If
we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and
purify us from all unrighteousness. (I John 1:9)
“Yes, I
did it, but I couldn’t help it, I was born this way.”
“Yes, I did it, but he deserved it!”
Are these confessions? I think we’d be tempted to believe they are. After all, they both admit that the person speaking did something. If you check the etymology of the word, you’re likely to be told that con intensifies the rest of the word, and the rest of the word meant “to admit or declare.” However, con also means “with.”
According to the etymologies, to confess is to really admit or declare, to strongly admit or declare. That would mean both examples are confessions. I suspect a judge would agree. It doesn’t matter what you say after, “I did it.” And maybe that’s correct. But as I look at it in the larger picture of God’s holy courtroom, it seems as if the with understanding of confession strikes closer to the mark.
In that larger courtroom, I suspect that confession has to do with admitting or declaring with God, or agreeing with Him about the thing in question. “I did it, it was wrong. There are no excuses. I’m guilty.” Anything less is trying to maintain control.
When we agree with God about something, that the thing we have done is wrong, only then can there be peace with God. Only then is He free to forgive and purify.
There’s a second word that needs attention here: faithful. God is faithful to whom? To what? He is faithful to us. He is faithful to His promise (AKA His Word.) But both of those are an extension of another faithfulness. He is faithful to Himself. This is why our confession (admitting in agreement with Him that what we’ve done is wrong.) If we do not agree with God, and He forgives, then He is bowing to our definitions even though they conflict with His. In other words, He would not be being faithful to Himself, or to His Word. If He were willing to break His Word about one thing, why not about the next, and the next? He would no longer be faithful to Himself or to us. That is too horrific an idea to even consider.
“Yes, I did it, but he deserved it!”
Are these confessions? I think we’d be tempted to believe they are. After all, they both admit that the person speaking did something. If you check the etymology of the word, you’re likely to be told that con intensifies the rest of the word, and the rest of the word meant “to admit or declare.” However, con also means “with.”
According to the etymologies, to confess is to really admit or declare, to strongly admit or declare. That would mean both examples are confessions. I suspect a judge would agree. It doesn’t matter what you say after, “I did it.” And maybe that’s correct. But as I look at it in the larger picture of God’s holy courtroom, it seems as if the with understanding of confession strikes closer to the mark.
In that larger courtroom, I suspect that confession has to do with admitting or declaring with God, or agreeing with Him about the thing in question. “I did it, it was wrong. There are no excuses. I’m guilty.” Anything less is trying to maintain control.
When we agree with God about something, that the thing we have done is wrong, only then can there be peace with God. Only then is He free to forgive and purify.
There’s a second word that needs attention here: faithful. God is faithful to whom? To what? He is faithful to us. He is faithful to His promise (AKA His Word.) But both of those are an extension of another faithfulness. He is faithful to Himself. This is why our confession (admitting in agreement with Him that what we’ve done is wrong.) If we do not agree with God, and He forgives, then He is bowing to our definitions even though they conflict with His. In other words, He would not be being faithful to Himself, or to His Word. If He were willing to break His Word about one thing, why not about the next, and the next? He would no longer be faithful to Himself or to us. That is too horrific an idea to even consider.
Comments
Post a Comment