Volume 20 of the Commentaries on the Gospel of John (Origen), Translated by ChatGPT from Migne's Patrologia Graeca
In dictating the twentieth volume on the Gospel according to John, most God-loving and knowledge-seeking in the Lord Ambrose, we pray from the fullness of the Son of God, in whom all fullness was pleased to dwell, to receive complete and, so to speak, substantial insights, and having nothing deficient, that the Gospel may be revealed to us according to our examinations, without us either omitting anything necessary to be examined and recorded in interpretative writings, nor unduly increasing anything, nor misunderstanding the mind of our Savior Jesus. So may God send Him, the Word, revealing Himself, so that we may become spectators of His depth, granted by the Father.
[John 8:37] I know that you are Abraham’s seed, but you seek to kill me because my word has no place in you.
It may seem contentious to those who do not understand the significance of the term "seed" and the term "child" to interpret the phrase "I know that you are Abraham’s seed" and what will be immediately brought forward and said to them: "If you were Abraham’s children, you would do the works of Abraham." So that these matters may be considered, let us first examine physically the difference between "seed" and "child." It is clear that the seed has within itself the words of the one who sowed it, still resting in quiet and laid up; but the child, after the seed has transformed and worked on the material surrounding it from the woman and the accumulated nourishment, stands formed and prepared for birth; and if indeed a part is truly a child of someone, in terms of the bodily, it has arisen from seed, while if it is a seed, it does not necessarily become a child. With these distinctions having been pre-stated by us, if one were supposed to understand "I know that you are Abraham’s seed" physically, it would certainly follow that they are also Abraham’s children to whom the phrase is spoken, granted that the child is still seed and not given strictly. Since the children of Abraham are judged by their character and works, perhaps those who are seeds of Abraham should be identified by certain seminal words sowed, as I suppose, into certain souls. And just as not all humans physically are Abraham’s seed, so in the matters now considered regarding who are Abraham’s seed, it is clear that not all humans inherit the same seminal words implanted into their souls for the life of mankind. The cause for these differences, through great judgments and ineffable ways, viewed by those who have received the mind of Christ, to see the things granted to them by God, can only be comprehended by a few who diligently grasp things before and within every individual’s birth; and since such considerations might disturb some, although understanding these things, not investigating them accurately, we risk endangering ourselves in dealing with such matters, where discussing and unfolding such subjects is perilous, even if it is correct. And furthermore, it is precarious because the steward of God's mysteries must also seek the opportune moment for the presentation of such doctrines, so as not to harm the listener, and consider the measure of what is lacking or excessive; and even if the opportune moment is observed, and something is done contrary to right reason, it must be more carefully examined whether those to whom such things are delivered are fellow slaves, or slaves of someone else other than the Lord of the ruler. For that the steward of God's mysteries must examine all these things is indicated by the saying: "Who then is the faithful and wise steward, whom his lord will appoint over his household, to give them their portion of food in due season?" Not all people, therefore, are the seed of Abraham; for they do not have the words sown within their souls which, if cultivated, could make them children of Abraham. And someone might argue that one who has become seed of Abraham could be condemned if he does not also become his child; but how could one reasonably blame someone for not doing the works of Abraham, who does not even have the initial condition of being the seed of Abraham, from which comes the becoming children of Abraham? We might answer this by using history as a stepping-stone and seeking the traces of truth regarding the place in the scriptures, that if someone is not a child of Abraham, but is seed of no righteous person, then one would be blameless among sinners, having no opportunity from the seeds for what is good. But now, just as in bodies one might be the seed of many righteous people, while another has fewer, as will be evident from the juxtaposition of what will be said, so also in matters of spiritual advancement it is fitting to speak proportionally. Abraham is the twentieth born from the first-formed: for there are ten generations from Adam to Noah, and ten from Noah to Abraham. And Abraham had brothers Nahor and Haran; for the three were the sons of Terah. Nahor and Haran were not descendants of Abraham; nor was Abraham himself a descendant of Abraham. The three were, however, descendants of righteous men, as we still seek to count those from Adam in certain numbers: of Seth, whom God raised in place of Abel; and of Enosh, who "began to call on the name of the Lord" and of Enoch, "who pleased God, after becoming the father of Methuselah for two hundred years"; and of Noah, of whom it is said that "Noah was a righteous man, perfect in his generation; Noah walked with God"; and of Shem, whose "Lord God" seems first to have been addressed in Genesis, as it is plain from "Blessed be the Lord, the God of Shem." Among those who were unrighteous, these three sons of Terah were the descendants. Therefore, what we have said about the seed of Abraham, let it be understood about the seed of Shem and Noah and the aforementioned righteous men, whose characteristics Abraham, Nahor, and Haran seem to have inherited as they came into existence. But Abraham cultivated within himself the seminal reasons of all the righteous before him and added to them his own holy quality, particular to his own seed, from which those who followed after him, called "seed of Abraham," could partake. But Haran made little effort for himself and the paternal seeds in him, from which he managed, though weakly, to give forth Lot. Nahor, however, was lesser than both his brothers. Therefore, it is possible, even not being of the seed of Abraham, to be of the seed of Noah, since certainly by the history of the flood all descended from Noah. If this is so, then also of the seed of Enoch, surely also of the seed of Enosh and Seth. It is unclear to us among many of those lower than Noah, who is of the seed of Shem, who of Ham, and who of Japheth, and of those even lower; but no one is without some share in the seed of the righteous. I consider it possible that one having the starting points which Abraham had from prior seeds, even not being of the seed of Abraham, might become similar to Abraham. For as Abraham, though not from the seed of Abraham but from those previously mentioned, became Abraham, so it is possible for someone, having cultivated the superior things sown in him, to become another Abraham, not necessarily from the seed of Abraham but himself also capable of sowing like Abraham. And let us hear of all these matters, referring the spoken words not to bodies and people, but to certain intelligible things and words, more or fewer, which those entering into generation or existence participate in variously, and perhaps even ascending. And you may consider if such seeds can apply, now being named as particular to those who receive them, the phrase "They that go forth, go weeping, bearing their seeds"; for if one can, let him understand the journey of some souls into generation with weeping, carrying the seeds either of more just or fewer and even unjust things. And let him reflect, seeing as if gardeners agonizing over the seeds they hold, how to cultivate these (I mean those that are superior), and not to sow these, if they come with worse seeds. For what kind of weeping is it likely for these to weep about whom the saying is: "They that go forth, go weeping, bearing their seeds"? And there is indeed a good hope among those who go forth and weep, carrying their seeds; for these as usually "shall come with rejoicing, carrying their sheaves." Perhaps, however, there are others, concerning whom you might say: "They that go forth went forth and laughed, bearing their seeds"; and for them the following will be: "And they shall come with weeping, carrying their sheaves"; concerning whom you might say: "They were born like grass on the rooftops, which withers before it is plucked, of which the mower fills not his hand, nor the binder of sheaves his bosom. And they that pass by do not say: The blessing of the Lord be upon you." And observe if it can perhaps be said more deeply and mystically by our savior the saying "Blessed are those who weep now, for they shall laugh;" and "Woe to those who laugh now, for they shall mourn and weep." However much the seed of later just ones is, it produces that many more words of righteousness, as for this reason the phrase "The seed of Abraham his servants, the sons of Jacob his chosen ones" is written, and for this reason somehow the saying about John: "Among those born of women, there is none greater than John the Baptist." Having come to these places, consider if it has any meaning that some seeds disappear by God, so that there be no more evil on earth, if those not deriving from better sources are sown to cultivate those from superior seeds. For this reason, the flood occurs to destroy the seed of Cain, since those born from him could not have anything to cultivate but only from Adam. That the flood happened to destroy the seed of Cain is shown by the inscription of the Proverbs of Solomon through these words: “Departing from her, the unrighteous in his anger perished” (it being evident that it means wisdom), “killed by fratricidal lusts, for whom wisdom again saved the submerged earth, steering the righteous with a simple piece of wood.” The disappearance of Sodom and the land of those likewise seems to be depicted to me: "Their land remains a smoking wasteland, bearing plants at fruitless seasons." And it was the work of a good God to make Sodom disappear from the earth and to dry up whatever residue of mist remained from it, so that there would no longer be a vine of Sodom, nor a branch of Gomorrah, nor a grape of bitterness, nor a cluster of harshness, nor wine, the anger of dragons and the incurable wrath of asps. You would say the same about the Egyptians, about whom it is said: “He killed their vines with hail, and their sycamore trees with frost”; for it is a good God who kills the vines of the Egyptians and the sycamore trees of the ungodly. These things are set forth for the examination of the debate about seeds regarding Abraham or any of the righteous, so that it may be shown how and in what manner it is said by the Savior, “I know that you are Abraham’s seed,” and “If you are Abraham’s children, do the works of Abraham.” Concerning the children of Abraham doing the works of Abraham, we will speak, God willing, in better time, when we come to the testing of that statement. It is possible then for someone who happens to be a seed of Abraham to become his child through diligence, but it is also possible through neglect and lack of cultivation to lose even the standing of being his seed. Those to whom the word was addressed were still of hope, for Jesus knew that they were still Abraham’s seed and saw that they had not yet lost the ability to become children of Abraham; as it was still possible for them to become children of Abraham since they were his seed, he said to them, “If you are children of Abraham, do the works of Abraham.” Just as there are some who are the seed of Abraham, there are others, as Daniel says, “the seed of Canaan and not of Judah,” and others, as Wisdom says, “a cursed seed from the beginning.” And we will say concerning these that just as in physical matters, from many seeds, sometimes one seed proves capable of more vigorous growth, so it is with spiritual seeds. What I say will be clear from the subsequent statements; for since the one who sows has within himself ancestral and kin-related reasons, sometimes his own reason prevails, and what is generated resembles the sower, sometimes the reason of the sower’s brother, or the sower’s father, or the sower’s uncle, or sometimes even the sower’s grandfather; hence, those who are begotten resemble one or another of these. One can see that the word of the wife or of the wife’s father or of her brother or of her grandfather prevails, in accordance with the comminglings in their fermentations while all of them are shaken, until some of the seminal words should prevail. Let these things be transferred to the soul filled with intelligible seeds, coming from certain named fathers of her, and from the mobility or ease of movement of the governing principle, let certain seminal words of the fathers emerge as images on such occasions. When cultivated, there will be a son, this one of Abraham, clearly the same also of Noah, another of Noah, not, however, to be also of Abraham, and another of Canaan, and another of someone among the just or the unjust. Yet, we have all come not with similar and the same seeds, but no one has come empty of salvific and holy seeds; unless one of us happens to entreat strongly and simultaneously offering the help from God that does not reject even the worst and those who have entered life without the best seeds, and to entreat from the saying, "God is able from these stones to raise up children to Abraham." All things spoken about the seed of Abraham and those having an analogy to this, we would reasonably accept if indeed we have received that it was not spoken according to the physical that "I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel" and "I have not found such faith in Israel," and whatever related things have been said similarly. These, to whom the word is directed, seem not to accommodate the word, unable to contain it through the excess of its own greatness beyond them, since they were still merely the seed of Abraham. But if in addition to being the seed of Abraham they had cultivated and the seed of Abraham had grown into greatness and increase, in the greatness and increase of the seed of Abraham the word of Jesus would have fitted. And even to this point, you will admit that the word does not fit in those not advancing from being the seed of Abraham and not coming into being his children. These also wish to kill the word and as it were to crush it, not being able to contain its greatness. And it is always possible to see those not accommodating the word, because they are lesser vessels, wishing to kill the unity of the greatness of the word, as if they could contain its members after its destruction and crushing. To those in whom the word thus happens, having, as it were, destroyed it, it will be said, "All my bones have been scattered." So if one of us is the seed of Abraham and yet the word of God does not fit in him, let him not seek to kill the word, but having changed from being the seed of Abraham to being the child of Abraham, he will be able to contain the word of God which he previously did not accommodate.
[John 8:38] What I have seen from the Father, I speak; and you, therefore, what you have heard from the Father, you do.
Just as we might say that certain men from the beginning have been eyewitnesses of the word, concerning whom Luke says, “Just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word handed them down to us,” so we will say that the Savior is an eyewitness of things from the Father, and thus the saying “No one knows the Father except the Son” is said, since there are no other eyewitnesses to whom the Son might reveal. Clearly, the statement in “What I have seen from the Father, I speak” indicates that the Savior is an eyewitness of things with the Father. If someone ever inquires whether there will be a time when the angels themselves will see the things with the Father, no longer seeing through an intermediary and servant; then those who have seen the Son have seen the Father who sent Him; in the Son, one sees the Father. But when one looks at the Father as the Son sees the Father and the things with the Father, one will be, as it were, an eyewitness of the Father and of the things of the Father, no longer understanding these things from the image of Him whom the image is. And I think this will be the end, when the Son hands over the kingdom to God the Father, and when God becomes all in all. Therefore, the Savior, having seen the things with the Father, speaks; but the Jews who believed in Him have not seen the things with the Father, but they heard from the Father to do what they heard. Therefore, the Lord tells them, “And you, therefore, do what you have heard from the Father.” Someone might ask when the Jews who believed in the Lord heard from the Father; and to this, one might say, having simply heard, “What you have heard from the Father, do,” that they heard from the Father through Moses and the prophets the things written in the Law and the Prophets to be done. He who uses the saying against heterodox opinions clearly demonstrates that the Father of Christ is no other than the God who gave the Law and the Prophets.
Another also, using the phrase "Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me; not that anyone has seen the Father, except the one who is from the Father, he has seen the Father," will say that there are some souls that, having been embodied before coming into existence, have been taught by the Father and have heard from Him, who also come to the Savior. Among these were even those Jews who now believe in Him and were being examined, to whom He said, "You then do what you have heard from the Father." And he will say that these are those also called the seed of Abraham. But someone might oppose this, claiming that the statement "Everyone who has heard from the Father and learned comes to me" necessarily means that the one who has heard from the Father and learned from Him comes to the Savior; but "You then do what you have heard from the Father," spoken to the Jews seeking to kill the Son of God, to whom it is said as if they were not yet children of Abraham, "If you were children of Abraham, you would do the works of Abraham," shows that they do not yet have the fruits of having come to the Savior. To such an opposer it will be answered, stating that "Everyone who has heard from the Father and learned" is not the same as "You then do what you have heard from the Father"; for the one who has heard from the Father and learned necessarily comes to the Savior, while those who have heard but not necessarily learned are not yet children of Abraham. We might inquire from those introducing the natures and attributing to "My word has no place in you" according to Heracleon, that it is because they are unfit either in essence or in intention, how those who are unfit in essence have heard from the Father. Moreover, were these ever sheep of Christ, or were they originally strangers to Him? If they were strangers, how did they hear from the Father? Clearly, as they believe, it is said to the strangers, "For this reason you do not hear, because you are not of my sheep." Unless, being pressed by another absurdity, they surround themselves with the claim that the strangers have heard from the Father but do not hear from the Savior. If they were belonging to the Savior and of the blessed nature, how were they seeking to kill Him? And how did the word of the Savior not have a place in them?
[John 8:39] They answered and said to Him, "Our father is Abraham."
They might have made their answer much humbler, accepting concerning who was their father, as the Lord was saying. For Jesus, referring to God, said "You do the works you heard from the Father." But humbler, they acknowledge their father's nationality, saying, "Our father is Abraham." Someone might assist them, as replying well, by saying that as moderate and not claiming themselves to be sons of God, when Jesus said "You do the works you heard from the Father" referring to God, they say "Our father is Abraham." Clearly, the Savior redirects even this as falsely spoken through "If you were the children of Abraham, you would do the works of Abraham." Therefore, one might inquire about these things improperly, because, according to the Savior, denying them to be children of Abraham, saying to them "You do the works you heard from the Father," referring to the Father, which is God. For he who is not a child of Abraham can be much more criticized as those after Abraham against whom the word is directed, much more so will he not be a child of God. But see if also for this we can say it has not been said, "And you also should do the works you heard from your father or our father," but "from the Father," whosoever He may be, not necessarily the father of those who are not children of Abraham and are not formed from the seed of Abraham to the children of Abraham; or the saying, "You do the works you heard from the Father," can be taken indefinitely instead of "from My Father," and this will be clear from "What I have seen with My Father I speak," meaning "with My Father." And following, we are taught to whom God is Father, by which also the Savior says these things: "If God were your Father, you would love Me." It is clear that those seeking to kill the Son did not love Him; and those not loving Him could not be called sons of God. Thus it is clear that "You do the works you heard from the Father" is not equal to "from your father."
[John 8:39] Jesus said to them, "If you are children of Abraham, do the deeds of Abraham."
Those who choose one of the deeds of Abraham, the "Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness," and thinking this is what is referred to by "Do the deeds of Abraham" so that it may be granted to them that faith is a deed, which would not be granted by those accepting the "Faith without works is dead" nor by those hearing that it differs to be justified "by faith" rather than "by works of the law," let them respond why it was not said: "If you are children of Abraham, do the deed of Abraham" in the singular, but in the plural: "Do the deeds of Abraham," which, as I think, amounts to "Do all the deeds of Abraham." And if it equals "Do all the deeds of Abraham," neither must he who has a wife approach a maidservant fleshly nor, after the death of the married woman in old age, take another woman, who wishes to become a child of Abraham by doing the deeds of Abraham according to the teaching of the Savior. Clearly, we learn here that it is necessary for each one to do spiritually all the history allegorized according to Abraham, starting from "Go out of your land and from your kindred and from your father's house to the land that I will show you," spoken not only to Abraham but to everyone who will be his child. For each of us has a land, an unworthy kindred before the divine instruction, and the house of our father before the word of God reached us, from all of which we must exit according to the word of God if we hear the Savior saying: "If you are children of Abraham, do the deeds of Abraham"; thus we will arrive, leaving our land, at the land which God will show us, truly good and really vast, which properly should be given by the Lord God to those who have fulfilled what was commanded in the "Go out of your land." And just as abandoning a family that is not good, we shall become a great nation and greater than according to humans; and just as despising the house of a not praiseworthy father, we shall be blessed with our name being magnified, becoming so blessed, that those who bless us will be blessed by God, and those who curse us will be under a curse, and every tribe of the earth will be blessed in us (when it may be said about us: “He went,” as it was said about Abraham, “And Abraham went, as the Lord had spoken to him.” I think that in the beginnings and for some time Lot will follow us, of which there was a symbol: “And Lot went with him”), and returning to the land of Canaan, we shall pass through the land as far as the place of Shechem, thus advancing in the ascent of the mind until we come to the high oak. And the Lord God, who appeared to Abraham, will appear to us, and he will promise to give the land around the high oak to the seed of our intellectual soul. It is for the one who understands the phrase “Do the works of Abraham” also to build an altar to the Lord where the high oak is manifesting to us, and after these things to depart from the place of the high oak to the mountain, and from the mountain towards the east of Bethel, which is interpreted “House of God,” where he will pitch his tent, with Bethel to the west and Ai to the east; Ai is interpreted “Feasts.” And as such a one progresses, he will build again an altar to the Lord, now also able to call on the name of the Lord. And next, departing from there, the one who will be a child of Abraham, becoming somewhat more strategic and understanding against how many enemies he must prepare himself, will camp in the wilderness. After this, he will experience the trial of the famine in the land and will go down to Egypt to sojourn there, so that the famine which prevails in the land may not overpower him there. And he will go down to Egypt with his beautiful wife, making certain agreements with her, so that the Egyptians may treat him well because of her and give him in Egypt “sheep and oxen and donkeys and male and female servants and mules and camels.” Concerning each one of whom some wise person, capable of reaching the depths of the text with proficiency, it would be the work to speak and generally test every part of the history of Abraham and everything written about him, which things are allegorized; these we will attempt to do spiritually, as spiritual ones. But see if it does not clearly appear to us from the examination of the passage that it is the mark of a wise person endowed with every virtue to become a child of Abraham. For what need is there to say how much wisdom we need to understand the works of Abraham? And how much strength to carry them out? What wisdom or what power do we need, or of Christ, who is "the power of God and the wisdom of God?" Therefore, it is written: "If you are Abraham's children, do the works of Abraham"; correspondingly, you could say: if you are Isaac's children, do the works of Isaac; and similarly about Jacob and each one of the holy fathers. And by the opposites, each sinner in general is a child of the devil, since "everyone who commits sin is of the devil," or more specifically, of Cain, or of Ham, or of Canaan, or of Pharaoh, or of Nebuchadnezzar, or some of the impious ones. Accordingly, you will say to these that each one departing from this life will go to his own fathers; for it must be supposed to be said of not only Abraham, but also to all people at their departure: "You shall go to your fathers"; yet not to all people, but only to the saints: "In peace"; and to those completed and become spiritually aged also: "Having lived a good old age," since "Wisdom is gray hair to men and an unspotted life is old age among men" and "A crown of pride is old age" and the glory to the true and godly elders are the adornments of spiritual gray hairs.
[John 8:40] Now you seek to kill a man who has spoken to you the truth which I heard from God.
Those who seek to kill, since God is not killed, even if they do kill, they kill a man. Even if they seek to kill, not yet killing, they do not think they are devising against God but against a man; for no one who is persuaded that he is God to whom he devises would still devise against him. It is always possible to consider those devising against the word of God, that they seek to kill and make him disappear, supposing him to be a man, that is, human and mortal, or they attack his more human and visible aspect; so that even if they kill the body of the word, it is clear that after this they can do nothing more. Therefore, we should not fear those who kill the body and after that can do nothing more, nor should we fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul of the word. But if there is such a word that both his body and soul can be destroyed, considering them worthy of destruction, we should fear the one who can destroy and make disappear both soul and body in Gehenna or in whatever manner he wishes; for the Lord Jesus will consume with the spirit of his mouth and abolish with the brightness of his coming the opposing word and what is lifted up against everything called God or worshiped. And these who seek to kill a man who has spoken the truth he heard from God and received do so. Yet if we take the place more simply, the Savior clearly taught that what was sought by the Jews to be killed was not God but a man, who was also killed; for it is not proper to say that God dies; therefore, the Word in the beginning with God, which was God, did not die. But you may ask, since it is written that "The Word became flesh," whether the Word that became flesh became also a man or not. For if he became a man, he could be sought to be killed; but if he did not become a man, then the Word that became flesh was not killed and restores each to what he was before he became flesh.
[John 8:40] "This Abraham did not do."
It was altogether impossible for this to be done by Abraham, if Abraham had not done it, as it happened to be stated, it would seem, that 'This Abraham did not do.' For some would say toward this that it is vainly said, 'This Abraham did not do,' if he did not do what was not at all done in his time; for Jesus had not come in his time. But since I consider "This Abraham did not do," to be said, so to speak, in praise regarding Abraham, I would say that according to the teacher's discourse, 'Abraham your father rejoiced that he might see my day, and he saw it and was glad,' it means that a man speaking the truth he heard from God did arise in the time of Abraham, yet was not sought to be slain by Abraham. And understand that there is no time when the man allegorically understood as Jesus was not present in life, both after the times of the story about him and earlier. Therefore, I think that anyone who was once enlightened and has tasted the heavenly gift, and has become a partaker of the Holy Spirit, and has tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, and has fallen away, again renews himself to repentance, either re-crucifying or re-nailing the Son of God to the cross and exposing him to public shame, whether before the bodily advent of our Savior or after. For he who, after enlightenment and the other beneficences of God towards him, sins again, re-crucifies the Son of God through his own sins to which he has returned, fulfills nothing short of the common bodily action known as crucifying the Son of God, nor was it done earlier and anyone sinning after hearing divine words pre-crucified the Son of God. But if anyone is pleased to accept what is recorded in the Acts of Paul as said by the Savior, ‘I am being crucified again above,’ this person, as he accepts 'I am being crucified again above' occurring after the advent, so also before the advent, whenever the same causes occur, might say, ‘Now I am being crucified.’ Why indeed should it not be said that ‘he is being crucified above,’ since he had been crucified before? But see if it is not only the voice of the saints after the presence that says 'I am crucified with Christ,' but also of those earlier, lest we say that the saints after the presence differ from Moses and the patriarchs. And the statement 'It is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me' should also be said not only by those after the presence but also by those earlier. I also bring into focus the statement 'God of Abraham and God of Isaac and God of Jacob; He is not the God of the dead but of the living' said by the Savior, lest it may be because of this that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are living, since they too were buried with Christ and rose together with him, not necessarily according to the bodily burial or bodily resurrection of Jesus. These things are in regard to 'This Abraham did not do.' But what is 'this'? It is the seeking to kill a man who has spoken the truth which he heard from God. For we assert that the spiritual economy according to Jesus was never absent from the saints. If you elevate these things as we have hinted at in other instances, interpreting them mystically rather than commonly in reference to Abraham, you will try to harmonize all the circumstances related to the place, seeking the coherence of each of these."
[John 8:41] You are doing the works of your father.
With respect to this saying, it is not clear which father He means to say to the Jews who have believed in Him and have not yet known the truth; for He says all these things to them. And if He had not shortly after added, "You are of your father the devil" and "you want to do the desires of your father," we would have understood clearly the intent of what was spoken. It is not remarkable if He said to those Jews who believed in Him but had not yet remained in His word, so that they might truly become His disciples and know the truth by being freed by it, "You are doing the works of your father" and as he shortly after added, "You are of your father the devil." For though such words may seem harsh when said of those who believe in Him and somewhat have become His disciples, though not yet truly being disciples of Jesus, it should be understood in the light of what is written in the Catholic epistle by John concerning the children of God and the children of the devil: "For the one who commits sin is of the devil, for the devil has been sinning from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that He might destroy the works of the devil. Everyone born of God does not commit sin, because His seed remains in him; and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. By this are manifest the children of God and the children of the devil: whoever does not do righteousness is not of God, neither he who does not love his brother." Therefore, with these words being so, understand this if it isn’t clearly said that everyone who commits sin is of the devil. As much as we commit sins, we have not yet shed the generation of the devil, even though we may be counted as believing in Jesus; and it follows from this that Jesus said to the believing Jews, "You are doing the works of your father," referring with "father" to the devil because of "You are of your father the devil." And if everyone who commits sin is of the devil, then everyone who is not of the devil does not commit sin. But even if "the Son of God was manifested for this purpose, that He might destroy the works of the devil," so long as He has not yet destroyed the works of the devil within us, by our not presenting ourselves to the One who destroys the works of the devil, we have not yet cast away being children of the devil, as we are known by our fruits as to whose children we are. And from these things, it is clear that no one is by nature a son of the devil, nor is anyone called a son of God among men because he was so created; and it is clear that one who was once a son of the devil can become a son of God, which is also evident from Matthew, who reports the Savior saying thus: "You have heard that it was said, 'You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven." Note that from "love your enemies" and "pray for those who persecute you," he who was not previously a son of the heavenly Father, afterward becomes His son; and indeed, because of "By this the works of God and the works of the devil are manifest," it was said concerning the children of the devil that "He who commits sin is of the devil"; but concerning the children of God, it was said that "Everyone who is born of God does not commit sin, for His seed remains in him; and he cannot sin, because he is born of God." It is therefore clear that every person completing the word is either a child of God or a child of the devil; for either he commits sin or he does not commit sin, with nothing in between committing sin and not committing sin; and if he commits sin, he is of the devil; but if he does not commit sin, he is born of God. Thus, what is said in the same letter concerning the children of God and the children of the devil stands: "Everyone who abides in Him does not sin; everyone who sins has not seen Him." Therefore, if everyone who abides in Him does not sin, he who sins does not abide in the Son; and if everyone who sins has not seen Him, he who has seen Him does not sin. At the same time, note what John meant by saying, "Everyone who sins has not seen Him," indicating through "has seen Him" that those who always see the Son of God and from having seen Him gain power to by no means sin. You might also say that the saying "You do the works of your father" can sometimes refer to the children of the devil and at other times to the children of God. For those who sin do the works of their father the devil, but those who do right do the works of their father, God. It is possible that someone might be moved by these things, not being able to be the same, doing good and evil deeds alternately, being a child of God due to the good deeds and a child of the devil due to the contrary ones. But this, besides being highly irrational, is not stated in the Scriptures. For John declares that "Everyone who has been born of God does not commit sin, because His seed remains in him, and he cannot sin, because he has been born of God." Therefore, everyone who has been born of God does not commit sin; but it is not written that everyone who has been born of the devil does not practice righteousness, but "the one who commits sin is of the devil". Again, it is not stated in the same way, "The one who commits sin is of the devil," as it is written, "the one who practices righteousness is of God." Pay attention to the distinctions of the statements, how with all precision John has said them, so as to marvel how perfectly and, as some might say, dialectically he expressed them, not bringing forth similar things about those born of the devil and those born of God. Similarly, he would have expressed it if he had said, just as "The one who commits sin is of the devil," so "the one who practices righteousness is of God," or as he wrote, "Everyone who has been born of God does not commit sin," he might have written "everyone who has been born of the devil does not practice righteousness." Perhaps also by using "is" for the one of the devil, and not using it for those of God, or by using "born" for those of God and not using it for those of the devil, he expressed it very wisely. For he exalted the one of God by attributing "born" to him; which, if it had been said of the one of the devil, would have shown something worse than "is of the devil." But even if he had used "is" as he did for the one of the devil, he would have shown less for the one of God, as being born of God is much greater than being from God. Some might say that some creatures are indeed from God but are not born of God, and these undoubtedly occupy a lesser rank in the universe than those who are said to be born of God. And indeed, being according to the distinction of "It is of the devil" and "Born of God," do not ever seek if there is someone who is both born of the devil and who is certainly of the devil, for not everyone who is of the devil is born of the devil; and again there is someone who is of God who is not entirely born of God, hence not everyone who is of God is born of God. However, the one born of God is characterized by not committing sin, because the seed of God remains in him, and due to the power of that seed residing within him, he is unable to sin any longer. And in the last parts of the letter, it is said: "Everyone who is born of God does not sin, but the one born of God keeps himself, and the wicked one does not touch him." If the one born of God keeps himself and the wicked one does not touch him, then the one who does not keep himself so that the wicked one does not touch him is not born of God, and everyone who the wicked one touches is not born of God. The wicked one touches those who do not keep themselves. Since there is no interval between the matters concerning Abraham, it follows: "You do the works of your father," we seek whether this is written on account of the first command given to Abraham. The first instruction to him is as follows: "Get out of your country, and from your kindred, and from your father's house, and go to the land that I will show you." So Abraham went out from his father's house, which those who are being rebuked for not speaking soundly have not done; "Our father is Abraham," they say. For if you are the children of Abraham, do the works of Abraham; the first of his works was to leave his country, and his kindred, and his father's house, and go to the land that God shows him. Therefore, those to whom this word applies are reproved as not being the children of Abraham, clearly because they have not gone out from their father's house they are reprimanded as still being of their wicked father and still doing the works of that father. With these things being clearly stated in the text, I think those who assume from this that there are some who are by nature children of the devil are refuted.
[John 8:41] They said to Him, "We were not born of fornication; we have one Father, God."
I seek whether, when reproved as not being children of Abraham, those who are said to have believed in Him, the Jews, answered more bitterly, covertly hinting that the Savior was born out of fornication, as they probably insinuate this by denying His notorious and widely discussed birth from the Virgin. For it seems quite irrational to me that they should dismiss these words offhand. Neither do they suit the preceding nor the following context if the phrase "We were not born of fornication" spoken by them is understood more literally. But since the Savior said that God was His own Father, not admitting any human father, it is likely that they brought up again the phrase "We have one Father, God" to confront the "We were not born of fornication." As if they were saying, "We have one Father, God, rather than you, who, claiming to be born of a virgin, were born of fornication, and by boasting of your virgin birth, claim to have God as your only Father," acknowledging both God as Father and not denying a human father. But someone will say that understood in this manner, these cannot be the words of Jews who believed in Him. To this it must be replied that, at the beginning of His conversation with them, "If you remain in My word, you are truly My disciples, and you shall know the truth," as they were capable of remaining in Jesus’ word and also of not remaining, it was not impossible that some of those reproved did not remain in His word, and those who did not remain spoke bitterly and reactively by saying, "We were not born of fornication; we have one Father, God." It seems to me that they answered more contentiously; for having previously said, "We are Abraham's seed," and confirming this more plainly by saying, "Our father is Abraham," on hearing in response, "If you are Abraham's children, do the works of Abraham," they claim a greater father than Abraham for themselves by saying, "We have one Father, God." Perhaps because some men are of the devil and others are born of God, we might rightly say that all who are not born of God are born of fornication. For the devil begets or makes those who are from him, not from a bride, but from a prostitute, from matter, those who are attached to bodily things and clinging to material lusts, becoming one body with her, whereas those who are born of God refrain from the prostitute matter, cleaving to the Lord, and being united with the Word who was in the beginning with God, and with His wisdom, "which He created as the beginning of His ways for His works," that they may become one spirit with her; for "He who is joined to the prostitute is one body with her; but he who is joined to the Lord is one spirit with Him."
[John 8:42] Jesus said to them, "If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and am here."
Therefore, since those who bring in the natures use this saying, narrating it thus, that you would have recognized me as your own and as a brother, but also as your own, you would have loved me if God were your Father, it must be questioned thus towards them: there was a time when Paul hated Jesus, and he hated him when he devastated and persecuted the church of God, and indeed the first divine communication correctly said to him, 'Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?' If therefore it is true that 'If God were your Father, you would love me,' it is clearly also valid to reverse it: 'If you do not love me, God is not your Father.' Therefore, for those who do not love Jesus, God is not the Father; there was a time when Paul did not love Jesus, therefore there was a time when God was not Paul's Father. Hence, Paul was not by nature a son of God, but later became a son of God, when we also properly take what follows, namely that 'But indeed God, O Paul, is your Father, therefore you love Jesus.' But even before the times of Paul's faith, being true the saying 'If God were your Father, you would love me,' it would have been correct to accept Jesus saying, 'But indeed you do not love me, therefore God is not your Father, O Paul.' But when does God become anyone's Father? Or when one keeps the commandments, through which he, who was not previously a son of the heavenly Father, becomes His son, when also the Father, leading him to rebirth, who becomes His son, takes him as such a Father. This can be addressed from what is written in the Gospel according to Matthew: 'You have heard that it was said, "You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy." But I say to you, love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may become sons of your Father who is in heaven.' Pay attention to 'so that you may become sons of your Father who is in heaven,' which shows that someone does not become a son of the heavenly Father before. By keeping carefully also concerning what pertains to 'the Father,' which is 'yours' (for it is written, 'so that you may become sons of your Father'), you will ask whether it is said more plainly, or whether it is added by error of the scribes (for we would not have questioned if it had been written, 'so that you may become sons of the Father who is in heaven'); and especially since it seems to contain contention about someone becoming a son, not simply of the heavenly Father, but of one's own Father. For if He is his Father, he does not later become his son; but if he becomes his son, He was not his Father. Moreover, you will note that some of those thought to have believed are called slaves of God, but others are called His sons, that perhaps not just by any commandment but by some notable achievement, someone becomes a son of God who achieves it. Observe, then, that in the Gospel of Matthew, it is stated, "That you may become sons of your Father who is in heaven," in connection with, "But I say to you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you." For indeed, the likeness to God and imitation of Him who loves all things and abhors nothing of what He has made, and spares all (for all things are His), is shown in the one who loves his enemies and prays for those who persecute him. How fitting would it be for "That you may become sons of your Father who is in heaven," to be joined with, "You have heard it said, 'You shall not commit adultery'; but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart," and concerning the loss of one of your members rather than the whole body being cast into hell? Furthermore, if it were added to "You have heard it said to the ancients, 'You shall not swear falsely, but shall perform your oaths to the Lord'; but I say to you, do not swear at all," it would cause great offense. But now, as the Father who is in heaven makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, so each of the sons of God, having love in themselves as a kind of sun, makes it rise on the evil when he loves his enemies. And again, as He sends rain on the just and on the unjust, so does the holy one send prayer as a kind of rain upon those below who persecute him and prays for such people. This is made clear in our teaching of, "If God were your Father, you would love me." Let us also consider the statement, "I came forth from God and am here," which seems useful for me to relate to the prophecy of Micah, saying, "Hear, O peoples, the word, and let the earth listen, and all that is in it. And the Lord will be a witness against you, the Lord from His holy house." For behold, the Lord is going forth from His place, and He will come down and step upon the high places of the earth, and the mountains will melt under Him, and the valleys will be split like wax before the fire, like waters poured down a steep place. And see if perchance “I proceeded from God” is equivalent to “The Lord goes forth from His place,” since when the Son is in the Father, being in the form of God before He emptied Himself, God is as it were His place. And if anyone understands that, before emptying Himself, He existed in the previous form of God, he will see the Son, not yet having gone forth from God, nor yet having proceeded from His place. But when comparing that state of the Son with taking on the form of a servant, emptying Himself, he will understand how the Son of God went forth and came to us, and as it were has come outside of the one who sent Him, even if in another way the Father did not leave Him alone but is with Him, and is in the Son as He is in the Father. And if in no other way you understand the Son to be in the Father as He was before He went forth from God, it will seem as though the going forth from God and being in God while having gone forth from God contain a contradiction. Others have narrated that “I proceeded from God” instead means “I was begotten from God,” following which they assert that the Son was begotten from the substance of the Father, as it were diminishing and lacking the substance which He previously had, when He begets the Son, as if one would understand this also of those who are pregnant. These also follow and say that the Father and the Son have a body, and that the Father is divided, which are the doctrines of men who have not at all conceived in thought the nature that is invisible and incorporeal, being truly essence. And it is clear that they will place the Father in a bodily place, and the Son as having changed place bodily, having visited life, and not from state to state, as we have understood.
[John 8:42] For I have not come of myself, but He who sent me.
I think these words are spoken to those who come of themselves and are not sent by the Father. Concerning such men, who pretend to teaching or prophecy, we are also taught by Jeremiah, where it is written: "I have not sent the prophets, yet they ran." And if certain powers come to men not sent by the Father, you understand and know if some of them are from God and have erred in this by not being sent from Him. But it must not be left unexamined in the discussion concerning the soul: perhaps the soul of Jesus, being in its own perfection in God and the fullness, having come forth from there, because it was sent by the Father, took up the body from Mary. But others have not come forth from God in this way, that is, they were not sent nor dispatched by the divine will.
[John 8:43] Why do you not understand my speech? Because you are not able to hear my word.
The reason, he says, that you do not understand my speech is that you are not able to hear my word. Therefore, one must first acquire the capacity to hear the divine word, so that afterward we may be able to understand all the speech of Jesus; for it is possible for one who was previously unable to hear the word of Jesus to later come to be able to hear it, just as someone who has not yet had his ears healed by the word saying to the deaf, "Be opened," cannot hear. But when the cause of deafness has been removed, then one will be able to hear Jesus, at which point he can also understand his speech. Or let those who believe and through these things construct the argument about nature tell us whether they were still able to hear when they were deaf, whom he later healed, or were they unable to hear? Since it is clear that "they were unable," it is evident that one can transition from being unable to hear the words of Jesus to being able to hear them, and not due to an incurable nature where one cannot hear. These things should particularly be applied to the heterodox, who delight in allegories and interpret the stories of healings as concerning the healing of the soul, relieved by Jesus from every disease and every weakness. I think that hearing now pertains to understanding the things being spoken, and knowing pertains to apprehending them with assent, enlightened by the light of understanding regarding the things being spoken. However, Heracleon assumes that the reason they could neither hear Jesus' word nor understand his speech is given in "You are of your father the devil."