Anf-03 v.ix.xiii Pg 5 There was One “who was,” and there was another “with whom” He was. But I find in Scripture the name Lord also applied to them Both: “The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit Thou on my right hand.”7909
John i. 1.
Anf-03 v.ix.xvi Pg 4 to whom “is given by the Father all power in heaven and on earth.”7963
John i. 1.
Anf-03 v.ix.xix Pg 16 and in that beginning He was sent forth8003
John i. 1.
8003 Prolatus. by the Father. The Father, however, has no beginning, as proceeding from none; nor can He be seen, since He was not begotten. He who has always been alone could never have had order or rank. Therefore, if they have determined that the Father and the Son must be regarded as one and the same, for the express purpose of vindicating the unity of God, that unity of His is preserved intact; for He is one, and yet He has a Son, who is equally with Himself comprehended in the same Scriptures. Since they are unwilling to allow that the Son is a distinct Person, second from the Father, lest, being thus second, He should cause two Gods to be spoken of, we have shown above8004
8004 See ch. xiii. p. 107. that Two are actually described in Scripture as God and Lord. And to prevent their being offended at this fact, we give a reason why they are not said to be two Gods and two Lords, but that they are two as Father and Son; and this not by severance of their substance, but from the dispensation wherein we declare the Son to be undivided and inseparable from the Father,—distinct in degree, not in state. And although, when named apart, He is called God, He does not thereby constitute two Gods, but one; and that from the very circumstance that He is entitled to be called God, from His union with the Father.
Anf-03 v.ix.xv Pg 9 and not the Father with the Word. For although the Word was God, yet was He with God, because He is God of God; and being joined to the Father, is with the Father.7944
John i. 1, 2.
7944 Quia cum Patre apud Patrem. “And we have seen His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father;”7945
Anf-03 v.ix.xxi Pg 3 Now, since these words may not be taken otherwise than as they are written, there is without doubt shown to be One who was from the beginning, and also One with whom He always was: one the Word of God, the other God (although the Word is also God, but God regarded as the Son of God, not as the Father); One through whom were all things, Another by whom were all things. But in what sense we call Him Another we have already often described. In that we called Him Another, we must needs imply that He is not identical—not identical indeed, yet not as if separate; Other by dispensation, not by division. He, therefore, who became flesh was not the very same as He from whom the Word came. “His glory was beheld—the glory as of the only-begotten of the Father;”8010
John i. 1–3.
Anf-03 v.v.xx Pg 13 Now, since we have here clearly told us who the Maker was, that is, God, and what He made, even all things, and through whom He made them, even His Word, would not the order of the narrative have required that the source out of which all things were made by God through the Word should likewise be declared, if they had been in fact made out of anything? What, therefore, did not exist, the Scripture was unable to mention; and by not mentioning it, it has given us a clear proof that there was no such thing: for if there had been, the Scripture would have mentioned it.
John i. 1–3.
Npnf-201 iii.vi.ii Pg 9
Npnf-201 iii.xii.xxvi Pg 43
Npnf-201 iv.viii.xiii Pg 15
Edersheim Bible History
Lifetimes vii.xii Pg 15.2, Lifetimes vii.xii Pg 49.1, Lifetimes viii.iii Pg 47.1, Lifetimes viii.ix Pg 31.1, Lifetimes viii.ix Pg 35.1
Treasury of Scriptural Knowledge, Chapter 1
VERSE (1) -
Ge 1:1 Pr 8:22-31 Eph 3:9 Col 1:17 Heb 1:10; 7:3; 13:8