Making a liar out of Jesus?

As it says in my profile, I dabble in supply preaching and one of my interests is theology (with a bias toward Christian theology). Next Sunday is the First Sunday after Easter or the Second Sunday of Easter, whichever you prefer, and in my neck of the woods (woods = Christianity, neck = ELCA), there's a passage from the New Testament reading for that Sunday (1 John 1:1 - 2:2) that we often recite on Sunday mornings as part of the Corporate Confession and Forgiveness that is part of the Service of Holy Communion: 1 John 1:8-9 (NRSV) - "If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. But if we confess our sins, he who is faithful and just will forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness." I had to look it up to get the quote exactly right, but mostly I typed it from memory as I suspect most my fellow ELCA Lutherans could do as well.

Sometimes it's the next verse that really catches your eye -- you know, the one that doesn't get recited in church on Sunday.

(The "Read more" feature doesn't seem to work for this post, so click here to read the rest of this post.)

The next verse is 1 John 1:10 (NRSV) - "If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us."

Maybe verse 10 is viewed as a repeat of verse 8, I don't know. Upon closer examination, I think verse 10 is actually saying something different than verse 8: in verse 8, "we" make a liar out of ourselves, while in verse 10, "we" make a liar out of "him".

The other difference is the content of the lie itself: in verse 8, "we" lie to ourselves that we have no sin when we really do. But in verse 10, somehow if we "say that we have not sinned" (which sounds the same as "say that we have no sin"), "he" (Jesus) lies about something, and how can that be possible?

First of all, what's the lie he supposedly tells -- if we say we have not sinned? That's screwed up right there, isn't it? We say we have not sinned (and by verse 8, the writer seems to be saying we're lying), and that makes a liar out of Jesus??

This is strange, wonderful, mysterious, irrational world of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. In chapter 2, the writer casts Jesus as an "advocate" and as the "atoning sacrifice for our sins". A substitution is being proposed here. We sin, and Jesus atones for it. Do NOT feel self-conscious in the least if you find this transaction illegal/impossible/whatever. It is perhaps the most irrational, objectionable salvation proposal I've ever heard of.

On the other hand, don't be fooled into thinking I don't buy into this proposal. I very much do: (1) I truly believe that the human condition with respect to sin is so dire that such a desperate and seemingly unfair measure is the only way to truly rescue us from the wrath of our creator, (2) since God himself is the only one this transaction is unfair to and he is the one who is instigating this transaction, who am I to look a gift horse in the mouth?

And therein lies the lie: Jesus has said, "I take your sin, make it my own, and put it to death on the cross." "If we say we have not sinned," we have declared Jesus' confession to be a lie, for we apparently had no sin for him to take but he claims to have taken it anyway.

But it's not simply that we lie about having no sin. What I think the writer is really saying is that by saying we have not sinned, we retain our sin that Jesus claimed to take, so when he says he took our sin, we nullify that assertion and we make him a liar. Interestingly enough, it would seem that we're the ones due punishment for Jesus' lie, though that is merely a side-effect of the fact that retaining our sin means we insist on paying for it ourselves.

Just some thoughts that may or may not end up in my sermon this Sunday...