Jesus therefore said to them: If God were your Father, you would indeed love me. For from God I proceeded, and came; for I came not of myself, but he sent me:

“(tom. xx. 15.) This was said, I think, in allusion to some who came without being sent by the Father, of whom it is said in Jeremiah, I have not sent these prophets, yet they ran. (Jer. 23:21) Some, however, use this passage1 to prove the existence of two naturesg. To these we may reply, Paul hated Jesus when he persecuted the Church of God, at the time, viz. that our Lord said, Why persecutest thou Me? Now if it is true, as is here said, If God were your Father, ye would love Me; (Acts 9:4) the converse is true, If ye do not love Me, God is not your Father. And Paul for some time did not love Jesus. There was a time when God was not Paul’s father. Paul therefore was not by nature the son of God, but afterwards was made so. And when does God become any one’s Father, except when he keeps His commandments?”

“(vi. de Trin. c. 30) It was not that the Son of God condemned the assumption of so religious a name; that is, condemned them for professing to be the sons of God, and calling God their Father; but that He blamed the rash presumption of the Jews in claiming God for their Father, when they did not love the Son. For I proceeded forth, and came from God. To proceed forth, is not the same with to come. When our Lord says that those who called God their Father, ought to love Him, because He came forth from God, He means that His being born of God was the reason why He should be loved: the proceeding forth, having reference to His incorporeal birth. Their claim to be the sons of God, was to be made good by their loving Christ, Who was begotten from God. For a true worshipper of God the Father must love the Son, as being from Godf. And he only can love the Father, who believes that the Son is from Him.”

“After the Lord showed that the Jews have a certain spiritual origin, and excluded from them the origin they presumed to have, here he asserts the true origin, ascribing to them the fatherhood of the Devil. First he sets forth his intention; second he assigns them the reason, at the words and the desires of your father you will do; third he makes manifest the reason he had set forth, at the words he was a murderer from the beginning. He says, then: you do the works of the Devil, therefore you are of your father the Devil, namely by imitation; Ezekiel 16:3: "your father was an Amorite, and your mother a Hittite." Here the heresy of the Manichees is to be guarded against, who say that there is a certain nature of evil, and a certain race of darkness with its own princes, from which all corruptible things draw their origin; and that according to this, all men have proceeded from the Devil according to the flesh. They held moreover that certain souls belong to the good creation, and certain to the evil; hence they said that this saying of the Lord's, you are of your father the Devil, was uttered because you have proceeded from him according to the flesh, and your souls are of the evil creation. But, as Origen says, to introduce two natures on account of the difference between good and evil seems similar to one who would say that the substance of a seeing eye is one thing, and that of a dim or averted eye another. For just as a healthy eye and a bleary one do not differ in substance, but rather a certain deficient cause occurs, namely one that makes it grow dim, so the substance and nature of a thing is the same, whether it is good or has in itself a defect, which is the sin of the will. The Jews, therefore, insofar as they are evil, are not said to be sons of the Devil by nature, but by imitation. Consequently, when he says and you wish to do the desires of your father, he explains the reason he had assigned; as if to say: you are not sons of the Devil as though created by him and brought into being by him, but because, imitating him, you wish to do the desires of your father, which indeed are evil. For just as he envied man, and killed him — Wisdom 2:24: "through the envy of the Devil death entered into the world" — so also you, envying me, seek to kill me, a man who has spoken the truth to you. Consequently, when he says he was a murderer from the beginning, he makes manifest the reason he had set forth, and first he sets down the condition of the Devil which they imitate; second he shows that they are imitators of that condition, at the words but I, if I tell the truth, you do not believe me. It must be known, concerning the first point, that a twofold sin holds chief sway in the Devil: namely the sin of pride toward God, and the sin of envy toward man, whom he killed. But it is from the sin of envy toward man, by which he inflicts harms upon men, that the sin of pride is known by us; and therefore he first sets down the Demon's sin against man, second his sin against God, at the words and he did not stand in the truth. Now the sin of envy against man is that he killed him; hence he says: he, namely the Devil, was a murderer from the beginning. Here it must be known that the Devil did not kill man girded with a sword, but by evil persuasion; Wisdom 2:24: "through the envy of the Devil death entered into the world." And first indeed the death of sin entered, Psalm 33:22 (34:21): "the death of sinners is the worst"; and afterward bodily death, Romans 5:12: "through one man sin entered, and through sin, death." And, as Augustine says, do not think that you are not a murderer when you persuade your brother to evil. It must be noted, however, according to Origen, that he is called a murderer not on account of some one person only, but for the whole race, which he destroyed in Adam, in whom all die, as is said in 1 Corinthians 15:22. Hence he is called murderer by antonomasia; and this from the beginning, namely from the time there was man, who could be killed, from which time murder could take place: for man could not be killed unless man had first come to be. Consequently, when he says and he did not stand in the truth, he sets down the Demon's sin against God, which consists in this: that he turned himself away from the truth, which is God. And first he shows him turned away from the truth; second he shows him contrary to the truth, at the words when he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own. Concerning the first he does two things: first he shows him turned away from the truth; second he makes manifest what he said, at the words because the truth is not in him. He says, then, and he did not stand in the truth. Here it must be known that truth is twofold: of speech and of deed. The truth of speech is that by which someone utters with the mouth what he bears in the heart, and it is found in the nature of things; Ephesians 4:25: "putting away lying, speak the truth each one with his neighbor"; Psalm 14:3 (15:2): "who speaks the truth with his neighbor, who has not done deceit with his tongue." The truth of justice is when someone does what is fitting for him according to the order of his own nature; of which he says above, John 3:21: "he who does the truth comes to the light, that his works may be made manifest, because they are done in God." Speaking, therefore, of this truth, the Lord says and in the truth — namely of justice — he did not stand, because he abandoned the order of his own nature, which was that he should be subject to God, and through this same subjection attain his own beatitude and the fulfillment of his natural desire. Hence, when he wished to attain this of himself, he fell from the truth. Now this saying, he did not stand in the truth, can be understood in two ways: either that he never stood in the truth, or that he stood in it at some time but did not remain in it. But that he never was in the truth of justice can itself have a twofold sense. One indeed is according to the Manichees, who say that the Devil is naturally evil, from which it follows that he was always evil, for what is present naturally is always present. But this is heretical, because in Psalm 145:6 (146:6) it is said that God made heaven and earth, the sea, and all things that are in them. Therefore every being is from God; and everything that is from God, insofar as it is, is good. And therefore others said that the Demon, by his own nature, was created good by God, but in the first instant was made evil through free will. And these differ from the Manichees, because the latter say the demons were always evil, and naturally so, whereas these say they were always evil, but through free will. But it might seem to someone that, since an Angel is not evil by nature but through the sin of his own will, and sin is a certain act, it could have come about that the Angel was good at the beginning of the act but, at the end of the evil act, was made evil. It is manifest, however, that the act of sin in the Demon is subsequent to creation, and the terminus of creation is the very being of the Angel, whereas the terminus of the operation of sin is that they are evil. And thus, on this reasoning, they hold that it is impossible that in the first instant in which the Angel began to be, he was evil. But this reasoning does not seem sufficient, for it holds only in temporal motions, which are carried out successively, and not in instantaneous motions. For in successive motions, the instant in which the action begins is one thing, and that in which it is terminated another: just as, if local motion follows upon an alteration, local motion and alteration cannot be terminated in the same instant. But in instantaneous changes, the terminus of the first and of the second change can occur at once and in the same instant, just as in the same instant in which the moon is illumined by the sun, the air is illumined by the moon. It is manifest, however, that creation is instantaneous, and likewise the movement of free will in the Angels, since they had no need of the comparison and discourse of reason; hence nothing prevents there being, at once and in the same instant, both the terminus of creation, in which he was good, and again the terminus of free will, in which he was evil. And some grant this, but say that it was not so, although it could have been — and this on account of the authority of Scripture. For it is said of the Devil, under the figure of the king of Babylon, Isaiah 14:12: "how have you fallen, Lucifer, who rose in the morning?" And Ezekiel 28:13 says, under the person of the king of Tyre: "you were in the delights of the paradise of God." And therefore they say that he was not evil at the beginning of his creation, but was good for a time, and fell through free will. But it must be said that in the first instant of his creation he could not have been evil. The reason for this is that no act has the character of sin except insofar as it is beyond the order proper to the nature of the voluntary agent. Now in any order of acts, the natural act is prior; just as in understanding, the first principles are understood first, and through them other things are understood; and likewise in willing, we first will the ultimate perfection and the ultimate end, the appetite for which is naturally present in us, and on account of which we desire other things. But what happens according to nature is not sin. It is impossible, therefore, that the Devil's first act was evil. The Devil, therefore, was good in some instant, but he did not stand in the truth — that is, he did not remain in it. As to what is said in 1 John 3:8, "the Devil has sinned from the beginning," it must be said that he did indeed sin from the beginning, because from the time he began to sin, he never ceased. Consequently, when he says because the truth is not in him, he makes manifest what he had said. This manifestation, indeed, is understood in two ways. In one way, according to Origen, it is a manifestation of the general by the specific, just as if I wished to manifest that Socrates is an animal by the fact that he is a man; as if he were to say: he did not stand in the truth, but fell — and this because the truth is not in him. Now there is a twofold degree of those not standing in the truth. For some do not stand in the truth because they are not made firm in it, but waver — Psalm 72:2 (73:2): "but my feet were almost moved, my steps had almost slipped." Others, however, recoil totally from the truth. And thus the Devil did not stand in the truth, but withdrew from it through aversion. But is there, then, no truth at all in him? Indeed, if there were no truth at all in him, he would understand neither himself nor anything else, since understanding is only of true things — which is unfitting. It must be said, therefore, that in the demons there is some truth, as there is something true in them. For no evil totally corrupts the good, since at the very least the subject in which the evil is, is itself good. Therefore Dionysius says that in the demons the natural goods remain intact. Thus, then, there is some truth in them, but not the perfective truth from which they have turned away, namely from God, who is the perfective truth and wisdom. In the second way, however, this manifestation is by a sign, as Augustine says. For it seems that rather the contrary ought to have been said — namely, that the truth is not in him because he did not stand in the truth. But just as a cause is sometimes made manifest through its effect, so the Lord wished to show that he did not stand in the truth through the fact that the truth is not in him: for it would be in him, had he stood in the truth. A similar manner of speaking is found in Psalm 16:6 (17:6): "I have cried out because you have heard me," as if from this it appears that he cried out, because he was heard. Consequently, when he says when he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own, he shows that the Devil is contrary to the truth. First he sets forth his intention; second he makes manifest his proposition, at the words because he is a liar, and the father thereof. Now contrary to truth is the false and the lie; and the Devil is contrary to the truth because he speaks a lie: and therefore he says when he speaks, he speaks a lie. Here it must be known that whoever, besides God, speaks from his own, speaks a lie — although not everyone who speaks a lie speaks from his own. Only God, however, in speaking from his own, speaks the truth. For truth is the illumination of the intellect; but God is the light itself, and by him all are illumined — above, John 1:9: "it was the true light, which illumines every man coming into this world" — hence he is truth itself, and others do not speak the truth except insofar as they are illumined by him. Hence, as Ambrose says, every truth, by whomever it is spoken, is from the Holy Spirit. Thus, then, when the Devil speaks from his own, he speaks a lie; man too, when he speaks from his own, speaks a lie; but when he speaks from God, then he speaks the truth; Romans 3:4: "but God is true, and every man a liar," as far as it depends on himself. But not every man who speaks a lie speaks from his own, because sometimes he receives this from another — not indeed from God, who is truthful, but from him who did not stand in the truth and first devised the lie. And therefore he alone, singularly, when he speaks a lie, speaks from his own; 1 Kings 22 (final chapter): "I will go out, and I will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets"; Isaiah 19:14: "the Lord has mingled" — that is, has permitted to be mingled — "in the midst thereof a spirit of error." He makes manifest, however, his proposition when he says because he is a liar, and the father thereof. This indeed the Manichees, understanding it badly, took as positing generations of demons, thinking that the Devil has a father. Hence they said that the Devil is a liar, and the father thereof — that is, the Devil is the father of himself. This indeed is not to be understood in this way. For the Lord said that the Devil is a liar, and the father thereof — that is, the father of the lie: for not everyone who lies is the father of his own lie. For, as Augustine says, if you received a lie from another and told it, you indeed have lied, but you are not the father of the lie. The Devil, however, because he did not receive the lie from elsewhere — the lie by which he killed man as if by poison — is the father of the lie, just as God is the Father of truth. For the Devil first devised the lie, when he lied to the woman: "you shall not die at all," Genesis 3:4. How this was true, the outcome of the matter afterward proved. It must be known, however, that these words, from that passage you are of your father the Devil onward, are expounded in the book On the Questions of the New and Old Testament as referring to Cain, in this way: he is called a devil who does the works of the Devil, and you imitate him. Cain was a murderer from the beginning — namely from the time he killed Abel his brother — and he did not stand in the truth, because the truth is not in him. And this appears because, when the Lord asked him (Genesis 4:9): "where is Abel your brother?" he answered, saying: "I know not, Lord; am I my brother's keeper?" Hence he himself is a liar, and the father thereof — namely the Devil, who is his father by impression. The first exposition, however, is better.”

“And because I tell you the truth,.... And no lie, the whole truth of the Gospel, and particularly the truth of his divine sonship: ye believe me not; to such an infatuation and judicial blindness were they give up, to disbelieve him, because he told the truth, and to believe a lie, that they might be damned; which showed them to be the children of the devil, and under his power and influence.”

“If God were your Father, ye would love me--"If ye had anything of His moral image, as children have their father's likeness, ye would love Me, for I am immediately of Him and directly from Him." But "My speech" (meaning His peculiar style of expressing Himself on these subjects) is unintelligible to you because ye cannot take in the truth which it conveys.”