2:20-21 In contrast to the heterodox secessionists (v. 19), the faithful believers within the community were "keeping the faith."The "anointing"referred to is evidently the Holy Spirit whom Jesus gives to each believer at conversion (Rom. 8:9; 1 Cor. 12:13; cf. Luke 4:18; John 6:69; 14:17; 15:26; 16:13; Acts 10:38; 2 Cor. 1:21-22). John said it abode in his readers to teach them and that it was truthful (v. 27). John referred to the Holy Spirit as the anointing. This seems preferable to the idea that the Word of God is the anointing.92John previously spoke of Jesus Christ as the life (1:2). The presence of the Holy Spirit in every believer enables him or her to perceive the truth of the gospel and to distinguish it from error (John 14:26; 16:13). Of course some Christians have more perception than others due to God-given ability, Satanic blindness, the influence of human teachers, sin in the life, etc.
2:22-23 The antichrists lie because they deny that Jesus is the Christ, God's Son and our Savior. This would have been the position of Jews who rejected Jesus as the Messiah and other false teachers whom John alluded to elsewhere. Among these were the Gnostics who believed that anything material was sinful and therefore Jesus could not have been God's Son.93Docetists taught that Jesus was not truly a man and therefore not our Savior. Followers of Cerinthus believed that Jesus was not fully God but that God only came upon Him at His baptism and departed from Him before His crucifixion.94These false teachers all claimed to have the truth from God. However, John pointed out that since the Son and the Father are one, a person cannot deny the Son without denying the Father as well (cf. Matt. 10:32-33; Mark 8:38).
". . . anyone who claims to know God, but disobeys his orders, is a' liar (. . . 2:4); but the person who denies that Jesus is the Christ must be regarded as the--archetypal--liar . . ."95
". . . we deny God by denying him his proper relationship with us."96
Some readers have understood the first part of verse 23 to mean that it is impossible for a true Christian, one who "has the Father,"ever to deny the Son. This interpretation seems inconsistent with other Scripture (2 Tim. 2:12) as well as human experience. Genuine Christians have denied Christ, to avoid martyrdom, for example. In the context John wrote about an abiding relationship with God, not just a saving relationship. So another explanation is that John meant that whoever denies the Son does not have the Father abiding in him. In this view, one who denies the Son does not have an abiding relationship with the Father. This describes all unbelievers and those believers who are not abiding in God. A third explanation is that John was describing what is typical: typically those having the Father do not deny the Son, though there may be a few exceptions. However the broad "whoever"in this verse seems to imply that what John wrote is true of all. I prefer view two.
The second part of the verse is the positive corollary to the first part. Confessing the Son is the opposite of denying Him. Confessing the Son results in the Father abiding in the confessor. Confessing the Son involves a public profession of faith in Him, not just exercising saving faith in Him (cf. Rom. 10:9-10; 2 Cor. 4:13). Belief in the heart results in imputed righteousness, and confessing with the mouth results in salvation (lit. deliverance, namely, from the consequences of being a secret, non-confessing, believer). A non-abiding Christian might not confess Christ even though he or she believes in Him. Both denying Christ and confessing Christ deal with giving personal testimony to one's faith in Him; they do not determine salvation. Thus denying Christ cannot result in the loss of eternal salvation nor can confessing Him obtain it. If John meant that no genuine Christian can deny the Son, the corollary is that every genuine Christian must confess the Son. That would make public confession of Christ a condition for salvation in addition to trusting in Him.
To summarize, John warned his readers of the danger to their intimate fellowship with God that the teaching of those who denied that Jesus is the Christ posed. If they rejected the Son, they could not expect an intimate relationship with the Father.
"The principle source of confusion in much contemporary study of 1 John is to be found in the failure to recognize the real danger against which the writer is warning. The eternal salvation of the readership is not imperilled. It is not even in doubt as far as the author is concerned. But seduction by the world and its antichristian representatives is a genuine threat which must be faced."97
