{"author":"Historical editor/translator (individual note author unspecified)","date_end":1895,"date_label":"1895 (historical English edition; transcription printing date uncertain)","date_start":1895,"edition_year":1895,"edition_year_basis":"Original NPNF Series II Volume VIII title and copyright, 1895; transcription physical printing year unknown","id":"ws-library-full-note:41026ff6c0c7e4bf2f35:cite_note-120","is_genuine_commentary_verified":false,"license_url":"https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Reusing_Wikisource_content","public_import_allowed":true,"publication_location":"source-library","record_type":"editorial-footnote","references":[],"rights_approved":true,"section":"Chapter uncertain; original source section: Dogmatic, editorial note cite_note-120","semantic_kind_reviewed":false,"source_context":["“If it is the incarnate Lord who says ‘I am the way,’ and ‘No man cometh unto the Father but by me,’ it is He Himself Who said, ‘The Lord created me beginning of ways.’ The word is also used of the creation and making of a begotten being, as ‘I have created a man through the Lord,’ and again ‘He begat sons and daughters,’ and so David, ‘Create in me a clean heart, O God,’ not asking for another, but for the cleansing of the heart he had. And a new creature is spoken of, not as though another creation came into being, but because the enlightened are established in better works. If the Father created the Son for works, He created Him not on account of Himself, but on account of the works. But that which comes into being on account of something else, and not on its own account, is either a part of that on account of which it came into being, or is inferior. The Saviour will then be either a part of the creature, or inferior to the creature. We must understand the passage of the manhood. And it might be said that Solomon uttered these words of the same wisdom whereof the Apostle makes mention in the passage ‘For after that in the wisdom of God, the world by wisdom knew not God.’ It must moreover be borne in mind that the speaker is not a prophet, but a writer of proverbs. Now proverbs are figures of other things, not the actual things which are uttered. If it was God the Son Who said, ‘The Lord created me,’ He would rather have said, ‘The Father created me.’ Nowhere did He call Him Lord, but always Father. The word ‘begot,’ then, must be understood in reference to God the Son, and the word created, in reference to Him who took on Him the form of a servant. In all these cases we do not mention two, God apart and man apart (for He was One), but in thought we take into account the nature of each. Peter had not two in his mind when he said, ‘Christ hath suffered for us in the flesh.’ If, they argue, the Son is a thing begotten and not a thing made, how does Scripture say, ‘Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God hath made that same Jesus, Whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ’? We must also say here that this was spoken according to the flesh about the Son of Man; just as the angel who announced the glad tidings to the shepherds says, ‘To you is born to-day a Saviour, Who is Christ the Lord.’ The word ‘to-day’ could never be understood of Him Who was before the ages. This is more clearly shewn by what comes afterwards where it is said, ‘That same Jesus whom ye have crucified.’ If when the Son was born He was then made wisdom, it is untrue that He was ‘the power of God and the wisdom of God.’ His wisdom did not come into being, but existed always. And so, as though of the Father, it is said by David, ‘Be thou, God, my defender,’ and again, ‘thou art become my salvation,’ and so Paul, ‘Let God be true, but every man a liar.’ Thus the Lord ‘of God is made unto us wisdom and sanctification and redemption.’ Now when the Father was made defender and true, He was not a thing made; and similarly when the Son was made wisdom and sanctification, He was not a thing made. If it is true that there is one God the Father, it is assuredly also true that there is one Lord Jesus Christ the Saviour. According to them the Saviour is not God nor the Father Lord, and it is written in vain, ‘the Lord said unto my Lord.’ False is the statement, ‘Therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee.’ False too, ‘The Lord rained from the Lord.’ False, ‘God created in the image of God,’ and ‘Who is God save the Lord?’ and ‘Who is a God save our God.’ False the statement of John that ‘the Word was God and the Word was with God;’ and the words of Thomas of the Son, ‘my Lord and my God.’ The distinctions, then, ought to be referred to creatures and to those who are falsely and not properly called gods, and not to the Father and to the Son.”"],"source_library_url":"/library/41026ff6c0c7e4bf2f35/#ws-library-full-note:41026ff6c0c7e4bf2f35:cite_note-120","source_url":"https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Nicene_and_Post-Nicene_Fathers:_Series_II/Volume_VIII/Prolegomena/Works/Dogmatic#cite_note-120","translator":"Blomfield Jackson (editorial survey author), Charles Hole (proof revision and suggestions)","verification":{"proof_file":"raw/review/source-library-note-batch-0056/proof-records.jsonl","proof_file_sha256":"e0df170d421dcd73bd0a76f61768b09f25dd2e36668f01c873ba3f2300ffa8a2","proof_record_id":"ws-library-full-note:41026ff6c0c7e4bf2f35:cite_note-120"},"verified":true,"work":"Prolegomena","work_id":"ws-npnf2-8-basil-selection-41026ff6c0c7e4bf2f35"}