TRV
Origen of Alexandria
Ante-Nicene · to AD 325
2,651 passages across 61 books of the Bible · Who was this?
On John
20 of 264-
John 11:42
He was about to pray for the resurrection of Lazarus when the only good God and Father anticipated his prayer and heard the words about to be spoken in his prayer. So the Savior begins by giving thanks in place of prayer in the hearing of the crowd.
-
John 11:42
“I knew that you hear me always,” which is reported by John as said by the Lord, makes clear that those who pray are always heard.
-
John 11:43
(t. xxviii.) His cry and loud voice it was which awoke him, as Christ had said, I go to awake him. The resurrection of Lazarus is the work of the Father also, in that He heard the prayer of the Son. It is the joint work of Father and Son, one praying, the other hearing; for as the Father raiseth up the dead and quickeneth them, even so the Son quickeneth whom He will. (5:21)
(as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274) Catena Aurea by Aquinas
-
John 11:44
Now, we ought to be aware that there are some Lazaruses even now who, after they have become Jesus’ friends, have become sick and died, and as dead persons they have remained in the tomb and the land of the dead with the dead who were later made alive by Jesus’ prayer. They were summoned from the tomb to the things outside it by Jesus with his loud voice. He who trusts in Jesus comes forth wearing bonds worthy of death from his former sins and still bound around his face, so that he can neither see nor walk nor do anything because of the bonds of death until Jesus commands those who are able to loose him and let him go.
-
John 11:45-46
The text has a certain ambiguity. Were those who went to the Pharisees and told them the things Jesus had done—were they from those many Jews who saw the things that he had done and believed in him and wished to win over those who were hostile to him by the announcement about Lazarus? Or were they the others not among the many who believed who, since what had happened did not bring about faith in Jesus, intended as much as possible to stir up the wicked jealousy in the Pharisees against him by the announcement about Lazarus? The Evangelist seems to me to be leaning toward this latter meaning.
-
John 11:45-46
(t. xxviii. 10.) Our Lord had said above, Because of the people that stand by I said it, that they may believe that Thou hast sent Me. It would have been ignorance of the future, if He had said this, and none believed, after all. Therefore it follows: Then many of the Jews which came to Mary, and had seen the things which Jesus did, believed on Him. But some of them went their way to the Pharisees, and told them what things Jesus had done. It is doubtful from these words, whether those who went to the Pharisees, were of those many who believed, and meant to conciliate the opponents of Christ; or whether they were of the unbelieving party, and wished to inflame the envy of the Pharisees against Him. The latter seems to me the true supposition; especially as the Evangelist describes those who believed as the larger party. Many believed; whereas it is only a few who go to the Pharisees: Some of them went to the Pharisees, and told them what things Jesus had done.
(as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274) Catena Aurea by Aquinas
-
John 11:47-48
(t. xxviii. c. 11.) This speech is an evidence of their audacity and blindness: of their audacity, because they testified that He had done many miracles, and yet thought that they could contend successfully against Him, and that He would have no power of withstanding their plots; of their blindness, because they did not reflect that He who had wrought such miracles could easily escape out of their hands; unless indeed they denied that these miracles were done by Divine power. They resolved then not to let Him go; thinking that they should thus place an impediment in the way of those who wished to believe in Him, and also prevent the Romans from taking away their place and nation. If we let Him thus alone, all men will believe on Him, and the Romans shall come and take away both our place and nation. (t. xxviii.) Mystically: It was fit that the Gentiles should occupy the place of them of the circumcision; because by their fall salvation came to the Gentiles. (non occ.). The Romans represent the Gentiles, being the rulers of the Gentile world. Their nation again was taken away, becaus…
(t. xxviii. c. 11.) This speech is an evidence of their audacity and blindness: of their audacity, because they testified that He had done many miracles, and yet thought that they could contend successfully against Him, and that He would have no power of withstanding their plots; of their blindness, because they did not reflect that He who had wrought such miracles could easily escape out of their hands; unless indeed they denied that these miracles were done by Divine power. They resolved then not to let Him go; thinking that they should thus place an impediment in the way of those who wished to believe in Him, and also prevent the Romans from taking away their place and nation. If we let Him thus alone, all men will believe on Him, and the Romans shall come and take away both our place and nation.
(t. xxviii.) Mystically: It was fit that the Gentiles should occupy the place of them of the circumcision; because by their fall salvation came to the Gentiles. (non occ.). The Romans represent the Gentiles, being the rulers of the Gentile world. Their nation again was taken away, because they who had been the people of God, were made not a people.(as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274) Catena Aurea by Aquinas
-
John 11:47
I think the phrase “this man” was used to diminish [Jesus’] glory because they did not believe what was said above about him being God.… Notice both the audacity and the blindness of their evil. It was audacious because they had already witnessed the fact that he had performed many signs, and yet they thought they could plot against him—as if he could do nothing when they plotted against him. On the other hand, they were no less blind either because it makes more sense to be on the side of someone who performs such miracles than [to be a part of] the plot of those who do not want to allow him to live. Or perhaps they thought that he performed signs that were not the result of divine power and that this was why he could not do all things or deliver himself from their plot. They resolved, therefore, not to let him live, thinking that they would place an impediment in the way of those who believed in him and also prevent the Romans from taking away their place and nation.
-
John 11:48
The mystical meaning of these words is that the Gentiles occupied the place of those of the circumcision, “For by their transgression salvation has come to the Gentiles to stir them to envy.” The Romans represent the Gentiles because they are the rulers of the Gentile world. But the nation also was taken away by the Gentiles because those who had been the people of God were made not a people, and those of Israel are no longer Israel, and their seed did not attain the status of becoming children.
-
John 11:48
The Romans did come and take away their place. For where is that which they call a sanctuary? And they also took away the nation, casting them out of the place and scarcely permitting them to be where they wish even in the Diaspora.
-
John 11:49-51
(t. xxx. c. 12.) a The character of Caiaphas is shown by his being called the High Priest of that same year; the year, viz. in which our Saviour suffered. Being the High Priest that same year, he said unto them, Ye know nothing at all, nor consider that it is expedient for us that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not. (non occ.). i. e. Ye sit still, and give no attention. Attend to me. So insignificant a thing as the life of one man may surely be made a sacrifice for the safety of the state. (tom. xxviii. c. 12.) Not every one that prophesieth is a prophet; as not every one that does a just action is just, he, for example, that does one for vainglory. Caiaphas prophesied without being a prophet, as did Balaam. Perhaps some will deny that Caiaphas prophesied by the Holy Spirit, on the ground that evil spirits may bear witness to Christ, as the one in Luke, who says, I know Thee who Thou art, the Holy One of God; (Luke 4:34) the intention of Caiaphas too being not to induce his hearers to believe on Him, but to excite them to kill Him. (c. 14.). It i…
(t. xxx. c. 12.) a The character of Caiaphas is shown by his being called the High Priest of that same year; the year, viz. in which our Saviour suffered. Being the High Priest that same year, he said unto them, Ye know nothing at all, nor consider that it is expedient for us that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not. (non occ.). i. e. Ye sit still, and give no attention. Attend to me. So insignificant a thing as the life of one man may surely be made a sacrifice for the safety of the state.
(tom. xxviii. c. 12.) Not every one that prophesieth is a prophet; as not every one that does a just action is just, he, for example, that does one for vainglory. Caiaphas prophesied without being a prophet, as did Balaam. Perhaps some will deny that Caiaphas prophesied by the Holy Spirit, on the ground that evil spirits may bear witness to Christ, as the one in Luke, who says, I know Thee who Thou art, the Holy One of God; (Luke 4:34) the intention of Caiaphas too being not to induce his hearers to believe on Him, but to excite them to kill Him. (c. 14.). It is expedient for us. Is this part of his prophecy true or false? If it is true, then those who contended against Jesus in the council, since Jesus died for the people, and they participate in the advantage of His death, are saved. This you say is absurd; and thence argue that the prophecy is false, and, if false, not dictated by the Holy Spirit, since the Holy Spirit does not lie. On the other side it is argued, for the truth of the prophecy, that these words only meant that He by the grace of God should taste death for all men; (Heb. 2:9) that He is the Saviour of all men, specially of them that believe. (1 Tim. 4:10) And in the same way the former part of the speech, Ye know nothing at all, is made out to be an assertion of the truth. They knew nothing of Jesus, who did not know that He was truth, wisdom, justice, and peace. And again, That one MAN. should die for the people. It was as man that He died for the people: in so far as He is the image of the invisible God, He was incapable of death. And He died for the people, in that He took upon Himself, made away with, blotted out the sins of the whole world. (c. 15.). And this spake he not of himself. Hence we see, what men say sometimes proceeds from themselves, sometimes from the influence of some power upon them. In the latter case though they may not be taken quite out of themselves, and in a certain sense go along with their own words, yet they do not go along with the meaning of them. Thus Caiaphas says nothing of himself; and therefore does not interpret his own prophcey, because he does not understand it. Thus Paul too speaks of some teachers of the law, who understand neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm. (1 Tim. 1:7)(as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274) Catena Aurea by Aquinas
-
John 11:51
I think we learn from this that we say some things on our own, by ourselves, where there is no power that inspires us to speak. But there are other things that we say when some power prompts us (as it were), dictating what we say, even if we do not fall completely into a trance and lose full possession of our own faculties, but seem to understand what we say. Now, it is possible for us, while we understand what we say on our own, not to understand the meaning of the words that are spoken. This is what happened in the case of Caiaphas the high priest. He did not speak on his own, by himself, nor did he understand the meaning of what he said, since it was a prophecy that was spoken.
-
John 11:53
(tom. xxviii. c. 17.) Inflamed by the speech of Caiaphas, they determined on killing our Lord: Then from that day forth they took counsel together to put Him to death. Was this then the work of the Holy Spirit, as well as the former, or was it another spirit which did both first speak by the mouth of a wicked man, and then excite others like him to kill Christ? Answer: It is not necessary that both should be the work of the same spirit. As some turn the Scriptures themselves, which were given for our good, to the support of bad doctrines; so this true prophecy respecting our Saviour was understood in a wrong sense, as if it were a call to put Him to death.
(as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274) Catena Aurea by Aquinas
-
John 11:53
Spurred on by Caiaphas's words, they took counsel together to kill the Lord. From what sort of spirit then did Caiaphas prophesy that Jesus was to die for the nation, and was the Holy Spirit at work in such a man, and thus became the cause of the plot against Jesus? Or was it not then the Holy Spirit but another spirit which was able both to speak in the impious man and to move those like him against Jesus?… Just as those who deliberately put the worst construction on things misrepresent the holy meaning of the Scriptures … so did the Pharisees and the chief priests. For they did not understand correctly the prophecy about our Savior that Caiaphas spoke. It is a prophecy that is true in that it is better for us that one man die for the people and the whole nation not perish. But they thought the meaning and intention of his counsel was something else, and so they took counsel together from that day to kill Jesus. Now, I say these things to answer the argument that it was the Holy Spirit who prophesied through Caiaphas. I personally do not in the least maintain that this was the case…
Spurred on by Caiaphas's words, they took counsel together to kill the Lord. From what sort of spirit then did Caiaphas prophesy that Jesus was to die for the nation, and was the Holy Spirit at work in such a man, and thus became the cause of the plot against Jesus? Or was it not then the Holy Spirit but another spirit which was able both to speak in the impious man and to move those like him against Jesus?… Just as those who deliberately put the worst construction on things misrepresent the holy meaning of the Scriptures … so did the Pharisees and the chief priests. For they did not understand correctly the prophecy about our Savior that Caiaphas spoke. It is a prophecy that is true in that it is better for us that one man die for the people and the whole nation not perish. But they thought the meaning and intention of his counsel was something else, and so they took counsel together from that day to kill Jesus. Now, I say these things to answer the argument that it was the Holy Spirit who prophesied through Caiaphas. I personally do not in the least maintain that this was the case but leave it to the readers to decide what one must recognize as correct concerning Caiaphas and whether he was moved by the Spirit. -
John 11:54
I think that these words and those like them have been recorded because the Word wishes to turn us back from rushing too hastily and irrationally to struggle unto death on behalf of the truth and to suffer martyrdom. For, on the one hand, it is right not to shun the confession or to hesitate to die for the truth if one has been caught in the struggle about confessing Jesus. But, on the other hand, it is no less right also not to provide an opportunity for such a great trial but to avoid it by every means, not only because the outcome of such an act is unclear to us but also so that we may not be responsible for causing those who would not, in actual fact, have become guilty of pouring out our blood, to have become more sinful and impious [by doing so], if we act in our own interest and take no thought for those who plot against us unto death. These people will experience greater and more serious punishment because of us if we are self-centered and do not consider the things of others and deliver ourselves to be killed when this necessity has not overtaken us.
-
John 11:54
Mystically, these words mean that long ago Jesus walked boldly among the Jews when the Word of God dwelled among them through prophets.… But now Jesus no longer walks boldly among the Jews but has departed from there.… He then entered the country near the desert of which it is said, “Many are the children of the desolate, more than of her who has a husband.” … Now Ephrem means “fruitfulness.” He was the brother of Manasseh, who stands for the elder people who were forgotten. For after the forgotten people were left behind, an abundant harvest from the Gentiles occurred.…“Jesus,” therefore, “no longer walks openly among the Jews but has departed from there into the country” of the whole world, “near the desert” of the church, “into the city that is called Ephrem,” that is, “fruitful,” “and there he has remained with his disciples.” And up to this moment, Jesus is with his disciples near the desert in the city called Ephrem, for he is present in “fruitfulness.” And at the birth, indeed, of this Ephrem, our Lord, magistrate of the grain, who begot him, who humbled himself and became obe…
Mystically, these words mean that long ago Jesus walked boldly among the Jews when the Word of God dwelled among them through prophets.… But now Jesus no longer walks boldly among the Jews but has departed from there.… He then entered the country near the desert of which it is said, “Many are the children of the desolate, more than of her who has a husband.” … Now Ephrem means “fruitfulness.” He was the brother of Manasseh, who stands for the elder people who were forgotten. For after the forgotten people were left behind, an abundant harvest from the Gentiles occurred.…“Jesus,” therefore, “no longer walks openly among the Jews but has departed from there into the country” of the whole world, “near the desert” of the church, “into the city that is called Ephrem,” that is, “fruitful,” “and there he has remained with his disciples.” And up to this moment, Jesus is with his disciples near the desert in the city called Ephrem, for he is present in “fruitfulness.” And at the birth, indeed, of this Ephrem, our Lord, magistrate of the grain, who begot him, who humbled himself and became obedient unto death, even death of the cross, might say, “God increased me in the land of my humility.” -
John 11:55
But the true purification was not before the Pasch but during the Pasch, when Jesus died as the Lamb of God for those who were purifying themselves and took away the sin of the world.
-
John 11:57
Observe how it has been testified that he has withdrawn, that we too might know to do such at the proper time. And notice indeed that neither the chief priests nor the Pharisees knew where he was, and because they did not know, they gave commands that if anyone should know where he was, he should reveal it to them and they would seize him. But you will say in addition that anyone who plots against Jesus does not know where he is. This is why they give commands that are other than those of God, “teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.”
-
John 12:3
Everything by which anyone is anointed is called oil. Ointment is one form of oil. So one form of ointment is costly; another is not. And so, every righteous action is called a good work. But one kind of good work is what we do for our fellow human beings or according to their [expectations]. Another kind of good work is something we do because of God and according to [his expectations]. Of the latter, one form is profitable to humanity; another serves only to the glory of God. For example, a person does something well under the influence of natural justice, not because of God, as sometimes even heathen or a lot of other people do. This kind of work is common oil, not of great fragrance, and yet it is duly accepted by God.…Peter says [in the Clementines] that good works done by unbelievers profit them in this world but not also in the other to the attainment of eternal life. This is only right, since they are not done because of God but because of human nature itself. But those who do them because of God, that is, believers, profit not only in this world but more especially in the on…
Everything by which anyone is anointed is called oil. Ointment is one form of oil. So one form of ointment is costly; another is not. And so, every righteous action is called a good work. But one kind of good work is what we do for our fellow human beings or according to their [expectations]. Another kind of good work is something we do because of God and according to [his expectations]. Of the latter, one form is profitable to humanity; another serves only to the glory of God. For example, a person does something well under the influence of natural justice, not because of God, as sometimes even heathen or a lot of other people do. This kind of work is common oil, not of great fragrance, and yet it is duly accepted by God.…Peter says [in the Clementines] that good works done by unbelievers profit them in this world but not also in the other to the attainment of eternal life. This is only right, since they are not done because of God but because of human nature itself. But those who do them because of God, that is, believers, profit not only in this world but more especially in the one to come. What believers do because of God is a kind of ointment that has a pleasing fragrance. But part of this very work that believers do because of God … is done for the welfare of humanity, such as the giving of alms, visitations of the sick, entertainments of strangers, humility, kindness.… Those who do these things to Christians anoint the Lord’s feet with ointment because they are the Lord’s feet with which he always walks—something that penitents are especially accustomed to do in the remission of their sins. This is a work called a fragrant ointment, but it is not the best. Rather, those who pursue charity, continue in fasting and prayer, have patience in adversities like Job, in temptations, those who are not afraid to confess the truth of God—all of which are things that are of no benefit to other people but only promote the glory of God—this is the ointment that anoints the head of the Lord Christ and from there runs down through his whole body, that is, the whole church. And this is very costly ointment whose fragrance fills the whole house, that is, the church of Christ. -
John 12:3
There seems then much likeness and some connection about the woman in the four Evangelists. Yet I would say to those who think that all wrote of the same woman, “Do you think that the very same woman who poured precious ointment on Jesus’ head, as Matthew and Mark have related, also anointed his feet with ointment (or “myrrh,” “myrrha”) as Luke and John have related?But it is not possible that the Evangelists should have contradicted one another in relating about the same woman, since they were perfected in the same understanding and the same spirit and the same mind, and they had been seeking to minister to the welfare of the church. But if anyone thinks it is the same woman in Luke and John, let him tell us if Mary was the woman who is said in Luke to have been a sinner in a city who, learning that Jesus had sat down to meet in a Pharisee’s house, brought an alabaster box of ointment and stood behind his feet weeping, washing his feet with her tears. It is incredible that Mary, whom Jesus loved, the sister of Martha, who had chosen the better portion, should be said to have been a…
There seems then much likeness and some connection about the woman in the four Evangelists. Yet I would say to those who think that all wrote of the same woman, “Do you think that the very same woman who poured precious ointment on Jesus’ head, as Matthew and Mark have related, also anointed his feet with ointment (or “myrrh,” “myrrha”) as Luke and John have related?But it is not possible that the Evangelists should have contradicted one another in relating about the same woman, since they were perfected in the same understanding and the same spirit and the same mind, and they had been seeking to minister to the welfare of the church. But if anyone thinks it is the same woman in Luke and John, let him tell us if Mary was the woman who is said in Luke to have been a sinner in a city who, learning that Jesus had sat down to meet in a Pharisee’s house, brought an alabaster box of ointment and stood behind his feet weeping, washing his feet with her tears.
It is incredible that Mary, whom Jesus loved, the sister of Martha, who had chosen the better portion, should be said to have been a sinner in the city. And the woman who, according to Matthew and Mark, poured precious ointment on Jesus’ head is not actually written to have been a sinner. But she who according to Luke is described as a sinner did not dare to reach to Christ’s head but washed his feet with her tears—as if scarcely worthy of his very feet—from sorrow that brought about sincere repentance with salvation.
The woman in Luke wails and weeps much so that she may wash Jesus’ feet. But she, who according to John is Mary, is introduced neither as a sinner nor as weeping. Perhaps then one will say that four different women are recorded by the Evangelists. But I rather agree that there were three. There was the one of whom Matthew and Mark wrote in complete agreement. There was also the woman of whom Luke wrote, while John wrote of yet another, differing from the other woman not only in what is written about the ointment but also because Jesus loved Mary and Martha—although she also is related to have been at Bethany like the woman in Matthew and Mark.