Category: Theology

Here is a brief analytical review I did for my Church History class at Biblical Seminary on Athanasius, On the Incarnation of the Word of God.

In “On the Incarnation of the Word,” Athanasius, Patriarch of Alexandria in the fourth century, offers a comprehensive apology for an orthodox understanding of the incarnation of Christ.  The apology is a masterful blending of narrative theology (to use an anachronistic term) and philosophical analysis.

Athanasius begins with an argument from creation.   He argues that there are different parts of creation that serve different functions, just as there are different parts of a human body.  One part cannot cause a part with a different function to exist.  For example, the Sun cannot cause the Moon to exist.  It follows, Athanasius argues, that every part of creation must have been brought into existence by a cause prior to any individual part.  Athanasius distinguishes this view of creation from the Platonic notion of eternally preexisting matter.  The Christian notion of the creator-God, unlike the Platonic ergon or the Gnostic demiurge, alone accounts for God as the cause of creation’s existence.

Athanasius then turns to the creation and rebellion of man.  Human beings were created by God “after His own image, giving them a portion even of the power of His own word.”[1]  Even though humans were “by nature mortal,” they were capable of immortality because the “likeness” of God would “stay [their] natural corruption.”[2]  But men turned away from God and thereby “became the cause of their own corruption in death. . . .”[3]  The effect of man’s rebellion was a sort of feedback loop of corruption:  “the race of man was perishing; the rational man made in God’s image was disappearing, and the handiwork of God was in process of dissolution.”[4]

God’s solution to the dissolution caused by human sin was the incarnation.  The incarnation had two purposes:  to end the law of sin and death, and to facilitate human knowledge of God.  Concerning the first purpose of the incarnation, God had mercy on humankind and “condescended to our corruption” by becoming a man, Jesus Christ.[5]  The death and resurrection of Christ ended the law of death for all humankind.[6]  Concerning the second purpose, God had provided evidence of Himself in the creation, the law and the prophets, but men ignored this evidence.[7]  Christ came to remind men of the nature and purpose for which they were created.  The life and works of Christ testify even more clearly than creation, the law, or the prophets to the glory for which man was originally created.[8] After describing the two purposes of the incarnation, Athanasius anticipates some objections to his Christology, in particular that an incarnate God must be part of the creation and therefore no longer God over creation.  He notes that Christ was not “bound to His body,” but was sustaining the universe at the same time as he was “wielding” his body.[9]  Yet, at the same time, his body was truly his own and was a real human body.[10]

The next chapters describe reasons for Christ’s death by crucifixion and for his resurrection on the third day.  Athanasius argues that the crucifixion demonstrated that Christ did not die of natural causes as an ordinary man.  Moreover, the public nature of crucifixion guaranteed that Christ truly died and forecloses any argument that the resurrection was faked.  Further, the crucifixion is a sign of God’s invitation to participate in the atonement:  “[f]or it is only on the cross that a man dies with his hands spread out.”[11]
  Finally, three days in the grave was a long enough period to demonstrate that Christ had truly died, but not so long as to raise suspicion that his body had been stolen.            

Having established the victory of Christ’s death and resurrection over the sinful trajectory set by man’s rebellion, Athanasius turns to the question why the Jews and the Greeks reject the claims of Christ.  With respect to the Jews, Athanasius argues that the Hebrew scriptures clearly prophecy the passion and death of Christ, including the particulars of the cross and Daniel’s supposed prediction of the date of Christ’s birth.  He further argues that the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem shows that Judaism has been judged by Christ.            

Concerning the Greeks, Athanasius argues for the propriety of the incarnation, a notion Greek philosophy thought scandalous.  God became incarnate in Christ so that he could offer true healing and restoration rather than mere correction by fiat.[14]  Moreover, human corruption was not ontologically separate from embodied humanity, and therefore could only be addressed by embodiment.[15]  Corruption and death had become intrinsic to human nature and would have remained so had Christ not become incarnate and been raised incorruptible.  Finally, the incarnate Christ is superior to pagan gods in the quality of his works, the continuing power of his presence (evidenced in the lives of his followers and the effects of the sign of the Cross), and Christianity’s capacity to pacify warring cultures.             

Athanasius sums up his argument by highlighting the triumphal progress of the gospel.  The telos of human history is realized in Christ:  “He was made man that we might be made God.”[16]  This process of theosis is progressively illuminating the entire world.[17]  All who search the Scriptures with pure intentions, Athanasius concludes, will clearly see and understand the glory of Christ.

II.  Discussion

The “Incarnation of the Son of God” is historically significant because it presents a rich account of the importance of the incarnation in Athanasius’ theology.  Athanasius was a key defender of orthodox Christology against Arius.  The “Incarnation” establishes that only one who is both the creator and a human being can remove the corruption of humanity that results from sin.

Athanasius’ anthropology, theory of atonement, and eschatology as reflected in the “Incarnation” also offer interesting resources for contemporary Christian theology as we wrestle to come to grips with the natural sciences after Darwin.  Athanasius’ anthropology  answers reductionist accounts of human nature without requiring an unsustainable reliance on prelapsarian humans with incorruptible physical bodies.  For Athanasius, the “likeness” of God  in prelapsarian humanity kept corruption at bay rather than anything inherent in the physical human body.

The “Christus Victor” emphasis of Athanasius’ theory of atonement and his eschatology of theosis likewise provide helpful resources to missional Christians living in a scientific age.  Evolutionary psychology suggests that humans are programmed by nature and history for selfishness.[18]  In our “natural” state, we are mere brutes.  Only the presence of Christ can defeat our brutish nature and enable us to live in consonance with the divine.  Moreover, the victorious presence of the divine in redeemed humanity establishes the conditions necessary for all of creation to realize its potential.  The presence of Christ in the Church is the means by which God ultimately will direct the entire creation to its proper telos.