Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - 1 John 2:23 - 2:23
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
1Jn_2:23. Confirmation of the last stated thought in two clauses, which express the same idea, only in different form.[174]
Πᾶς Ὁ ἈΡΝΟΎΜΕΝΟς ΤῸΝ ΥἹΌΝ , ΟὐΔῈ ΤῸΝ ΠΑΤΈΡΑ ἜΧΕΙ ] ἈΡΝΕῖΣΘΑΙ ΤῸΝ ΥἹΌΝ is in meaning synonymous with ἈΡΝΕῖΣΘΑΙ , ὍΤΙ ἸΗΣΟῦς ΟὐΚ ἜΣΤΙΝ Ὁ ΧΡΙΣΤΌς . The assertion that John here confounds with the idea of Christ that of the Son, i.e. of the eternal Logos (de Wette and others), is erroneous; it is not Christ apart from Jesus that he regards as the Son, but Christ in his identity with Jesus (Düsterdieck, Brückner).
Instead of saying in the second part of the first clause: καὶ ἀρνεῖται , corresponding to the first part, John says: ΟὐΔῈ … ἜΧΕΙ , which has a wider import, for ἜΧΕΙΝ is to be taken emphatically = “to possess in living fellowship” (Düsterdieck); the explanation of Beza is insufficient: nec patrem esse credit (better, a Lapide: habere in mente et fide, in ore et confessione); the thought of the apostle is utterly eliminated when, with Socinus, Episcopius, Grotius, ἔχειν τ . πατέρα is explained by: “to know the will of God;” erroneously Storr also: “to him is the Father not gracious.”
In the following words: Ὁ ὉΜΟΛΟΓῶΝ Κ . Τ . Λ ., which are wanting in the Recepta (see the critical notes), ὁμολογεῖν forms the antithesis of ἈΡΝΕῖΣΘΑΙ ; it means a confession which is the expression of faith (Mat_10:32; Rom_10:10). In regard to the construction, Ebrard rightly remarks: “That ΤῸΝ ΥἹΌΝ is dependent on ὉΜΟΛΟΓῶΝ , and not along with ΚΑῚ ΤῸΝ ΠΑΤΈΡΑ (as in 2Jn_1:9) on ἜΧΕΙ (in which case ὉΜΟΛΟΓῶΝ would be used absolutely), clearly results from the preceding words, to which these form the antithesis.”
[174] Braune, rightly: “Here is the progress from the denying to the having, and from the particular ( ὁ ψεύστης ) to the general ( πᾶς ).”