A Change of Focus
With the opening of Incarnation, Athanasius begins a gradual transition from the focus in Pagans on the loss and restoration of the knowledge of God to the subject of the loss and restoration of immortality, which becomes the primary theme of Incarnation. Athanasius starts out by summarizing the content of Pagans in a manner that further supports my argument about the purpose of Pagans. He describes Pagans as a treatise “regarding the error of the Gentiles concerning idols and their
superstition, how their invention was from the beginning, and that out of wickedness human beings devised for themselves the worship of idols,” which also contains “points regarding the divinity of the Word of the Father and his providence and power in all things, that through him the good Father arranges all things, by him all things are moved, and in him are given life” (Incarnation 1). For Athanasius, Pagans was meant to demonstrate the necessity of the cross by highlighting the evil and irrationality that arose as a result of humans forgetting their Creator and replacing him with gods of their own invention.
Having summarized Pagans, Athanasius proceeds by anticipating a theme that he will return to later in Incarnation: the cross is mocked by unbelievers because of its weakness, but this very weakness shows the power of God, for it was through the powerless cross that Christ did the “impossible” (ἀδύνατα) in defeating death, overthrowing idolatry, and revealing God. Athanasius argues that mockery of Christ’s crucifixion ultimately promotes the worship of Christ because:
The more [Christ] is mocked by unbelievers by so much he provides a greater witness of his divinity, because what human beings cannot understand as impossible, these he shows to be possible, and what human beings mock as unseemly, these he renders fitting by his own goodness, and what human beings through sophistry laugh at as merely human, these by his power he shows to be divine, overturning the illusion of idols by his own
apparent degradation through the cross, invisibly persuading those who mock and disbelieve to recognize his divinity and power.
(Incarnation 1)
The apparent degradation of the cross presents a stumbling block to so-called wise persons who are too proud to believe that God could work in this way. However, to those who believe, the apparent powerlessness of Christ on the cross proves the power of God and strengthens their faith. This is because the cross shows that God was able to do the impossible through the most unlikely of means.
Athanasius’s transition from the focus in Pagans on rationality and knowledge of God to the subject of mortality continues in Incarnation 2–7. In Incarnation 2, Athanasius introduces the subject of cosmogony, which leads to a second account of the creation of the universe and the fall of human beings.27 He observes that the various Greek cosmogonies rob
God of his glory as Creator, teaching that the universe was formed through spontaneity,28 preexistent matter,29 or a creator other than the
Father of Christ.30 Athanasius proceeds to contrast these views with his
understanding of creation. In Pagans, Athanasius’s account of creation and the fall emphasizes the significance of the rationality of the human soul due to its formation according to the image of God, which gave humans the ability to know God. The nature of this account helps to set up Athanasius’s argument for the need to restore rationality and the knowledge of God. In Incarnation 3, the account of the creation and the fall reaffirms humanity’s rationality, but it places more emphasis on matters related to human mortality and immortality. The account begins
27On the first account, see above, pp. 40–45; Pagans 2–5.
28Athanasius attributes this to the Epicureans. Cf. the denigrative account in
Aelian, fr. 61.
29Attributed to Plato. See Tim. 31b–33a.
30Athanasius is thinking of Marcionism, which is described similarly in
by again linking humanity’s rationality to its formation according to the image of God:
[God] seeing that by the principle of [humanity’s] own coming into being it would not be able to endure eternally (καὶ θεωρήσας ὡς οὐχ ἱκανὸν εἴη κατὰ τὸν τῆς ἰδίας γενέσεως λόγον διαμένειν ἀεί), he granted them a further gift, creating human beings not simply like all the irrational (ἄλογα) animals upon the earth but making them according to his own image, giving them a share of the power of his own Word (μεταδοὺς αὐτοῖς καὶ τῆς τοῦ ἰδίου Λόγου δυνάμεως), so that having as it were shadows of the Word and being made rational (ἵνα ὥσπερ σκιάς τινας ἔχοντες τοῦ Λόγου καὶ γενόμενοι λογικοὶ), they might be able to abide in blessedness, living the true life which is really that of the holy ones in paradise.
(Incarnation 3)
As in Pagans, Athanasius at least partially defines the formation of human beings according to the image of God in terms of the experience of rationality, and describes this rationality as a participation in the Word’s own rationality.31 Human rationality is again associated with the
preservation of immortality.
The Restoration of Immortality
From here, the subject of immortality becomes central to Athanasius’s account of the creation and fall of human beings. God created humans with free choice, and he desired for them to use their contemplative abilities to remain in paradise and in relationship to himself. God also recognized that free choice involved risk. Humans could use their contemplative powers to focus on bodily pleasures, which would lead
31The English use of “Word” and “rationality” for λόγος and λογικός of
course hides the cognate relationship between these Greek words. The language of participation indicates that humans do not intrinsically possess rationality; their experience of rationality is contingent on their relationship to the Word. For more on participation, see above, pp. 41–43, and Chapter 6.
them to invent evil. The implicit problem with this option is that allowing humans to live forever after abandoning God and discovering evil would ultimately result in a world filled with unending horror.32 Therefore,
according to Athanasius, God, being wise and good, established the law of death to protect humans from this scenario. Consequently, if the first humans “guarded the grace” of their rational powers and their formation according to the image of God, using it only for good, they would preserve their immortality, living the angelic life with God. On the other hand, if they turned from God, becoming evil, “they would know that they endure the corruption of death according to nature (γινώσκοιεν ἑαυτοὺς τὴν ἐν θανάτῳ κατὰ φύσιν φθορὰν ὑπομένειν), and no longer live in paradise, but thereafter dying outside of it, would remain in death and corruption (μένειν ἐν τῷ θανάτῳ καὶ ἐν τῇ φθορᾷ)”(Incarnation 3 TM).
Here, Athanasius introduces an important theme in Incarnation—that death is accompanied by corruption. Athanasius describes his
understanding of this relationship in the subsequent section, which discusses the fall of human beings. He writes:
For the transgression of the commandment returned them to the natural state (τὸ κατὰ φύσιν), so that, just as they, not being (οὐκ ὄντες), came to be, so also they might rightly endure in time the corruption unto non-being (τὴν εἰς τὸ μὴ εἶναι φθορὰν). For if having a nature that did not once exist (τὸ μὴ εἶναί ποτε), they were called into existence by the Word’s advent and love for human beings, it follows that when human beings were bereft of the
knowledge of God and had turned to things which exist not—evil is non- being, the good is being, since it has come into being from the existing God—then they were bereft also of eternal being. But this, being
decomposed, is to remain in death and corruption (μένειν ἐν τῷ θανάτῳ καὶ τῇ φθορᾷ). For the human being is by nature mortal (θνητός), having come
32In this scenario individuals could subject one another to every evil
imagineable for the sake of attempting to satisfy their corporeal desires.
Exploited persons would never be able to escape from these unchecked terrors— not even through death, since there is no death.
into being from nothing (ἐξ οὐκ ὄντων γεγονώς). But because of his likeness (ὁμοιότητα) to the One who Is, which, if had guarded through his
comprehension (κατανοήσεως) of him, would have blunted his natural corruption (φύσιν φθοράν), he would have remained incorruptible (ἔμεινεν ἄφθαρτος).
(Incarnation 4)
Human beings, having been created by God out of nothing, are naturally pulled towards this nothingness. However, by the grace of participation in the Word and contemplation of God, humans were initially protected from this draw towards non-existence.33 However,
when humans turned their contemplation from God to themselves and sensual things, they forfeited everything that anchored them to goodness and life; consequently, they are pulled back towards the nothingness from which they came. In Incarnation 10, Athanasius contrasts this
understanding of death accompanied by corruption with the almost sleep- like death (not accompanied by corruption) that human beings now experience as they await “the general resurrection of all” from the dead.
This second account of the creation and fall of human beings provides the justification for Athanasius’s claim that humans required
33To Athanasius, the Word is capable of sustaining human beings because he
is incorruptible. On Athanasius’s understanding of incorruptibility, it is important to note that, as Louis Bouyer, L’Incarnation et l’Église-Corps du Christ
dans la théologie de saint Athanase (Paris: Éditions du Cerf, 1943), 37, observes,
“L’αφθαρσία n’est pas simplement le fait de ne pas mourir: elle est la propriété d’une vie qui n’a en elle-même aucune raison de cesser jamais d’être, qui se définirait au contraire comme de l’être à l’état pur, si l’on peut dire.”
Incorruptibility is not a negative term, meaning merely the inability to perish. Instead, it is a divine quality, proper to the eternal Creator. This aspect of incorruptibility is expressed well in Johannes Roldanus, Le Christ et l’homme dans
la théologie d’Athanase d’Alexandrie (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1968), 59–60. Roldanus
writes: “[Ἀφθαρσία] elle est une expression synonyme de comprendre Dieu comme celui qui, seul, est et vit réellement et qui, par là, peut donner existence et vie.” As such, incorruptibility should be associated with life more than death.
salvation from death and corruption. After reminding readers of the evil actions that followed humanity’s turn away from God (Incarnation 5), Athanasius devotes the subsequent five sections to explaining how the incarnation of the Word occurred as a philanthropic response to
humanity’s need for rescue from death and corruption (Incarnation 6–10). In his first discussion about the Word’s philanthropic response, Athanasius presents his famous “divine dilemma” argument (Incarnation 6–7). God, Athanasius says, had made the law proclaiming that if human beings transgressed his commandment they would die. After humans disobeyed his commandment and began to die, God was placed in a difficult position (by human standards, at least). If God revoked the law of death, it would invalidate his statement about death, which by extension would make him appear to be a liar (Incarnation 6, 7). On the other hand, “it was supremely improper that the workmanship of God in human beings should disappear either through their own negligence or through the deceit of demons” because this would make God appear to be weak (Incarnation 6). The only apparent solution—repentance—would temporarily halt human sin, but it would still make God appear inconsistent, leaving humanity marked by corruption and deprived of being in the image of God (Incarnation 7). Consequently, Athanasius argues, there was only one solution that would solve all of these problems—the incarnation of the Word.
Through the course of Incarnation, Athanasius describes the incarnation of the Word in several ways. It is beyond the scope of this paper to examine these here, but it is important to grasp his basic logic regarding the Word’s incarnate presence and experience. Athanasius frequently uses forms of ἐνανθρωπήσαντα (literally, “enhumanization”) to speak of the incarnation, which expresses the notion of the Word coming to be “in” a human being for the sake of humanity’s salvation.34
Athanasius says that in the incarnation the Word “takes for himself a body and that not foreign to our own (καὶ τοῦτο οὐκ ἀλλότριον τοῦ ἡμετέρου)… from a spotless and stainless virgin” (Incarnation 8).
As a result of the Word coming to humanity in this way, being joined to a body, the Word was able to address the problems that had become inherent to humankind. In Incarnation 8–10, Athanasius summarizes the Word’s intentions for his incarnation, death, and resurrection. The Word desired that:
On the one hand, with all dying in him the law concerning corruption in human beings might be undone (its power being fully expended in the lordly body and no longer having any ground against similar human beings), and, on the other hand, that as human beings had turned towards corruption he might turn them again to incorruptibility and give them life from death, by making the body his own and by the grace of the resurrection banishing death from them as straw from fire.
(Incarnation 8)35
Athanasius credits the Word with resolving two specific problems— guilt under the law, requiring the death of all, and corruption in death. Motivated by his love for humankind, the Word resolved these by taking a body that is like (ὅμοιον) other human bodies but of the Virgin, and then offering it “to the Father.” For Athanasius, Christ’s death pays the debt required by the law of death, and his death and subsequent
resurrection rescues the human body from the corruption that accompanied death.
Athanasius “uses the word ‘incarnation’ in a broader sense than has since become customary in theology.… ‘Incarnation’ does not simply refer to the birth of Jesus from Mary… but rather refers to this birth when seen from, and then described in, the perspective of the Cross.” See John Behr, The Nicene Faith (Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2004), 1:184–85.
35See also the similar summaries in Incarnation 9, 10. Cf. Augustine, ep. 140.15
In sections 10 and 11, Athanasius makes an important thematic transition. As we have seen, in Incarnation 6–10, Athanasius focuses on explaining how the incarnation of the Word occurred as a loving response to humanity’s loss of immortality. At the end of Incarnation 10, Athanasius provides a summary of the effects of Christ’s death and resurrection that is very similar to the text that was just quoted (Incarnation 8). Athanasius explains again that Christ’s sacrifice fulfilled the law of death and his resurrection ended the corruption accompanying death. Athanasius then writes, “this, therefore, is the first motive (αἰτία) for the incarnation of the Saviour” (Incarnation 10 TM). So, in Incarnation, Athanasius considers the abolition of corruption and fulfillment of the law of death to be one of the two principal motives for the Word’s incarnation.
At the beginning of this chapter, I claimed that Athanasius uses two arguments in Pagans-Incarnation to explain the reasonableness of the cross—one concerning immortality and one concerning rationality and the knowledge of God. In the quotation above (Incarnation 10), Athanasius explicitly identifies themes associated with the restoration of immortality as the “first motive” for the incarnation. Later, in Incarnation 16,
Athanasius explicitly identifies the restoration of the knowledge of God as the other “motive” for the incarnation.
The Restoration of the Knowledge of God
In Incarnation 11–19, Athanasius returns to the subject of the knowledge of God. First, Athanasius says that God created human beings to be distinct from animals, which is why God initially provided them with the ability to know him, their maker. Whereas animals are “irrational
creatures” because they lack the knowledge of their creator, human beings have been made according to God’s “own image and according to this likeness, so that understanding through such grace the image, I mean the Word of the Father, they might be able to receive through him a notion
of the Father, and knowing the Creator they might live the happy and truly blessed life” (Incarnation 11).36
Then, repeating the broad ideas outlined in Pagans about humanity’s fall, the loss of the knowledge of God, and the invention of idols
(Incarnation 11), Athanasius proceeds to explain how the cross offered the solution to this loss. Although “the grace of being in the image was sufficient to know God the Word, and through him the Father,” God “anticipated also their carelessness” and revealed himself through created things, so that they might know him even if their attention “descended gradually to lower things” (Incarnation 12). Athanasius lists various ways in which God revealed himself before the incarnation, including through the law, the prophets, the “heavens,” and the harmony of the universe. Yet, despite these opportunities, human beings were focused on bodily things and “sated themselves even more with evils and sins, so that they no longer appeared rational, but from their ways of life were reckoned irrational” (Incarnation 12). Therefore, because human beings were now focused entirely on bodily things, it was necessary for the Word to appear in a body so that he, being the image of God, might reveal to them the Father and, through his works, demonstrate his own identity as the Word of God (Incarnation 15; 16–18).
Although the Word revealed his identity in many ways during his lifetime, the most dramatic revelation occurred as a result of the cross. Following the narratives in the Synoptic gospels, Athanasius claims that “all creation confessed that he who was made known and suffered in the body was not simply a human being but Son of God and Saviour for all. For the sun turned back and the earth shook and the mountains were rent, and all were awed” (Incarnation 19).37 Creation’s response to the
36Unlike several of his predecessors, Athanasius does not distinguish between
God’s image and likeness. See Bernard, L’Image de Dieu, 27–29.
Word’s death showed “the whole of creation to be his servant, witnessing in fear the advent of the Master. In this way, then, God the Word showed himself to human beings by his works” (Incarnation 19 TM).
From here, Athanasius proceeds to reiterate the content of Incarnation 6–10, though in summarized form (Incarnation 20–21). It is important to note that Athanasius admits he is repeating himself, but he reasons that “it is better to submit to the blame of repetition than to omit anything that should be laid down” (Incarnation 20). This shows that Athanasius is careful to include everything that he considers to be relevant for his purposes in Pagans-Incarnation. By extension, he has omitted any subjects that he considers to be extraneous to his argument, such as the subject of the Holy Spirit.
Following this summary, Athanasius takes up the questions and objections raised by four groups. First, he addresses critics outside of the church whose arguments against the reasonableness of the cross appear to have troubled Athanasius’s audience. Athanasius counters each objection with arguments about why Christ’s death had to occur through the cross (Incarnation 21–24). Second, Athanasius responds to earnest Christians who also wonder if the cross was necessary. Athanasius provides a list of outcomes that, he believes, could only have been accomplished by the cross. Through the cross, the Word bore “the curse,” paid the ransom of death, drew Jews and Gentiles to himself, purified the air from demons, overthrew the devil, and opened the way to heaven (Incarnation 25).38 The
cross also allowed the Word to demonstrate his victory over death by