Homilies on the Gospel of John

“All things were made by Him; and without Him was not anything made that was made.”

1. Moses in the beginning of the history and writings of the Old Testament speaks to us of the objects of sense, and enumerates them to us at length. For, “In the beginning,” he says, “God made the heaven and the earth,” and then he adds, that light was created, and a second heaven and the stars, the various kinds of living creatures, and, that we may not delay by going through particulars, everything else. But this Evangelist, cutting all short, includes both these things and the things which are above these in a single sentence; with reason, because they were known to his hearers, and because he is hastening to a greater subject, and has instituted all his treatise, that he might speak not of the works but of the Creator, and Him who produced them all. And therefore Moses, though he has selected the smaller portion of the creation, (for he has spoken nothing to us concerning the invisible powers,) dwells on these things; while John, as hastening to ascend to the Creator Himself, runs by both these things, and those on which Moses was silent, having comprised them in one little saying, “All things were made by Him.” And that you may not think that he merely speaks of all the things mentioned by Moses, he adds, that “without Him was not anything made that was made.” That is to say, that of created things, not one, whether it be visible or intelligible was brought into being without the power of the Son.

For we will not put the full stop after “not anything,” as the heretics do. They, because they wish to make the Spirit created, say, “What was made, in Him was Life”; yet so what is said becomes unintelligible. First, it was not the time here to make mention of the Spirit, and if he desired to do so, why did he state it so indistinctly? For how is it clear that this saying relates to the Spirit? Besides, we shall find by this argument, not that the Spirit, but that the Son Himself, is created by Himself. But rouse yourselves, that what is said may not escape you; and come, let us read for a while after their fashion, for so its absurdity will be clearer to us. “What was made, in Him was Life.” They say that the Spirit is called “Life.” But this “Life” is found to be also “Light,” for he adds, “And the Life was the Light of men.” Therefore, according to them the “Light of men” here means the Spirit. Well, but when he goes on to say, that “There was a man sent from God, to bear witness of that Light”, they needs must assert, that this too is spoken of the Spirit; for whom he above called “Word,” Him as he proceeds he calls “God,” and “Life,” and “Light.” This “Word” he says was “Life,” and this “Life” was “Light.” If now this Word was Life, and if this Word and this Life became flesh, then the Life, that is to say, the Word, “was made flesh, and we beheld” Its “glory, the glory as of the Only-Begotten of the Father.” If then they say that the Spirit is here called “Life,” consider what strange consequences will follow. It will be the Spirit, not the Son, that was made flesh; the Spirit will be the Only-Begotten Son.

And those who read the passage so will fall, if not into this, yet in avoiding this into another most strange conclusion. If they allow that the words are spoken of the Son, and yet do not stop or read as we do, then they will assert that the Son is created by Himself. Since, if “the Word was Life,” and “what was made in Him was Life”; according to this reading He is created in Himself and through Himself. Then after some words between, he has added, “And we beheld His glory, the glory as of the Only-Begotten of the Father.” See, the Holy Spirit is found, according to the reading of those who assert these things, to be also an only-begotten Son, for it is concerning Him that all this declaration is uttered by him. See when the word has swerved from the truth, whither it is perverted, and what strange consequences it produces!

What then, says one, is not the Spirit “Light”? It is Light: but in this place there is no mention of the Spirit. Since even God (the Father) is called “Spirit,” that is to say, incorporeal, yet God (the Father) is not absolutely meant wherever “Spirit” is mentioned. And why do you wonder if we say this of the Father? We could not even say of the Comforter, that wherever “Spirit” (is mentioned), the Comforter is absolutely meant, and yet this is His most distinctive name; still not always where Spirit (is mentioned is) the Comforter (meant). Thus Christ is called “the power of God”, and “the wisdom of God”; yet not always where “the power” and “the wisdom of God” are mentioned is Christ meant; so in this passage, although the Spirit does give “Light,” yet the Evangelist is not now speaking of the Spirit.

When we have shut them out from these strange opinions, they who take all manner of pains to withstand the truth, say, (still clinging to the same reading,) “Whatever came into existence by him was life, because,” says one, “whatever came into existence was life.” What then do you say of the punishment of the men of Sodom, and the flood, and hell fire, and ten thousand like things? “But,” says one, “we are speaking of the material creation.” Well, these too belong entirely to the material creation. But that we may out of our abundance refute their argument, we will ask them, “Is wood, life,” tell me? “Is stone, life?” these things that are lifeless and motionless? Nay, is man absolutely life? Who would say so? He is not pure life, but is capable of receiving life.

2. See here again, an absurdity; by the same succession of consequences we will bring the argument to such a point, that even hence you may learn their folly. In this way they assert things by no means befitting of the Spirit. Being driven from their other ground, they apply those things to men, which they before thought to be spoken worthily of the Spirit. However, let us examine the reading itself this way also. The creature is now called “life,” therefore, the same is “light,” and John came to witness concerning it. Why then is not he also “light”? He says that “he was not that light”, and yet he belonged to created things? How then is he not “light”? How was he “in the world, and the world was made by him”? Was the creature in the creature, and was the creature made by the creature? But how did “the world know him not”? How did the creature not know the creature? “But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God.” But enough of laughter. For the rest I leave it to you to attack these monstrous reasonings, that we may not seem to have chosen to raise a laugh for its own sake, and waste the time without cause. For if these things are neither said of the Spirit, (and it has been shown that they are not,) nor of anything created, and yet they still hold to the same reading, that stranger conclusion than any which we before mentioned, will follow, that the Son was made by Himself. For if the Son is the true Light, and this Light was Life, and this Life was made in Him, this must needs be the result according to their own reading. Let us then relinquish this reading, and come to the recognized reading and explanation.