machine-draft · no human review7 passages · 2,014 words
Work dossier · summary and historical context
Summary
This encomium, attributed to John Chrysostom, honors John the Evangelist, celebrating his role as a theologian and proclaimer of the Logos. The homily likely dates to Chrysostom's Antiochene or early Constantinopolitan period (late 4th–early 5th century). It survives in Greek manuscripts and was used in Byzantine liturgy for John's feast days. The text employs rhetorical devices typical of Chrysostom, but its authenticity is debated due to its panegyric form and limited early attestation. The khazarzar edition lacks critical apparatus, hindering verification of textual variants.
This encomium illustrates the development of John the Evangelist's cult in late antique Christianity, particularly his veneration as a theologian of the Logos. It reflects post-Nicene Trinitarian theology and the rhetorical traditions of Chrysostom's school. The homily's attribution to Chrysostom, even if disputed, shows how authoritative names were used to promote hagiographical and doctrinal themes in Byzantine liturgy.
Historical context
The homily is attributed to John Chrysostom (c. 347–407), a prominent preacher and theologian of the Greek-speaking church. It likely originates from his Antiochene period (c. 386–397) or early years as bishop of Constantinople (398–404), when he delivered many festal sermons. The work belongs to the genre of encomium, a rhetorical panegyric common in late antique Christian literature, often used to honor saints on their feast days. The text was transmitted in Greek manuscripts, probably within Byzantine monastic and liturgical circles, and was read on the feast of John the Evangelist (26 September or 8 May). Its attribution to Chrysostom lent authority to later hagiographical traditions, though some scholars question its authenticity due to its panegyric style and lack of early external attestation. The khazarzar edition does not specify its manuscript base, limiting critical analysis.
term — a Coptic word and the rendering chosen for it
scripture — a biblical quotation or allusion
background — historical or institutional context the text presupposes
parallel — a parallel in another text or tradition
structure — the passage's function in the work
caution — uncertainty or a contested reading
sense — what the passage says
reception — later use — liturgy, canon law, daughter versions
Pipeline notes
coverageNo English translation could be identified: a language model asked twice could not name one, though it could not rule one out either. That is not proof that none exists — translations in dissertations, recent books and other modern languages are easily missed.
limitThe English is a machine draft produced passage by passage from the transcribed Coptic; no human has verified it. The commentary is model-written and cites only keys the pipeline could resolve.
registerRegister: homily in ancient Greek; the English keeps the liturgical formulae and the vocatives rather than normalising them.
structurePassages: 7 narrative.
scripture1 scriptural phrase match(es) noted: John 1:1.
sourceSource edition: khazarzar — Migne PG text (public domain); khazarzar host and the digitising project state no licence for this layer
An encomium by our father among the saints John Chrysostom on the holy John the Evangelist.
Again the great and only theologian John has come to us from heaven; again he proclaims the Word of God and prepares the whole world to look up to the heavens. John has come to us today from the heavens, the fisherman who cast the net and took the Gospel, John, who left the reed and took up the word, John, who taught the world doctrines higher than those of Moses. For Moses said: In the beginning God made the heaven and the earth; but this man, leaving aside the creatures, ascends to the Creator. In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God, a hypostatic Word, a Word revealed in later times and saving the world, a Word identical with the essence of the Father.
For just as the word in me, together with the essence, is hidden in the soul, but after being uttered through the mouth and taking the garment of speech, it is no longer concealed only in me but becomes known to all, so also the only-begotten, being in God and being of the essence of the Father, remained known in the beginning, but after putting on the flesh, he thus becomes manifest to all. For just as the word, having taken on speech, becomes known to all, so the Word of God, having put on the flesh, was revealed to all men through the flesh. But we take these images not because of the nature of God; for that nature is unsearchable, inconceivable, incomprehensible, and inscrutable.
For if the judgments of God are inscrutable, his ways, how does anyone dare to investigate that nature which is incomprehensible? But we take human images on account of our weakness, if we might be able to understand even in part the image of the heavenly wonders. For this the apostle also made known to us, saying that we know in part and we prophesy in part. For this reason we strive to take partial knowledge of the above from earthly and human things. But just as it is not possible to cut the word from the soul, but it is of the same substance, remaining in the soul and being conceived inseparably with it and not cut, but being of the same substance and of the same divinity as the Father, having come forth from the paternal treasuries, he came down clothing himself in flesh and bestowing upon all the wonders of the gift. This treasure John revealed to us today, John, who is more voiceless than fish and who sewed up the mouths of orators and philosophers. In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. Nowhere is "was not" but everywhere "was," nowhere "he made" but everywhere "was," after the "was" then the "he made," not concerning the creator but concerning the creatures. And that you may learn how "was" and how "he made," I speak, you count. In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. Nowhere is "was not" but everywhere "was"; this one was in the beginning with God; behold, he mentioned the Word a fourth time and not once did he say "came to be." What then after these things? All things came to be through him; he did not say here "was"; why? Because the discourse was about the creatures.
All things came to be through him. It says "came to be," and it did not say "was" but "came to be": all things came to be through him, and without him not one thing came to be. Again, "came to be": where it concerns God, "was"; where it concerns creatures, "came to be." In the beginning was the Word; from this, the Father also was made known according to the Old Testament.
For when Moses said to him, "If the sons of Israel say to me, 'Who sent you to us?' what shall I say to them?" and God said, "I am the one who is," the one who is sent me to you, the Father who is, the Son was in the beginning. But if someone contends, saying that it is not the same for the Father and for Christ, for concerning the Father it is "I am the one who is," but concerning the Son it is "in the beginning was," and "is" and "was" are not the same, I show the same appellation also for the Only-begotten: listen to the evangelist saying, "the only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father." Behold, the Gospel has one voice in the phrase "who is." And again the Apostle: "from whom the fathers and from whom Christ according to the flesh, the blessed God who is over all." Do you see how John secures you, having placed "was" concerning God, but "came to be" concerning creatures? For neither does "came to be" befit God, nor does "was" befit creation. In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God; this one was in the beginning with God. All things came to be through him, and without him not one thing came to be. When "came to be" descends to creatures, when "was" ascends to the Creator. And again, "life was": again it ascends to the Creator; it bears a ladder filled with many mysteries today.
When he ascends to God, he proclaims the "was"; when he descends to the creatures, he takes the "came to be." When he ascends to God, he puts aside the "came to be" and takes the "was." Just as someone coming before a king enters with a garment with which it is fitting to see the king, but if he comes before a private citizen, he enters with private clothing, so also the evangelist: when he ascends to God, he ascends with that expression which is fitting for God: "In the beginning was the Word"; when he descends to creation, he descends with the servile expression: "All things came to be through him, and without him not one thing came to be which has come to be"; "In him was life, and the life was the light of men"; and again: "Was the true light, which illumines every man coming into the world."
Where the Word was, where life was, where the light was, there the creatures came to be. A man came to be, sent from God, his name John. But some of the heretics dare to say: "There was once a time when the Father was, when the Son was not." How great is the interval between them, tell me? Time was the interval. But the Son made both the seasons and the times and the ages: "All things came to be through him." Listen to Paul saying: "In many ways and in many parts long ago God spoke to our fathers; in the last of the days he spoke to us in Christ Jesus, whom he appointed heir of all, through whom he also made the ages." How then can an age or time exist before the one who made the ages? Listen, therefore, also to the prophet saying: "The one who exists before the ages." The apostle says: "That through him he made the ages." The evangelist:
All things came to be through him: the prophet, the one who exists before the ages; and again the apostle: whether beginnings, or powers, or thrones, or lordships, all things were created through him and for him, and he himself is before all things. And do you dare to say that the Father was when the Son was not? But for this audacity they will have to give account on the day of judgment. For on the day of judgment he calls both John and those who say the "was" and those who say the "was not." Why? Because the Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son, so that all may honor the Son as they honor the Father. So on the day of judgment he calls both those who say the "was" and those who say the "was not." The record of each comes forth. What did you say? Read the confession. I said the "was." This one, what? This one said the "was not."
Who taught you to say the "was not"? John. Did you teach him to say the "was not"? I, no, master; but what? In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God; and this one was in the beginning; everywhere was, and nowhere the "was not" from human reasonings. What else did you confess? I, he says, that he is equal. That one, what?
That he is unlike. But you, where did you learn that he is equal? Who taught you? The evangelist, saying: For this reason, he says, they persecuted the Savior, because he not only abolished the Sabbath but also called God his own Father, making himself like God. This the apostle also taught, saying what? He did not consider it a usurpation to be equal to God, but he emptied himself. Whence then did he learn the "unlike"? From human reasonings. And you, what did you confess? I, that as the Son works. Who taught you? The evangelist, saying what? As the Father raises the dead and gives life, so also the Son gives life to whom he wishes. What then did you confess again? That he is like the Father in all things. Who said it? The evangelist: He who has seen me has seen the Father. What did that one say? That the Son is a creature. Who taught you? No one; but from human reasonings. See these blasphemous things, contrary to the heretics, they dare to baptize outside the command of Christ: "Go, teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." Let the heretics not dare to baptize in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the unlike, but their baptism becomes lame. But we, having one confession, receive one baptism, sanctified indivisibly by the Holy Trinity. Therefore, I exhort all of you to hold firmly to this foundation of the faith and never to apply to the Only-Begotten either "he became" or "he was not"; for these are beneath the ineffable and indescribable essence of the Only-Begotten. Why?
that he was in the beginning, and of this beginning there is nothing more original. For however far you ascend, however far you leap, however far you stretch, you find yourself beyond that beginning and not beyond the beginning: the Word was in the beginning, and you cannot ascend above it, for you cannot. But consider the blessed John, how, having abandoned bodily fishing, through these words he netted the whole world for salvation. The Word was in the beginning. How many tyrants strove to destroy this utterance and were unable? A wind came, it blew, the waves dashed against the building—that is, against the faith—and it did not fall; for it was a tower built upon the rock, struck from all sides and never collapsing.
Upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it. Kings rose up, tyrants rose up, wars were waged against Christians; tyrants and God-fighters often hurled their tyranny against Christians, but they were unable to erase a single hair of the Gospel. The Word was in the beginning; not sent along with time; a Word conquering all, instructing all, and extending with time, making earth heaven and presenting many sons to the Father by grace, to whom is due glory, honor, power, majesty, and magnificence together with the beginningless Father and his life-giving Spirit, now and always and unto the ages of ages. Amen.
Colophon. Source: khazarzar ·
licence: Migne PG text (public domain); khazarzar host and the digitising project state no licence for this layer ·
model: deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash:floor ·
provider: Relace ·
cost: $0.0044 ·
generated 2026-11-15.