through him all things were made

The Text

The clause closes the inner-trinitarian cluster of Article 2 and pivots toward the incarnation. Having confessed who the Son is (the eternal Son, begotten not made, of one Being with the Father), the creed now confesses what the Son does before the incarnation: he is the one through whom the Father makes all that is. The creed thereby refuses to leave the doctrine of the Son at the level of inner-trinitarian relations. The eternal Son is the eternal Word, the Wisdom, the image through whom the Father has spoken the whole created order into being. The clause therefore looks back, to Article 1 (maker of heaven and earth), and presses the Trinitarian point: there is one act of creation, the Father’s act, accomplished through the Son, in the Spirit. The Father does not create alone, with the Son standing by; nor does the Son create alongside the Father, as a second creator. The Father creates through the Son, and the Son’s eternal generation is the eternal ground of the Father’s creative act ad extra.

The clause is brief — five English words — but it carries enormous freight. It is the creed’s compression of the Johannine prologue and the great Pauline cosmological texts: all things came into being through him, and without him not one thing came into being (John 1:3); for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist (1 Cor. 8:6); in him all things in heaven and on earth were created (Col. 1:16); he is before all things, and in him all things hold together (Col. 1:17); he sustains all things by his powerful word (Heb. 1:3). The biblical witness is dense, and the creed gathers it into a single phrase.

Translation Notes

Di’ hou / per quem — through whom. The agency-preposition that does the doctrinal work. The Father is from whom (ἐξ οὗ, ex quo) all things are, and the Son is through whom (δι’ οὗ, per quem) all things are. The distinction is Pauline (1 Cor. 8:6) and was crucial for the patristic Trinitarian articulation: the Father is source, the Son is agent, the Spirit is perfecter (Basil of Caesarea, On the Holy Spirit, develops the threefold prepositional structure at length). The English through preserves the distinction. The older BCP 1662 by is grammatically defensible but theologically less precise, since by most readily names a direct agent rather than a mediating one. The modern translations have settled on through, which preserves the inner-trinitarian shape of the one creative act.

Ta panta / omnia — all things. The biblical-philosophical term for the totality of created reality. In the New Testament the phrase is the standard term for the cosmos in its totality (Rom. 11:36; 1 Cor. 8:6; Eph. 1:10–11; Phil. 3:21; Col. 1:16–20; Heb. 1:3, 2:8; Rev. 4:11), and it carries the same totalizing force in the creed. The clause makes no creaturely reservation: all that is, visible and invisible, was made through the Son. The Gnostic temptation — to reserve the material order to a lower demiurge while assigning the spiritual order to the true God — is closed by ta panta. The Son is the agent of all, not part of it.

Egeneto / facta sunt — were made / came to be. The aorist (Greek) and perfect passive (Latin) of the verb of creation. The verb is sharply distinguished from the was (ἦν) of the Logos in the Johannine prologue: the Logos was (eternal being), but all things came to be (temporal coming-into-being). The distinction names the absolute difference between Creator and creature. The Son is not on the side of all things; he is on the side of was. The clause therefore presupposes the doctrine that the previous clauses have just established (eternally begotten, not made; of one Being with the Father) and applies it: precisely because the Son is uncreated, he can be the one through whom all things were made.

The English translation choice between were made and came to be is largely stylistic. ELLC has were made, which is the broader liturgical inheritance. Came to be (NRSV at John 1:3) is closer to the Greek aorist of γίνομαι but has not displaced were made in the creedal tradition.

Historical Context

The clause in its Greek form (δι’ οὗ τὰ πάντα ἐγένετο) is one of the most direct biblical citations in the creed. The phrase comes from John 1:3 (πάντα δι’ αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο) and 1 Corinthians 8:6 (δι’ οὗ τὰ πάντα); the Nicene fathers compressed the two texts into a single phrase. The clause was therefore not a fresh dogmatic articulation but a scriptural citation, lifted from the apostolic confession of the Son’s cosmological role and incorporated into the creed’s confession of his identity.

The phrase has the early form preserved in the 325 text (through whom all things came into being, both things in heaven and things on earth) — an even fuller paraphrase of the Pauline-Johannine cosmology, drawing especially on Col. 1:16. The 381 Constantinopolitan revision shortened the phrase to its present form, retaining the dogmatic substance while moving toward liturgical concision. The Western (Latin) text has carried per quem omnia facta sunt from the early reception forward.

The clause carried particular weight against two of the principal Christological heresies of the patristic period. Against Arianism, the clause closes a possible loophole: an Arian could grant that the Son was the agent through whom the Father made all things, while still holding that the Son himself was the first and highest creature. The creed’s previous clauses have made this position impossible — the Son is eternally begotten, not made, of one Being with the Father — and the present clause now applies the dogma: the Son, who is uncreated, is the one through whom the created order has come to be. Against Gnosticism (and its descendants, including Marcionism and various forms of dualism), the clause refuses any division of the created order: all things without remainder were made through the same Son who is of one Being with the Father. The material world is not the work of a lower demiurge; it is the work of the eternal Word.

The clause has had a long iconographic life in the Christ-Pantokratōr tradition: the Son who is through whom all things were made is the Son in whose hand the created order rests, depicted in the dome of the Byzantine church as the cosmic ruler whose blessing gathers all of creation up into himself.

Lines of Interpretation

Patristic

Tradition: Irenaeus, Against Heresies IV–V; Athanasius, On the Incarnation; Basil of Caesarea, On the Holy Spirit; the Cappadocians; Augustine, On the Trinity and Literal Commentary on Genesis; Cyril of Alexandria, Commentary on John

The patristic articulation of this clause is unified across the Greek and Latin fathers: the one act of creation is the Father’s act, accomplished through the Son, in the Spirit. Irenaeus’s image of the two hands of the Father — the Son and the Spirit — names the inner-trinitarian shape: the Father creates with his two hands, never alone, never delegating creation to a subordinate. Athanasius’s On the Incarnation uses the clause as the dogmatic ground for the redemption: the same Word through whom all things were made has come to remake what he had made. The redemptive logic of the patristic tradition presupposes the cosmological role: only the one who made can remake; only the one through whom all things came to be can be the one through whom all things are renewed.

Basil’s On the Holy Spirit gives the most precise patristic treatment of the prepositional grammar. Basil’s opponents (the Pneumatomachi) had argued from the prepositions: the Father creates from (ἐξ), the Son through (διά), the Spirit in (ἐν), and the prepositions name a descending order of dignity. Basil’s reply is that the prepositions name distinct modes of one creative act, not a hierarchy of agents. The Father, the Son, and the Spirit are equally Creator; the through of the Son’s role does not subordinate him to the Father.

Augustine’s Literal Commentary on Genesis and his On the Trinity (especially Book V) develop the doctrine that the external works of the Trinity are inseparable (opera Trinitatis ad extra indivisa sunt): every divine act in the created order is the act of the one God, accomplished by Father, Son, and Spirit in their proper modes. The doctrine has been received as a regula by the catholic tradition, East and West.

Strengths

• The patristic settlement is the foundation of subsequent catholic Trinitarian theology
• Irenaeus’s two hands image preserves the inner-trinitarian shape without subordination
• Basil’s prepositional analysis is permanently useful pastorally
• Augustine’s opera Trinitatis ad extra indivisa is the catholic regula

Weaknesses

• The patristic articulation occasionally drifted toward speculative cosmology
• The polemical context produced sharper articulations than the catholic substance required

Scholastic

Tradition: Anselm, Monologion; Hugh of St Victor, On the Sacraments; Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae I.45 (on creation), I.32–43 (on the persons); Bonaventure, Sentences I and Itinerarium

The scholastic tradition received the clause as the dogmatic articulation of the Son’s role in the one creative act, and articulated it under the doctrine of appropriations. Creation is the work of the one God — Father, Son, and Spirit — but it is appropriated to the persons in distinct ways: to the Father as source, to the Son as exemplar and wisdom (the forma exemplaris of all that is), to the Spirit as perfecter and love. The clause through him all things were made names the Son’s appropriated role: he is the eternal Wisdom of the Father, and the created order has its rational structure, its intelligibility, its form — because the Father has made it through his eternal Wisdom.

Bonaventure’s articulation of the doctrine is especially rich: the Son is the ars Patris, the Art of the Father, in whom the eternal forms of all that the Father will make are eternally present, and through whom the Father expresses these forms in the created order. The created order is therefore an expression of the eternal Son, and the rational intelligibility of the world is the trace (vestigium) of the Son who is its eternal exemplar.

Aquinas’s treatment in ST I.45 distinguishes creation from generation: the Son is generated eternally from the Father (the inner-trinitarian act), and all things are created in time through the Son (the act ad extra). The distinction preserves the absolute difference between the eternal generation and the temporal creation while making the second presuppose the first.

Strengths

• The doctrine of appropriations gives the clause its mature dogmatic articulation
• Bonaventure’s ars Patris is a permanently valuable image for the Son’s exemplary role
• Aquinas’s careful distinction between generation and creation is essential

Weaknesses

• The Aristotelian-essence vocabulary is not native to scripture
• Some scholastic articulations drifted toward speculative refinement of the Son’s exemplary role

Lutheran

Tradition: Luther, Lectures on Genesis; Luther’s catechetical writings; the Formula of Concord; Lutheran scholastic theology (Gerhard, Quenstedt)

The Lutheran tradition has held the clause in catholic form. Luther’s Lectures on Genesis read the opening chapters of Scripture as the trinitarian confession of the one creative act: when the Father speaks, the Word is the Son, and the breath that hovers over the waters is the Spirit. The reading is patristic in inheritance and Christological in application: the same Son who is the eternal Word, through whom the world was spoken into being, is the same Christ who is preached in the gospel.

The Lutheran integration with the gospel is characteristic. The clause is not held as a remote piece of cosmology but as the dogmatic substance of the gospel itself: the Christ who is preached, the Christ who is received in word and sacrament, is the same Christ through whom all things were made. The pastoral effect is that the Son’s cosmological role grounds the Son’s redemptive role: only the one who made all things can be the one who remakes all things in himself.

Strengths

• The catechetical use of the clause is pastorally strong
• The integration with the doctrine of the Word (Christ as the eternal Word spoken by the Father) is permanently valuable
• The Lutheran reading of Genesis 1 in trinitarian form is faithful to the patristic inheritance

Weaknesses

• Some Lutheran scholastic treatments pressed the doctrine into refinements the New Testament does not warrant

Reformed

Tradition: Calvin, Institutes I.13–14, II.12–14; Belgic Confession (1561) Article 10; Westminster Confession Ch. 2; Herman Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics II; T. F. Torrance, The Christian Doctrine of God

The Reformed tradition has held the clause in catholic form. Calvin’s articulation in Institutes I.13 affirms the Son’s cosmological role in the strongest terms: the eternal Word, through whom the Father made all things, is the same Word who became flesh in Christ. The Reformed reading of John 1 has been particularly attentive to the cosmological-redemptive arc: the prologue’s through whom all things came into being is the same Word whose incarnation is announced in and the Word became flesh.

Bavinck’s Reformed Dogmatics (vol. II) gives the most sustained modern Reformed treatment of the cosmological role of the Son. Bavinck’s category of general and special revelation is grounded in the doctrine: because all things are made through the Son, the created order itself is a revelation of the Son’s wisdom, and the Son’s incarnation is the climactic expression of what is already, in lesser ways, revealed in creation.

T. F. Torrance’s 20th-century recovery of the patristic-Reformed synthesis treats the clause as the dogmatic foundation of his entire theology of nature and grace. For Torrance, the rational intelligibility of the natural order — what makes natural science possible — is the trace of the Son’s eternal Wisdom in creation.

Strengths

• The Reformed tradition has held the catholic substance with care
• Bavinck’s integration of cosmology and redemption is a permanent contribution
• Torrance’s modern Reformed-Patristic synthesis is one of the great recent achievements

Weaknesses

• Some Reformed scholasticism pressed the doctrine into speculative refinements
• The 19th-century Reformed natural theology occasionally drifted away from the Christological foundation

Eastern Orthodox

Tradition: Athanasius; the Cappadocians; Maximus the Confessor, Ambigua and Questions to Thalassios; John of Damascus, On the Orthodox Faith; the iconographic tradition of Christ Pantokratōr; modern: Sergei Bulgakov, Dumitru Stăniloae

The Eastern tradition has held the clause in catholic form, with particular emphasis on the doctrine of the logoi. Maximus the Confessor develops the doctrine at length: the eternal Logos contains within himself the logoi — the eternal rational principles, the divine intentions — of all created things. To say that all things were made through him is to say that the rational intelligibility, the meaning, the purpose, of every created thing is rooted in the eternal Logos. The created order is therefore not merely a thing made by the Logos but a thing whose very being is grounded in the Logos’s eternal intention for it.

The doctrine has enormous pastoral and contemplative consequences. The contemplative encounter with creation — what the Eastern tradition calls natural contemplation (theōria physikē) — is the discernment of the logoi of created things, the perception of the eternal Logos in the things he has made. The clause therefore is not only a piece of dogmatic affirmation but a foundation for the church’s spiritual life.

The iconographic tradition expresses the same doctrine visually. The Pantokratōr in the dome — the Son enthroned, holding the gospel book, raising his hand in blessing — names the through whom all things were made: the cosmic ruler whose blessing reaches every created thing, whose Word holds the universe in being.

Strengths

• The doctrine of the logoi gives the clause a rich contemplative articulation
• The integration with the spiritual life (natural contemplation) is permanently valuable
• The iconographic embedding makes the doctrine visible in the liturgy
• Maximus’s articulation is one of the great patristic-monastic syntheses

Weaknesses

• The doctrine of the logoi can drift toward speculative cosmology if separated from the Christological foundation
• Some modern Russian sophiology pressed the doctrine in directions the catholic tradition has not received

Wesleyan

(See Wesleyan Voice below.)

Modern Ecumenical

Tradition: Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics III/1; Wolfhart Pannenberg, Systematic Theology II; T. F. Torrance, The Christian Doctrine of God and Theological Science; Jürgen Moltmann, God in Creation; Robert Jenson, Systematic Theology II; Sarah Coakley; Katherine Sonderegger, Systematic Theology I

The 20th-century recovery of trinitarian theology has been particularly attentive to this clause. Barth’s Church Dogmatics III/1 makes the doctrine of creation a Christological doctrine: the God who creates is the God revealed in Christ, and the Yes of God to creation is the Yes spoken in the Son. Barth’s reading reframes the entire doctrine of creation around the clause: the question of who creates determines the meaning of what is created.

Pannenberg’s Systematic Theology II treats the doctrine of creation as integrally trinitarian and integrally eschatological: the Son through whom all things were made is the Son who will be all in all (1 Cor. 15:28), and the creation’s coming-to-be has its end in the Son’s eschatological reign.

Moltmann’s God in Creation presses the doctrine in an ecological direction: if all things are made through the Son and held together in him (Col. 1:17), then the creation has its own integrity and its own value as a participant in the Son’s reign, not merely as a backdrop to human history.

Jenson’s Systematic Theology II reads the clause as the foundation of the doctrine of providence: the same Son through whom all things were made is the same Son who sustains all things in being, and the church’s reception of him in the eucharist is the participation in the same act of divine self-giving by which the world is held in being.

Strengths

• The modern recovery has restored the Christological centrality of the doctrine of creation
• The ecumenical convergence is remarkable: Barth, Torrance, Pannenberg, Jenson, and Sonderegger all read the clause in catholic form
• The ecological extension (Moltmann) opens the doctrine to contemporary pastoral need

Weaknesses

• Some modern reconstructions have so emphasized the Son’s role in creation that the Father has receded
• Some ecological readings press the doctrine toward panentheism in ways the catholic tradition has not received

Wesleyan Voice

Wesley’s confession of the Son as the agent of creation is unambiguous, catholic, and characteristically integrated with the doctrine of redemption. The Methodist Articles of Religion (1784), Article II, names the Son as the very and eternal God, of one substance with the Father, and Wesley’s Explanatory Notes on the New Testament read John 1:3 directly: all things were made by him, and without him was not anything made that was made. Wesley’s exposition: by him — as the instrumental cause; and without him — that is, separate from him, was not anything made that was made; both visible and invisible. The exposition is plain and catholic.

What is distinctively Wesleyan is the practical-soteriological integration. Wesley’s doctrine of the Son’s cosmological role is not held in a speculative register; it is held as the foundation of the gospel. Sermon 5, “Justification by Faith,” and Sermon 55, “On the Trinity,” both press the connection: the Christ who saves is the same Christ through whom all things were made, and the full divinity that makes him able to create is the full divinity that makes him able to save. The doctrine of the Son’s cosmological role is therefore not a piece of remote metaphysics; it is the dogmatic ground of the believer’s actual hope.

Wesley’s pastoral integration also presses toward the doctrine of prevenient grace. Because all things are made through the Son, the Son’s grace is already at work in every human life from before the moment of conscious faith — the light that enlightens every human being who comes into the world (John 1:9). The Wesleyan doctrine of prevenient grace is therefore not a soft universalism but a strong Christological affirmation: every human life is already related to the Son through whom that life was made, and the Son’s grace is at work in every human life drawing it toward the Father.

Charles Wesley’s hymnody confesses the cosmological Son on nearly every page. Christ, by highest heaven adored, / Christ, the everlasting Lord, / late in time behold him come, / offspring of a Virgin’s womb; / veiled in flesh the Godhead see, / hail the incarnate Deity, / pleased as man with men to dwell, / Jesus, our Immanuel — the everlasting Lord of the second line is the cosmological Son, and the late in time of the third line is the incarnation of the same Son. The hymn refuses the modern separation of cosmology and redemption: the Christ of the manger is the Christ of the eternal Word.

Charles’s Father, in whom we live, / in whom we are and move, draws directly on Acts 17 (in the Son we live and move and have our being) and confesses the cosmological-redemptive arc in trinitarian form.

The pastoral Wesleyan posture: confess the Son as the agent of the one creative act without modification; receive the doctrine as the ground of prevenient grace, that the Son who made every human life is the Son already at work in every human life drawing it toward the Father; refuse every separation of cosmology and redemption that would make the gospel a remote rescue rather than the climax of a love that has always been at work; let the doctrine ground the actual confidence of the believer that the Christ who saves is the Christ who has the cosmic authority to save.

Hymnody

The hymnody on this clause overlaps substantially with the hymnody on maker of heaven and earth (clause 3) and on the inner-trinitarian Christology (clauses 5–8), but a distinct cluster of hymns confesses the Son’s cosmological role specifically.

“Of the Father’s love begotten” (Prudentius, 4th c.) is the great hymnic confession of the cosmological Son. Of the Father’s love begotten, / ere the worlds began to be, / he is Alpha and Omega, / he the source, the ending he, / of the things that are, that have been, / and that future years shall see — the source, the ending of all that is, that has been, that shall be, is the eternal Son through whom all things were made.

“O come, all ye faithful” (Adeste, fideles, 18th c.) makes the connection explicit: God of God, Light of Light, / lo, he abhors not the Virgin’s womb; / very God, begotten, not created. The hymn places the cosmological Son in the Virgin’s womb.

“Hark! the herald angels sing” (Charles Wesley, 1739) confesses the cosmological Son in the incarnation: Christ, by highest heaven adored, / Christ, the everlasting Lord.

“Christ is the world’s Light” (Fred Pratt Green, 1968) confesses the cosmological Son in ecumenical-modern register: Christ is the world’s Light, Christ and none other; / born in our darkness, he became our brother.

“Praise to the Lord, the Almighty” (Joachim Neander, 1680) confesses the cosmological Son in the trinitarian doxology: praise to the Lord, who o’er all things so wondrously reigneth.

“Let all things now living” (Katherine K. Davis, 1939) confesses the cosmological Son in the language of universal praise: let all things now living a song of thanksgiving / to God the Creator triumphantly raise.

“All creatures of our God and King” (Francis of Assisi, 13th c.; trans. William Draper, 1919) confesses the cosmological Son by naming the creatures whose praise rises through him: all creatures of our God and King, / lift up your voice and with us sing.

“For the beauty of the earth” (Folliott S. Pierpoint, 1864) confesses the cosmological Son in the form of thanksgiving for created beauty: for the beauty of the earth, / for the glory of the skies, / for the love which from our birth / over and around us lies, / Lord of all, to thee we raise / this our hymn of grateful praise.

For the liturgical year: this clause is properly placed at Christmas and Epiphany (the Word who made all things now made flesh) and at the Easter Vigil (the Exultet’s announcement that this is the night in which the Author of all things has reordered all things).

Pastoral and Liturgical Use

Three pastoral tasks attach to this clause.

The first is teaching the parish to hear the Trinitarian shape of the one creative act. Most parishioners hear the doctrine of creation as a doctrine of the Father alone: the Father made the world, the Son redeemed the world, the Spirit sanctifies the church. The creed refuses the separation. The Father is the maker (clause 3), and the Son is the one through whom all things were made (clause 9), and the Spirit is the giver of life (clause 17). The creative act is one, accomplished by the three persons in their proper modes. The pastor’s task is to teach the parish to read Genesis 1 trinitarianly: the Word by which God speaks is the Son, and the Spirit that hovers over the waters is the Spirit. The trinitarian reading of Genesis is not an imposition on the text; it is the catholic reading that the church has held from Irenaeus onward.

The second is restoring the dignity of the created order. The clause is the church’s strongest dogmatic refusal of every gnostic and dualist temptation. The material order, the body, the sensible world, the earth itself — these are not the work of a lower demiurge or a degraded principle; they are the work of the eternal Son. The pastor’s task is to teach the parish that the body matters, the earth matters, the work of human hands matters — because all of this was made through the Son, and the Son became flesh, and the Son will raise the body in glory. The Christian’s care for the body, for the neighbor’s body, for the earth, for the work of human hands, is the practical confession of the creed’s through him all things were made.

The third is the practical integration of cosmology and redemption. The Christ who saves is the Christ through whom all things were made. The pastor’s task is to refuse every separation. The Christ of the manger is the Christ of the eternal Word; the Christ of the cross is the Christ who holds the universe in being; the Christ of the resurrection is the Christ in whom all things were made and in whom all things will be made new. When the parish confesses the creed at the Sunday eucharist, the cosmological clause is not a piece of remote metaphysics; it is the church’s confession that the one we receive in word and sacrament is the one through whom we exist.

For the preacher: the clause comes around in the Sunday creed every week and can pass through the congregation’s lips without any sense of its weight. Once a year, at Christmas or at Easter, preach the connection: the child in the manger, the man on the cross, the risen Lord — this is the one through whom all things were made. Let the cosmological scale of the confession press the congregation toward the actual breadth of the gospel.

Further Reading

• Genesis 1:1–3 — In the beginning God created… and God said
• Psalm 33:6, 9 — by the word of the Lord the heavens were made
• Psalm 104 — the trinitarian-cosmological psalm
• Proverbs 8:22–31 — Wisdom at the creation
• Wisdom of Solomon 7:22–8:1; 9:1–2 — Wisdom as agent of creation
• Sirach 24 — Wisdom in creation and Torah
• John 1:1–18 — the prologue
• 1 Corinthians 8:6 — one God, the Father, from whom… one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom
• Romans 11:36 — from him and through him and to him are all things
• Colossians 1:15–20 — the cosmic Christ
• Ephesians 1:9–10 — all things gathered up in Christ
• Hebrews 1:1–4 — the Son through whom God made the worlds
• Hebrews 2:10; 11:3 — through whom all things, and the worlds prepared by the word
• Revelation 3:14 — the origin (ἀρχή) of God’s creation
• Irenaeus, Against Heresies IV.20.1 (the two hands of the Father)
• Athanasius, On the Incarnation §§1–3
• Basil of Caesarea, On the Holy Spirit §§3–8 (the prepositions)
• Augustine, On the Trinity V; Literal Commentary on Genesis
• Maximus the Confessor, Ambigua 7, 41 (the doctrine of the logoi)
• John of Damascus, On the Orthodox Faith I.7, II.2
• Bonaventure, Itinerarium II–III (the trace of the eternal Art)
• Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae I.45 (creation), I.39 (appropriations)
• Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion I.13–14
• Belgic Confession (1561), Article 10
• Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter 2.3; Chapter 4
• Articles of Religion of the Methodist Church (1784), Article II
• John Wesley, Explanatory Notes upon the New Testament on John 1
• John Wesley, Standard Sermons, Sermons 5, 55
• Charles Wesley, “Hark! the herald angels sing” (1739)
• Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics III/1 (the doctrine of creation)
• T. F. Torrance, The Christian Doctrine of God (T&T Clark, 1996); Theological Science (Oxford, 1969)
• Wolfhart Pannenberg, Systematic Theology II (Eerdmans, 1994)
• Jürgen Moltmann, God in Creation (Harper & Row, 1985)
• Robert Jenson, Systematic Theology II (Oxford, 1999)
• Katherine Sonderegger, Systematic Theology I (Fortress, 2015)
• Lewis Ayres, Nicaea and Its Legacy (Oxford, 2004)