Беседа 5

John 1:3. Everything came into being through Him, and without Him nothing came into being that came into being. 1. How some heretics changed the meaning of the third verse of the first chapter of the Gospel of John through changes in punctuation. – 2. The absurd conclusions to which the opinion assumed by heretics leads that the Holy Spirit is created. – 3. The Son of God is equal to his Father. – The inexhaustible fruitfulness of the Creator. – God is not a complex being. – 4. That sinners are like drunken and furious people. “It is better to walk and be shown naked in the streets than covered and burdened with sins.” 1. Moses, at the beginning of the history of the Old Testament, tells us about sensory objects and counts them in detail. Having said: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth,” he then adds that light came into being, the firmament 8, the nature of the stars, all kinds of animals and everything else; Let us not dwell on each creation, so as not to delay. And the Evangelist John, having concluded everything in one saying, embraces with it both everything visible and that which is above the visible. Leaving what is known to his listeners, and raising his thoughts to more sublime objects and embracing all creativity - in general, he speaks not about creations, but about the Creator, Who brought everything from non-existence into being. Thus, Moses concerns only a smaller part of the creation (since he did not tell us anything about the invisible forces), and limited himself to that. And the Evangelist, hastening to ascend to the Creator himself, rightly passes over everything else, and what was said, as well as what was kept silent, by Moses is concluded in one short saying: “All things began to be through Him.” But lest you think that he speaks only of what was said by Moses, he adds: “and without Him nothing began to be that began to be,” that is, nothing created, visible or contemplated by the mind, received existence except by the power of the Son. After the word: “nothing” we will not put periods, as heretics do. They, wanting to prove that the Holy Spirit is a creature, read this: “what began to be, in it was life” (John 1:3-4). But such reading makes no sense. And, firstly, it was inappropriate to mention the Spirit here; and if the Evangelist wanted to mention, then why did he use such an unclear expression about Him? And where can we see what is said about the Spirit? Otherwise, based on this presentation of words, we can conclude that not the Spirit, but the Son came into existence through himself. But stop at this saying so that it does not pass you by. Let's read like them; Thus, the absurdity will be even more obvious to us: “what began to be, there was life in it.” They say that here the Spirit is called “life.” But, as can be seen, this very “life” is also “light”, because the Evangelist adds: “and life was the light of men” (John 1:4). So, in their opinion, “and the light of men” in the Evangelist means the Spirit. So what? When the Evangelist continues: “There was a man sent from God... to testify about the Light” (John 1:6–7), they must already necessarily admit that the Spirit is being spoken about here too. Whoever is called the Word above is also called God, life and light. Life, says the Evangelist, was the Word and this same life was light. So, if the Word was “life” and the Word “became flesh” (John 1:14), then life also “became flesh” - and we saw His glory, glory as the only begotten from the Father. Therefore, as soon as they say that the Spirit is called “life,” look at the absurdities that come out of this: it turns out that it was not the Son who became incarnate, but the Spirit, and that the Spirit is the only begotten Son. And if not, then, by avoiding this absurdity, they may fall into even greater absurdity in their reading. If they agree that it is said here about the Son, yet they do not put our punctuation marks and do not read as we do, then they will have to say that the Son came from himself - because if the Word is “life”, and “what began to be, in him was life”, then, as a result of their reading, the Word came from himself and through himself. Further, the Evangelist adds in passing: “and we have seen His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father” (John 1:14). Here, according to their reading, the Holy Spirit becomes the only begotten Son, because all this narrative refers to one and the same person. Do you see how thought is distorted when it deviates from the truth, and how many absurdities arise from this? So what? Isn’t the Spirit light, you say? Of course - light; but this is not about Him. So God is called spirit, that is, incorporeal; but not everywhere where the spirit is spoken of, of course, is God. And why are you surprised if we say this about the Father? We will not argue about the Comforter either, that wherever the spirit is spoken of, there is certainly a Comforter there, of course. Although this is His most distinctive name, the Comforter must not be understood wherever the word “spirit” is found. Christ is also called “God’s power” and “God’s wisdom”; but not everywhere where the power and wisdom of God is spoken about, of course, Christ. So it is here: although the Spirit enlightens, now the Evangelist is not talking about the Spirit. However, when we bring them to such absurdities, they, again strengthening their resistance to the truth, and still holding to their reading: “what began to be, in it was life,” they explain this in such a way that everything created was life. So what? And the execution of the Sodomites, and the flood, and Gehenna, and the like, is all this life? But we, they say, mean creation. But what we have now indicated, of course, also relates to creation. However, in order to fully expose them, let us ask them: tell me, is a tree life? Is stone life? Are these soulless and motionless objects life? And is man a perfect life? Who will say this? Man is not an original life, but only a being involved in life. 2. But look here, again, what absurdities. Let us draw conclusions in the same order in order to clarify all the nonsense. Thus, they attribute to the Spirit that which never befits Him in the least. And having started with this, they already attribute to people what, in their opinion, is really said about the Spirit. Let's look at this reading again. The creature here is called life; therefore, she is also light, and John came to testify about her. Why is he himself not light? It is said: “he was not light” (John 1:8). But he was one of the creatures, right? Why is he not light? How did “He was in the world, and the world came into being through Him”? Was creation in creation, and creation came into being through creation? How is it that “the world did not know Him” (John 1:10)? The creature did not know the creature? “And to those who received Him, He gave power to become children of God” (John 1:12). But enough of the laughter; I leave it to you to follow all these monstrous thoughts yourself, so that you don’t think that I was just saying this for fun, and so as not to waste your time. If those words were not spoken about the Spirit (as indeed they were not said, and as I have already shown), nor were they said about the creature, and despite that, they still adhere to their reading, then, finally, an even more absurd consequence should emerge from here - that, as we have already said before, the Son came into being through Himself. If the “true Light” (John 1:9) is the Son, and this light is also “life” and life was in Himself, then according to their reading such a conclusion is necessary. So let us leave it and turn to proper reading and explanation. What is the correct reading? With the words: “what began to be,” you need to finish the previous thought, and then begin the following words: “In Him was life.” These words mean the same as the previous ones: “without Him nothing began to be that began to be.” Of all that exists, he says, nothing happened without Him. Do you see how with this short addition the Evangelist eliminates all possible inconsistencies? Having said: “without Him nothing began to be” and adding: “what began to be,” he thus embraced all creatures, even intelligible ones, and excluded the Holy Spirit from them. Such an addition was necessary so that in response to his words: “Everything came into being through Him, and without Him nothing began to be,” someone would not say: “If everything happened through Him, then through Him the Spirit also came into existence.” I, he says, said that everything that was created came into being through Him, whether invisible, or incorporeal, or heavenly. That’s why I didn’t just say “everything,” but “everything that began to be,” that is, everything created. But the Spirit is not created. Do you see how precise the teaching is? The Evangelist only mentioned the creation of visible creatures, since Moses had already taught about this; The evangelist, having already been instructed in this subject, elevates people to higher creatures, that is, incorporeal and invisible, and completely excludes the Holy Spirit from among them. Paul, inspired by grace, said in a similar way: “For by him all things were created” (Col. 1:16). Here again the same accuracy is true, because the same Spirit controlled Paul’s soul. And so, so that no one excludes anything created from the creation of God, since there are invisible creatures, and on the other hand, so that no one includes the Comforter among them, Paul, bypassing the sensible and known creatures, counts the creatures of heaven and says: “Whether thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers” ​​(Col. 1:16). The particle “whether” expresses nothing else, just like those words: “Through Him all things began to be, and without Him nothing began to be that began to be.” And if it seems to you that the expression: “through Him” seems to diminish His dignity, then listen to what Paul says: “In the beginning You, O Lord, founded the earth, and the heavens are the work of Your hands” (Heb. 1:10). Thus, what is said by the prophet (Ps. 101:26) about the Father as the Creator, Paul speaks about the Son, depicting Him as nothing other than the Creator, and not as if He had the meaning of a mere auxiliary being. And if it is said here: “through Him,” then this is so expressed only so that someone would not consider the Son unborn. But that in relation to the creation He has a dignity in no way less than the Father, listen to Him about this: “just as the Father,” He says, “raises the dead and gives them life, so the Son gives life to whomever He will” (John 5:21). So, if in the Old Testament it is said about the Son: “in the beginning You, Lord, founded the earth” (Heb. 1:10), then His dignity as the Creator is obvious. If you say that the prophet spoke these words actually about the Father, and Paul only attributed to the Son what was said about the Father, then the same thing comes out. Yes, Paul would not have dared to attribute this to the Son if he had not been completely confident in the equality of honor (of the Father and the Son). It would be extremely daring to classify something that belongs to a nature incomparable with anything as a smaller and subordinate nature. 3. But the Son is not less and not inferior to the Father in essence. Therefore, Paul dared to say about Him not only the above words, but also something else. The expression: “from him,” which you recognize as exclusively worthy of the Father alone, Paul also uses about the Son, saying this: “and not holding fast to the head, from which the whole body, being joined and held together by joints and bonds, grows with the growth of God” (Col. 2:19). But he is not content with this either; and, on the other hand, they close your mouth, adding the expression: “by whom” to the Father, an expression that, according to you, means a lesser dignity: “God is faithful,” he says, “by whom you were called into the fellowship of His Son” (1 Cor. 1:9). Also: “according to his will.” And again: “For all things are from Him, by Him, and to Him” (Rom. 11:36). But not only is it said about the Son: “from this,” but also about the Spirit. So the angel said to Joseph: “Do not be afraid to accept Mary your wife, for what is born 9 in her is of the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 1:20). In the same way, the prophet does not refuse to apply the expression: “about him”, which refers to the Spirit, to God (the Father), saying: “In God we will create strength, and He will bring down those who oppress us” (Ps. 59:14). And Paul said: “always asking in my prayers that the will of God may someday prosper me to come to you” (Rom. 1:10); and the same expression applies to Christ: “About Christ Jesus.” We can find many such expressions, used indifferently, in Scripture; which could not be the case if the same being were not assumed everywhere. Also, do not think that the words: “All things came into being through Him” are talking about miracles: other Evangelists spoke about them. And after these words John adds: “He was in the world, and the world through Him began to be” (John 1:10), - the world, and not the Spirit, because He is not a creation, but is above every creature. But let's hurry further. Having said about creation: “All things came into being through Him, and without Him nothing came into being that was made,” John also adds to this the doctrine of providence in the following words: “In Him was life” (John 1:4). And he added these words: “In Him was life” so that no one would doubt how everything happened through Him. Just as in a bottomless spring, no matter how much water you draw, you will not diminish the source, so the creative power of the Only Begotten, no matter how much it creates or produces, does not decrease in the least. Or, better, I will use a comparison more characteristic of this force, I will call it light, just as the Evangelist himself says further: “and life was the light of men.” Just as light, even if it illuminates an innumerable multitude of objects, does not thereby diminish in any way in its luminosity, so in God, both before and after creation: the power does not diminish in the least, is not diminished or weakened in the least by the multiplicity of creation; but, even if a thousand more such worlds were to come into being, even if there were an infinite number of them, His power influences them all to not only produce them, but also to preserve them after creation. The name of life used here refers not only to creation, but also to the industry of preserving what has been created. In addition, speaking about life, the Evangelist lays the foundation for the doctrine of the resurrection and begins that wondrous gospel that, with the coming to us of life, the power of death is destroyed, that, after the illumination of light, there is no longer darkness, but life always abides in us, and death can no longer overcome it. So, it is quite possible to say about the Son what is said about the Father: “for in Him we live and move and have our being” (Acts 17:28). Paul expresses this in the following words: “For by Him were all things created, that are in heaven and that are in earth, visible and invisible;... and He is before all things, and by Him all things consist” (Col. 1:16-17). Therefore the Son is called both the root and the foundation. But when you hear that “in Him was life,” do not imagine Him as complicated, because He subsequently speaks about the Father: “For just as the Father has life in Himself, so He has given to the Son to have life in Himself” (John 5:26). In this regard, you will not say about the Father that He is complex; don’t talk about the Son either. Elsewhere it is said that “God is light” (1 John 1:5), also that He “dwells in unapproachable light” (1 Tim. 6:16). But all this is said not to give us an idea of ​​complexity, but to little by little raise us to the heights of dogma. In fact, since it was not easy for the people to understand how He has life in Himself, he first spoke about what was not so high, and then, having taught them, he raised them to more sublime truths. The one who said that He (the Father) “gave Him to have life,” then himself says: “I am life,” and also: “God is light.” What kind of light is this? The light is not sensual, but spiritual, enlightening the soul. Since Christ said: “No one can come to Me unless the Father draws him” (John 6:44), the Evangelist, prefacing these words, said that He is the one who enlightens, so that you, having heard something like this about the Father, would not attribute it only to the Father, but also to the Son: “Everything,” He says, “that the Father has, is Mine” (John 16:15). So, the Evangelist first teaches us about creation, then he speaks about the spiritual blessings given to us with the coming of the Savior, and means them in one word: “life was the light of men.” He did not say: “there was light” to the Jews, but to all people, because not only the Jews, but also the pagans received knowledge of Him, and this light is added to the fellowship of all. But why didn’t the Evangelist include angels here, but spoke only about people? Because the Evangelist now has a word about the human race, and because the Savior came to him to preach the good news. “And the light shines in the darkness” (John 1:5). Here both death and delusion are called darkness. Sensual light shines not in darkness, but when there is no darkness; but the preaching of the Gospel shone among the darkness of error that surrounded everything, and dispelled it. This light penetrated into death itself and defeated it, so that it delivered those already possessed by death from it. So, since neither death nor delusion has overcome this light, but it shines everywhere and shines with its own power, the Evangelist says: “and darkness did not overcome it.” Yes, he is irresistible and does not like to dwell in souls that do not want enlightenment. 4. But if it does not embrace everyone, you should not be embarrassed by it. God approaches us not under compulsion, not against our will, but according to our desire and goodwill. Do not close the doors to this light - and you will receive a lot of pleasure. And this light comes to us through faith and, having arrived, abundantly enlightens the one who receives it. And if you present him with a pure life, he will dwell in you constantly. “Whoever loves Me will keep My word,” says the Savior, “and We will come to him” (I and my Father) “and make our abode with him” (John 14:23). Just as no one can use the light of the sun without opening his eyes, so no one can participate in this enlightenment without completely opening the eyes of the soul and without refining them in all respects. How can this be done? Cleansing the soul from all passion. Sin is darkness and deep darkness; and this is evident from the fact that it is carried out recklessly and secretly. “Everyone who does evil hates the light and does not come to the light” (John 3:20). “For what they do in secret is shameful even to speak of” (Eph. 5:12). Just as in darkness we recognize neither friend nor enemy and do not recognize the properties of things at all, so it is in sin. A covetous person does not distinguish friend from enemy; an envious person looks at the person most favored towards him as an enemy; the accuser is equally armed against everyone - in a word: everyone who commits sin is no different from people who get drunk and go berserk, in the sense that they do not recognize the properties of objects. And just as at night it makes no difference to our eyes whether it is wood, or lead, iron, silver, or gold, or a precious stone, because there is not enough light to distinguish these objects, so a person who leads an unclean life does not comprehend either the virtue of chastity or the beauty of wisdom. After all, in the darkness, as I said, even precious stones do not reveal their beauty, not of themselves, but because of the ignorance of those who look. But this is not the only misfortune that befalls us when we live in sins; We then also live in constant fear. Just as those on a journey on a moonless night feel fear, even though nothing terrible has happened, so sinners cannot have boldness, even if no one denounces them; but, feeling remorse, they are afraid of everything, suspect everything, everything brings fear and horror to them, they look around at everything with fear, they tremble at everything. Let us escape such a painful life. And such torment will be followed by death, immortal death; then there will be no end to the punishment. Here, those who, as if in a dream, imagine unprecedented things are no different from the insane. This is how they imagine themselves rich without being rich; they think of luxury without having any pleasure; and they will not recognize, as they should, such a delusion, until they are freed from insanity, or until they shake off their sleep. This is why Paul commands everyone to be sober and watchful; Christ commands the same. He who is sober and awake, even if he is carried away by sin, immediately reflects it; and whoever sleeps or is mad does not feel what power sin has over him. Let's not sleep. Now it is not night, but day; therefore, “Let us conduct ourselves decently as in the day” (Rom. 13:13). There is nothing more shameful than sin. In this regard, it is not as bad to walk in nakedness as to walk in sins and crimes. Nudity is not yet such a crime - it often comes from poverty; but there is nothing more shameful and contemptible than sin. Let us imagine those who are brought to trial for theft and forgery: what shame and laughter covers them, as shameless, deceitful and arrogant people! It is unpleasant and difficult for us to endure having our outerwear put on us carelessly or inside out; even when we see this in others, we correct it; and when all of us and our neighbors walk on our heads, we don’t notice it. Tell me, what could be more shameful when a man approaches a slutty woman? Who deserves more ridicule than a quarrelsome, slanderous and envious person? Why does all this seem less shameful than walking naked? Only from habit. No one has ever allowed themselves to do this of their own free will; and everyone always dares to sin, without any fear. Of course, if someone entered the host of angels, in which nothing like this had ever happened, he would see how worthy of ridicule it was. But what am I talking about the host of angels? If anyone in the royal palace, having brought in a harlot, took advantage of her, or got drunk on wine, or allowed himself to do any other dishonorable act, such a person would be subjected to the most severe punishment. If such insolence is not tolerated in the royal palaces, all the more must we be subjected to extreme punishment if we dare to do such things in the presence of the omnipresent and all-seeing King. Therefore, I beg you, let us show modesty and purity in our lifestyle. We have a King who constantly sees all our deeds. And so that we are always illuminated in abundance by the highest light, let us attract its ray to ourselves. Then we will enjoy both present and future blessings, according to the grace and love of our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom and with whom be glory to the Father and the Holy Spirit forever and ever. Amen. The paragraphs in the text were arranged by us – Editorial staff of “ABC of Faith” In the original St. Chrysostom: second heaven. More precisely: “what was born in her.” – I.N. You might be interested in: