30 - 1 Jn 2:23
Πᾶς ὁ ἀρνούμενος τὸν υἱὸν οὐδὲ τὸν πατέρα ἔχει, ὁ ὁμολογῶν τὸν υἱὸν καὶ τὸν πατέρα ἔχει. At the end of 1Jn 2:22 the apostle brought forward a new point, which has not in what precedes been demonstrated: the declaration, namely, that the Antichrist denied not only the Son, but the Father also. The twenty-third verse takes this up again with emphasis, in order that a due consideration may establish it as truth. Now, if no man hath ever seen God nor can see Him, but He is declared only by His only-begotten Son, it follows that he of necessity loses the knowledge of the Father who rejects the way in which alone it can be found. If Christ as the ἀπαύγασμα [“radiance”] of the Father is equally with the Father the truth, it follows that he who has not the One cannot have the Other: else would he at once have and not have the truth. But that the Redeemer is not here, any more than at the close of the previous verse, called Χριστός [“Christ”], but υἱός [“Son”], has its simple reason in the fact that He is placed in direct relation to the Father. At the same time, the choice of both terms points to the absolute and necessary unity and mutual indwelling of the Two, which affects that no man can be partaker of the One without being partaker of the Other. And because this is an internal necessity, it holds good in every particular case of error: πᾶςὁἀρνούμενος [“everyone who denies”] declares that even the members of the church fall under the condemnation of this sentence if they in any measure become confederates of the lie. Yet this most solemn declaration has also its bright converse. That lies in the second half of the verse: ὁ ὁμολογῶν τὸν υἱὸν καὶ τὸν πατέρα ἔχει [“the one who confesses the Son has the Father also”]. Manifestly the ὁμολογεῖν [“to confess”] is the antithesis of the ἀρνεῖσθαι [“to deny”] in the previous verse; but, instead of the more diffuse ὅτι Ἰησοῦς ἔστιν ὁ Χριστός [“that Jesus is the Christ”] or ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ [“the Son of God”], the simple τὸν υἱὸν [“the Son”] is appended. For he who sees not in Jesus the Son of God, does not acknowledge another being as such, but denies generally the existence of the Son of God. No man who has ever contended against the Christology of Christian doctrine has ever accepted the Christian doctrine of the Trinity.