Exodus 3

Exodus 3:1

Ephrem the Syrian: Moses in Egypt was held in great honor: Pharaoh’s daughter called him her own son —yet rejecting this, he chose to be just a shepherd, living in hardship. — HYMNS ON PARADISE 6

Exodus 3:2

Augustine of Hippo: And here he is first called the angel of the Lord and then God. Is the angel then the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob? Therefore he may be rightly understood to be the Savior himself of whom the apostle says, “Whose are the fathers, and from whom is Christ according to the flesh, who is over all things, God blessed forever.” Hence even here he, who is the God blessed over all things forever, is not unreasonably understood to be himself the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob. But why was he previously called the angel of the Lord when he appeared in the flame of fire from the bush? Was it because he was one of many angels but by a dispensation represented the person of his Lord? Or was something belonging to a creature assumed which might appear visibly for the task at hand and from which words might be uttered in an audible way, whereby the presence of the Lord would also become known to the bodily senses of man, as circumstances required, by means of a creature made subject to him? For if he was one of the angels, who can readily affirm whether the person given him to announce was that of the Son, or of the Holy Spirit, or of God the Father or of the Trinity itself altogether, who is the one and only God, in order that he might say, “I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob”?For we cannot say that the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob is the Son of God and not the Father. Nor will anyone dare to deny that either the Holy Spirit or the Trinity itself, which we believe and understand to be the one God, is the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob. For he who is not God is not the God of those fathers. Moreover … not only the Father is God, as all, even the heretics, admit, but the Son also, which willingly or not they are forced to confess, for the apostle says, “who is, over all things, God blessed forever,” and the Holy Spirit as well. The same apostle declares, “Therefore glorify God in your body,” when he had previously stated, “Do you not know that your bodies are the temple of the Holy Spirit in you, whom you have from God?” And these three are one God, as the sound Catholic faith believes. It is not sufficiently clear which person in the Trinity that angel represented, assuming that he was one of the rest of the angels, and whether it was any person and not that of the Trinity itself. — THE TRINITY 2.13.23

Caesarius of Arles: It was not without reason, beloved brethren, nor without the signification of some mystery that there was a flame in the bush: “And the bush was not consumed.” Indeed, the bush was a genus of thorns. What the earth has produced for sinful man cannot be put in any kind of praise, for it was first said to man when he sinned: “Thorns and thistles shall the earth bring forth to you.” The fact that the bush was not burned, that is, was not seized by the flames, is understood to signify no good. In the flame is recognized the Holy Ghost; in the bush and thorns is represented the hard, haughty Jewish people. — SERMON 96.1

Clement of Alexandria: When the almighty Lord of the universe began to legislate through the Word and decided to make his power visible to Moses, he sent Moses a divine vision with the appearance of light, in the burning bush. Now a bramble bush is full of thorns. So too when the Word was concluding his legislation and his stay among men as their Lord, again he permitted himself to be crowned with thorns as a mystic symbol. Returning to the place from which he had descended, the Word renewed that by which he had first come, appearing first in the bush of thorns and later being surrounded with thorns that he might show that all was the work of the same one power. He is one, and his Father is one, the eternal beginning and end. — The Instructor Book 2

Ephrem the Syrian: The bush which was unsuitable even as an image of dead gods was able to depict within itself the mystery of the living God. Moses, this is a sign to you: as you saw God dwelling in the midst of fire, by fire must you serve the God who dwells in the fire. — COMMENTARY ON Exodus 3:2

Eusebius of Caesarea: And when an angel appears to Moses, Holy Scripture also makes it plain, saying, “The angel of the Lord appeared to him in a flame of fire in a bush.” But when it refers to the actual being who replies, it calls him God and Lord and no longer an angel. It is equally clear in its distinction between the angel and the Lord in the account of what happened at the Red Sea. — PROOF OF THE GOSPEL 5.11.238

Hilary of Poitiers: And now let us enquire whether elsewhere than in the case of Hagar the Angel of God has been discovered to be God Himself. He has been so discovered, and found to be not only God, but the God of Abraham and of Isaac and of Jacob. For the Angel of the Lord appeared to Moses from the bush; and Whose voice, think you, are we to suppose was heard? The voice of Him Who was seen, or of Another? There is no room for deception; the words of Scripture are clear: And the Angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a flame of fire from a bush, and again, The Lord called unto him from the bush, Moses, Moses, and he answered, What is it? And the Lord said, Draw not nigh hither, put off thy shoes from off thy feet, for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground. And He said unto him, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. He who appeared in the bush speaks from the bush; the place of the vision and of the voice is one; He Who speaks is none other than He Who was seen. He Who is the Angel of God when the eye beholds Him is the Lord when the ear hears Him, and the Lord Whose voice is heard is recognised as the God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob. When He is styled the Angel of God, the fact is revealed that He is no self-contained and solitary Being: for He is the Angel of God. When He is designated Lord and God, He receives the full title which is due to His nature and His name. You have, then, in the Angel Who appeared from the bush, Him Who is Lord and God. — ON THE TRINITY 4.32

Pacian of Barcelona: What does this mean? The vision that is said to have appeared to Moses in the desert is sometimes called an angel, sometimes the Lord. It means this: he is called angel when he served by speaking externally, and Lord, because he ruled within and produced the conditions needed for speaking. For when the speaker is ruled from within, he is called both angel because of his service and Lord because of his inspiration. Exposition of the Old and New Testament, Exodus

Paterius: What does this mean? The vision that is said to have appeared to Moses in the desert is sometimes called an angel, sometimes the Lord. It means this: he is called angel when he served by speaking externally, and Lord, because he ruled within and produced the conditions needed for speaking. For when the speaker is ruled from within, he is called both angel because of his service and Lord because of his inspiration. — EXPOSITION OF THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENT, Exodus 7

Prudentius: It was the Word, breathed from the Father’s mouth, Who of the Virgin took a mortal frame. The human form that not yet in the flesh Appeared to Moses wore a brow like ours, Since God, who would by power of the Word Assume a body, made the face the same. Flames rose and seemed to burn the thorny bush. God moved amid the branches set with spines, And tresses of the flames swayed harmlessly, That he might shadow forth his Son’s descent Into our thorny members sin infests With teeming briers and fills with bitter woes. For tainted at its root that noxious shrub Had sprouted from its baneful sap a crop Of evil shoots beset with many thorns. The sterile branches suddenly grew bright As God enkindled with his mighty power The leafy boughs, nor harmed the tangled briers. He touched the scarlet berries, blood-red fruits, And grazed the twigs that grew from deadly wood, Shed by the tortured bush with cruel pangs. — THE DIVINITY OF CHRIST 49-70

Exodus 3:3

Ambrose of Milan: Moses, too, passing by things of this world, saw a great sight and said, “I will turn aside and see this great sight,” for had he been held by the fleeting pleasures of this world he would not have seen so great a mystery. — Concerning Repentance 1.14.74

Gregory the Dialogist: Hence Moses, when he was seeking the glory of heavenly contemplation, said, “I will now pass on, and see this great sight.” For except he had withdrawn the footstep of the heart from the love of the world, he would never have been able to understand things above. — Morals on the Book of Job, Book 15, Section 68

Jerome: Moses says, “I must go over to look at this remarkable sight.” If he does not go over, that is, if he does not escape all vice, he cannot behold the great marvel. — HOMILIES ON THE Psalms 51

Origen of Alexandria: Moses, when he had seen the bush burning and not consumed, marveling at the sight said: “I will pass over and behold this sight.” Certainly he too was not signifying that he would traverse some span of earth, nor climb mountains nor go apart into the steep places of the valleys. The vision was close to him, in his mouth and in his eyes. But he says: “I will pass over,” to show that, admonished by the heavenly vision, he ought to ascend to a higher life and to cross over from those things in which he was to better things. — HOMILIES ON Genesis 12.2

Exodus 3:4

Ambrose of Milan: Why should we despair that God should speak in men, who spoke in the thorn bush? God did not despise the bush. Would that he might also give light to my thorns. Perhaps some may wonder that there is some light even in our thorns. Some of our thorns will not burn. There will be some whose shoes shall be put off their feet at the sound of my voice, that the steps of the mind may be freed from bodily hindrances. — Concerning Virginity 1.1.2

Augustine of Hippo: Was the Lord speaking through an angel? Or was the Lord that angel who has been called the “angel of great counsel” and is understood to be Christ? For Scripture said above, “the angel of the Lord appeared to him.” — QUESTIONS ON Exodus 3

Peter Chrysologus: This is why he summons Moses by his fatherly voice, addresses him with paternal love and invites him to be the liberator of his people. Why should I say more? He makes him a god; he sets him up as a god before Pharaoh. He makes him a god, fortifies him with signs, arms him with virtues, wins wars through mere commands, grants to him as a soldier victory gained by a mere word. By his orders he concedes him a triumph and leads him through all the crowns of virtues to his own friendship, gives him an opportunity to share in his heavenly kingdom and allows him to be a legislator. However, Moses received all this that he might love—that at length he might be so inflamed with the love of God that he would burn with it himself and encourage others to have it too. — SERMON 147

Exodus 3:5

Ambrose of Milan: For it is said to Moses when he was desiring to draw nearer: “Put off your shoes from your feet,” how much more must we free the feet of our soul from the bonds of the body and clear our steps from all connection with this world. — Concerning Repentance 2.11.107

Ambrose of Milan: Pass by like Moses, that you may see the God of Abraham and of Isaac and of Jacob and that you may see a great vision. This is a great vision, but if you wish to see it, remove the sandals from your feet, remove every bond of iniquity, remove the bonds of the world, leave behind the sandals which are earthly. Likewise Jesus sent the apostles without sandals, without money, gold and silver, so that they would not carry earthly things with them. For the man who seeks the good is praised not for his sandals but for the swiftness and grace of his feet, as Scripture says, “How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the gospel of peace, of those who bring glad tidings of good things!” Therefore remove the sandals from your feet, that they may be beautiful for preaching the gospel. — FLIGHT FROM THE WORLD 5.25

Ambrose of Milan: Such was Moses, of whom it is said: Take off the sandals from your feet (Exodus 3:5), so that he, in calling the people to the kingdom of God, might first lay aside the trappings of the flesh and walk with a naked spirit and the mark of the mind. — On Isaac and the Soul 4.16

Ambrose of Milan: Stand therefore firm in your hearts, that no one overthrow you, that no one be able to make you fall. The Apostle has taught us what it is “to stand,” that is what was said to Moses: “The place whereon thou standest is holy ground;” for no one stands unless he stand by faith, unless he stands fixed in the determination of his own heart. — Epistle 63.41

Augustine of Hippo: What are the shoes? Well, what are the shoes we wear? Leather from dead animals. The hides of dead animals are what we protect our feet with. So what are we being ordered to do? To give up dead works. This is symbolically what he instructs Moses to do in his honor, when the Lord says to him, “Take off your shoes. For the place you are standing in is holy ground.” There’s no holier ground than the church of God, is there? So as we stand in it let us take off our shoes, let us give up dead works. — SERMON 101.7

Caesarius of Arles: Finally see what the Lord said to Moses and Joshua: “Remove the strap of your shoe, for the place where you stand is holy ground.” Can this be understood according to the letter, beloved brethren? How could that ground upon which they trod be holy, since doubtless it was like the rest of the earth? However, notice carefully what was said: “For the place whereon you stand is holy ground.” That is to say, Christ, whose figure you bear and of whom you seem to be a type, is holy ground. True holy ground is the body of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom everything heavenly and earthly is sanctified. — SERMON 96.4

Ephrem the Syrian: “Remove your sandals” and go trample the Egyptians. See, it is thirty years past the time of their picking. Up to this point, Moses proceeded without fear. But when he saw a sight that was more than his eyes [could bear], he hid his face out of fear of looking at God the way he looked at the angel. — COMMENTARY ON Exodus 3:1

Evagrius Ponticus: If Moses, when he attempted to draw near the burning bush, was prohibited until he should remove the shoes from his feet, how should you not free yourself of every thought that is colored by passion seeing that you wish to see One who is beyond every thought and perception? — CHAPTERS ON PRAYER 4

Gregory of Nazianzus: And as to shoes, let him who is about to touch the holy land which the feet of God have trodden, put them off, as Moses did upon the mount, that he may bring there nothing dead; nothing to come between man and God. — ORATION 45.19

Gregory of Nyssa: He willingly shook off his royal dignity like so much dust which is stripped off by the stomping of the feet. He banished himself from human society for forty years and lived alone, focusing steadfastly in undistracted solitude on the contemplation of invisible things. After this he was illuminated by the inexpressible light and freed the lower part of his soul from the dead garment made of skin. — ON THE INSCRIPTIONS OF THE Psalms 1.7.52

John Damascene: The burning bush was an image of God’s mother, and when Moses was about to approach it, God said, “Do not come near; put off your shoes from your feet, for the place on which you are standing is holy ground.” Now if the ground where Moses saw an image of the Theotokos is holy ground, how much more holy is the image itself? Not only is it holy, I daresay, but the holy of holies. — ON DIVINE IMAGES 20

Exodus 3:6

Aphrahat the Persian Sage: For the name of Divinity is given for the highest honor in the world, and with whomsoever God is well pleased, he applies it to him. But however, the names of God are many and are venerable, as he delivered his names to Moses, saying to him, “I am the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob. This is my name forever, and this is my memorial unto generations.” And he called his name “Ahiyah ashar Ahiyah,” “El Shaddai” and “Adonai Sabaoth.” By these names God is called. The great and honorable name of Godhead he withheld not from his righteous ones; even as, though he is the great king, without grudging he applied the great and honorable name of kingship to men who are his creatures. — DEMONSTRATIONS 17.5

Aphrahat the Persian Sage: And when the holy One called Moses from the bush he said thus to him: “I am the God of Abraham, of Isaac and of Jacob.” When Death heard this utterance, he trembled and feared and was terrified and perturbed and knew that he had not become king forever over the children of Adam. From the hour that he heard God saying to Moses, “I am the God of Abraham, of Isaac and of Jacob,” Death [struck] his hands together, for he learned that God is king of the dead and of the living and that it is appointed to the children of Adam to come forth from his darkness and arise with their bodies. And observe that our Redeemer Jesus also, when he repeated this utterance to the Sadducees, when they were disputing with him about the resurrection of the dead, thus said, “God is not [God] of the dead, for all are alive unto him.” — DEMONSTRATIONS 22.2

Augustine of Hippo: God gives witness and says, “I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob.” Were there not other patriarchs? Was not Noah a holy man before these, who alone in the whole human race together with his whole house deserved to be delivered from the flood, in whom and in his sons the church is represented? They escape the flood, with wood carrying them. And then afterwards [come] the great men whom we know, whom Holy Scripture commends, Moses faithful in all his house. And those three are named, as if they alone were deserving of him: “I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob; this is my name forever.“An enormous mystery! The Lord has the power to open both our mouths and your hearts that we may be able to speak as he has deigned to reveal and that you may be able to grasp as it is advantageous to you. Therefore those patriarchs are three: Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. You already know that the sons of Jacob were twelve and from them are the people of Israel because Jacob himself is Israel and the people of Israel are the twelve tribes belonging to the twelve sons of Israel. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, three fathers and one people. Three fathers, as it were, in the beginning of the people; three fathers in whom the people was prefigured. And the earlier people itself [is] the present people. For in the people of the Jews the people of the Christians was prefigured. There a figure, here the truth; there a shadow, here the body, as the apostle says, “Now these things happened to them in figure.” It is the apostle’s voice, and he says, “They were written for us, upon whom the end of the world has come.” Let your mind return to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. In those three we find free women giving birth and bondwomen giving birth. We find there the progeny of free women; we find there also the progeny of bondwomen. The bondwoman signifies nothing good. “Cast out the bondwoman,” [Scripture] says, “and her son; for the son of the bondwoman will not be heir with the son of the free woman.” The apostle mentions this; and in these two sons of Abraham the apostle says was a figure of the two Testaments, Old and New. To the Old Testament belong the lovers of temporal things, the lovers of the world; to the New Testament belong the lovers of eternal life. Therefore that Jerusalem on earth was a shadow of the heavenly Jerusalem, the mother of us all, which is in heaven. And these are the apostle’s words. And about that city from which we are sojourners you know many things, you have already heard many things. Now we find something remarkable in these births, that is, in these offspring, in these procreations of free women and bondwomen, namely, four types of men. And in these four types of men is comprised the figure of the Christian people, so that what was said in regard to these three is not astonishing: “I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob.” — TRACTATE ON THE GOSPEL OF John 11.7.2-8.2

Cyril of Alexandria: But the Savior also demonstrated the great ignorance of the Sadducees by bringing forward their own hierophant Moses, who was well and clearly acquainted with the resurrection of the dead. For he has set before us God, he says, as saying in the bush, “I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob.” But of whom is he God, if, according to their argument, these have ceased to live? For he is the God of the living; and therefore certainly and altogether they will rise, when his almighty right hand brings them thereunto; and not them only but also all who are upon the earth. — HOMILIES ON THE GOSPEL OF Luke 136

Gregory of Nazianzus: Of the other titles, some are evidently names of his authority, others of his government of the world, and of this viewed under a twofold aspect: the one before, the other in, the incarnation. For instance, the Almighty, the King of Glory, or of the Ages, or of the Powers, or of the Beloved or of Kings. Or again, the Lord of Sabaoth, that is, of hosts, or of powers or of lords; these are clearly titles belonging to his authority. But the God either of salvation or of vengeance, or of peace, or of righteousness, or of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and of all the spiritual Israel that sees God—these belong to his government. For since we are governed by these three things, the fear of punishment, the hope of salvation and of glory besides, and the practice of the virtues by which these are attained, the name of the God of vengeance governs fear, and that of the God of salvation our hope, and that of the God of virtues our practice; that whoever attains to any of these may, as carrying God in himself, press on yet more unto perfection and to that affinity which arises out of virtues. Now these are names common to the Godhead, but the proper name of the unoriginate is “Father,” and that of the unoriginately begotten is “Son” and that of the unbegottenly proceeding or going forth is “the Holy Ghost.” — THEOLOGICAL ORATION 4:19

Origen of Alexandria: Abraham sets forth, as it were, moral philosophy, through obedience. For so great was his obedience and observance of the commandments that, when he heard: “Go forth from your land, and from your kindred, and from the house of your father,” he did not delay, but did it at once … For hearing that he should sacrifice his son, not even then does he doubt, but he obeys the precept: and, to give to posterity an example of the obedience which is moral philosophy, he did not spare even his only son. Isaac also holds to natural philosophy, since he both digs wells and searches out the depths of things. But Jacob too holds the inspective place, inasmuch as he was named Israel on account of the contemplation of divine things, and saw the camps of heaven, and beheld the house of God and the ways of the angels — that is, the ladder stretched out from earth to heaven. — COMMENTARY ON THE SONG OF SONGS, PROLOGUE

Origen of Alexandria: God has been recorded indeed to be the God “of Abraham, and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob.” He indeed who wishes the light to belong to none other than men (because it is said, “The life was the light of men”) will think, according to this analogy, that the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob is the God of no one except these three fathers alone. But he is at least also the God of Elijah, and, as Judith says, the God of her father Simeon, and he is God of the Hebrews. Wherefore, according to the analogy, if nothing prevents him from being the God of others also, nothing prevents the light of men from also being the light of other creatures besides men. — COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF John 2.143

Origen of Alexandria: If the God of the universe, having been made familiar to the saints, becomes their God, the being named the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob, by how much more will it be possible for the Holy Spirit, having been made familiar to the prophets, to be called their spirit, that the Spirit might thus be said to be the spirit of Elijah and the spirit of Isaiah? — COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF John 6.68

Exodus 3:8

Augustine of Hippo: I ask whether we should take the land flowing with milk and honey spiritually, since, according to the proper sense, this phrase does not describe the land that was being given to the people of Israel. Or is it a figure of speech that is used to praise the richness and sweetness of the land? — QUESTIONS ON Exodus 4

Augustine of Hippo: Indeed, unless that land which was styled the land that flowed with milk and honey signified something great, through which, as by a visible token, he was leading those who understood his wondrous works to invisible grace and the kingdom of heaven, they could not be blamed for scorning that land, whose temporal kingdom we also ought to esteem as nothing, that we may love that Jerusalem which is free, the mother of us all, which is in heaven, and truly to be desired. — EXPLANATION OF THE Psalms 106.20

Tertullian: … Jesus Christ was to introduce the second people (which is composed of us nations, lingering deserted in the world previously) into the land of promise, “flowing with milk and honey” (that is, into the possession of eternal life, than which nothing is sweeter). This had to come about not through Moses (that is, not through the law’s discipline) but through Joshua (that is, through the new law’s grace), after our circumcision with “a knife of rock” (that is, with Christ’s precepts, for Christ is in many ways and figures predicted as a rock). Therefore the man who was being prepared to act as an image of this sacrament was inaugurated under the figure of the Lord’s name, even so as to be named Jesus. — ANSWER TO THE JEWS 9.22

Exodus 3:9

Augustine of Hippo: Clamor: not like the clamor of the Sodomites, which signified iniquity without fear or shame. — QUESTIONS ON Exodus 5

Exodus 3:11

Ephrem the Syrian: Moses said, “Who am I to go before Pharaoh?” Although I have a royal title, I will not be received by him. And now that I do the work of a simple shepherd, who will allow me to go before Pharaoh? And even if I were let in, what importance would he see in me to believe my words? — COMMENTARY ON Exodus 3:3

Exodus 3:14

Ambrose of Milan: Christ therefore is and always is; for he who is, always is. And Christ always is, of whom Moses says, “He that is has sent me.” — Exposition of the Christian Faith 5.1.26

Ambrose of Milan: The Lord said, I am that I am, thou shalt say, I AM hath sent me unto you. This is the true Name of God – Eternity. — Letter 8.8

Ambrose of Milan: This is the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, the God of Jacob, who appeared to Moses in the bush, concerning whom Moses says, “He who is has sent me.” It was not the Father who spoke to Moses in the bush, or in the desert, but the Son. — Exposition of the Christian Faith 1.13.83

Augustine of Hippo: Perhaps it was hard even for Moses himself, as it is much also for us, and much more for us, to understand what was said, “I am who I am” and “He who is has sent me to you.” And if by chance Moses understood, when would they to whom he was being sent understand? Therefore the Lord put aside what man could not grasp and added what he could grasp. For he added and said, “I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob.” This you can grasp. But what mind can grasp, “I am who I am”? — TRACTATE ON THE GOSPEL OF John 38.8.3

Augustine of Hippo: But now the Lord speaks to Moses—you know all this, and I won’t keep you longer on it, for lack of time—“I am who I am; he who is sent me.” When he asked God’s name, you see, this is what was said: “I am who I am. And you shall say to the children of Israel, he who is sent me to you.” What’s this all about? O God, O Lord of ours, what are you called? “I am called He is,” he said. What does it mean, I am called He is? “That I abide forever, that I cannot change.” Things which change are not, because they do not last. What is, abides. But whatever changes was something and will be something; yet you cannot say it is, because it is changeable. So the unchangeableness of God was prepared to suggest itself by this phrase “I am who I am.” — SERMON 6.4

Augustine of Hippo: Magnificently and divinely, therefore, our God said to his servant: “I am that I am,” and “You shall say to the children of Israel, He who is sent me to you.” For he truly is because he is unchangeable. For every change makes what was not, to be. Therefore he truly is, who is unchangeable; but all other things that were made by him have received being from him each in its own measure. — ON THE NATURE OF THE GOOD 19

Augustine of Hippo: He is the first and greatest existence, who is utterly unchangeable and who could say most perfectly, “I am who I am, and you shall say to them, “He who is has sent me to you.” As a result, the other things which exist could not exist except by him, and these things are good insofar as they have received the ability to be. — ON CHRISTIAN TEACHING 1.32.35

Augustine of Hippo: Then too Plato’s definition of a philosopher—one who loves God—contains an idea which shines forth everywhere in Scripture. But the most palpable proof to my mind that he was conversant with the sacred books is this, that when Moses, informed by an angel that God wished him to deliver the Hebrews from Egypt, questioned the angel concerning the name of the one who had sent him, the answer received was this: “I am who I am. Thus shall you say to the children of Israel: he who is has sent me to you,” as though, in comparison with him who, being immutable, truly is, all mutable things are as if they were not. Now Plato had a passionate perception of this truth and was never tired of teaching it. Yet I doubt whether this idea can be found in any of the works of Plato’s predecessors except in the text “I am who I am, and you shall say to them, he who is has sent me to you.” — City of God 8.11

Augustine of Hippo: But God is without doubt a substance, or perhaps essence would be a better term, which the Greeks call ousia. For just as wisdom is so called from being wise and knowledge is so called from knowing, so essence is so called from being [esse]. And who possesses being in a higher degree than he, who said to his servant Moses, “I am who I am” and “He who is has sent me to you.” But all other things that are called essences or substances are susceptible of accidents, by which a change, whether great or small, is brought about in them. But there can be no accidents of this kind in God. Therefore only the essence of God, or the essence which God is, is unchangeable. — THE TRINITY 5.2.3

Augustine of Hippo: For although that immutable and ineffable nature does not admit of was and will be but only is (for it truly is, because it cannot be changed), and therefore it was proper for him to say, “I am who I am” and “You will say to the children of Israel, ‘He who is has sent me to you,’ " nevertheless, on account of the changeableness of the times in which our mortality and our changeableness are involved, we do not falsely say was and will be and is. Was, in past ages; is, in present ones; will be, in future ones. Was, because he was never lacking; will be, because he will never be lacking; is, because he always is. — TRACTATE ON THE GOSPEL OF John 99.5.2

Cassiodorus: So in Genesis [sic] he bade Moses say of himself, “Go and say to the children of Israel, I am who I am. He who is has sent me to you.” So he wanted his eternity to be denoted by the present tense. This use of present time (“today”) is acknowledged to be peculiar to the divine Scriptures in the sense of perpetuity. — EXPOSITION OF THE Psalms 2:8

Cassiodorus: The phrase “I am” belongs to the divinity. It does not change with time but is always there and remains eternal. So the reply to Moses was “I am who I am” and again “He who is has sent me.” But we must first investigate why God alone claims this term which denotes essence for himself. When it was spoken, there were angels, heavenly creatures and all earthly creatures as were decreed to exist. But because he is the only uncreated and eternal nature which did not begin in time and subsists as one divinity in three persons, God alone is rightly said to be, for he needs no one for his existence but ever abides by the strength of his own power. In it there is another mystery: a single syllable, sum (“I am”), is embraced by three letters, so we are taught that the holy Trinity is one God. — EXPOSITION OF THE Psalms 49:7

Eusebius of Caesarea: Everything that has ever existed or now exists derives its being from the One, the only existent and preexistent being, who also said, “I am the existent.” … As the only being and the eternal being, he is himself the cause of existence to all those to whom he has imparted existence from himself by his will and his power and gives existence to all things and their powers and forms, richly and ungrudgingly from himself. — PROOF OF THE GOSPEL 4.1

Fulgentius of Ruspe: Hold most firmly and never doubt that the holy Trinity, the only true God, just as it is eternal, is likewise the only one by nature unchangeable. He indicates this when he says to his servant Moses, “I am which I am.” — TO PETER ON THE FAITH 9.50

Gregory of Nazianzus: As far then as we can reach, “He who is” and “God” are the special names of his essence; and of these especially “He who is,” not only because when he spoke to Moses in the mount, and Moses asked what his name was, this was what he called himself, bidding him say to the people, “I am has sent me,” but also because we find that this name is the more strictly appropriate. For the name theos [“God”], even if, as those who are skillful in these matters say, it were derived from theein [“to run”] or from aithein [“to blaze”], from continual motion, and because he consumes evil conditions of things (from which fact he is also called a consuming fire) would still be one of the relative names and not an absolute one, as again is the case with “Lord,” which also is called a name of God. “I am the Lord your God,” he says, “that is my name;” and “The Lord is his name.” But we are inquiring into a nature whose being is absolute and not [into being] bound up with something else. But being is in its proper sense peculiar to God and belongs to him entirely, and it is not limited or cut short by any before or after, for indeed in him there is no past or future. — THEOLOGICAL ORATION 4:18

Hilary of Poitiers: While my mind was dwelling on these and on many like thoughts, I chanced upon the books which, according to the tradition of the Hebrew faith, were written by Moses and the prophets, and found in these words spoken by God the Creator testifying of Himself `I Am that I Am, and again, He that is hath sent me unto you.’ I confess that I was amazed to find in them an indication concerning God so exact that it expressed in the terms best adapted to human understanding an unattainable insight into the mystery of the Divine nature. For no property of God which the mind can grasp is more characteristic of Him than existence, since existence, in the absolute sense, cannot be predicated of that which shall come to an end, or of that which has had a beginning, and He who now joins continuity of being with the possession of perfect felicity could not in the past, nor can in the future, be non-existent; for whatsoever is Divine can neither be originated nor destroyed. Wherefore, since God’s eternity is inseparable from Himself, it was worthy of Him to reveal this one thing, that He is, as the assurance of His absolute eternity. — ON THE TRINITY 1.5

Jerome: There is one nature of God and one only; and this, and this alone, truly is. For absolute being is derived from no other source but is all its own. All things besides, that is, all things created, although they appear to be, soon are not. For there was a time when they were not, and that which once was not may again cease to be. God alone who is eternal, that is to say, who has no beginning, really deserves to be called an essence. Therefore also he says of him, “I am has sent me.” As the angels, the sky, the earth, the seas all existed at the time, it must have been as the absolute being that God claimed for himself that name of essence, which apparently was common to all. But because his nature alone is perfect and because in the three persons there subsists but one Godhead, which truly is and is one nature, whoever in the name of religion declares that there are in the Godhead three elements, three hypostases, that is, or essences, is striving really to predicate three natures of God. — LETTER 15.4

John Chrysostom: Wouldest thou learn also His eternity? Hear what Moses saith concerning the Father. When he asked what he was commanded to answer should the Jews enquire of him, “Who it was that had sent him,” he heard these words: “Say, I AM hath sent me.” Now the expression “I AM,” is significative of Being ever, and Being without beginning, of Being really and absolutely. — HOMILIES ON THE GOSPEL OF John 15

Origen of Alexandria: That the activity of the Father and the Son is to be found both in saints and in sinners is clear from the fact that all rational beings are partakers of the word of God, that is, of reason, and so have implanted within them some seeds, as it were, of wisdom and righteousness, which is Christ. And all things that exist derive their share of being from him who truly exists, who said through Moses, “I am that I am”; which participation in God the Father extends to all, both righteous and sinners, rational and irrational creatures and absolutely everything that exists. — ON FIRST PRINCIPLES 1.3.6

Pseudo-Athanasius: As there is one Beginning and therefore one God, so one is that Essence and Subsistence which indeed and truly and really is. It is this One who said “I am that I am,” and not two, that there be not two Beginnings; and from the One, a Son in nature and truth, is its own Word, its Wisdom, its Power, and inseparable from it. — FOURTH ORATION AGAINST THE ARIANS 1

Exodus 3:15

Ambrose of Milan: For God and Lord is a name of majesty, a name of power, even as God himself says, “The Lord is my name,” and as in another place the prophet declares, “The Lord almighty is his name.” He is God, therefore, and Lord, either because his rule is over all or because he beholds all things and is feared by all without exception. — Exposition of the Christian Faith 1.1.7

Augustine of Hippo: What does it mean then that later on he gave himself another name, where it says, “And the Lord said to Moses, I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob: this is my name forever”? How is it that there I am called this name that shows “I am,” and lo and behold here is another name: “I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob”? It means that while God is indeed unchangeable, he has done everything out of mercy, and so the Son of God himself was prepared to take on changeable flesh and thereby to come to man’s rescue while remaining what he is as the Word of God. Thus he who is clothed himself with mortal flesh, so that it could truly be said, “I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob.” — SERMON 6.5

Exodus 3:19

Clement of Alexandria: He said to Moses, “Go and speak to Pharaoh, that he may let my people go, but I know that he will not let them go.…” He manifests his divinity by foreseeing what is to happen and also his love for man by offering to the free will of man an opportunity to repent. — The Instructor Book 1

Exodus 3:22

Augustine of Hippo: Whether then the reason was what I have said, or whether in the secret appointment of God there was some unknown reason for his telling the people by Moses to borrow things from the Egyptians and to take them away with them, this remains certain. This was said for some good reason and Moses could not lawfully have done otherwise than God told him, leaving to God the reason of the command, while the servant’s duty is to obey. — AGAINST FAUSTUS, A MANICHAEAN 22.71

Augustine of Hippo: The Lord commanded the Hebrews through Moses to take gold and silver vessels and garments from the Egyptians, and he added, “And you will despoil them.” The judgment implied in this command cannot be unjust. For it is a commandment of God. It was not to be judged but obeyed. For God knew how just his command was. It pertains to the servant obediently to do what was commanded. — QUESTIONS ON Exodus 6

Augustine of Hippo: Accordingly on the one hand the Egyptians deserved being deceived, and on the other the people of Israel were then situated at such a level of morality, because of the age of the human race, that it would not be unworthy of them to deceive an enemy. It therefore came about that God commanded them (or, rather, permitted them because of their desire) to ask of the Egyptians gold and silver implements which these seekers of a kingdom as yet earthly were gazing upon longingly, even though they were not going to return them, and to take them as if they were going to return them. God did not want to be unjust in the matter of the reward for such lengthy hardship and labor—a reward adapted to the level of such souls; nor did he want to be unjust in the matter of the punishments of the Egyptians, whom appropriately enough he caused to lose what they were under obligation to pay. And so God is not a deceiver. — ON EIGHTY-THREE VARIED QUESTIONS 53.2

Tertullian: The Egyptians put in a claim on the Hebrews for these gold and silver vessels. The Hebrews assert a counterclaim, alleging that by the bond of their respective fathers, attested by the written engagement of both parties, there were due to them the arrears of that laborious slavery of theirs for the bricks they had so painfully made and the cities and palaces which they had built. — AGAINST MARCION 2.20.2