John 10:35Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

These words mean this: if those who received this title by grace incur no accusation when they call themselves gods...

See Jn 10:34. If even those to whom the Word of God came are gods, that is, I, for I am the Word of God, and I, having dwelt in them, granted them sonship, then all the more may I call Myself God without any fault. I am God by My nature, and I grant deification to others. Let the Arians and Nestorians be put to shame by these words. For Christ is the Son of God and God by essence and nature, not a creature. He grants deification to others, to whom the Word of God came, and is not Himself deified by grace. Clearly, by these present words He distinguishes Himself from those deified by grace. He shows that He granted them deification, being the Word of God and dwelling in them. For this is indicated by the words, "to whom the Word of God came," with whom He was, and in whom He dwelt.

"I said, You are gods," and so on.

Since the Father called certain men gods, this dignity must surely be understood as given to them, not natural. For there is only one God by nature. Therefore He necessarily sets Himself clearly over against them.

He does this so that He may not be reckoned one of them, clothed with the glory of the Godhead not by essence, but by acquisition, like the rest.

He shows Himself so far removed from their poverty that, when He appeared among them, they were called gods for this very reason alone. For He is the Word of God and the Father.

If the Word, by appearing among them, could illumine even men with the glory of the Godhead, how could He not be God by nature, who communicates this glory even to others?

He now reproves the Jews. They wished to stone Him, not because He said, "I and the Father are one," but in vain.

He says: If, by calling Myself God, I seem to you a blasphemer, then why, when the Father said in the Law to men, "You are gods," did you not condemn Him for blasphemy?

He says this not to provoke them to say anything against the Father, but to expose their ignorance of the Law and the God-inspired Scriptures.

Since the distance between those called gods and God by nature is exceedingly great, He teaches this distinction in the words cited.

For if those "to whom the word of God came" are called "gods," and are illumined with the honor of the Godhead, having received and made the Word of God dwell in their soul, can He fail to be God by nature for whose sake they are gods?

For "the Word was God" (Jn 1:1), according to John. It is He who bestowed this glory upon others.

If the Word of God, through the Holy Spirit, raises those in whom He dwells to grace above man and adorns them with divine honor, why, He asks, do you "say that I blaspheme," when I call Myself the "Son of God" and God?

By the work entrusted to Me by Him, I am witnessed to be God by nature. For "He who sanctified Me sent Me into the world" as "the Savior of the world" (1 Jn 4:14).

This belongs to God alone by nature, namely, the power to save men from the devil, from sin, and from corruption.

But if Divine Scripture says that the Son was sent by the Father, perhaps the heretic will immediately make this saying food for his error.

He may say: You refuse to call the Son less than the Father. Yet do you not see Him being sent by Him, as by one greater and higher?

What shall we answer, except that the term mission most properly and fittingly belongs to the state of humiliation?

For you hear Paul joining both things together, Christ's equality with God and His humiliation in the form of a servant.

He says that the Son was sent by the Father when He appeared of a woman and under the Law as man with us, although He was Lawgiver and Lord (Gal 4:4).

If the Son is understood as having appeared in the form of a servant, and then is said to have been sent by the Father, no harm at all is done to His being consubstantial with the Father.

Nor is any harm done to His being equal in honor and in no respect inferior.

For our expressions, when applied to God, require careful discrimination. They must not be understood as we are accustomed to use them of ourselves, but as befits the Divine and Supreme Nature itself.

What else can be done, if human language has no words sufficient to express the divine glory?

Therefore it is absurd, because of the weakness of human language and the poverty of expressions, to injure the dignity of the glory that surpasses all.

Remember the words of Solomon: "The glory of the Lord conceals a word" (Prov 25:2).

When we subject the glory of the Lord to exact investigation, we become like those who wish to measure heaven with the span of the hand (Is 40:12).

Therefore, when something is said of God in human fashion, it must be understood in a manner worthy of God.

Otherwise, what will you do when you hear David singing, "You who sit upon the Cherubim, manifest Yourself; stir up Your might, and come to save us" (Ps 79:2-3)?

Can the bodiless sit? Where is the God of all, whom he summons to come to us, the One who says through the prophets, "Do I not fill heaven and earth? says the Lord" (Jer 23:24)?

To what place will He come to us, who fills all things?

It is also written that certain men began to build a tower reaching to heaven, "and the Lord came down to see the city and the tower. And the Lord said, Come, let Us go down and there confuse their tongues" (Gen 11:5-7).

Where did the Lord come down? Or how does the Holy Trinity urge Itself to descend?

And how, tell me, did the Savior promise to send us the Comforter from heaven? To where, and from where, is He sent who fills all things?

For "the Spirit of the Lord has filled the world," as it is written (Wis 1:7).

Thus our expressions have meanings that surpass us when they are used of God.

You wish to understand something of these difficult matters, but your mind proves powerless to receive it. In that case, acknowledge your weakness.

Do not be ashamed, O man. Confess the infirmity of your nature. Remember the words, "Do not seek what is beyond your strength" (Sir 3:21).

When you direct your bodily gaze toward the disk of the sun, you immediately turn away, struck by the blinding brilliance of the light.

Know, then, that the divine nature also dwells in unapproachable light, unapproachable precisely to the mind of the inquisitive.

Therefore, when divine realities are expressed in human words, one must think nothing low. Rather, in the poverty of our expressions, as in a mirror, one must contemplate the wealth of the divine glory.

What, then, if the Son is sent by the Father? Will He therefore be less?

When light is sent from the body of the sun, does it have another nature, different from it, and less than it? Is it not absurd even to think this?

Thus the Son, being the Light of the Father, is sent to us as, for example, the sun sends forth its radiance.

David prayed for this when he said, "Send out Your light and Your truth" (Ps 42:3).

If it is the Father's glory to have Light, how can you call lesser that in which He is glorified?

The Son Himself says of Himself, "Him whom the Father sanctified and sent."

The word "sanctified" has many uses in Scripture. Thus what is dedicated to God is called sanctified, as He said to Moses, "Sanctify to Me every firstborn" (Ex 13:2).

That also is sanctified which is appointed by God for the accomplishment of some purpose of His.

Thus He speaks of Cyrus and the Medes when He wished to send them to conquer the land of Babylon: "Giants come to fulfill My wrath, rejoicing and at the same time causing distress. They are sanctified, and I lead them" (Is 13:3).

That also is sanctified which becomes a partaker of the Holy Spirit.

Therefore the Son says that He has been sanctified by the Father, as one appointed by Him for the ordering of life for the world and the destruction of its adversaries.

Or again, He says this because He was sent to be slain for the salvation of the world, since what is appointed as a sacrifice to God is also called holy.

We also call Him sanctified together with us, in human fashion, when He became flesh. For His flesh was sanctified when it received the Word united to it, not being holy by nature.

But that through which this takes place is sanctified by the Father, for the Godhead of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit is one.

Yet God is not in the Son as He is in each of the saints, whom He sanctifies by His indwelling.

Rather, the Son Himself is the power and wisdom of the Father, sanctifying all who partake of Him in the Spirit.

He Himself, again, is not holy by any participation, as we are. Nor is He called Son by grace, but He is the eternal offspring of the Father's essence.

Thus He sets Himself over against the gods by adoption, clearly as being Himself by nature what is bestowed upon them as grace.

Therefore it is said of Him, "Who is like You among the gods, O Lord?" For He has this dignity not by adoption, but by nature.

And again: "Who in the clouds shall be compared to the Lord, or who among the sons of God shall be likened to Him?" (Ps 85:8; 88:7).

Here the Psalmist speaks very clearly. Neither among the prophets, whom he figuratively calls clouds, nor among those raised to sonship by grace, can there be anyone equal to Him who is Son by nature.

Of us it is written, "I said, You are gods, and all of you sons of the Most High; but you die like men" (Ps 81:6-7).

Thus, if we do not use every diligence to withdraw from evil, we can very easily lose what we have received.

We have received by grace the name both of sons of God and of gods. This belongs to the Son by nature.

Therefore great and immeasurable is the difference between us, who are called sons by grace, and the natural and true Son.

John calls the Son "Word," assigning this name to Him in the proper sense and as a special designation of His being.

Conversely, if the name "Word" did not apply to the Son in the sense of nature and being, it would certainly have to express something else.

In that case one must determine why the Son, who exists by nature, is called Word, if this name does not indicate His being.

For example, the name carpenter, mason, or swift writer does not define what those so named are by nature, but indicates what occupation they have.

If, then, this name does not designate the being of the Son, and the title "Word" does not present Him as what He is by nature, we must say what occupation He has.

Why, then, do we marvel at the Evangelist in vain?

How could he be called a "Son of Thunder," as one who uttered something great and extraordinarily important, although Divine Scripture names the Son by many names?

But when he said "Word," he uttered something wondrous and extraordinary. He added nothing else to this name, as we see in the case of Paul: "Paul, an Apostle."

The name "Word" was sufficient to express the being of the Son.

He, therefore, is the true Word of the Father, and no other besides Him.

If the opponents of Christ imagined for this reason that the Son is not consubstantial with the Father, because the Father is not the Word and the Word is not the Father, then they divide the unity of nature by difference of names.

Let them tell us how our forefather Adam will be consubstantial with his descendants, when he himself can never be Abel, nor Abel Adam.

Difference of names does not abolish identity of being.

If this is true of originated and created nature, is it not impious to think otherwise of the uncreated Nature, which surpasses all created things?

Therefore, if He were of another essence, He would not be the true Word. Since He is consubstantial, He is the true Word.

"We are sons by adoption, ascending to this dignity above nature by the will of Him who has honored us with it, and receiving the name of gods and sons because Christ dwells in us through the Holy Spirit."

The Only-begotten is the sanctifier also of everything else that ascends to holiness by participation in sanctification.

Sacred Scripture speaks in different ways about the sanctification of something.

He is sanctified, that is, appointed to be sent into the world in order to save those who live in it.

Or understand by the sanctification of something its being set apart for sacrifice. For One died for all (2 Cor 5:14), according to the good pleasure of God and the Father.

Or He is said to be sanctified because He made His temple holy. For His flesh was not holy by its own nature, but was sanctified by receiving the holiness of the Word united to it.

For this reason also, I think, He spoke in this way.

In a scholion on Jn 10:19-21, there is a passage close in content. To the three meanings of the verb "sanctify" given here, another is added: sanctification as dedication to God, as in the case of Israel's firstborn.

Do you see how He sets Himself most plainly over against the gods by position, as being by nature what is given to them as a gift?

If the words of God were addressed to men so that they were called gods (Ps 81:6), how is the very Word of God, Who is with God, not God? If by God's words men become gods, and if they become gods by participation, is not that in which they participate God?

If kindled lamps are gods, is not the lamp that gives light God? If, warmed by a saving fire, they become gods, is not that which warms them God? You approach the light and are kindled, and you are numbered among the sons of God. If you withdraw from the light, you grow dark and fall into twilight. Yet this light does not approach itself, for it does not withdraw from itself. Therefore, if the words of God make you gods, how is the Word of God not God?

And how could there have been deification without the Word and before the Word, when He Himself says to the brothers of these heretics, the Jews: "If He called them gods, to whom the word of God came"? If all those named sons and gods on earth and in heaven were adopted and deified by the Word, and the Word is the Son Himself, then it is clear that all things are through Him. He is before all. Better yet, He alone is the true Son and the one true God from true God. He did not receive this as a reward for virtue, nor was He anything else. Rather, by nature, according to essence, He is Son and God, because He is the offspring of the Father's essence. Therefore there is no doubt whatever that, in likeness to the unchangeable Father, the Word also is unchangeable.

To the accusation that He, being a man, made Himself God, Jesus answered by appealing to Scripture, whose truth the Pharisees did not doubt. Scripture records the words of God: "I said, You are gods." Therefore, if God called those gods to whom He spoke such words, how do you say that I blaspheme by calling Myself the Son of God, I whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world (Jn 10:36)?

But His untroubled majesty disarmed them. "Many good works I have shown you from My Father," He said. "For which of them do you wish to stone Me?" They answered, "We do not wish to stone You for a good work, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a man, make Yourself God."

In His defense, the Savior appealed to Holy Scripture, where even God-enlightened men in general are called "gods" (Ps 81:6). All the more, then, may He call Himself "the Son of God," who proved by His teaching and His works His right to such a name.

"If He called them": He, that is, the law, that is, all the Old Testament Scripture, so calls them. "To whom the word of God came," that is, the indicated saying of God. "I said: You are gods." This saying does not refer to the time of the Psalmist, but expresses in general God's thought about the high dignity of the divine organs of God's authority among the people; cf. Ps 2:7. "The Scripture cannot be broken." It cannot lose its force, cannot become untrue or nonbinding; cf. Mt 5:19; Jn 5:18; Jn 7:23. Clearly, the entire force of the proof given by the Lord lies in this statement. The whole proof rests on it. At the same time, this saying of the Lord shows His complete reverence before the Old Testament Scripture in its entirety as indisputable truth. It shows His reverence before its full composition as the unalterable word of God. Consequently, this saying contains the teaching of the Lord Himself concerning the divine inspiration of the Old Testament Scripture in its full composition.

Verses 31-36. As before, the Jews took up stones to throw at Jesus for supposed blasphemy, Jn 8:57. "Many good works have I shown you from My Father; for which of them do you stone Me?" the Lord said to them. "Good works" are works of love, 1 Tim 6:18; Gen 44:4. They include the healing of various sick persons and the feeding of the hungry. The people bore witness of Him: "He has done all things well. He makes the deaf hear and the mute speak" (Mk 7:37). "I have shown from the Father" means by the power of the Father abiding in the Son. To show works is a Hebrew expression meaning to perform works, Ps 4:6; Ps 70:20; Ps 83:8. I have done many good works for you. For which of them do you wish to kill Me? What bitter lament, and what astonishing meekness, are in this question!

We see clearly that the chief accusation of the Jews lay in this: the Lord was revealing to them that He was the Messiah. In their answer they cannot deny that His works are great and good. Yet they plainly indicate that they do not wish to acknowledge Him as the Son of God.

For these narrow minds, unable to rise on the wings of faith, the Lord brings forward the conclusions of human logic. He reminds them of the words of Psalm 81, addressed chiefly to rulers and judges: "How long will you judge unjustly?" "I said, You are gods, and all of you sons of the Most High. But you shall die like men."