ગુજરાતી

Hilary of Poitiers

Nicene & Post-Nicene · AD 325–500

625 passages across 25 books of the Bible · Who was this?

On John

20 of 164
  1. John 14:6
    (vii. de Trin) For He who is the way doth not lead us into devious courses out of the way; nor does He who is the truth deceive us by falsehoods; nor does He who is the life leave us in the darkness of death.

    (as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274) Catena Aurea by Aquinas

  2. John 14:7
    (vii. de Trin) Or thus: When it is said that the Son is the way to the Father, is it meant that He is so by His teaching, or by His nature? We shall be able to see from what follows: If ye had known Me, ye should have known My Father also. In His incarnation asserting His Divinity, He maintained a certain order of sight and knowledge: separating the time of seeing from that of knowing. For Him, who He saith must be known, He speaks of as already seen: that henceforward they might from this revelation have knowledge of the Divine Nature which they had all along seen in Him.

    (as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274) Catena Aurea by Aquinas

  3. John 14:7
    How can knowledge of him be knowledge of the Father? For the apostles see him wearing the aspect of that human nature that belongs to him. But God is not encumbered with body and flesh and is unrecognizable by those who dwell in our weak and fleshly body. The answer is given by the Lord, who asserts that under the flesh that, in a mystery, he had taken, his Father’s nature dwells within him.… He makes a distinction between the time of seeing and the time of knowing. He says that from this time onward they shall know him whom they had already seen and so shall possess, from the time of this revelation onward, the knowledge of that nature on which, in him, they had gazed for so long.

    ON THE TRINITY 7.34

  4. John 14:7
    It was not the carnal body that he had received by birth from the Virgin that could manifest to them the image and likeness of God. The human aspect that he wore could be no aid toward the mental vision of the incorporeal God. But God was recognized in Christ by those who recognized Christ as the Son on the evidence of the powers of his divine nature. And a recognition of God the Son produces a recognition of God the Father. For the Son is in such a sense the image as to be one in kind with the Father and yet in a way that indicates that the Father is his origin.

    ON THE TRINITY 7.37

  5. John 14:8
    (vii. de Trin) A declaration so new startled Philip. Our Lord is seen to be man. He confesses Himself to be the Son of God, declares that, if He were known, the Father would be known, that, if He is seen, the Father is seen. The familiarity of the Apostle therefore breaks forth into questioning our Lord, Philip saith unto Him, Lord, show us the Father, and it sufficeth us.He did not deny He could be seen (non visum negavit), but wished to be shown him; nor did he wish to see with his bodily eyes, but that He whom he had seen might be made manifest to his understanding. He had seen the Son in the form of man, but how through that form He saw the Father, he did not know. This he wants to be shown him, shown to his understanding, not set before his eyes; and then he will be satisfied: And it sufficeth us.

    (as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274) Catena Aurea by Aquinas

  6. John 14:8
    When he hears the words, He that hath, seen Me hath seen the Father also, he jumps to the blasphemous conclusion of an inseparable and indistinguishable identity of nature in Father and Son, because he fails to see that the revelation of the birth is the mode in which Their unity of nature is manifested to us. For the fact that the Father is seen in the Son is a proof of the Son's Divinity, not a disproof of His birth. Thus our knowledge of Each of Them is conditioned by our knowledge of the Other, for there is no difference of nature between them and, since in this respect they are One, a reverent study of the character of Either will give us a true insight into the nature of Both.

    On the Trinity, Book 7

  7. John 14:9
    He rebukes the apostle for defective knowledge of himself. For previously he had said that when he was known the Father was known also. But what did they mean when he complained that for so long they had not known him? It means this: that if they had known him, they must have recognized in him the Godhead that belongs to his Father's nature. For his works were the peculiar works of God.

    ON THE TRINITY 7.36

  8. John 14:9
    (vii. de Trin) He reproves the ignorance of Philip in this respect. For whereas his actions had been strictly divine, such as walking on the water, commanding the winds, remitting sins, raising the dead, He complained that in His assumed humanity, the Divine nature was not discerned. Accordingly to Philip's request, to be shown the Father, Our Lord answers, He that hath seen Me, hath seen the Father.

    (vii. de Trin) He does not mean the sight of the bodily eye: for His fleshly part, born of the Virgin, doth not avail towards contemplating the form and image of God in Him; but the Son of God being known with the understanding, it follows that the Father is known also, forasmuch as He is the image of God, not differing from but expressing His Author. For our Lord's expressions do not speak of one person solitary and without relationship, but teach us His birth. The Father also excludes the supposition of a single solitary person, and leaves us no other doctrine but that the Father is seen in the Son, by the incommunicable likeness of birth.

    (as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274) Catena Aurea by Aquinas

  9. John 14:9
    I ask whether he is the visible likeness of the invisible God and whether the infinite God can also be presented to view under the likeness of a finite form. For a likeness must necessarily repeat the form of that of which it is the likeness. Let those, however, who want there to be a nature of a different sort in the Son determine what sort of likeness of the invisible God they wish the Son to be. Is it a bodily likeness exposed to the gaze and moving from place to place with human gait and motion? No, rather let them remember that according to the Gospels and the prophets both Christ is a Spirit and God is a Spirit. If they confine this Christ the spirit within the bounds of shape and body, such a corporeal Christ will not be the likeness of the invisible God, nor will a finite limitation represent that which is infinite.

    ON THE TRINITY 8.48

  10. John 14:10
    That the Father dwells in the Son proves that the Father is not isolated and alone. That the Father works through the Son proves that the Son is not an alien or a stranger. There cannot be one person only, for he speaks not of himself. And, conversely, they cannot be separate and divided when the one speaks through the voice of the other. These words are the revelation of the mystery of their unity.

    ON THE TRINITY 7.40

  11. John 14:10
    (vii. de Trin) For what excuse was there for ignorance of the Father, or what necessity to show Him, when the Father was seen in the Son by His essential nature, while by the identity of unity, the Begotten and the Begetter are one: Believest thou not that I am in the Father and the Father in Me? (vii. de Trin) But the Father is in the Son, and the Son in the Father, not by a conjunction of two harmonizing essences, nor by a nature grafted into a more capacious substance as in material bodies, in which it is impossible that what is within can be made external to that which contains it; but by the birth of a nature which is life from life; forasmuch as from God nothing but God can be born. (v. de Trin) The unchangeable God follows, so to speak, His own nature, by begetting unchangeable God. Nor does the perfect birth of unchangeable God from unchangeable God forsake His own nature. We understand then here the nature of God subsisting in Him, since God is in God, nor besides Him who is God, can any other be God. (vii. de Trin) Wherein He neither desires Himself to be the Son, nor hi…
    (vii. de Trin) For what excuse was there for ignorance of the Father, or what necessity to show Him, when the Father was seen in the Son by His essential nature, while by the identity of unity, the Begotten and the Begetter are one: Believest thou not that I am in the Father and the Father in Me?

    (vii. de Trin) But the Father is in the Son, and the Son in the Father, not by a conjunction of two harmonizing essences, nor by a nature grafted into a more capacious substance as in material bodies, in which it is impossible that what is within can be made external to that which contains it; but by the birth of a nature which is life from life; forasmuch as from God nothing but God can be born.

    (v. de Trin) The unchangeable God follows, so to speak, His own nature, by begetting unchangeable God. Nor does the perfect birth of unchangeable God from unchangeable God forsake His own nature. We understand then here the nature of God subsisting in Him, since God is in God, nor besides Him who is God, can any other be God.

    (vii. de Trin) Wherein He neither desires Himself to be the Son, nor hides the existence of His Father's power in Him. In that He speaks, it is Himself that speaks in His own person; in that He speaks not of Himself, He witnesseth His nativity, that He is God from God.

    (as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274) Catena Aurea by Aquinas

  12. John 14:10
    The words of the Lord, “I am in the Father and the Father is in me,” confuse many minds, and this is only natural since the powers of human reason cannot provide them with any intelligible meaning. It seems impossible that one object should be both within and without another, or that—since it is laid down that the beings of whom we are treating, although they do not dwell apart, retain their separate existence and condition—these beings can reciprocally contain one another so that one should permanently envelope and be permanently enveloped by the other whom yet he envelopes. This is a problem that human wisdom will never solve, nor will human research ever find an analogy for this condition of divine existence. But God can be what human beings cannot understand.

    ON THE TRINITY 3.1

  13. John 14:10
    In no other words than these that the Son has used can the fact be stated that Father and Son, being alike in nature, are inseparable. The Son, who is the way and the truth and the life, is not deceiving us by some theatrical transformation of names and aspects when he, while wearing manhood, styles himself the Son of God. He is not falsely concealing the fact that he is God the Father. He is not a single person who hides his features under a mask so that we might imagine that two are present. He is not a solitary being, now posing as his own Son, and then again calling himself the Father, adorning the one unchanging nature with varying names.… It is the height of impiety to believe that Father and Son are two gods. It is sacrilege to assert that Father and Son are singularly God. It is blasphemy to deny the unity, consisting in sameness of kind, of God from God.

    ON THE TRINITY 7.39

  14. John 14:11
    (vii. de Trin) That the Father dwells in the Son, shows that He is not single, or solitary; that the Father works by the Son, shows that He is not different or alien. As He is not solitary who doth not speak from Himself, so neither is He alien and separable who speaketh by Him. Having shown then that the Father spoke and worked in Him, He formally states this union: Believe Me that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me: that they might not think that the Father worketh and speaketh in the Son as by a mere agent or instrument, not by the unity of nature implied in His Divine birth.

    (as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274) Catena Aurea by Aquinas

  15. John 14:11
    His power belonged to his nature, and his working was the exercise of that power. In the exercise of that power, then, they might recognize in him the unity with the Father's nature. To the extent that anyone recognized him to be God in the power of his nature, that person would come to know God the Father who was present in that mighty nature. The Son, who is equal with the Father, showed by his works that the Father could be seen in him so that when we perceived in the Son a nature like the Father's in its power, we might know that in Father and Son there is no distinction of nature.

    ON THE TRINITY 9.52

  16. John 14:18
    Now how it is that we are in Him through the sacrament of the flesh and blood bestowed upon us, He Himself testifies, saying, "And the world will no longer see Me, but ye shall see Me; because I live ye shall live also; because I am in My Father, and ye in Me, and I in you." If He wished to indicate a mere unity of will, why did He set forth a kind of gradation and sequence in the completion of the unity, unless it were that, since He was in the Father through the nature of Deity, and we on the contrary in Him through His birth in the body, He would have us believe that He is in us through the mystery of the sacraments? and thus there might be taught a perfect unity through a Mediator, whilst, we abiding in Him, He abode in the Father, and as abiding in the Father abode also in us; and so we might arrive at unity with the Father, since in Him Who dwells naturally in the Father by birth, we also dwell naturally, while He Himself abides naturally in us also.

    On the Trinity, Book 8, Section 15

  17. John 14:20
    If he wished to indicate a mere unity of will, why did he set forth a kind of gradation and sequence in the completion of the unity, unless it were that, since he was in the Father through the nature of deity and we on the contrary are in him through his birth in the body, he would have us believe that he is in us through the mystery of the sacraments? And thus there might be taught a perfect unity through a mediator while, we abiding in him, he abode in the Father and as abiding in the Father abode also in us. In this way we might arrive at unity with the Father, since in him who dwells naturally in the Father by birth, we also dwell naturally while he himself abides naturally in us also.

    ON THE TRINITY 8.15

  18. John 14:20
    (viii. de Trin) Or He means by this, that whereas He was in the Father by the nature of His divinity, and we in Him by means of His birth in the flesh; He on the other hand should be believed to be in us by the mystery of the Sacrament: as He Himself testified above: Whoso eateth My flesh, and drinketh My blood, dwelleth in Me, and I in Him. (supr. 6:54)

    (as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274) Catena Aurea by Aquinas

  19. John 14:22-23
    For by this he testified that while the Spirit of Christ abides in us the Spirit of God abides in us. The Spirit of him who was raised from the dead is no different from the Spirit of him who raised him from the dead. For they come and dwell in us. I ask whether they will come as strangers associated together and make their abode or in unity of nature? No, the teacher of the Gentiles contends that it is not two spirits—the spirits of God and of Christ—that are present in those who believe but the Spirit of Christ, which is also the Spirit of God. This is no joint indwelling; it is one indwelling, yet an indwelling under the mysterious semblance of a joint indwelling. For it is not the case that two spirits indwell, nor is one that indwells different from the other. For there is in us the Spirit of God and there is also in us the Spirit of Christ, and when the Spirit of Christ is in us there is also in us the Spirit of God. And so, since what is of God is also of Christ, and what is of Christ is also of God, Christ cannot be anything different from what God is. Christ, therefore, is G…
    For by this he testified that while the Spirit of Christ abides in us the Spirit of God abides in us. The Spirit of him who was raised from the dead is no different from the Spirit of him who raised him from the dead. For they come and dwell in us. I ask whether they will come as strangers associated together and make their abode or in unity of nature? No, the teacher of the Gentiles contends that it is not two spirits—the spirits of God and of Christ—that are present in those who believe but the Spirit of Christ, which is also the Spirit of God. This is no joint indwelling; it is one indwelling, yet an indwelling under the mysterious semblance of a joint indwelling. For it is not the case that two spirits indwell, nor is one that indwells different from the other. For there is in us the Spirit of God and there is also in us the Spirit of Christ, and when the Spirit of Christ is in us there is also in us the Spirit of God. And so, since what is of God is also of Christ, and what is of Christ is also of God, Christ cannot be anything different from what God is. Christ, therefore, is God, one Spirit with God.

    ON THE TRINITY 8.27

  20. John 14:27
    If, then, the Father is greater through His authority to give, is the Son less through the confession of receiving? The Giver is greater: but the Receiver is not less, for to Him it is given to be one with the Giver. If it is not given to Jesus to be confessed in the glory of God the Father, He is less than the Father. But if it is given Him to be in that glory, in which the Father is, we see in the prerogative of giving, that the Giver is greater, and in the confession of the gift, that the Two are One. The Father is, therefore, greater than the Son: for manifestly He is greater, Who makes another to be all that He Himself is, Who imparts to the Son by the mystery of the birth the image of His own unbegotten nature, Who begets Him from Himself into His own form, and restores Him again from the form of a servant to the form of God.

    On the Trinity, Book 9, Section 54

All writers