Commentary on the Gospel of John 1 part 4/4

XXXII. These things, then, were said by him about himself from the books of the New Testament. But in Isaiah he declared that his mouth had been made by the Father like a sharp sword, and hidden under the shelter of his hand; likened to a chosen arrow, and hidden in the Father's quiver; called by him 'servant of the God of all things,' and 'Israel,' and 'light of the nations.' The mouth of the Son of God, then, is a sharp sword.

Since the word of God is 'living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and spirit, of joints and marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart' — and besides, having come not to bring 'peace' upon the earth, that is, upon bodily and perceptible things, but to 'cast' a sword, and cutting through this friendship of soul and body that is so harmful, so that the soul, giving itself over to the spirit that wages war against the flesh, might be made a friend to God — his mouth was a sword, or like a sharp sword, according to the prophetic word. Moreover, seeing so many wounded by divine love — like the one who confesses to have suffered this in the Song of Songs, through the words: 'I am wounded with love' — as for the arrow that wounded the souls of so many unto the love of God, one will find nothing else than him who said: 'He made me like a chosen arrow.'

Further, everyone who understands how Jesus became to his disciples not as 'the one who reclines at table' but as 'the one who serves' — he who is of God, having taken the 'form of a servant' for the sake of the freedom of those who had been enslaved to sin — will not fail to know in what manner the Father says to him: 'You are my servant,' and, a little later: 'It is a great thing for you to be called my child.'

For one must dare to say that the goodness of Christ appears greater, and more divine, and truly also an image of the Father, when he 'humbled himself, becoming obedient unto death, even death on a cross,' than if he had 'regarded it as robbery to be equal with God,' and, unwilling, had become a servant for the salvation of the world.

For this reason, wishing to teach us that he had received a great gift from the Father in having thus become a servant, he says: 'And my God will be my strength.' And, 'He said to me: It is a great thing for you to be called my child.' For had he not become a servant, he would not have established the tribes of Jacob, nor turned back the dispersion of Israel, nor indeed would he have become a light for the nations, so as to be for salvation unto the end of the earth.

And it is in fact a modest thing for him to have become a servant, even though this is said by the Father to be a great thing, in comparison with his becoming 'a harmless lamb' and 'the lamb.' For just as 'the harmless lamb, led to be slaughtered,' so the lamb of God became, that he might 'take away the sin of the world' — he who is the provider of reason to all — having been made like 'a lamb before its shearer, silent,' so that by his death we might all be cleansed, being dispensed like a medicine against the opposing powers and the sin of those willing to accept the truth. For the death of Christ has made the powers that war against the human race grow weak, and has caused the life in each of those who believe to go forth from sin by unspeakable power.

But since, until every enemy of his is abolished — and the last of all, indeed, is death — he takes away sin, so that the whole world might become one without sin, for this reason John, pointing him out, says: 'Behold the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world' — not meaning the one who is going to take it away but is not yet taking it away, nor the one who has taken it away but is not still taking it away.

For the 'taking away' is at work on each and every one of those in the world, until sin is removed from the whole world, and the Savior delivers the kingdom, ready, to the Father — a kingdom in which not even the slightest sin can find room, for it to be ruled by the Father, and the world again receives all the things of God, in the whole of itself and entirely, when that is fulfilled which says: 'that God may be all in all.'

But he is also, besides these titles, called 'a man' — 'coming after John,' 'having come before him,' and 'being prior to him' — so that we might be taught that also the man of the Son of God, which has been mingled together with his divinity, is older than his birth from Mary — this man, of whom the Baptist says that he did not know him.

But how did he not know him, he who leapt in exultation, being still an infant in the womb of Elizabeth, when the sound of Mary's greeting came into the ears of Zachariah's wife?

Consider, then, whether 'he did not know' can be said with reference to the things before his embodiment. But if indeed he did not know him before he then came into a body, yet, while he was still in the womb of his mother, he perhaps learns something about him beyond what he already knew — namely, that: 'He upon whom you see the Spirit descending and remaining upon him, this is the one who baptizes in Holy Spirit and fire.'

For even if he knew him already from his mother's womb, he certainly did not know everything about him; indeed, perhaps he was even ignorant that this was the one who baptizes in the Spirit, and only when he had seen the Spirit descending and remaining upon him did he know this — before that, although he was indeed a man, John, in this first respect, did not know him.

None of the aforementioned names indicates his advocacy on our behalf before the Father, as he intercedes on behalf of human nature and makes propitiation, as does the title 'Paraclete,' and 'propitiation,' and 'mercy-seat.' 'Paraclete' is spoken of in the letter of John: 'For if anyone sins, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous'; and 'he is the propitiation for our sins.' And 'propitiation' is likewise called, in the same letter, 'propitiation for our sins'; and similarly also, in the letter to the Romans, 'mercy-seat': 'Whom God set forth as a propitiatory sacrifice through faith' — of which mercy-seat, set in the innermost and holy places, the golden mercy-seat, lying upon the two Cherubim, was a certain shadow.

How could he possibly have become 'Paraclete,' and 'propitiation,' and 'mercy-seat,' without the power of God that blots out our weakness, flowing upon the souls of those who believe, administered by Jesus — of which power he himself is the first, being the very Power of God — on account of whom one might say: 'I am able for all things in Christ Jesus who strengthens me'?

For this reason we know that Simon the magician, who proclaimed himself to be the power of God called 'Great,' went to destruction along with his silver; but we, confessing Christ to be truly the power of God, have come to believe that all things, wherever they are empowered, share in him, insofar as he is Power.

Let it not be passed over by us in silence either that he rightly is, and for this reason is called, the Wisdom of God. For his wisdom does not have its subsistence in the bare fantasies of God and Father of all, according to those images which are analogous to human conceptions.

But if anyone is capable of conceiving of a bodiless subsistence, containing various contemplations that encompass the principles of all things, as something living and, as it were, ensouled, he will know the Wisdom of God that is beyond all creation, as she rightly says of herself: 'God created me the beginning of his ways, for his works.' By virtue of this creation, indeed, all creation too has been enabled, not being incapable of receiving the divine wisdom according to which it came into being — for, according to the prophet David: 'God made all things in wisdom.'

But many things have come into being by participation in wisdom, without apprehending her, by whom they were created; whereas very few not only comprehend the wisdom concerning themselves, but also concerning many other things — Christ being the one who possesses the whole of wisdom.

Each of the wise, to the extent that he has room for wisdom, to that extent partakes of Christ, insofar as he is wisdom; just as each of those possessing greater power, to the extent that he has obtained a share of the power, to that extent has communed with Christ, insofar as he is power.

The like must be understood also concerning sanctification and redemption: for Jesus himself has become for us sanctification — that very thing from which the saints are sanctified — and redemption; and each of us is sanctified by that sanctification and redeemed according to that redemption.

Consider whether it is not in vain that the phrase 'to us' is applied to us by the Apostle when he says: 'Who became for us wisdom from God, and righteousness and sanctification and redemption' — and whether elsewhere, concerning Christ, in respect of his being wisdom it is spoken absolutely, and likewise in respect of his being power, namely that Christ is the power of God and the wisdom of God — even though we might have supposed him not to be simply and absolutely wisdom and power of God, but only 'to us'. But now, in the case of wisdom and power, in addition to 'to us' the absolute designation has also been recorded; whereas in the case of sanctification and redemption the same statement has not been made.

Wherefore consider: since he who sanctifies and those being sanctified are all of one, whether the Father is the sanctification of our very sanctification, just as, Christ being our head, his Father is his head.

But Christ is our redemption — the redemption of us who, because we had been taken captive, were in need of redemption. But I do not seek his redemption, of him who was tempted in all things according to likeness, without sin, and was never held captive by the enemies into captivity.

Now that 'to us' and 'absolutely' have once been distinguished — sanctification and redemption being 'to us' and not absolutely, while wisdom and power are both 'to us' and absolutely — the discussion concerning righteousness must not be left unexamined. And that Christ is 'to us' righteousness is clear from the text: 'Who became for us wisdom from God...'

...and righteousness and sanctification and redemption. But if we do not find him to be absolutely righteousness, as he is absolutely the wisdom and power of God, it must be examined whether, just as the Father is sanctification even to Christ himself, so also the Father is righteousness. For indeed there is no unrighteousness with God, and the Lord is righteous and holy, and his judgments are in righteousness; and being righteous, he administers all things righteously.

But that which prompted those of the heresies to say that the righteous one is other than the good one — though not clearly articulated by them, who supposed the Demiurge to be righteous, but the Father of Christ to be good — I think, when examined carefully with investigation, can be said to apply concerning the Father and the Son: the Son being righteousness, who received authority to execute judgment, because he is the Son of Man and will judge the world in righteousness; while the Father, after the kingdom of Christ, benefits those who have been trained in the righteousness of the Son, showing by his works the title 'good', when God shall become all in all.

And perhaps by his own righteousness the Savior arranges all things at fitting times, by reason and order and chastisements, and by, so to speak, his spiritual medicinal remedies, so that in the end people may make room for the goodness of the Father. And the Only-begotten, having understood this goodness, says to the one who addressed him 'Good Teacher': 'Why do you call me good?'

'No one is good except one, God, the Father.' And we have shown the like elsewhere also concerning someone being greater than the Demiurge, taking Christ to be the Demiurge, and the Father to be greater than him. He himself, then, being so many things — the Paraclete, the propitiation, the mercy-seat — having sympathized with our weaknesses through being tempted in all things human, according to likeness, without sin, is a great high priest, offering himself as the once-for-all sacrifice, not only on behalf of men but of every rational being. For 'apart from God he tasted death for everyone', which in certain copies of the Epistle to the Hebrews stands instead as 'by grace'.

Whether, then, 'apart from God he tasted death for everyone', he died not only for men but also for the rest of rational beings; or whether 'by the grace of God he tasted death for everyone', he died for all apart from God. For 'by the grace of God he tasted death for everyone'.

For indeed it is absurd to say that he tasted death for human sins, but not also for any other being besides man that has come to be in sins — such as, for instance, for the stars, since the stars are not altogether pure before God, as we have read in Job: 'The stars are not pure before him' — unless indeed this is spoken hyperbolically.

For this reason he is a great high priest, since he restores all things to the kingdom of the Father, administering that whatever is lacking in each of the created beings be filled up, so that they may make room for the Father's glory.

This high priest, according to another notion besides those mentioned, is named Judah, so that those who are Jews in secret might be styled Jews not from Judah the son of Jacob, but from him, being his brothers and praising him, laying hold of the freedom by which they have been freed by him, having been delivered from their enemies — he having placed his hands upon the back of their enemies and subjected them.

But also, having tripped up the opposing power, and alone seeing the Father, when he became man he is Jacob and Israel; from whom, just as we become light, since he is the light of the world, so too, he being called Jacob, we become Jacob, and he being named Israel, we are named Israel.

Moreover, he receives the kingdom from a king whom the sons of Israel made king for themselves, and not having set him to rule through God, nor having made it known to God; and the wars of the Lord having ceased, he prepares peace for his son, the people. And perhaps for this reason he is called David, and afterward a rod, for those who are in need of a laborious and harsher discipline and who have not offered themselves to the love and gentleness of the Father.

For this reason, if he is called a rod, he will come forth; for he does not remain in it, but seems to be outside the preceding condition.

But having gone forth and become a rod, he does not remain a rod; rather, after the rod he becomes a flower, rising up, and the flower is shown to be the terminus of being a rod, for those who, through his having become a rod for them, have obtained visitation. For 'God will visit their transgressions with a rod' — that is, with Christ — those whom he shall visit. 'But my mercy I will not utterly take from him'; for he shows mercy on him, since whomever the Son wishes to be shown mercy, the Father shows mercy. It is also possible not to take it that he becomes both rod and flower with respect to the same persons, but rather a rod for those in need of chastisement, and a flower for those being saved; but I think the former is better.

However, this must be added on this point: that perhaps, because of the end in view, if for someone he becomes a rod, he will certainly also become a flower; but it is not the case that if for someone he becomes a flower, for that one he will certainly also have become a rod — unless indeed, since there is a flower more perfect than another flower, and 'flowering' being named with reference to those not yet perfectly bearing fruit, the perfect attain to that which is beyond the flower of Christ, while those who have experienced his rod will, along with the rod, partake not of his perfection but of the flower that precedes his fruits.

Last, before we come to the Logos, Christ was 'stone' — rejected by the builders and appointed to be the head of the corner. For since living stones are built up upon a foundation, upon other stones, the apostles and prophets, he, our Lord Jesus Christ, being the chief cornerstone, because he is a part of the building made of living stones in the land of the living, is called 'stone'.

All these things have been said by us, wishing to refute the haphazard and unexamined manner of the many: that, although so many names are attributed to him, they stand only upon the designation 'Logos', not investigating why the Son of God is recorded as being Logos — that is, 'God in the beginning with the Father, through whom all things came to be'.

Just then, as, on account of his activity in illuminating the world, of which he is the light, he is called 'light of the world'; and on account of making those who genuinely come to him lay aside deadness and, being raised up, take on newness of life, he is called 'resurrection'; and, according to another activity, 'shepherd' and 'teacher' and 'king', 'chosen arrow' and 'servant', and besides these 'paraclete' and 'propitiation' and 'mercy-seat' — so also 'Logos', both removing all our irrationality and making us truly rational, so that, doing all things to the glory of God, even to eating and drinking, we may accomplish through the Logos even the more common and more perfect works of life, to the glory of God.

For if by partaking of him we are raised up and illumined, and perhaps also shepherded or ruled as king, it is clear that we also become divinely rational, he making the irrational things in us and the deadness disappear, insofar as he is Logos and Resurrection.

And consider whether all men somehow partake of him, insofar as he is Logos. For this reason the Apostle teaches us that seeking him is not beyond the reach of those who choose to find him, saying: 'Do not say in your heart, "Who will ascend into heaven?" — that is, to bring Christ down; or "Who will descend into the abyss?" — that is, to bring Christ up from the dead. But what does the Scripture say? "The word is near you, very near, in your mouth and in your heart."'

This shows that the Christ and the word being sought are the same. But also when the Lord himself says: 'If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not have had sin; but now they have no excuse concerning their sin' — nothing else is to be understood except that it is the Logos speaking, meaning that for those in whom it is not yet fulfilled that there is no sin, these are liable to it — namely those who, having already partaken of him, act contrary to the conceptions out of which this Logos is fulfilled in us; and only in this way is it true: 'If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not have had sin.'

For come, let this be examined with reference to the visible Jesus, as the many will suppose: but how is it true that those to whom he has not come do not have sin? For then all who lived before the coming of the Savior would be free from all sin, since Jesus, seen according to the flesh, had not yet come.

But also all those to whom nothing at all was announced concerning him will not have sin; and it is clear that those who do not have sin are not, with respect to judgment—

—subject to it. But the reason that is in humans, of which we have said our race partakes, is spoken of in two ways: either according to the fulfillment of conceptions, which occurs in everyone who has passed beyond childhood — with the exception of those who are monstrous — or according to the summit, which is found only in the perfect.

According to the former, then, the saying 'If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not have had sin; but now they have no excuse concerning their sin' is to be understood; but according to the latter: 'All who came before me are thieves and robbers, and the sheep did not hear them.'

For before the perfecting of the Logos, all things in humans are blameworthy, being deficient and lacking — things to which the irrational elements in us do not perfectly submit, these irrational elements being called 'sheep' in a more figurative sense. And perhaps, according to the former sense, 'The Word became flesh'; but according to the latter, 'The Word was God.'

It follows from this to inquire whether there is something in between 'The Word became flesh' and 'The Word was God' to be seen in human affairs — as it were, the Word being transformed from having become flesh and being gradually refined, until it becomes what it was in the beginning: God the Word who is with the Father; the glory of which Word John truly saw, the glory of the Only-begotten, as from the Father.

But the Logos can also be the Son, on account of announcing the hidden things of that Father, analogous to the word being called 'son' of the mind, since it belongs to the mind. For just as the word among us is a messenger of the things seen by the mind, so too the Word of God, having known the Father — since none of the created beings is able to approach him without a guide — reveals the Father whom he has known.

For no one has known the Father except the Son, and whomever the Son reveals him to; and, insofar as he is Logos, he is the messenger of great counsel, being the one upon whose shoulder the government came to be — for he reigned through having suffered the cross. And in the Revelation he is said to sit upon a white horse, called 'faithful and true Word', as I think, representing the clarity of the voice, upon which the Word of truth who dwells among us is carried.

It is not for the present occasion to show that, in the language of Scripture in many places — in which lie the matters set before us, by which we are benefited as we look to divine teachings — the designation 'horse' occurs. But only one or two examples should be recalled: 'A horse is a false hope for safety', and 'These trust in chariots and these in horses, but we shall be magnified in the name of the Lord our God.'

But the verse 'My heart overflowed with a good word; I speak my works to the king', written in the forty-fourth Psalm, though very frequently cited by the many as if understood, must not be left by us unexamined. For let it be that the Father says these things...

What then is his heart, that the good word may appear in accordance with the heart? For if the word does not need any explanation, as those men suppose, it is clear that neither does the heart; and this is most absurd — to think that the heart, like the heart in our body, is a part of God.

But they must be reminded that, just as 'hand' and 'arm' and 'finger' are said of God — we not fixing our mind on the bare wording, but examining how all these things must be understood soundly and worthily of God — so also the heart of God is to be understood as his intellective and purposive power concerning all things, and the word as the announcing faculty of what is in it.

But who announces the counsel of the Father to those worthy among begotten beings, having become present alongside them, except the Savior? And perhaps it is not without purpose that it says 'it overflowed'; for countless other words could have been used instead of 'it overflowed' — 'my heart put forth a good word,' 'my heart spoke a good word.' But perhaps, just as the belch of one who belches is the coming-forth into the open of some hidden breath, as it were the breathing-out of the one who breathes through it, so the Father, not containing the contemplations of truth, belches them forth and makes their impress in the word, and the word, on account of this, is called the image of the invisible God. And this we say so that, accommodating ourselves to the understanding of the many, we may accept that it is said by the Father: 'My heart overflowed with a good word.'

But it must not be conceded to them altogether, as though it were admittedly God who announces these things. For why should it not be the prophet who is speaking, filled with the Spirit and bringing forth a good word concerning the prophecy about Christ, unable to contain himself: 'My heart overflowed with a good word; I speak my works to the king; my tongue is the pen of a swift-writing scribe; you are beautiful in comeliness beyond the sons of men' — and then, addressing Christ himself: 'Grace has been poured out on your lips'?

For how, if the Father were saying these things, could there follow upon 'Grace has been poured out on your lips' the words 'Therefore God has blessed you forever,' and shortly after, 'Therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness above your fellows'?

But someone wishing that what is said in the psalm be announced from the Father might object with: 'Hear, O daughter, and see, and incline your ear, and forget your people and your father's house'; for surely the prophet would not say to the church, 'Hear, O daughter.'

But it is not difficult to show, also from other psalms, that changes of speaking person occur quite frequently, so that here too it is possible for the Father to be the one speaking from 'Hear, O daughter' onward.

It is also necessary to set alongside this inquiry concerning the word the text: 'By the word of the Lord the heavens were established, and by his breath all their host' — which some suppose is set down concerning the Savior and the Holy Spirit, being capable of showing that the heavens were made firm by the word of God, just as if we should say that a house came to be by the architectural reason and a ship by the shipbuilding reason; so then the heavens were made firm by the word of God, being possessed of a more divine body — and for this reason called 'firm' — not having the abundantly flowing and easily-dissolved nature of the rest and the lower things, but made firm, and having received their distinctive character especially through the divine Word.

Since, then, it is our task to see clearly 'In the beginning was the Word,' and 'beginning' has been shown, with testimonies from Proverbs, to be said of Wisdom, and Wisdom is conceived of beforehand in relation to the Word who announces her, we must understand that the Word always is in the beginning, that is, in Wisdom; and being in Wisdom, called 'beginning,' he is not prevented from being with God, being himself also God, and he is not 'nakedly' with God, but being in the beginning, that is, in Wisdom, he is with God.

Accordingly he adds and says: 'This one was in the beginning with God.' For he could have said: 'This one was with God.' But just as he was in the beginning, so also he was with God in the beginning; and all things came to be through him, who was in the beginning; for God made all things in Wisdom, according to David.

And further, to establish that the Word has his own circumscription, being as it were alive in his own right, one must speak also concerning 'powers,' not only 'power'; for 'Thus says the Lord of powers' is found in many places, certain rational divine living beings being named 'powers,' of whom Christ was the higher and superior one, being called not only Wisdom of God but also Power.

Just then as there are many powers of God, each existing according to its own circumscription, powers from which the Savior differs — so also 'word' — even though the word that is in us does not have a circumscription outside of us — Christ will be understood, on account of what has already been examined, as the Word, having his subsistence in the beginning, that is, in Wisdom. Let this suffice for us for the present concerning 'In the beginning was the Word.'