2/2/2026

 

Samuel Clifford

 

Overview

 

Athanasius of Alexandria is one of the defining figures of early Christian history. He was born around 296-298 A.D. in Alexandria and he rose to prominence as a deacon under Bishop Alexander. He became a central defender of Nicene orthodoxy during the Arian controversy. His life was marked by conflict. He faced five exiles, constant political pressure, and a decades‑long struggle against emperors, bishops, and theologians who opposed the full deity of Christ. Yet he remained unwavering. Some emperors opposed him such as Constantius and Valens. Yet others supported or tolerated him such as Constantine and Jovian. To Athanasius’ supporters he was Athanasius contra mundum, “Athanasius against the world”, because he refused to compromise on the confession that the Son is fully God, of the same essence (homoousios) with the Father. As bishop of Alexandria for forty‑five turbulent years, he shaped the theological trajectory of the church, influenced monasticism through his Life of Antony, and left a legacy that would define Christian orthodoxy for centuries.

 

He wrote On the Incarnation as a theological and pastoral response to the central question raised by both pagans and heretical Christians: Why did God become man? Athanasius opens On the Incarnation by addressing a man named Macarius, a Christian acquaintance who had asked him for a clear and orderly explanation of the faith. Although the name was common and the exact identity of this Macarius is unknown, Athanasius’ tone suggests he was an educated believer, perhaps a friend, patron, or spiritual student seeking deeper understanding. By dedicating the work to him, Athanasius frames the entire treatise as pastoral rather than polemical, offering guidance rather than argument. However, he does also address heretical views so while it is pastoral it still has apologetic intent. 

 

Chapter One

 

Firstly, Athanasius provides an early view that Jesus is in view when John wrote in his gospel about the “Word.”

 

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.” (John‬ ‭1‬:‭1‬-‭3‬, ‭14‬ ‭NASB)

 

Athanasius writes “We also, by God’s grace, briefly indicated that the Word of the father is Himself divine, that all things that are owe their being to His will and power, and that it is through Him that the Father gives order to creation… and consider also the Word’s becoming Man and His divine Appearing in our midst.” (On The Incarnation Chapter 1).

 

Athanasius treats John 1 as foundational to Christology. Athanasius takes John’s writing these literal metaphysical claims about the Son’s identity:

 

-Eternal (“in the beginning”)

-Distinct yet inseparable from the Father (“with God”)

-Fully divine (“was God”)

-Creator (“all things came into being through Him”)

-Incarnate (“became flesh”)

 

Athanasius continues to write about the incarnation stating that Jesus [the Word of the Father], “has not assumed a body as proper to His own nature…He has been manifested in a human body for this reason only, out of the love and goodness of His Father, for the salvation of us men” (On The Incarnation Chapter 1). Athanasius is stating that the Word did not take flesh because He needed it, lacked something, or was naturally embodied. He took flesh solely out of love, as an act of divine condescension.

 

Athanasius after this turns to creation and the Word. He states, “the renewal of creation has been wrought by the Self-same Word Who made it in the beginning” (On The Incarnation Chapter 1). He expands this thought by pointing out that the same Word that effected salvation of the world is the same Word that made the world in the beginning. Athanasius first critiques various philosophical views, including the Epicurean belief that the universe arose by chance and Plato’s idea that God formed the world from pre-existent matter. Against these, Athanasius affirms the Christian doctrine that God created all things out of nothing, not from pre-existing substance, and did so through the Word. This reinforces the unity of divine action: the Word is not a secondary craftsman or a demiurge, but the omnipotent Creator Himself. Athanasius also rebukes Gnostic claims that the Maker is not the Father of Jesus Christ, insisting that true Christian teaching recognizes the Father as both Creator and Redeemer, working through the Son to bring about both the origin and restoration of creation.

Later he explains that the reason he must talk about creation when he is supposed to be focusing on Jesus’ incarnation is because it was because of humans “sorry case” that Jesus [the Word] came down to save us from our transgressions. He gives a pretty detailed account of man’s descent into sin and the need for a savior. The tempting of man and the serpent, who he identifies as the devil in paragraph 5: “counsel of the devil” (On The Incarnation Chapter 1). He then spends time talking about the corruption of humanity and its creation of new sins. He speaks about adultery, war, and theft. He quotes Romans 1:26 at the end speaking of homosexuality. He states, “the martyr-apostle of Christ [Paul] says: ‘[t]he women changed the natural use into that which is against nature; and the men also, leaving the natural use of the woman, flamed out in list towards each other, perpetrating shameless acts with their own sex, and receiving in their own persons the due recompense of perverseness” (On The Incarnation Chapter 1). This provides an early stance that homosexuality was a sin according to the Bible, even though it is sometimes popularized by some today that homosexuality is not a sin.

 

"For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged natural relations for that which is contrary to nature," (Romans 1:26 NASB)

 

Chapter Two

 

Athanasius opens chapter two once again dwelling on the Fall of Man by stating, “The thing that was happening was in truth both monstrous and unfitting. It would, of course, have been unthinkable that God should go back upon His word and that man, having transgressed, should not die; but it was equally monstrous that beings which once had shared the nature of the Word should perish and turn back again into non-existence through corruption. It was unworthy of the goodness of God that creatures made by Him should be brought to nothing through the deceit wrought upon man by the devil; and it was supremely unfitting that the work of God in mankind should disappear, either through their own negligence or through the deceit of evil spirit.” (On The Incarnation Chapter 2). The reasoning provided by Athanasius here is somewhat faulty. God, if He had left humanity to perish and return to non-existence, would have been completely just in doing so. I’m not saying Athanasius doesn’t agree. However, it wouldn’t have been monstrous for man to perish as that is what we deserve. The purpose of the incarnation and salvation of man was not because it would be wrong for humanity to not be saved. Instead, the scriptures clearly lay out the reasoning for the incarnation, death, and resurrection of Christ:

 

“For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.” John 3:16 NASB

 

“and walk in love, just as Christ also loved you and gave Himself up for us, an offering and a sacrifice to God as a fragrant aroma.” Ephesians 5:2 NASB

 

“and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the firstborn of the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth. To Him who loves us and released us from our sins by His blood—” Revelation 1:5 NASB

 

The scriptures are clear, the reasoning for the incarnation, death, and resurrection of Christ is because of God’s love for us. Athanasius correctly argues that the incarnation and salvation of man is for the glory of God. The problem is that he leaves out the most important and scriptural reason for the incarnation which is love. Athanasius does later affirm that love is part of the reason stating, “[t]his He did out of sheer love for us” (On The Incarnation Chapter 2). In summary, Athanasius has one main problem in his writings that aren’t scriptural. It would not have been monstrous for humanity to perish. It was just that humanity should perish, but because God loves us, He came down from heaven in the incarnation and died for us to that we may be saved. He also did this for His own glory. 

 

Now there are some phrases in this section that also raise some eyebrows. Athanasius says “turn back again into non-existence” when describing the consequences of sin. Some interpret this as belief in annihilationism, which is the belief that the punishment for sin is not eternal conscious torment but instead the ceasing of existence. However, Athanasius rejects the notion that the wicked simply cease to exist, describing instead a state of ongoing, conscious punishment. In Against the Heathen, he speaks of the ungodly as “plunged in darkness” and suffering the consequences of their rebellion in a state that persists rather than ends (Athanasius, Contra Gentes 3–4). Later, in his Letters to Serapion, he refers to “everlasting fire” and “eternal punishment” as the destiny of those who remain opposed to God, language that presupposes continued existence rather than annihilation (Athanasius, Ep. Serap. 1.30–31). These descriptions show that for Athanasius, judgment is not the termination of being but the miserable continuation of a life cut off from the Word who sustains all creation. Athanasius, when speaking of non-existence, is describing the metaphysical trajectory of fallen humanity, not the final state of the wicked. For him, “corruption” = the disintegration of human nature away from the life of God. It is not literal annihilation.

 

Later in chapter two Athanasius turns to the circumstances surrounding the incarnation directly. He writes, “[h]e took our body, and not only so, but He took it directly from a spotless, stainless virgin, without the agency of human father-a pure body, untainted by intercourse with man” (On The Incarnation Chapter 2). Athanasius correctly states that Jesus took our body and was born of a virgin. Yet, Athanasius doesn’t spend much time stating why Jesus had to come from a virgin. Athanasius leaves hints and early developments of the doctrine of original sin when he states humanity fell under the power of corruption, death, and disintegration, and this condition is passed on to all his descendants. He does not speak of Adam’s descendants inheriting guilt likely because it wasn’t necessary to the writing. This is evident by the minimal amount of time he spent on the virgin birth. Original Sin states that Adam’s guilt is imputed on his descendants through the man/father. Jesus had to be born of a virgin so that He did not inherit Original Sin. For reference read Romans 5:12-19 and 1 Corinthians 15:21-22. 

 

Athanasius spends some time discussing how Jesus’ sacrifice saved us. He states, “…being immortal and the Father’s Son, was such as could not die. For this reason, therefore, He assumed a body capable of death, in order that it…might become in dying a sufficient exchange for all, and, itself remaining incorruptible through His indwelling, might thereafter put an end to corruption for all others as well, by the grace of the resurrection” (On The Incarnation Chapter 2). Athanasius’ explanation of Christ’s saving work is deeply rooted in his larger vision of the Incarnation as a metaphysical rescue mission. Because the Word is immortal and cannot die, Athanasius argues that He takes on a mortal body precisely so that death can be confronted on its own ground. The body becomes the instrument through which the divine Son accomplishes what is impossible for divinity alone: undergoing death on behalf of all. Yet because the Word remains united to this body, it never succumbs to corruption; His indwelling preserves it from decay. This union means that Christ’s death is not merely the end of a human life but a cosmic exchange, His incorruptible life offered in place of humanity’s corrupted one. By dying in a body that cannot ultimately be held by death, Christ breaks the power of corruption from the inside and opens the way for all humanity to share in His resurrection.

 

Chapter Three

 

In chapter three Athanasius continues his discussion of the purpose of the incarnation. Athanasius explains that when God the Almighty fashioned humanity through His own Word, He recognized that human beings, because of the limitations inherent in their created nature, were incapable of attaining knowledge of their Maker on their own. The Word who made them is incorporeal, uncreated, and infinitely beyond the grasp of finite minds. Seeing this, God took pity on His creatures and did not abandon them to ignorance of Himself. Such abandonment would contradict the very purpose for which they were made, for a rational creature cannot fulfill its nature if it remains unable to know the One who formed it. Knowledge of God is not an optional enhancement to human life but the very condition for its proper existence. Without the Word’s self‑disclosure, humanity would drift toward futility, unable to realize the end for which it was created. 

 

Athanasius’s argument shares a surface‑level resemblance to the later doctrine of total depravity because both emphasize the inability of humanity to know or reach God by their own natural powers. In each case, human beings are portrayed as fundamentally dependent on divine initiative for true knowledge of God. Athanasius grounds this in the limits of created nature and the darkening effects of sin, while total depravity grounds it in the moral corruption of every human faculty after the Fall. Yet the structural parallel remains: left to themselves, humans cannot perceive, understand, or return to God. Both frameworks insist that revelation and grace are not optional supplements but absolute necessities.

 

It can be determined from the following paragraph that total depravity is not in view specifically in this passage as it says, “…men, foolish as they are, thought little of the grace they had received, and turned away from God” (On The Incarnation Chapter 3). Athanasius continues by discussing the state and sins of man after the Fall. He specifically mentions the creation of idols that man worshiped. 

 

Athanasius builds a case that God, knowing human frailty, provided four safeguards so that mankind could never claim ignorance of Him:

 

1. The Image of God (internal knowledge)

 

Athanasius stated that humanity was created with the capacity to know the Word directly. This inner illumination was sufficient if man remained faithful (which is impossible to do fully; Romans 7:15; 1 John 1:8). However, God knew human weakness, so He added further helps. 

 

2. Creation (cosmic witness)

 

The harmony, order, and beauty of the heavens reveal the Word who rules them. Even if a person ignored the grace within, the world around them still proclaimed the Maker. This is Athanasius’ version of what Paul says in Romans 1:20.

 

3. Holy men and prophets (personal witness)

 

God also sent prophets, people they knew, people like themselves. Humans learn best from other humans, so God used human teachers to point upward. Even though the prophets were sent to Israel, Athanasius insists their purpose was universal. 

 

While this is true that prophets reveal God to all and not just Israel, it is important to not make a universal application out of prophets to Israel. Many of their statements applied only to Israel.

 

4. The Law (moral witness)

 

Athanasius states the law wasn’t merely for Jews; it was a “sacred school” for the whole world. Anyone who lived according to its moral clarity could rise from lukewarmness to genuine knowledge of God. The law revealed God’s character and exposed the emptiness of idolatry.

 

This is the most faulty out of all of Athanasius’ safeguards. Firstly, the law was given specifically to Israel. It was given at Sinai and was delivered through Moses. It was administered within the covenant people (Israel). The prophets were sent to Israel and persecuted by Israel. Secondly, the law cannot be held completely. Jesus emphasized the incapability of man to keep the law in Matthew 5. He makes anger toward a brother equal to murder (Matthew 5:21-22). He makes lust the same as adultery (Matthew 5:27-28). He continues this trend through the rest of the chapter in numerous other ways. The law is impossible for man to keep and according to James, if you break one part of the law you break the entire law (James 2:10). It is impossible for man to come to the knowledge of God through the law as it is impossible to keep. That is truly why it was necessary for Jesus to come. Man fell from God, man cannot return to God, so God came to man. The law can reveal God in that it can show the holiness of God and the way we cannot uphold that standard. If that is perhaps the way Athanasius intended then his argument is true.

 

The last few paragraphs of chapter 3 is one of Athanasius’ most important Christological paragraphs, because he’s explaining how the one Person of Christ can both eat and uphold the universe at the same time. He is pushing against two heresies at once: 

 

-Docetism (Christ only appeared human)

-Arianism (the Word is a creature and cannot be truly divine)

 

“You must understand, therefore, that when writers on this sacred theme speak of Him as eating and drinking and being born, they mean that the body, as a body, was born and sustained with the food proper to its nature; while God the Word, Who was united with it, was at the same time ordering the universe and revealing Himself through His bodily acts as not man only but God.” (On The Incarnation Chapter 3)

 

Athanasius explains that when Scripture speaks of Christ being born, eating, or drinking, it refers to the genuine human body He assumed, which naturally underwent the experiences proper to human nature. Yet at the same time, the Word who was united to that body continued to govern the universe and reveal His divine identity through the very actions performed in and through His humanity. 

 

Because the body belonged to Him personally, and attributing them to Him as man demonstrates that His body was real rather than an illusion. His ordinary human experiences showed that He was truly present in the flesh, while His extraordinary works, performed through that same body, revealed Him as the Son of God.

 

Chapter Four

 

Chapter four opens with a vivid image of creation’s response to the death of its creator. Athanasius states, “[t]he sun veiled his face, the earth quaked, the mountains were rent asunder, all men were stricken with awe” (On The Incarnation Chapter 4). Athanasius of course is referencing the gospel accounts of the death of Christ on the cross:

 

1. The sun darkened (Matthew 27:45; Mark 15:33)

2. The earth quaked and mountains rent asunder (Matthew 27:51)

3. Men were stricken with awe (Matthew 27:54).

 

Athanasius then gives his purpose for the fourth chapter. “We must next consider the end of His earthly life and the nature of His bodily death. This is, indeed, the very center of our faith…” (On The Incarnation Chapter 4). Paul argues the center of our faith is the resurrection in 1 Corinthians 15 and that our faith is in vain without it. Athanasius, however, is not wrong to also argue the death of Christ is not also a center. For how can there be a resurrection without death. 

 

Athanasius makes one of his central theological beliefs concerning the incarnation after. He states that Christ destroyed death by dying and gave us immortality by rising. Athanasius insists that Jesus’ body was a real human body, capable of dying just like ours. But because the Word (the Son) dwelt in it, corruption could not take hold of it. Athanasius argues that the Word Himself cannot die. So if He is going to pay the debt of death on behalf of humanity, He must assume a body that can die. Athanasius afterward explains the consequences for Christians:

 

-We still physically die, but it is no longer the condemnation threatened by the law.

-Death has become a temporary loosening of the body, not destruction.

-Because Christ rose, corruption has been “banished and done away.”

 

Athanasius quotes 1 Corinthians 15 to prove this. 

 

“Have no fears then. Now that the common Savior of all has died on our behalf, we who believe in Christ no longer die, as men died aforetime, in fulfillment of the threat of the law. That condemnation has come to an end; and now that, by the grace of the resurrection, corruption has been banished and done away, we are loosed from our mortal bodies in God’s good time for each, so that we may obtain thereby a better resurrection.” (On The Incarnation Chapter 4).

 

Athanasius states, “We who believe in Christ no longer die as men died aforetime…” (On The Incarnation Chapter 4). This statement sounds a lot like the later Protestant doctrine of faith alone. It is no doubt that the scriptures state faith is the requirement for salvation (Ephesians 2:8-9; John 3:16; Romans 4:1-5).  So here does Athanasius state that it is belief in Christ that rids humans of “condemnation.”

 

Athanasius then answers a question as to why Jesus had to die in public and not in a private manner. Athanasius explained that Christ’s death could not be a quiet, private one because ordinary humans die because their nature is weak and corruptible, but Christ is the divine Word and Life itself. If He had simply died in bed, people would have assumed He was just another mortal. His public death was necessary to show that His death was voluntary, powerful, and undertaken for the salvation of all, not the result of natural decay.

 

He then states that Christ did not die because of personal weakness but because He took on a body capable of dying. His body did not fail through sickness as He who healed others could not be overcome by illness. Instead, He accepted death deliberately so that resurrection could occur. Preventing His own death would have prevented the resurrection, which was essential for defeating death on behalf of humanity.

 

Athanasius emphasizes that Christ did not avoid death but stepped forward to meet it. He did so publicly so that all could see that He is the Word of God and that His sacrifice was for everyone. His death was a ransom offered openly, not secretly, so that the reality of His victory over death would be undeniable. The repetition on this page reinforces the idea that Christ’s death was voluntary, public, and universal in scope.

 

Athanasius describes the symbolism of Christ’s outstretched arms on the cross: one arm drawing Israel, the other drawing the Gentiles, uniting both in Himself. He explains that the devil sought to hold humanity in corruption, but Christ came to overthrow him, purify the world, and open the way to heaven through His flesh. By offering His body to death, Christ created a path for humanity to ascend to God. It should be noted that replacement theology is not being spoken of here. Athanasius is stating the unification of the people of God in Christ (cf. Galatians 3:28). He is not stating that the Church has replaced Israel or fulfilled Israel. 

Chapter Five

 

Athanasius begins chapter five by summarizing chapter four and the reasoning Christ died in the public manner he did. But, he quickly switched to discussing the resurrection. First, he deals with the question as to why Jesus waited three days to resurrect and appear. Athanasius states, “It was, of course, within His power thus to have raised His body and displayed it as alive directly after death. But the all-wise Savior did not do this, lest some should deny that it had really or completely died.” (On The Incarnation Chapter 5) He devotes much writing on the timing of the resurrection and why it was necessary. Athanasius knew that had Jesus appeared immediately after His death, then the people wouldn’t have believed He was really dead but perhaps fainted or misdiagnosed. Therefore, Jesus had to wait some time before resurrecting. 

 

Athanasius is equally concerned about the opposite danger. If Jesus had waited too long, say, four or five days, people might have said that this a different body or that someone stole the corpse. In other words, too long an interval would create suspicion about identity, not death. So Athanasius argues that the third day is the perfect midpoint:

 

• Long enough to confirm death

• Short enough to confirm identity

 

Athanasius’ real theological point is that the resurrection is not just a return to life, it is the manifestation of incorruption, the divine life of the Word overpowering death from within. The third day becomes the moment when the body is undeniably dead, it shows no decay, and it rises in power.

 

Athanasius then gives evidence to the destruction of death by the work of the cross and resurrection. He states that the disciples of Christ despise death and that “all those who believe in Christ tread it underfoot as nothing, and prefer to die rather than to deny their faith in Christ.” (On The Incarnation Chapter 5). Not only does this provide evidence that disciples and believers of Christ died for what they believe is true but it shows that Christ’s work made them not fear death at all, and they welcomed it and “hasten thus to die” (On The Incarnation Chapter 5). Athanasius argues that because even the holiest of men used to fear death and now believers do not fear but welcome death that it shows the destruction of death. 

 

Athanasius insists that the cross itself, joined with faith in Christ, has objectively broken the power of death. That transformation of believers from being frightful of death to welcoming, he argues, is impossible unless death has truly been emptied of its power. From this he concludes that Christ cannot be a mere man, because no human being can drive away death. Only the One who is Life itself could drive death away. Athanasius then attempts to prove the fact of the resurrection by Jesus’ work across the world. He states that the work of Christ across the world, and he emphasizes even beyond the Greek-speaking world, makes it evident that Christ rose from the dead. How could a dead man be actively working?

 

Chapter Six

 

Athanasius starts chapter six by explaining what chapters 6-8 will be about. He states that the purposes of these chapters are to investigate and refute the unbelief of the Jews (chapter 6) and the Gentiles (chapters 7-8). 

 

Chapter six is devoted specifically to the Jews. Athanasius states that “[t]heir unbelief has its refutation in the Scriptures which even themselves read” (On The Incarnation Chapter 6). The scriptures that the Jews themselves read foretold the Virgin Birth (Isaiah 7:14), the coming of the Messiah who would be a great leader (Numbers 24:17; Numbers 24:5-7; Isaiah 8:4). Athanasius states that all of these scriptures prophecy of the coming Messiah.

 

Not only do the scriptures foretell of the coming Messiah but they also foretold of His death (Isaiah 53:3-10). Athanasius even points out that the manner of His death on the cross is not hidden (Deuteronomy 28:66; Jeremiah 11:19; Psalm 22:16-18; Isaiah 11:10).

 

Athanasius contrasted Christ’s virgin birth with the genealogical origins of biblical figures such as Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, David, Solomon, etc, all of whom had earthly fathers. The repetition of “The witness to His birth was not from the earth, but idolatry put it otherwise” underscores the uniqueness of Christ’s birth and critiques pagan reinterpretations. The argument is polemical as  Christ’s birth is singular and divine, unlike any patriarch or prophet, and thus a sign of His divine origin.

 

He then presses the argument that the prophets themselves foretold a figure that would be revealed after rejection, suffering, and public manifestation. Athanasius cites prophecies about God stretching out His hands to a disobedient people and being found by those who did not seek Him. These texts are interpreted as pointing directly to Christ’s appearance among the nations and His rejection by Israel. Later he moves to the prophetic promises of healing such as the deaf hearing, the blind seeing, the stammering tongue speaking clearly. These are presented as unmistakable signs that God Himself has come among humanity.

 

Athanasius deals with the argument the Jews make stating that they are still awaiting their messiah by referencing Daniel 9. Daniel himself settles the matter, because Daniel provides both the timing and the conditions of the Savior’s appearance. The prophecy of the “seventy weeks” declares that sin will be ended, iniquity reconciled, prophecy sealed, and the Holy One of holies anointed, all of this while Jerusalem still stands. This cannot be deferred to some distant future, because the prophecy explicitly names the Anointed One and describes Him as more than a mere man. Athanasius notes that earlier anointed figures such as David, Solomon, and Hezekiah lived while Jerusalem remained intact and prophets continued to speak, so they cannot be the Holy One of holies. Nor can the Babylonian Exile fulfill the prophecy, since Jerusalem’s destruction then did not end prophecy as Daniel, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Haggai, and Zechariah all prophesied during that period. The only moment in history that matches Daniel’s sequence is the coming of Christ before the final destruction of Jerusalem and the cessation of prophecy. Thus, Athanasius concludes that Daniel’s words decisively prove that the Messiah has already come, and that His identity is Jesus Christ.

 

“Seventy weeks have been decreed for your people and your holy city, to finish the transgression, to make an end of sin, to make atonement for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the most holy place. So you are to know and discern that from the issuing of a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until Messiah the Prince there will be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks; it will be built again, with plaza and moat, even in times of distress. Then after the sixty-two weeks the Messiah will be cut off and have nothing, and the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. And its end will come with a flood; even to the end there will be war; desolations are determined.” Daniel 9:24-26 NASB

 

Chapter Seven and Eight

 

Athanasius spends chapters seven and eight refuting the Gentiles and accusing them of mocking a subject that isn’t fit for mockery while at the same time not realizing the ridiculous nature of their own idols and gods. Athanasius responded to Gentiles who laugh at the idea that God’s Word appeared in a human body. He argues their mockery makes no sense because they already believe the Word is present throughout the entire universe. If the universe is a body, and the Word is inside it, then it’s not strange at all for Him to enter a human body too. In fact, it’s perfectly fitting, because humanity is the part of creation most capable of understanding Him.

 

Athanasius explains why the Word did not manifest through fire, water, air, or celestial bodies. These elements are either inaccessible, terrifying, or incapable of rational reception. Only humanity can understand God’s self-revelation. He insists the incarnation is not a humiliation but a deliberate act of healing. God chose the medium that could receive Him and be saved. Athanasius emphasizes that the Word assumed a normal human body, not a special or celestial one, because death had to be undone from within the very condition in which it held power. The incarnation is medicinal, not theatrical.

 

Athanasius states that people across the world have begun abandoning idols and worshipping Christ. Such a collapse of idolatry can only be explained by the arrival of the Word of God. He emphasized the regional difference in that men made idols in certain regions and believed that their gods were the only gods. However, Christ is distinct in Athanasius’ time in that He is worshipped across the world.

 

Furthermore, Athanasius writes against the former oracles. The pagan oracles (Delphi, Dodona, Lycia, Boeotia, Egypt, Libya) were the backbone of ancient religious life and feared as sources of divine knowledge. People would travel long distances to seek guidance from these shrines. Athanasius claims that these oracles stopped after Christ. The oracles used to speak and were active for centuries but now have fallen silent according to Athanasius. He saw this as a sign. He did not believe the oracles were fake or harmless superstitions. Instead, he believed they were demons who deceived people and imitated divine knowledge. He further challenged his readers to see this first hand. He states “[i]n the very presence of the fraud demons and the imposture of the oracles and the wonders of magic, let him use the sign of the cross which they all mock at, and but speak the Name of Christ, and he shall see how through Him demons are routed, oracles cease, and all magic and witchcraft confounded.” (On The Incarnation Chapter 8). Athanasius is not wrong to note the chronology. By the fourth century when he wrote Delphi was a shadow of its former self. Dodonna had been damaged and partially abandoned. Many other oracles had lost their political influence and the Roman support for pagan cults had weakened. Athanasius argues that Christ entered the world and that His power spread through His people which caused idolatry to collapse. Athanasius gives a powerful statement of this:

 

“Let the Greeks tell us, who mock at Him without stint or shame. If He is a man, how is it that one man proved stronger than all those whom they themselves regard as gods, and by His own power has shown them to be nothing?” (On The Incarnation Chapter 8)

 

Athanasius states that humanity before Christ was full of hatred but now there is peace and friendship. He also states the courage of Christians in standing against demons and chasing them away. They also endure persecution and make light of death itself. He states the power of Christ and His divinity by showing that Christ has done so much that no one, not even a king and his works, is comparable to the works of Christ.  He then spends some time on the divine nature of the Word stating that the Word was not man prior to the incarnation. He stated that all things proceed from the Word as they do from the Father. He also states that the works of Christ are innumerable.

 

Chapter Nine 

 

Chapter nine is the conclusion of Athanasius’ writing. He reminds Macarius that the truth of Christ’s divinity is learned through the Scriptures that were “written and inspired by God” and confirmed by the witness of those who suffered for it. He tells Macarius that if he reads the scriptures he will learn of Christ’s Second Coming/Rapture (“manifestation:”) when He will return not in humility but in glory and will “bestow on us all the fruit of His cross-the resurrection and incorruptibility.” He then states that no one can understand the Scriptures if they do not have a purified life. He also takes a heretical stance that only those who live a “godly life” will reach heaven and dwell with the Father, Son, and Spirit. Of course, this is untrue, as no one can live a godly life. Until we are glorified and have received our heavenly bodies our flesh is still wicked. It is through faith, and not works, that we are saved (Ephesians 2:8-9).

 

Source:

 

Athanasius of Alexandria. On the Incarnation. Translated by Penelope Lawson, Pantianos Classics, 1944.