==========================
This seems to be above
29)
Chrysostom: Homilies on the Gospel of St. Matthew
The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom.
Matthew I. 17.
How then was He of the root of Jesse? How was He a rod? how Son of man? how was Mary His mother? how was He of David’s seed? how did he “take the form of a servant?” .how “was the Word made flesh?” .and how saith
Paul to the Romans, “Of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is God over all?” Therefore that He was of us, and of our substance, φυρματο.and of the Virgin’s womb, is manifest from these things, and from others beside; but how, is not also manifest. Do not either thou then inquire; but receive what is revealed, and be not curious about what is kept secret
==========================
30 and 31 are nothings
==========================
This seems to be above.
32) Chrysostom: Homilies on the Acts of the Apostles and the Epistle to the Romans
The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Roman
Homily XVI on Rom. ix. 1.
Ver. 4, 5. “To whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the Law, and the service of God, and the promises; whose are the father’s, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, Who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.”
==========================
33) Chrysostom: Homilies on the Acts of the Apostles and the Epistle to the Romans
The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans Homily XIX on Rom. xi. 7.
Romans 9:5
For when he tells of any great and unutterable thing of this kind,
he ends in wonder with a doxology. And this he does in regard to the Son also. For in that passage also he went on to the very same thing that he does here. “Of whom is Christ according to the flesh, Who is over all God blessed forever. Amen.
==========================
34 is nothing
==========================
35) Chrysostom: Homilies on First and Second Corinthians
Homilies on First Corinthians.
Homily XX
[6.] Nor yet, if you observe, hath he distributed the names as if belonging exclusively, assigning to the Son the name Lord, and to the Father, God. For the Scripture useth also often to interchange them; as when it saith, (
Ps. cx. 1.) “The Lord saith unto My Lord;” and again, (
Ps. lxv. 8.) “Wherefore God Thy God hath appointed Thee;” and,
“Of Whom is Christ according to the flesh, Who is God over all.” And in many instances you may see these names changing their places. Besides, if they were allotted to each nature severally, and if the Son were not God, and God as the Father, yet continuing a Son: after saying, “but to us there is but One God,” it would have been superfluous, his adding the word “Father,” with a view to declare the Unbegotten. For the word of God was sufficient to explain this, if it were such as to denote Him only.
==========================
36 - looks like index from 35
37= nothing
==========================
38)
Chrysostom: Homilies on the Gospel of St. John and the Epistle to the Hebrews
The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John.
John 1.1
“Yet observe,” says he, “the Father is named with the addition of the article, but the Son without it.” What then, when the Apostle says, “The Great God, and our Saviour Jesus Christ”
; and again, “Who is above all, God”?
==========================
39)
Chrysostom: Homilies on the Gospel of St. John and the Epistle to the Hebrews
The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John.
John 4.21,22
. Or rather, one would not be wrong in calling both these things “salvation” which He said was “of the Jews”; which Paul implied when he said, “Of whom is Christ according to the flesh, who is God over all.”
Literally, singular, personal epithet is a succinct statement that covers every point of the rule as expounded by Glassius and Sharp. It is, in fact, more Glassius than Sharp. It's certainly not my own. You can stop being silly now.