The interpretation timeline
John 1:18 Douay-Rheims

No man hath seen God at any time: the only begotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.

A.D. 253 – 1871 12 witnesses 27 excerpts

Patristic

before A.D. 750
253
A.D.
Origen Patristic
c. A.D. 184–253
“(in Joan. t. vi. §. 2) Heraclcon asserts, that this is a declaration of the disciple, not of the Baptist: an unreasonable supposition; for if the words, Of His fulness have we all received, are the Baptist’s, does not the connexion run naturally, that he receiving of the grace of Christ, the second in the place of the first grace, and confessing that the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ; understood here that no man had seen God at any time, and that the Only Begotten, who was in the bosom of the Father, had committed this declaration of Himself to John, and all who with him had received of His fulness? For John was not the first who declared Him; for He Himself who was before Abraham, tells us, that Abraham rejoiced to see His glory.”
Source
367
A.D.
Hilary of Poitiers Patristic
c. A.D. 310–367
“(de Trin. vi. 39) The Truth of His Nature did not seem sufficiently explained by the name of Son, unless, in addition, its peculiar force as proper to Him were expressed, so signifying its distinctness from all beside. For in that, besides Son, he calleth Him also the Only-Begotten, he cut off altogether all suspicion of adoption, the Nature of the Only-Begotten guaranteeing the truth of the name.”
Source
407
A.D.
John Chrysostom Patristic
A.D. 347–407
“(in Joan. Hom. xiv. [xiii.] 1) Or thus; the Evangelist after shewing the great superiority of Christ’s gifts, compared with those dispensed by Moses, wishes in the next place to supply an adequate reason for the difference. The one being a servant was made a minister of a lesser dispensation: but the other Who was Lord, and Son of the King, brought us far higher things, being ever coexistent with the Father, and beholding Him. Then follows, No man hath seen God at any time, &c.”
Source
“(Hom. xv. [xiv.]) If the old fathers had seen That very Nature, they would not have contemplated It so variously, for It is in Itself simple and without shape; It sits not, It walks not; these are the qualities of bodies. Whence he saith through the Prophet, I have multiplied visions, and used similitudes, by the ministry of the Prophets: (Hosea 12:10) i. e. I have condescended to them, I appeared that which I was not. For inasmuch as the Son of God was about to manifest Himself to us in actual flesh, men were at first raised to the sight of God, in such ways as allowed of their seeing Him.”
Source
“(Hom. xv. [xiv.] 1) That very existence which is God, neither Prophets, nor even Angels, nor yet Archangels, have seen. For enquire of the Angels; they say nothing concerning His Substance; but sing, Glory to God in the highest, and Peace on earth to men of good will. (Luke 2:1) Nay, ask even Cherubim and Seraphim; thou wilt hear only in reply the mystic melody of devotion, and that heaven and earth are full of His glory. (Is. 6:3)”
Source
“(Hom. xv. [xiv.] 1.) In this complete sense only the Son and the Holy Ghost see the Father. For how can created nature see that which is uncreated? So then no man knoweth the Father as the Son knoweth Him: and hence what follows, The Only-Begotten Son, Who is in the bosom of the Father, He hath declared Him. That we might not be led by the identity of the name, to confound Him with the sons made so by grace, the article is annexed in the first place; and then, to put an end to all doubt, the name Only-Begotten is introduced.”
Source
“(Hom. xv. [xiv.] 2.) He adds, Which is in the bosom of the Father. To dwell in the bosom is much more than simply to see. For he who sees simply, hath not the knowledge thoroughly of that which he sees; but he who dwells in the bosom, knoweth every thing. When you hear then that no one knoweth the Father save the Son, do not by any means suppose that he only knows the Father more than any other, and does not know Him fully. For the Evangelist sets forth His residing in the bosom of the Father on this very account: viz. to shew us the intimate converse of the Only-Begotten, and His coeternity with the Father.”
Source
“(Hom. xv. [xiv.] 3) But what hath He declared? That God is one. But this the rest of the Prophets and Moses proclaim: what else have we learnt from the Son Who was in the bosom of the Father? In the first place, that those very truths, which the others declared, were declared through the operation of the Only Begotten: in the next place, we have received a far greater doctrine from the Only Begotten; viz. that God is a Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship Him in spirit and in truth; and that God is the Father of the Only Begotten.”
Source
“(Hom. xvi. [xv.] 1.) The text then, No man hath seen God at any time, applies not to the Father only, but also to the Son: for He, as Paul saith, is the Image of the invisible God; but He who is the Image of the Invisible, must Himself also be invisible.”
430
A.D.
Augustine of Hippo Patristic
A.D. 354–430
“(Ep. to Paulina [Ep. 147. al. 112. c. 5]) What is that then which Jacob said, I have seen God face to face; (Gen. 32.) and that which is written of Moses, he talked with God face to face; (Ex. 33) and that which the prophet Isaiah saith of himself, I saw the Lord sitting upon a throne? (Isa. 6.)”
“(Ep. to Paulina sparsim.) Now it is said, Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God; (Matt. 5:8) and again, When He shall appear, we shall be like unto Him, for we shall see Him as He is. (1 John 3:2) What is the meaning then of the words here: No man hath seen God at any time? The reply is easy: those passages speak of God, as to be seen, not as already seen. They shall see God, it is said, not, they have seen Him: nor is it, we have seen Him, but, we shall see Him as He is. For, No man hath seen God at any time, neither in this life, nor yet in the Angelic, as He is; in the same way in which sensible things are perceived by the bodily vision.”
Source
“(xii. on Gen. ad litteram c. 27) For unless any in some sense die to this life, either by leaving the body altogether, or by being so withdrawn and alienated from carnal perceptions, that he may well not know, as the Apostle says, whether he be in the body or out of the body, (2 Cor. 12:2) he cannot be carried away, and borne aloft to that vision.”
Source
“(to Paul. c. iv.) If we say, that the text, No oned hath seen God at any time, (1 Tim. 6:16) applies only to men; so that, as the Apostle more plainly interprets it, Whom no man hath seen nor can see, no one is to be understood here to mean, no one of men: the question may be solved in a way not to contradict what our Lord says, Their Angels do always behold the face of My Father; (Mat. 18:10) so that we must believe that Angels see, what no one, i. e. of men, hath ever seen.”
Source
“(to Paulina c. 7) Which indeed is true so far, that no bodily or even mental vision of man hath ever embraced the fulness of God; for it is one thing to see, another to embrace the whole of what thou seest. A thing is seen, if only the sight of it be caught; but we only see a thing fully, when we have no part of it unseen, when we see round its extreme limits.”
Source
“(in Joan. Tr. iii. c. 17) In the bosom of the Father, i. e. in the secret Presence1 of the Father: for God hath not the folde on the bosom, as we have; nor must be imagined to sit, as we do; nor is He bound with a girdle, so as to have a fold: but from the fact of our bosom being placed innermost, the secret Presence of the Father is called the bosom of the Father. He then who, in the secret Presence of the Father, knew the Father, the same hath declared what He saw.”
Source
“(Tr. iii. c. 18) Yet have there been men, who, deceived by the vanity of their hearts, maintained that the Father is invisible, the Son visible. Now if they call the Son visible, with respect to His connexion with the flesh, we object not; it is the Catholic doctrine. But it is madness in them to say He was so before His incarnation; i. e. if it be true that Christ is the Wisdom of God, and the Power of God. The Wisdom of God cannot be seen by the eye. If the human word cannot be seen by the eye, how can the Word of God?”
Source
604
A.D.
Gregory the Great Patristic
c. A.D. 540–604
“(xviii. Moral. c. 54. [88] rec. 28) It is plainly given us to understand here, that while we are in this mortal state, we can see God only through the medium of certain images, not in the reality of His own nature. A soul influenced by the grace of the Spirit may see God through certain figures, but cannot penetrate into his absolute essence. And hence it is that Jacob, who testifies that he saw God, saw nothing but an Angel: and that Moses, who talked with God face to face, says, Shew me Thy way, that I may know Thee: (Exod. 33:13) meaning that he ardently desired to see in the brightness of His own infinite Nature, Him Whom he had only as yet seen reflected in images.”
Source
“(xviii. Moral.) If however any, while inhabiting this corruptible flesh, can advance to such an immeasurable height of virtue, as to be able to discern by the contemplative vision, the eternal brightness of God, their case affects not what we say. For whoever seeth wisdom, that is, God, is dead wholly to this life, being no longer occupied by the love of it.”
Source
“(xviii. Moral. c. 54. 90. vet. xxxviii.) Some hold that in the place of bliss, God is visible in His brightness, but not in His nature. This is to indulge in over much subtlety. For in that simple and unchangeable essence, no division can be made between the nature and the brightness.”
“(xviii. Moral. c. 54. [91] vet. xxxviii.) Some however there are who conceive that not even the Angels see God.”
735
A.D.
Bede the Venerable Patristic
c. A.D. 672–735
“(in loc.) Farther, if the word declared have reference to the past, it must be considered that He, being made man, declared the doctrine of the Trinity in unity, and how, and by what acts we should prepare ourselves for the contemplation of it. If it have reference to the future, then it means that He will declare Him, when He shall introduce His elect to the vision of His brightness.”
Source

Scholastic

c. 1100 – 1500
1270
A.D.
Thomas Aquinas Catholic
1225–1274
“Above, the Evangelist showed how the apostles received grace from Christ, by his doing; here he shows how they received it from him by his teaching it. And concerning this he does three things. First, he shows the necessity of this teaching, saying "No man hath seen God at any time"; second, the doctor's capacity for teaching it, there "the only begotten who is in the bosom of the Father"; third, he sets forth the teaching itself, there "he hath declared." Now the necessity of this teaching was the lack of wisdom in men, which lack indeed the Evangelist implies through the ignorance of God that abounded among men, saying "No man hath seen God at any time." And this he does fittingly: for wisdom consists properly in the knowledge of God and of divine things. Whence Augustine says that wisdom is the knowledge of divine things, just as knowledge is of human things. But what the Evangelist here says, "No man hath seen God at any time," seems to be contrary to several authorities of divine Scripture. For it is said in Isaiah 6:1: "I saw the Lord sitting upon a throne high and elevated"; in 2 Kings 6:2 almost the same is found: "the name of the Lord sitting upon the Cherubim," etc.; Matthew 5:8, the Lord says: "Blessed are the clean of heart, for they shall see God." But if someone should answer to this last, saying that it is true that in the past no one saw him, but in the future he shall see, as the Lord promises, the Apostle excludes this, saying in 1 Timothy, last chapter, 16: "He dwelleth in light inaccessible, whom no man hath seen, nor indeed can see." But because the Apostle says "no man hath seen," someone could say that if he cannot be seen by men, at least he is seen by the angels, especially since God says in Matthew 18:10: "Their angels in heaven always see the face of the Father." But neither in this way can it be said, because, as is said in Matthew 22:30: "The children of the resurrection shall be as the angels of God in heaven." If therefore the angels see God in heaven, it is manifest also that the children of the resurrection see him too; 1 John 3:2: "When he shall appear, we shall be like to him, and we shall see him as he is." How then is this to be understood, that which the Evangelist says, "No man hath seen God at any time"? For the understanding of this, therefore, it must be known that God is said to be seen in three ways. In one way indeed through a subject creature, presented to bodily sight; as Abraham is believed to have seen God, when he saw three and adored one, Genesis 18; he adored one indeed, because the three, whom he had first reckoned to be men, and afterwards believed to be angels, he recognized the mystery of the Trinity. In another way through a represented imagination; and thus Isaiah saw the Lord sitting upon a throne high and elevated. Many visions similar to this are found in the Scriptures. And in yet another way he is seen through some intelligible species abstracted from sensible things, by those who through the consideration of the magnitude of creatures behold in their intellect the magnitude of the Creator, as is said in Wisdom 13:5: "For by the greatness of the beauty and of the creature the creator of them may be knowably seen," and Romans 1:20: "The invisible things of God are clearly seen, being understood by the creature of the world through the things that are made." In another way through some spiritual light infused by God into spiritual minds in contemplation; and in this way Jacob saw God face to face, Genesis 32:30, which vision, according to Gregory, was accomplished through lofty contemplation. But through none of these visions is the vision of the divine essence attained: for no created species, whether that by which the exterior sense is informed, or that by which the imagination is informed, or that by which the intellect is informed, is representative of the divine essence as it is. Now a man knows through its essence that thing which the species he has in his intellect represents as it is: therefore through no species is the vision of the divine essence attained. And that no created species represents the divine essence is clear: because nothing finite can represent the infinite as it is; but every created species is finite: therefore, and so on. Moreover, God is his own being; and therefore his wisdom and goodness, and whatever else, are the same; but through one created thing all these could not be represented: therefore the knowledge by which God is seen through creatures is not of his essence, but enigmatic and mirror-like, and from afar. Job 36:25: "All men see him," in some of the said ways, "but each one beholds afar off," because through all those knowledges it is not known concerning God what he is, but what he is not, or whether he is. Whence Dionysius says in the book on Mystical Theology, that the perfect mode by which God is known in the present life is through the removal of all creatures, and of the things understood by us. Now there were some saying that the divine essence will never be seen by any created intellect, and that it is not seen even by the angels or the blessed. But this proposition is shown to be false and heretical in three ways. First indeed, because it is contrary to the authority of divine Scripture; 1 John 3:2: "We shall see him as he is"; and below, 17:3: "This is eternal life, that they may know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent." Second, because the brightness of God is nothing other than his substance: for it is not shining by participation of light, but through itself. Third, because it is impossible that anyone attain perfect beatitude, except in the vision of the divine essence: because the natural desire of the intellect is to know and understand the causes of all effects known by it; which cannot be fulfilled unless the first universal cause of all things is known and understood, which is not composed of effect and cause, as are the secondary causes. And therefore to take away the possibility of the vision of the divine essence from men is to take away beatitude itself. It is necessary therefore for the beatitude of the created intellect that the divine essence be seen, Matthew 5:8: "Blessed are the clean of heart, for they shall see God." Now as regards the vision of the divine essence, three things must be attended to. First, because it will never be seen by the bodily eye, or by any sense, or by the imagination, since through the senses nothing is perceived except corporeal sensible things; but God is incorporeal; below, 4:24: "God is a spirit." Second, because the human intellect, so long as it is joined to the body, cannot see God, because it is weighed down by the corruptible body, so that it cannot reach to the summit of contemplation. And thence it is that the soul, the more it is free from the passions, and purged from the affections of earthly things, so much the more does it ascend into the contemplation of truth, and taste how sweet the Lord is. Now the highest degree of contemplation is to see God through his essence; and therefore, so long as man lives in the body subject of necessity to many passions, he cannot see God through his essence. Exodus, chapter 33:20: "Man shall not see me and live." For this therefore, that the human intellect may see the divine essence, it is necessary that it totally forsake the body; either through death, as the Apostle says, 2 Corinthians 5:8: "We are confident, and have a good will to be absent rather from the body, and to be present to the Lord"; or that it be totally abstracted through rapture from the bodily senses, as is read of Paul, 2 Corinthians, chapter 12:3. In the third way, that no created intellect, however much abstracted, whether through death, or separated from the body, seeing the divine essence, can in any way comprehend it. And therefore it is commonly said that, although the whole divine essence is seen by the blessed, since it is most simple and lacking parts, nevertheless it is not seen totally, because this would be to comprehend it. For this that I say, "totally," expresses a certain mode. Now any mode of God is the divine essence; whence he who does not see him totally does not comprehend him. Now someone is properly said to comprehend some thing in knowing it, who knows that thing as far as it is knowable in itself; otherwise, although he knows it, nevertheless he does not comprehend it. As he who knows this proposition, "a triangle has three angles equal to two right angles," by a dialectical syllogism, does not know it as far as it is knowable, and therefore does not know it totally; but he who knows it by a demonstrative syllogism knows it totally. For each thing is knowable to the extent that it has of being and truth; but the knower himself knows to the extent that he has of cognitive power. Now every created intellectual substance is finite: therefore it knows finitely. Since therefore God is of infinite power and entity, and consequently infinitely knowable, he cannot be known by any created intellect as far as he is knowable; and therefore to every created intellect he remains incomprehensible; Job 36:26: "Behold, God is great, exceeding our knowledge." But he alone, by comprehending, contemplates himself, because his power in knowing is as great as his entity in being. Jeremiah 32:18: "Most strong, great, powerful, the Lord of hosts is thy name, great in counsel, incomprehensible in thought." Thus therefore, according to the premises, is understood "No man hath seen God at any time." First thus: "no man," that is, no man, "hath seen God," that is, the divine essence, with the bodily and imaginary eye. Second, "no man" living in this mortal life has seen the divine essence in itself. Third, "no man," man or angel, "hath seen God," with the vision of comprehension. But what is said of certain ones, that they saw God with the eye, or while living in the body, is understood not through his essence, but through a subject creature, as has been said. Thus therefore it was necessary that we receive wisdom, because "No man hath seen God at any time." Now a sufficient doctor of this wisdom is proposed to us by the Evangelist, when he adds "the only begotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father," in which he shows us the capacity of the doctor himself through three things. Namely through natural likeness, and through singular excellence, and through most perfect consubstantiality. Through natural likeness, because the Son naturally has the likeness of the Father. And thence it is also that someone is called a son of God to the extent that he participates in the likeness of the natural Son; and to the extent that he knows, to the extent that he has of his likeness: because knowledge comes about through assimilation. 1 John 3:2: "Now we are the sons of God," and there follows: "When he shall appear, we shall be like to him, and we shall see him as he is." And therefore in this that the Evangelist says "Son," there is implied likeness, and aptitude for knowing God. But because this doctor knows God more specially than the other sons, therefore the Evangelist implies this through singular excellence, when he says "only begotten"; as if to say: this one knows God before the other sons. Therefore he is called "only begotten," because he is the natural Son, having the same nature and knowledge with the Father; Psalm 2:7: "The Lord said to me: Thou art my Son." But although he might know singularly, nevertheless the capacity of teaching could still be lacking to him, if he did not know totally; and therefore he adds a third thing, namely his consubstantiality with the Father, when he says "in the bosom of the Father": so that "bosom" is not taken as it is customarily said among men girded with a garment, but for the hidden place of the Father. For that we bear in secret which we carry in the bosom. Now the secret of the Father is because he exceeds every power and knowledge, since the divine essence is infinite. In that bosom therefore, that is, in the most hidden place of the paternal nature and essence, which exceeds every power of a creature, is the only begotten Son; and therefore he is consubstantial with the Father. And what the Evangelist here signified through "bosom," this David expressed through "womb," saying in Psalm 109:3: "From the womb before the day star," that is, from the innermost and hidden place of my essence, incomprehensible to every created intellect, "I begot thee," and consubstantial to me, and of the same nature and power and might and knowledge; 1 Corinthians 2:11: "The things that are of man, no man knoweth, but the spirit of man (...) and the things that are of God, no man knoweth, but the Spirit of God." He comprehends therefore the divine essence, which is his own. But the soul of Christ, in knowing God, does not comprehend him, because this is said only of the only begotten, who is in the bosom of the Father. Whence also the Lord says in Matthew 11:27: "No one knoweth the Father, but the Son, and he to whom the Son shall be willing to reveal him"; so that both are understood of the knowledge of comprehension, of which the Evangelist here seems to speak. For no one comprehends the divine essence, except God the Father alone, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Thus therefore is clear the capacity of the doctor for teaching. It is also to be noted, that through this that he says "who is in the bosom of the Father," is excluded the error of certain ones, saying that the Father is invisible, but the Son visible, and that he was not seen in the Old Testament. For, from this that he is in the hidden place of the Father, it is manifest that he is naturally invisible, just as the Father. And on account of this Isaiah 45:15 said of him: "Thou art truly a hidden God." And therefore in divine Scripture mention is made of the incomprehensibility of the Son; Matthew 11:27: "No one knoweth the Son but the Father, neither doth any one know the Father but the Son"; Proverbs 30:4: "What is the name of his son, if thou knowest?" Consequently the Evangelist implies the manner of handing down the teaching itself, when he says "he hath declared." For of old the only begotten Son manifested the knowledge of God through the prophets, who announced him to the extent that they were partakers of the eternal Word. Whence they said: "The word of the Lord was made," and so on. But now the only begotten himself, the Son, has declared it to the faithful. Isaiah 52:6: "I myself that spoke, behold I am here"; Hebrews 1:1: "God, who at sundry times and in many ways spoke in times past to the fathers by the prophets, last of all in these days hath spoken to us by his Son." And this teaching therefore surpasses all other teachings in dignity, authority and usefulness, because it was handed down immediately by the only begotten Son, who is the first wisdom. Hebrews 2:3: "Which having begun to be declared by the Lord, was confirmed unto us by them that heard him." But what did he narrate except one God? This same thing Moses also declared, Deuteronomy 6:4: "Hear, O Israel: the Lord thy God is one Lord." What therefore more than Moses? Much in every way, because the mystery of the Trinity, and many other things, which neither Moses, nor any of the prophets narrated.”

Reformation

c. 1500 – 1650
1637
A.D.
1567–1637
“No man hath seen God , &c. He gives the reason why neither Moses, nor any one else, but Christ alone, hath taught us the perfect truth concerning God and Divine things — because He alone hath seen God. It is as though he said, those things of which thus far I have been speaking, concerning God and the Word, are so sublime, that inasmuch as no mortal man (and therefore not Moses), except the Son of God, hath seen God, therefore that Incarnate Son alone is able perfectly to declare these things. Thus the Fathers passim ; who teach from this passage that Moses saw not the essence of God, but only a certain luminous substance assumed by an angel, in some manner representing to the eyes of Moses the glory of God. Thus S. Gregory says in the Catena : “ So long as we live here in mortal flesh, God may be seen by certain manifestations or images of Him, but as He is in His own nature He cannot be seen.” Tropologically, S. Gregory teaches (lib. 1 8, A/or. cap. ult. et. penult .) that no one can behold God and Divine things, unless he first die Digitized by V^rOOQie THE BOSOM OF THE FATHER* 53 to this world and its pleasures. For thus he expounds the words in the 18th chapter of Job, It is hid from the eyes of the thing: “ Because whosoever seeth wisdom, which is God Himself, dieth wholly to this life, lest he should be holden of its love. For no man seeth It who still liveth to the flesh, because no man can at the same time embrace God and the world. For he who seeth God ditfth in this respect, either in will, or in reality, for with his whole soul he is separated from the pleasures of this life.” The Only Begotten who is in the bosom ; Syriac, in the lap: S. Cyril, in the womb , for this is one meaning of the Greek *&.*•*. It is a figure of speech. For by bosom is signified the highest possible union of the Son with the Father. It means that the Son, who is most closely united, and consubstantial with the Father, is partaker of the wisdom of the Father, and conscious of His most secret counsels. And because He knoweth them most perfectly and intimately, therefore He alone is able most fully and plainly to declare them. And so in fact He has declared them. Thus SSw Chrysostom, Cyril, and Augustine. S. Athanasius observes (lib. 3 de Unica Trin . substant.) that this expression, the Only Begotten , , which is in the bosom of the Father, is made use of lest when it is said that He was made flesh, it should be supposed He was divided from the Father. For in truth He abideth, and is with the Father, even as He was in the beginning, and everlastingly. Listen to S. Chrysostom, who by this word bosom thinks it is signified that the Son not only sees, but comprehends the Father. “ Many,” saith he, M know God, yet none but the Only Begotten Son know of what nature His substance is. He has certain knowledge, sight, and comprehension, such as it is befitting a son to have of his father. For as the Father knoweth Me, He said, so also know I the Father (John x. 15). Observe therefore with what fulness of language the Evangelist speaks ; for when he says, no man hath seen God at any time , he does not go on to say, the Son who hath seen , hath declared Him, but He who is in the bosom of the Father hath declared Him. For he who only seeth hath not certain knowledge of the thing seen : but he who dwelleth in the bosom , to him are all Digitized by V^rOOQie 54 things plain and certain. Lest therefore when you hear, no man knoweth the Father save the Son (Matt. xi. 27), you should say that though He hath greater knowledge of the Father than others have, and yet knows not what His nature is, therefore the Evangelist says, * He is in the bosom of the Father.’ ” There is an allusion to the words of David concerning Christ in the noth Psalm, “From the womb, before the morning star, have I begotten Thee ” (Vulg.) That is, “From my fruitful understanding I have, as it were, as a Word spoken this, and as a Son have I begotten thee.” S. Jerome says, “ From the womb f />., of My substance, of My nature, of the very essence of My substance, have I begotten Thee.” So also Theodoret says, “ From the womb” that is, “ of My substance. For as human beings produce from the womb, and that which they bring forth hath the same nature as those who bring it forth, so art Thou begotten of Me, and Thou showest forth in Thyself the substance of Him who begat” More* over, Jerome himself translates this verse of the noth Psalm thus, “ The dew of Thy youth shall arise to Thee as it were from the womb ; * Aquila, “The dew of Thy childhood arising to Thee early from the womb.” It means, “ Of My Deity have I begotten Thee God : ” as it is in the Creed, “God of God.” So SS. Hilary, Ambrose, Augustine, Athanasius, and others against the Arians. For dew means in Hebrew the same as flower in English. “ Dew,” says R. Solomon, “ means sweetness, joyfulness, purity of heavenly generation, as it were dew bom of the heavenly dayspring.” He hath declared: that is, He hath dearly explained and set forth to His disciples, and through them to the whole world. The Greek is ifyyiiearo, which S. Chrysostom says means clearly to explain secret and hidden things , as Christ has explained to us the secrets of the Father concerning the Trinity and the Word, concerning the vocation of man, grace, resurrection, heavenly glory, and such like. “This word,” says S. Chrysostom, “sets forth more express and certain doctrine : wherefore also Christ is called the Word, and (the Angel) of great counsel.””
Source

Post-Reformation

c. 1650 – 1900
1771
A.D.
John Gill Reformed
1697–1771
“No man hath seen God at any time,.... That is, God the Father, whose voice was never heard, nor his shape seen by angels or men; for though Jacob, Moses, the elders of Israel, Manoah, and his wife, are said to see God, and Job expected to see him with his bodily eyes, and the saints will see him as he is, in which will lie their great happiness; yet all seems to be understood of the second person, who frequently appeared to the Old Testament saints, in an human form, and will be seen by the saints in heaven, in his real human nature; or of God in and by him: for the essence of God is invisible, and not to be seen with the eyes of the body; nor indeed with the eyes of the understanding, so as to comprehend it; nor immediately, but through, and by certain means: God is seen in the works of creation and providence, in the promises, and in his ordinances; but above all, in Christ the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person: this may chiefly intend here, man's not knowing any thing of God in a spiritual and saving way, but in and by Christ; since it follows, the only begotten Son; the word that was with God in the beginning. The Jerusalem Targum on Gen 3:22 says almost the same of the word of the Lord, as here, where it introduces him saying, "the word of the Lord God said, lo, the man whom I created, the only one in my world, even as I am, "the only one", (or, as the word is sometimes rendered, "the only begotten",) in the highest heavens. And to the same purpose the Targum of Jonathan, and also Jarchi, on the same place. The Syriac version here renders it, "the only begotten, God which is in the bosom of the Father"; clearly showing, that he is the only begotten, as he is God: the phrase, which is in the bosom of the Father, denotes unity of nature, and essence, in the Father and Son; their distinct personality; strong love, and affection between them; the Son's acquaintance with his Father's secrets; his being at that time, as the Son of God, in the bosom of his Father, when here on earth, as the son of man; and which qualified him to make the declaration of him: he hath declared him. The Persic and Ethiopic versions further add, "to us"; he has clearly and fully declared his nature, perfections, purposes, promises, counsels, covenant, word, and works; his thoughts and schemes of grace; his love and favour to the sons of men; his mind and will concerning the salvation of his people: he has made, and delivered a fuller revelation of these things, than ever was yet; and to which no other revelation in the present state of things will be added. Somewhat like this the Jews (n) say of the Messiah, "there is none that can declare the name of his Father, and that knows him; but this is hid from the eyes of the multitude, until he comes, "and he shall declare him". He is come, and has declared him: so Philo speaks of the "Logos", or word, as the interpreter of the mind of God, and a teacher of men (o), (n) R. Moses Haddarsan in Psal. 85. 11. apud Galatin. de Arcan, Cathol. ver. l. 8. c. 2. (o) De nominum mutat. p. 1047.”
Source
1832
A.D.
Adam Clarke Methodist
1762–1832
“No man hath seen God at any time - Moses and others heard his voice, and saw the cloud and the fire, which were the symbols of his presence; but such a manifestation of God as had now taken place, in the person of Jesus Christ, had never before been exhibited to the world. It is likely that the word seen, here, is put for known, as in Joh 3:32; Jo1 3:2, Jo1 3:6, and Jo3 1:11; and this sense the latter clause of the verse seems to require: - No man, how highly soever favored, hath fully known God, at any time, in any nation or age; the only begotten Son, (see on Joh 1:14 (note)), who is in the bosom of the Father, who was intimately acquainted with all the counsels of the Most High, he hath declared him, εξηγησατο, hath announced the Divine oracles unto men; for in this sense the word is used by the best Greek writers. See Kypke in loco. Lying in the bosom, is spoken of in reference to the Asiatic custom of reclining while at meals; the person who was next the other was said to lie in his bosom; and he who had this place in reference to the master of the feast was supposed to share his peculiar regards, and so be in a state of the utmost favor and intimacy with him.”
Source
1849
A.D.
1774–1849
“No man hath seen God. No mortal in this life by a perfect union and enjoyment of him. Nor can any creature perfectly comprehend his infinite greatness: none but his only begotten divine Son, who is in the bosom of his Father, not only by an union of grace, but by an union and unity of substance and nature; of which Christ said, (John xiv. 11.) I am in the Father, and the Father in me. (Witham)”
Source
1871
A.D.
1871
“No man--"No one," in the widest sense. hath seen God--by immediate gaze, or direct intuition. in the bosom of the Father--A remarkable expression, used only here, presupposing the Son's conscious existence distinct from the Father, and expressing His immediate and most endeared access to, and absolute acquaintance with, Him. he--emphatic; As if he should say, "He and He only hath declared Him," because He only can.”
Source
Modern · 1953 →

The in-app commentary runs from the Fathers to the early-modern record, then stops — that's where the public-domain sources end, not where the reading does. For the modern reading, follow the sources directly.