Thomas Aquinas Commentary John 1:3-4

"All things were made through him; and without him was not anything made that hath been made. In him was life; and the life was the light of men." — John 1:3-4 (ASV)

1. After the Evangelist has told of the existence and nature of the divine Word, as far as it can be told by man, he then shows the might of His power.

   First, he shows His power with respect to all things that come into existence.

   Second, especially with respect to man, at the words and the life was the light of men.

   As to the first, he uses three clauses. We will not distinguish these at present because they will be distinguished in different ways according to the different explanations given by the saints.

2. The first clause is all things were made through him, which is used to show three things concerning the Word. First, according to Chrysostom, it shows the equality of the Word to the Father.John Chrysostom, Commentary on Saint John, hom. 5, ch. 3.

   As stated earlier, the Evangelist rejected the error of Arius when he showed the coeternity of the Son with the Father by saying, he was in the beginning with God. Here he excludes the same error by showing the omnipotence of the Son, saying, all things were made through him. For to be the principle of all things that are made is proper to the great, omnipotent God, as it is said, whatever the Lord wills he does, in heaven and on earth (Psalms 134:6). Thus the Word, through whom all things were made, is God, great and coequal with the Father.

3. Second, according to Hilary, this clause is used to show the coeternity of the Word with the Father (The Trinity, 2.17).

   For since someone might understand the earlier statement, in the beginning was the Word, as referring to the beginning of creatures—that is, that before there were any creatures there was a time in which the Word did not exist—the Evangelist rejects this by saying, all things were made through him. For if all things were made through the Word, then time was also. From this we can form the following argument: if all time was made through Him, there was no time before Him or with Him, because He was before all these things. Therefore the Son and the Father are eternally coeternal.

4. Third, according to Augustine, this clause is used to show the consubstantiality of the Word with the Father.Augustine, Tractates on the Gospel of John (CPL 0278), tract. 1, par. 11; The Trinity (CPL 0329), bk. 1, ch. 6, par. 9.

   For if all things were made through the Word, the Word Himself cannot be said to have been made. If He were made, He would have been made through some other Word, since all things were made through the Word. Consequently, there would have been another Word through whom the Word of whom the Evangelist is speaking was made. This Word, through whom all things are made, we call the only-begotten Son of God, because He is neither made nor is He a creature. And if He is not a creature, it is necessary to say that He is of the same substance with the Father, since every substance other than the divine essence is made. But a substance that is not a creature is God. And so the Word, through whom all things were made, is consubstantial with the Father, since He is neither made, nor is He a creature.

5. And so in saying all things were made through him, you have, according to Chrysostom, the equality of the Word with the Father;John Chrysostom, Commentary on Saint John, hom. 5, ch. 3. the coeternity of the Word with the Father, according to Hilary; and the consubstantiality of the Word with the Father, according to Augustine.Augustine, Tractates on the Gospel of John (CPL 0278), tract. 1, par. 11.

6. Here we must guard against three errors.

   First, the error of Valentinus. He understood all things were made through him to mean that the Word offered to the Creator the cause for His creating the world, so that all things were made through the Word as if the Father’s creating the world came from the Word. This leads to the position of those who said that God created the world because of some exterior cause, which is contrary to Proverbs: the Lord made all things for himself (Proverbs 16:4).

   The reason this is an error is that, as Origen says, if the Word had been a cause to the Creator by offering Him the material for making things, he would not have said, all things were made through him, but on the contrary, that all things were made through the Creator by the Word.Origen, Commentary on John, bk. 2, par. 102–104.

7. Second, we must avoid the error of Origen. He said that the Holy Spirit was included among all the things made through the Word, from which it follows that He is a creature.Origen, Commentary on John bk. 2, par. 73. And this is what Origen thought.

   This is heretical and blasphemous, since the Holy Spirit has the same glory, substance, and dignity as the Father and the Son, according to what is said: make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit (Matthew 28:19). And, there are three who give testimony in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one (1 John 5:7). Thus when the Evangelist says, all things were made through him, one should not understand all things absolutely, but in the realm of creatures and of things made. It is as if to say: all things that were made, were made through Him. Otherwise, if all things were taken absolutely, it would follow that the Father and the Holy Spirit were made through Him, which is blasphemous. Consequently, neither the Father nor anything substantial with the Father was made through the Word.

8. Third, we must avoid another of Origen’s errors.

   He said that all things were made through the Word as something is made by a greater through a lesser, as if the Son were inferior to, and an instrument of, the Father.Origen, Commentary on John bk. 2, par. 70–72. But it is clear from many places in Scripture that the preposition ‘through’ does not signify inferiority in the one who is its grammatical object, that is, in the Son or Word. For the Apostle says, speaking of the Father, God is faithful, through whom you were called into the fellowship of his Son (1 Corinthians 1:9). If He through whom something is done has a superior, then the Father has a superior. But this is false. Therefore, the preposition through does not signify any inferiority in the Son when all things are said to have been made through Him.

9. To explain this point further, we should note that when something is said to be made through someone, the preposition ‘through’ denotes some sort of causality in its object with respect to an operation, but not always the same kind of causality.

   Since an operation, according to our manner of speaking, is considered to be intermediate between the one acting and the thing produced, the operation itself can be regarded in two ways. In one way, as issuing from the one operating, who is the cause of the action itself; in another way, as terminated in the thing produced. Accordingly, the preposition ‘through’ sometimes signifies the cause of the operation insofar as it issues from the one operating, but sometimes as it is terminated in the thing which is produced.

   It signifies the cause of the operation as issuing from the one operating when the object of the preposition is either the efficient or formal cause why the one operating is operating. For example, we have a formal cause when fire is heating through heat, for heat is the formal cause of the fire’s heating. We have a moving or efficient cause in cases where secondary agents act through primary agents, as when I say that the bailiff acts through the king, because the king is the efficient cause of the bailiff’s acting. This is the way Valentinus understood that all things were made through the Word: as though the Word were the cause of the maker’s production of all things.

   The preposition ‘through’ implies the causality of the operation as terminated in the thing produced when what is signified through that causality is not the cause which operates, but the cause of the operation precisely as terminated in the thing produced. So when I say that the carpenter is making a bench by means of a hatchet, the hatchet is not the cause of the carpenter’s operating; but we do say that it is the cause of the bench’s being made by the one acting.

   And so when it says that all things were made through him, if the through denotes the efficient or moving cause, causing the Father to act, then in this sense the Father does nothing by the Son, but He does all things by Himself, as has been said. But if the through denotes a formal cause, as when the Father operates by His wisdom, which is His essence, He operates by His wisdom as He operates by His essence. And because the wisdom and power of the Father are attributed to the Son, as when we say, Christ, the power of God and the wisdom of God (1 Corinthians 1:24), then by appropriation we say that the Father does all things by the Son, that is, by His wisdom. And so Augustine says that the phrase from whom all things is appropriated to the Father; through whom all things is appropriated to the Son; and in whom all things is appropriated to the Holy Spirit.Augustine, The Trinity (CPL 0329), bk. 6, ch. 10, par. 12. But if the through denotes causality from the standpoint of the thing produced, then the statement, the Father does all things by the Son, is not mere appropriation but is proper to the Word, because the fact that He is a cause of creatures is had from someone else, namely the Father, from whom He has His being.

   However, it does not follow from this that the Word is the instrument of the Father, although whatever is moved by another for some operation has the nature of an instrument. When I say that someone works through a power received from another, this can be understood in two ways. In one way, it can mean that the power of both the giver and of the receiver is numerically one and the same power. In this way, the one operating through a power received from another is not inferior but equal to the one from whom he receives it.

   Therefore, since it is the same power which the Father has and which He gives to the Son, and through which the Son works, when it is said that the Father works through the Son, one should not on that account say that the Son is inferior to the Father or is His instrument. This would be the case, rather, in those who receive from another not the same power, but another and created one.

   And so it is plain that neither the Holy Spirit nor the Son are causes of the Father’s working, and that neither is the minister or instrument of the Father, as Origen raved.Origen, Commentary on John, bk. 1, par. 104.

10. If we carefully consider the words, all things were made through him, we can clearly see that the Evangelist spoke with the utmost exactitude.

    For whoever makes something must preconceive it in his wisdom, which is the form and pattern of the thing made, just as the form preconceived in the mind of an artisan is the pattern of the cabinet to be made. So, God makes nothing except through the conception of His intellect, which is an eternally conceived wisdom, that is, the Word of God, and the Son of God. Accordingly, it is impossible that He should make anything except through the Son. And so Augustine says in The Trinity that the Word is the art full of the living patterns of all things.Augustine, The Trinity (CPL 0329), bk. 6, ch. 10, par. 11. Thus it is clear that all things which the Father makes, He makes through Him.

11. It should be remarked that, according to Chrysostom, all the things which Moses enumerates individually in God’s production of things, saying, and God said, ‘let there be light’ (Genesis 1:3), and ‘let there be a firmament’ (Genesis 1:6), and so forth, all these the Evangelist transcends and embraces in one phrase, saying, all things were made through him.John Chrysostom, Commentary on Saint John, hom. 5, ch. 1.

    The reason is that Moses wished to teach the emanation of creatures from God; hence he enumerated them one by one. But John, hastening toward higher things, intends in this book to lead us specifically to a knowledge of the Creator Himself.

12. Then he says, and without him was made nothing. This is the second clause which some have distorted, as Augustine says in his work, The Nature of the Good (25). Because of John’s manner of speaking here, they believed that he was using nothing in an affirmative sense, as though nothing was something which was made without the Word. And so they claimed that this clause was added by the Evangelist in order to exclude something which was not made by the Word. They say that the Evangelist, having said that all things were made through him, added and without him was made nothing. It was as if to say: I say that all things were made through Him in such a way that still something was made without Him, that is, the nothing.

13. Three heresies came from this. First, that of Valentinus. He affirmed, as Origen says, a multitude of principles, and taught that from them came thirty eras.Origen, Commentary on John, bk. 2, par. 100–101. The first principles he postulates are two: the Deep, which he calls God the Father, and Silence. From these proceed ten eras. But from the Deep and from Silence, he says, there are two other principles, Mind and Truth, and from these issued eight eras. Then from Mind and Truth, there are two other principles, Word and Life, and from these issued twelve eras, thus making a total of thirty. Finally, from the Word and Life there proceeded in time, the man Christ and the Church. In this way Valentinus affirmed many eras previous to the issuing forth of the Word.

    And so he said that because the Evangelist had stated that all things were made through him, then, lest anyone think that those previous eras had been effected through the Word, he added, and without him was made nothing, that is, all the preceding eras and all that had existed in them. All of these John calls nothing, because they transcend human reason and cannot be grasped by the intellect.

14. The second error to arise from this was that of Manichaeus, who affirmed two opposing principles: one is the source of incorruptible things, and the other of corruptible things. He said that after John had stated that all things were made through him, then, lest it be thought that the Word is the cause of corruptible things, he immediately added, and without him was made nothing, that is, things subject to corruption, which are called nothing because their being consists in being continually transformed into nothing.

15. The third error is that of those who claim that by nothing we should understand the devil, about whom is said: may the companions of him who is not dwell in his house (Job 18:15). And so they say that all things except the devil were made through the Word. In this way they explain, without him was made nothing, that is, the devil.

16. All these three errors, arising as they do from the same source—namely, taking nothing in a positive sense—are excluded by the fact that nothing is not used here in an affirmative, but in a merely negative sense. The sense is that all things were made through the Word in such a way that there is nothing participating in existence that was not made through Him.

17. Perhaps someone will object and say that it was superfluous to add this clause if it is to be understood negatively, on the ground that the Evangelist, in stating that all things were made through him, seems to have already said adequately enough that there is not something that was not made through the Word.

    The answer to this is that, according to many expositors, this clause was added for a number of reasons. One of these reasons is, according to Chrysostom, so that no one reading the Old Testament and finding only visible things listed by Moses in the creation of things would think that these were the only things made through the Word.John Chrysostom, Commentary on Saint John, hom. 5, ch. 1.

    And so, the Evangelist, after he had said, all things were made through him, namely, those that Moses listed, then added, and without him was made nothing, as though he were saying: none of the things which exist, whether visible or invisible, was made without the Word. Indeed, the Apostle also speaks in this way (Colossians 1:16), saying that all things, visible and invisible, were created in Christ. Here the Apostle makes specific mention of invisible things because Moses had made no express mention of them on account of the lack of education of that people, who could not be raised above the things of sense.

    Chrysostom also gives another reason why this clause was added.John Chrysostom, Commentary on Saint John hom. 5, ch. 1. For someone reading in the Gospel of the many signs and miracles worked by Christ, such as, the blind see, the lame walk, lepers are cleansed (Matthew 11:5), might believe that in saying, all things were made through him, John meant that only the things mentioned in those Gospels, and nothing else, were made through Him. So lest anyone suspect this, the Evangelist adds, and without him was made nothing. As if to say: not only were all the things contained in the Gospels made through Him, but none of the things that were made, was made without Him. And so, according to Chrysostom, this clause is added to bring out His total causality, and serves, as it were, to complete his previous statement.

18. According to Hilary, however, this clause is introduced to show that the Word has operative power from another.Hilary of Poitiers, The Trinity (CPL 0433), bk. 2, ch. 18. For since the Evangelist had said, all things were made through him, it might be supposed that the Father is excluded from all causality. For that reason he added, and without him was made nothing. As if to say: all things were made through Him, but in such a way that the Father made all things with Him. For without him is equivalent to saying, not alone, so that the meaning is: it is not He alone through whom all things were made, but He is the other one without whom nothing was made. It is as if he said: without him, with another working, that is, with the Father, was made nothing, as it says, I was with him forming all things (Proverbs 8:30).

19. In a certain homily attributed to Origen, which begins, the spiritual voice of the eagle, we find another rather beautiful exposition.St. Thomas' reference here is, in fact, to a work of John Scotus Eriugena (c. 800–877); see The Voice of the Eagle: The Heart of Celtic Christianity: John Scotus Eriugena's Homily on the Prologue to the Gospel of John, trans. Christopher Bamford (Great Barrington, MA: Lindisfarne Books, 2000), 8, p. 83.

    It says there that the Greek has thoris where the Latin has without. Now thoris is the same as ‘outside’ or ‘outside of.’ It is as if he had said: all things were made through him in such a way that outside Him was made nothing. And so he says this to show that all things are conserved through the Word and in the Word: he sustains all things by his powerful word (Hebrews 1:3).

    Now there are certain things that do not need their producer except to bring them into existence, since after they have been produced they are able to subsist without any further activity on the part of the producer. For example, a house needs a builder if it is to come into existence, but it continues to exist without any further action on the part of the builder. So lest anyone suppose that all things were made through the Word in such a way that He is merely the cause of their production and not of their continuation in existence, the Evangelist added, and without him was made nothing, that is, nothing was made outside of Him, because He encompasses all things, preserving them.

20. This clause is also explained by Augustine, Origen, and several others in such a way that nothing indicates sin.Augustine, Tractates on the Gospel of John (CPL 0278), tract. 1, par. 13. Origen, Commentary on John, bk. 2, par. 92–96.

    Accordingly, because all things were made through him might be interpreted as including evil and sin, he added, and without him was made nothing, that is, sin. For just as art is not the principle or cause of the defects in its products, but is through itself the cause of their perfection and form, so the Word, who is the art of the Father, full of living archetypes, is not the cause of any evil or disarrangement in things, particularly of the evil of sin, which carries the full notion of evil.

    The per se cause of this evil is the will of a creature, whether a man or an angel, freely turning away from the end to which it is ordained by its nature. Someone who can act by virtue of his art but purposely violates it is the cause of the defects occurring in his works—not by reason of his art, but by reason of his will. In such cases, his art is not the source or cause of the defects; his will is. Consequently, evil is a defect of the will and not of any art. To the extent that it is such a defect, it is nothing.

21. So then, this clause is added to show the universal causality of the Word, according to Chrysostom; His association with the Father, according to Hilary; the power of the Word in the preserving of things, according to Origen; and finally, the purity of His causality, because He is so the cause of good as not to be the cause of sin, according to Augustine, Origen, and a number of others.

22. Then he says, what was made in him was life; and this is the third clause. Here we must avoid the false interpretation of Manichaeus, who was led by this to maintain that everything that exists is alive: for example, stones, wood, men, and anything else in the world. He understood the clause this way: what was made in him, (comma), was life. But it was not life unless it was alive. Therefore, whatever was made in Him is alive. He also claimed that in him is the same as saying through Him, since very often in Scripture in him and through him are interchangeable, as in in him and through him all things were created (Colossians 1:16).

    However, our present explanation shows that this interpretation is false.

23. There are, nevertheless, a number of ways to explain it without error. In that homily, The Spiritual Voice, we find this explanation: what was made in him, that is, through Him, was life, not in each thing itself, but in its cause. For in the case of all things that are caused, it is always true that effects, whether produced by nature or by will, exist in their causes, not according to their own existence, but according to the power of their appropriate cause. Thus, lower effects are in the sun as in their cause, not according to their respective existences but according to the power of the sun. Therefore, since the cause of all effects produced by God is a certain life and an art full of living archetypes, for this reason what was made in him, that is, through Him, was life, in its cause, that is, in God.John Scotus Eriugena, The Voice of the Eagle 9.

24. Augustine reads this another way, as: what was made, distinguished from in him was life.Augustine, Tractates on the Gospel of John (CPL 0278), tract. 1, par. 17.

    For things can be considered in two ways: as they are in themselves, and as they are in the Word. If they are considered as they are in themselves, then it is not true that all things are life or even alive, but some lack life and some are alive. For example, the earth was made and metals were made, but none is life, none is living; animals and men were made, and these, considered in themselves, are not life, but merely living.

    Yet considered as they are in the Word, they are not merely living, but also life. For the archetypes which exist spiritually in the wisdom of God, and through which things were made by the Word, are life. Just as a chest made by an artisan is in itself neither alive nor life, yet the exemplar of the chest in the artisan’s mind prior to the existence of the chest is in some sense living, insofar as it has an intellectual existence in the mind of the artisan. Nevertheless it is not life, because it is neither in his essence nor is it his existence through the act of understanding of the artisan. But in God, His act of understanding is His life and His essence. And so whatever is in God is not only living, but is life itself, because whatever is in God is His essence. Hence the creature in God is the creating essence. Thus, if things are considered as they are in the Word, they are life.

    This is explained in another place.

25. Origen, commenting on John, gives another reading, thus: what was made in him; and then, was life.Origen, Commentary on John, bk. 2, par. 114.

    Here we should note that some things are said of the Son of God as such; for example, that He is God, omnipotent, and the like. And some things are said of Him in relation to ourselves; for example, we say He is savior and redeemer. Some things are said in both ways, such as wisdom and justice. Now in all things said absolutely and of the Son as such, it is not said that He was made; for example, we do not say that the Son was made God or omnipotent. But in things said in reference to us, or in both ways, the notion of being made can be used, as in, God made him our wisdom, our justice, our sanctification and redemption (1 Corinthians 1:30). And so, although He was always wisdom and justice in Himself, yet it can be said that He was newly made justice and wisdom for us.

    And so Origen, explaining it along these lines, says that although in Himself the Son is life, yet He was made life for us by the fact that He gave us life, as is said, just as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will come to life (1 Corinthians 15:22).Origen, Commentary on John, bk. 2, par. 128. And so he says the Word that was made life for us in himself was life, so that after a time He could become life for us; and so he immediately adds, and the life was the light of men.

26. But Hilary interprets it this way: and without him was made nothing, that was made in him, and later it says, he was life.Hilary of Poitiers, The Trinity (CPL 0433), bk. 2, ch. 20. For he says (in On the Trinity II) that when the Evangelist says without him was made nothing, one might be perplexed and ask whether there are still other things made by Him that were not made through Him, although not without Him, but with respect to which He was associated with the maker. This clause is added to correct this error. Therefore, so that this is not misunderstood, when the Evangelist says, all things were made through him, he adds, and without him was made nothing, that was made, in him, that is, through Him. The reason for this is that he was life.

    It is plain that all things are said to have been made through the Word inasmuch as the Word, who proceeds from the Father, is God. But let us suppose that some father has a son who does not perfectly exercise the operations of a man, but reaches such a state gradually. In that case the father will do many things, not through the son, yet not without him. Since, therefore, the Son of God has from all eternity the same life that the Father has—for as the Father has life in himself, so he has also given to the Son to have life in himself (John 5:26)—one cannot say that God the Father, although He made nothing without the Son, nevertheless made some things not through Him, because He was life.

    In living things which participate in life, it can happen that imperfect life precedes perfect life. But in life per se—which does not participate in life but is simply and absolutely life—there can be no imperfection at all. Accordingly, because the Word is life per se, there was never imperfect life in Him, but always perfect life. And so it is that without him was made nothing that was not also made in him, that is, through Him.

27. Chrysostom has a different reading and punctuation, thus: and without him was made nothing that was made.John Chrysostom, Commentary on Saint John, hom. 5, ch. 2. The reason for this is that someone might believe that the Holy Spirit was made through the Word.

    So to exclude this, the Evangelist says, that was made, because the Holy Spirit is not something that is made. And afterward follows, in him was life, which is introduced for two reasons. First, to show that after the creation of all things His causality was unfailing not only with respect to the things already produced, but also with respect to things yet to be produced. As if to say: in him was life, by which He could not only produce all things, but which has an unfailing flow and a causality for producing things continually without undergoing any change, being a living fountain which is not diminished in spite of its continuous outflow. In contrast, collected water that is not living water is diminished when it flows out and is used up. So it is said, with you is the fountain of life (Psalms 36:9).

    The second reason is to show that things are governed by the Word. For since in him was life, this shows that He produced things by His intellect and will, not by a necessity of His nature, and that He governs the things He made: the Word of God is living (Hebrews 4:12).

    Chrysostom is held in such esteem by the Greeks in his explanations that they admit no other where he expounded anything in Holy Scripture. For this reason, this passage in all the Greek works is found to be punctuated exactly as Chrysostom did, namely, and without him was made nothing that was made.