sacrifice to mollify the evidently hostile gods. The move paid off; west winds blew again, and the fleet reached Troy without further difficulty.
This bit of the Trojan War legend, which dates from about 1000 B.C., mirrors an idea of propitiation on which pagan religion all over the world, and in every age, has been built. They would take a present to their god and try to bribe him. They would try to turn the god's favor toward them by a sacrifice.
In pagan propitiation, the gods need to be propitiated because they are grumpy and capricious. They don't care much about humans except when something makes them angry; then they smite! And it's up to humans to get busy doing the propitiating, to make up for whatever they've done that angered the gods. The humans find something that the gods like (sweets, or meat, or pain, or blood), and offer it as a bribe to calm down their wrathful deities.
Because of the negative connotations of turning away a gods wrath by sacrifice, some scholars (C. H. Dodd) argue that the word propitiation does not focus on God's wrath, but rather on man's sins. Thus they translate the word "expiation," which means: "to blot out the guilt of our sins by making atonement."
They just want God to be love, love, love and that's all. And they're offended that we would consider God to be a God of anger, that we would think of God in any way like the gods of the pagans, capricious, angry, evil deities of the pagans who have to be appeased, who have to be placated by sacrifices, sometimes even human sacrifices. They read things like, well for example, the seventeenth chapter of 2 Kings verse 29,
and the Avvites made Nibhaz and Tartak; and the Sepharvites burned their children in the fire to Adrammelech and Anammelech, the gods of Sepharvaim. 2 Kings 17:31 ESV
All these nations coming in have all these gods and actually to placate those gods, burned up their children as human sacrifices in an effort to propitiate, or to satisfy an otherwise angry deity.
And there are many people who read that, and they say, "You're not going to make God like that. You're not going to make God the kind of God whose anger has to be appeased by sacrifice." But that's exactly what the word propitiate means.
Let me just throw this in here. There are certain scholars that believe that the Bible teaches that Yahweh demanded the Israelites to offer human sacrifices. They would use:
The LORD said to Moses, "Consecrate to me all the firstborn. Whatever is the first to open the womb among the people of Israel, both of man and of beast, is mine." Exodus 13:1-2 ESV
They argue that this was part of orthodox Yahweh worship back in the early days of Israel. In my opinion this is nonsense. Yahweh condemned human sacrifice. Speaking of Ahaz king of Judah Scripture says:
but he walked in the way of the kings of Israel. He even burned his son as an offering, according to the despicable practices of the nations whom the LORD drove out before the people of Israel. 2 Kings 16:3 ESV
So there were Israelites that practiced human sacrifice, but Yahweh condemns it—it was a "despicable practice of the nations."
As I said, There are many people who read that, and they say, "You're not going to make God like that. You're not going to make God the kind of God whose anger has to be appeased by sacrifice." But that's exactly what the word propitiate means.
One of these people would be Steve Chalke, founder and Global Leader of Oasis an Oasis church in Waterloo Uk. He wrote a book in 2003, entitled The Lost Message of Jesus, published by Grand Rapids and Zondervan, and this book has caused outrage in the evangelical world. He actually asks how we as believers, particularly as evangelicals, can—and I quote: "Come to believe that at the cross this God of love suddenly decides to vent His anger and wrath on His own Son. How can we believe that?" He believes that God should only be displayed as a God of love, not a God of anger, and he considers it to be mockery to say that Jesus taught that God could punish Him. It is a contradiction of the statement, he says, that "God is love."
What we have to understand is that every aspect of biblical propitiation contrasts with the pagan kind. God requires propitiation: not because He's moody or easily provoked, but because He is holy and just. God responds to sin with absolute consistency, and His "wrath is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness" (Romans 1:18).
In biblical propitiation it is not humans on their own initiative figuring out what God likes, but God Himself declaring what kind of sacrifice He accepts, and then providing it. Even in the Old Covenant, God takes credit for providing the blood of animal sacrifice:
For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it for you on the altar to make atonement for your souls, for it is the blood that makes atonement by the life. Leviticus 17:11 ESV
Also consider what kind of sacrifice brings about biblical propitiation: not a bribe or something nice to tide Him over. No, in the fullness of time, God fulfills the Old Covenant symbolism by giving His own Son to die for us.
and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Yeshua, whom God put forward 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. It 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 Yeshua. Romans 3:24-26 ESV
Stifler has written, "The chief question in saving man is not how the man may be accounted just, but how God may remain so in forgiving sins."
God could have settled accounts by punishing all sinners. This would have demonstrated that He is just. But Yeshua died "so that He [God] would be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Yeshua." To be righteous, and to declare as righteous those who are guilty seems like an unrighteous decision. God's righteousness would dictate pour out your wrath on guilty sinners—that would be righteous. But if God is going to justify the ungodly, then someone, namely Yeshua, had to bear the wrath of God to show that God is just. That's why the word "propitiation" is so important. Christ bore the wrath of God for our sins, and turned it away from us.
Christ, and Christ alone, is our propitiation. That is, out of love for the glory of God, He absorbs the wrath of God that was rightfully ours, so that it might be plain that when we are "justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption of Christ Yeshua," God will be manifestly just, righteous, in counting as righteous those who trust in Yeshua.
As Stott summarizes, in biblical propitiation, "God Himself gave Himself to save us from Himself."
It is important that we understand what biblical propitiation is so that we can make sure our plan is the biblical one rather than one of our own devising. In daily life there is a constant temptation to ignore Christ as our God-given propitiation, and to seek other ways of cutting little deals with God, to try to earn His favor and appease His wrath, to give Him something He'll like so He'll at least refrain from smiting us, and maybe even reward us with various blessings. As I stressed earlier the beginning part of verse 2 states that "He, and He alone is the propitiation for our sins." Apart from Christ there is no propitiation, just wrath.
"And not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world"—the Universalists are standing and cheering, see Christ propitiates the sin of the whole world, everybody is saved. Is this speaking of Universalism? Does this mean that Yeshua has literally propitiated God for the whole world? Has Yeshua actually satisfied God's justice for everybody who has ever lived? If so, why all the warnings and why preach the Gospel?
Let's start by looking at the word "world." Do you know that the term "world" has at least ten meanings? Some have claimed thirteen in the New Testament. To affirm that it means everybody without exception, is to beg the question. One must prove that. The contexts give us the clues. There isn't anything in the context that suggests this.
Let's remember here that Lazarus, was an Israelite and their background had exclusivist tendencies. They thought that God only loved them. So here this word in context means, "all without distinction," not all without exception, and John has that meaning in several places in his Gospel, the Samaritans say:
They said to the woman, "It is no longer because of what you said that we believe, for we have heard for ourselves, and we know that this is indeed the Savior of the world." John 4:42 ESV
They were saying that Yeshua saves Samaritans also. What John means by "world" can best be seen when we compare the closest parallel to this verse in his writings:
He did not say this of his own accord, but being high priest that year he prophesied that Yeshua would die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but also to gather into one the children of God who are scattered abroad. John 11:51-52 ESV
The "nation" here is Israel. Christ died, "not for the nation only, but also to gather into one the children of God who are scattered abroad."
This is what Yeshua said in:
just as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for the sheep. And I have other sheep that are not of this fold. I must bring them also, and they will listen to my voice. So there will be one flock, one shepherd. John 10:15-16 ESV
These verses refer back to vv. 1-5. There the sheep pen represents Judaism. Yeshua calls His own sheep out of that fold, thereby constituting His own flock; the sheep that remain in that pen are the unbelieving Jews. If Yeshua has other sheep that are not of this sheep pen, the reference must be to Gentiles. In other words there are children of God, or sheep, scattered through the whole world.
And they sang a new song, saying, "Worthy are you to take the scroll and to open its seals, for you were slain, and by your blood you ransomed people for God from every tribe and language and people and nation, Revelation 5:9 ESV
Christ did not propitiate the wrath of God against everybody. But He laid down His life for the sheep. They are scattered throughout the world in every tongue and tribe and people and nation. It does not say that He purchased all people in every group, but some from every group. Yeshua Himself specifically excluded the world from His priestly prayer, and prayed rather for those whom the Father had given Him (John 17:9). So, when we compare Scripture with Scripture, we must conclude that Christ's death actually satisfied God's wrath only for His elect.
Listen to John Owen in his Great Conundrum. It's still applicable today. "For whom did Christ die?" Mr. Owen says, "The Father imposed His wrath due unto, and the Son underwent punishment for either, one, all the sins of all men. Two, all the sins of some men, or three, some of the sins of all men, in which case it may be said, if the last be true, all men have some sins to answer for, and so none are saved. That, if the second be true, that is that He died for all the sins of some men, then Christ in there stead suffered for all sins of all the elect of the whole world, and this is the truth. But if the first be the case, He died for all the sins of all men, why are not all men free from the punishment due unto their sins? You answer because of unbelief. I ask is this unbelief or sin? Or is it not? If it be, then Christ suffered the punishment due unto it, or He did not. If He did, why must that hinder them more than their other sins for which He died? If He did not, He did not die for all their sins."
By saying that Christ is the propitiation for the whole world John may have intended to counter the heretics, who claimed that the knowledge of salvation was exclusive and secret. They restricted it to the enlightened few. Instead, John throws open the door to the entire world, as if to say, "God's grace is far more extensive than you imagine! Christ's sacrifice is not just for the enlightened few; it is not just for the Jews; it's for the entire world!" Anyone, anywhere who trusts in Christ's sacrifice for his sin will be saved.
John also may have been saying, "He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only"—he is the ONLY propitiation there is. He is the ONLY propitiation —"for the sins of the whole world." There is no other propitiation besides Christ.
Let me close this morning with a question: "How can we, who are sinners in thought, in word, in deed, possibly have fellowship with a God who is light, a holy God?"
The answer is? Through the Lord Yeshua's work of propitiation, which He has accomplished on Calvary's cross, it is possible for sinners to have fellowship with the One who is light. The light of God itself can discover no sin in us for which that blood is not an absolute remedy. Did you get that? The light of God itself can discover no sin in us for which that blood, the blood Christ has shed, is not an absolute remedy. In other words, all that the light shows us of our evil, of our sin, of our wickedness, all of that and more is covered by the blood the Yeshua shed on Calvary's cross.