《反亞流（Contra Arianos）》2.14中告訴我們：

11. Hence it holds that the Apostle’s expression, ‘He made,’ does not prove that the Word is made, but that body, which He took like ours; and in consequence He is called our brother, as having become man. But if it has been shewn, that, even though the word ‘made’ be referred to the Very Word, it is used for ‘begat,’ what further perverse expedient will they be able to fall upon, now that the present discussion has cleared up the word in every point of view, and shewn that the Son is not a work, but in Essence indeed the Father’s offspring, while in the Economy, according to the good pleasure [271] of the Father, He was on our behalf made, and consists as man? For this reason then it is said by the Apostle, ‘Who was faithful to Him that made Him;’ and in the Proverbs, even creation is spoken of. For so long as we are confessing that He became man, there is no question about saying, as was observed before, whether ‘He became,’ or ‘He has been made,’ or ‘created,’ or ‘formed,’ or ‘servant,’ or ‘son of an handmaid,’ or ‘son of man,’ or ‘was constituted,’ or ‘took His journey,’ or ‘bridegroom,’ or ‘brother’s son,’ or ‘brother.’ All these terms happen to be proper to man’s constitution; and such as these do not designate the Essence of the Word, but that He has become man.

故此，使徒’祂造（He made）‘的這個表述是正確的，它並不是說道是被造的，而是指那個祂所取的與我們一樣的身體。故此，祂成為人，被稱作是我們的兄弟。即使當‘造（made）’這個字被用來指這位道的時候，它乃是被當作‘生（begat），’現今的討論已經從每一個角度陳明了這個字的意義，並指明子（Son）不是一個成品，從素質上就是父的流出。而根據父的良善旨意，在經綸（Economy）中，祂為了我們的緣故被造、並被組成為一個人。我要再看看他們還能掰出其他錯誤的推論？因着這個原因，使徒說，‘祂向那造祂者盡忠。’在箴言中，甚至稱祂為被造之物。只要我們承認祂成為人，不論我們說‘祂成為，’或‘祂被造作（has been made），’或‘被造（created），’或‘被塑造（formed），’或‘奴僕，’或‘使女之子（son of an handmaid），’或‘人子，’或‘被構成（was constituted），’或‘走了祂的旅程，’或‘新郎’或‘兄弟的兒子，’或‘兄弟，’都是沒有問題的。這些詞彙都能夠合適的別用來描述人的構成。它們都不代表道的素質，而是祂的成為人。