[OPEN]Reading Athanasius: Week Three

Macrina

Macrinator
Sep 8, 2004
10,896
775
✟22,415.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Here we are at week three. This week we'll be reading and discussing chapters 5 & 6 of the Incarnation according to the chapter divisions in this link.





Again, my apologies for being MIA in this. I've had a very difficult week and I haven't been able to tear my brain away from that to focus on more fun things.
 

Knowledge3

Well-Known Member
Mar 29, 2005
9,523
18
✟9,814.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
I finished the whole book

It's summary can be surmised that the Incarnation was the solution to the divine dilemma. Was God to let man come to ruin and suffer in the image he was originally created? No, a new plan unfolded as God revealed His only Son in His one image and the exact stamp of His substance. God did not become man in order to condemn the world, but to save it.
 
Upvote 0

a_ntv

Ens Liturgicum
Apr 21, 2006
6,329
259
✟38,913.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Celibate
Christ did not risen to "pay" something, but to defeat the death.

St Athanasius had to answer the bigger of the remarks: how can had Christ defeated the death, if we go on to die ?

Look at this image:
§27 Death has become like a tyrant who has been completely conquered' by the legitimate monarch; bound hand and foot the passers-by jeer at him, hitting him and abusing him, no longer afraid of his cruelty and rage, because of theking who has conquered him.

A very nice image :)

But which is the proof?

If we ask to a pastor/priest which is the proof of the merits of Christ, at the 90% he answers us that the proof is in this verse of St Paul or in that other Bible verse.

Nothing of similar for St Athanaius: for him the proof of the merits of Christ is in the martyrs and saints: and he is very sure of that because it is repeated more than once.

§28 Or is it a slight indication of the Saviour's victory over it, when boys and young girls who are in Christ look beyond this present life and train themselves to die? Every one is by nature afraid of death and of bodily dissolution; the marvel of marvels is that he who is enfolded in the faith of the cross despises this natural fear and for the sake of the cross is no longer cowardly in face of it.

§29 If you see with your own eyes men and women and children, even, thus welcoming death for the sake of Christ's religion, how can you be so utterly silly and incredulous...?

When we attend a weekday Mass, if the priest wears vestments in red in memory of a martyr, we should remember that our poor faith is based on their testimony of blood.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Willtor
Upvote 0

eccl12.13

Active Member
Feb 15, 2005
176
8
40
at my computer
Visit site
✟7,846.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I think what he is trying to say is that Christ paid the death penalty of sin so that we did not have to die *as a consequence of sin* ("For the wages of sin is death ...").

The deaths we die as humans are simply natural deaths. The death Christ paid for was our spiritual and thus eternal death.
 
Upvote 0

Macrina

Macrinator
Sep 8, 2004
10,896
775
✟22,415.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Let's go with week 4?
Or wait for an other week?

How would you all feel about continuing week four here with the same reading? I'm guessing from the lack of posting that I'm not the only one who hasn't had much time for brainy things lately.

On top of Holy Week services, I've had a bunch of stuff going on in the congregation that's stressed me out, but I'm thinking I'll be getting back to normal this week. I hope. :)

What do y'all think?
 
Upvote 0

Macrina

Macrinator
Sep 8, 2004
10,896
775
✟22,415.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Again, my apologies for being MIA in this thread. Hopefully offline life is normalizing such that I'll have some gray cells to use for more fun things like this. :)


I was just thinking about how Athanasius describes sin as "dehumanizing of mankind," likening sinful humanity to "brute beasts" as contrasted with a likeness to the Word.

Sometimes when I talk to people about sin and Christ's reversal of the Fall, I talk about how Christ came fully human so that we could be fully human, whole people rather than the broken people we were before.

Sometimes it can be tempting to say "humanity = bad" and "God = good." Well, the second half of that is right, and humanity is certainly fallen (I believe in total depravity, meaning that no aspect of human life is left untouched by sin) -- but if we recognize the Lord's humanity we find hope for our own humanity.

This may be rather a tangent, but it's something I think about and it relates to some pastoral care situations I've been dealing with in my congregation. I look for ways to help people find hope that their lives can be changed through Christ, that they are not stuck in their old destructive patterns. I think looking at things this way -- how Christ enables us to be fully human -- may help give people that hope.

[/random musing]
 
Upvote 0

a_ntv

Ens Liturgicum
Apr 21, 2006
6,329
259
✟38,913.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Celibate
I was just thinking about how Athanasius describes sin as "dehumanizing of mankind," likening sinful humanity to "brute beasts" as contrasted with a likeness to the Word.

Sometimes when I talk to people about sin and Christ's reversal of the Fall, I talk about how Christ came fully human so that we could be fully human, whole people rather than the broken people we were before.

Sometimes it can be tempting to say "humanity = bad" and "God = good." Well, the second half of that is right, and humanity is certainly fallen (I believe in total depravity, meaning that no aspect of human life is left untouched by sin) -- but if we recognize the Lord's humanity we find hope for our own humanity.

This may be rather a tangent, but it's something I think about and it relates to some pastoral care situations I've been dealing with in my congregation. I look for ways to help people find hope that their lives can be changed through Christ, that they are not stuck in their old destructive patterns. I think looking at things this way -- how Christ enables us to be fully human -- may help give people that hope.

The calvinist "total depravity" doctrine is a wrong doctrine and St Athanasius doesnt support it, nor after the fall, nor after the redemption.

Let's see what St Athaniasius says:
§15: Men had turned from the contemplation of God above, and were looking for Him in the opposite direction, down among created things and things of sense
Is clear that for St Athanasius the depravation is not total in deep: the man anyway retained something of the image of God even after the creation.
There is always in the man, even after the fall, the need to look for God. But the sin made the man to look in the wrong direction....
St Athanasius explains that the man after the fall is anyway looking for God, but because the corruption of the sin, the man dont look in the right direction and so worship false idols.
Also a muslim (an un-baptized) feels the desire of God, but due to the lack of the merits of Christ, his worship is not the correct one.

The depravation after the original sin cannot arrive to touch the inner part of the man: the desire of God. This can has a deep pastoral result: we can start from the desire of God that is present in anyone (well..sometime it is shown as interest int he new-age) and move it through Christ to arrive to worship properly God.

§25 He cleansed the air from all the evil influences of the enemy. "I beheld Satan as lightning falling," ( Luke 10. 18) He says; and thus He re-opened the road to heaven, saying again, "Lift up your gates, 0 ye princes, and be ye lift up, ye everlasting doors." ( Psalm 24. 7) For it was not the Word Himself Who needed an opening of the gates, He being Lord of all, nor was any of His works closed to their Maker. No, it was we who needed it, we whom He Himself upbore in His own body - that body which He first offered to death on behalf of all, and then made through it a path to heaven.

St Athanasius paints the original sin (well, any sin) as a corruction of the original nature of the man, not like a change in the nature of the man: in fact the verb used to describe the work of Christ is to clean : to clean the man from the influences of the evil.

And Christ prepared the path to the heaven: no more.
St Athanasius never says that Christ moves the man to the heaven: the man is always free to use his free will to follow (or not) the path prepared by Christ.

This is the reason beacuse St Athanasus divide always clearly in two steps the work of Christ (see my post http://www.christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=33214854&postcount=5):
1) to restore the situation before the fall (§8-10): here to 'clean the air'
2) to gift the man a situation even better than the the one before the fall (§11-16): here to open the path to the heaven
Christ doesnt force the man into the heaven, but leaves the man to decide. He simply prepare everything for this to be possible: He clean the man from the influences of the sin and prepare the path.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Macrina

Macrinator
Sep 8, 2004
10,896
775
✟22,415.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Actually, the doctrine of total depravity is widely misunderstood. It doesn't mean that humanity changed totally with the Fall and didn't retain any of God's image. What it means is that there is no aspect of humanity which has remained untouched by sin: Our relationships, morality, society, decision-making ability, etc -- everything has in some way been affected by sin. This doesn't mean that we have entirely lost the image of God; it just means that image is "broken" and needs to become "whole." So when I liken this to what Athanasius said about the dehumanization of humanity through sin, I mean that sin prevents us from fully living out that image of God imprinted upon us at creation. That's what total depravity really means, and I think that's compatible with Athanasius.


ETA: In one of his works of fiction, C.S. Lewis uses the word "bent" to describe humanity's state after the Fall -- the elements are still there, they're just skewed and distorted by sin.

I would say that it's like everything has been filtered through a distorted lens... it's still present, just not in the way it had been intended.
 
Upvote 0

a_ntv

Ens Liturgicum
Apr 21, 2006
6,329
259
✟38,913.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Celibate
Actually, the doctrine of total depravity is widely misunderstood. It doesn't mean that humanity changed totally with the Fall and didn't retain any of God's image. What it means is that there is no aspect of humanity which has remained untouched by sin: Our relationships, morality, society, decision-making ability, etc -- everything has in some way been affected by sin. This doesn't mean that we have entirely lost the image of God; it just means that image is "broken" and needs to become "whole." So when I liken this to what Athanasius said about the dehumanization of humanity through sin, I mean that sin prevents us from fully living out that image of God imprinted upon us at creation. That's what total depravity really means, and I think that's compatible with Athanasius..

This definition of 'total depravaity' is more acceptable, but anyway some points shall be cleared.
The free will remains always in the man. Ok, the free will is not a 'perfect will' (a will that desire always the good, as Christ's one), but it is always free.

Let's lissen St Athanasius:
§12 Man's neglect of the indwelling grace tends ever to increase; and against this further frailty also God made provision by giving them a law, and by sending prophets, men whom they knew.....Or, if this was beyond them, they could converse with holy men, and through them learn to know God, the Artificer of all things, the Father of Christ, and to recognise the worship of idols as the negation of the truth and full of all impiety. Or else, in the third place, they could cease from lukewarmness and lead a good life merely by knowing the law. ..... Yet men, bowed down by the pleasures of the moment and by the frauds and illusions of the evil spirits, did not lift up their heads towards the truth....

After the fall, God sent the prophets and the Law to the man in order that the man could learn to know God and cease form the sin.
This obviously requires that the free will of the man exists...little, confused but still acting (or God made a mistake to send the prophets if there was no chance)
The man said no to the prophets one time more, not becuase their will was depravated, but because of the pleasure of the moment.

So burdened were they with their wickednesses that they seemed rather to be brute beasts than reasonable men, reflecting the very Likeness of the Word.
The man, rejecting the prophets, acted as a brute beasts, not as reasonable men, as they could have done if they had followed the prophets.
In other words the wickedness of the sin is a weight that moves the man towards the rejection of God (we catholics call it concupiscence), but this does not touch the very Likeness of the Word, that is simply obfuscated by the sin, and so need simply of a 'cleaning'
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Willtor

Not just any Willtor... The Mighty Willtor
Apr 23, 2005
9,713
1,429
43
Cambridge
Visit site
✟32,287.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I wonder if perhaps we are using different words to describe the same thing?

That seems very likely to me. I have spoken to self-professed Calvinists who seem to think that the core of what it is to be human is corrupt. But I'd coin the term "deep depravity" to describe this idea. I think it is inconsistent with "total depravity" as described by Calvin, himself. Total depravity seems to be more like what you have been describing as tainted or "in need of cleaning" as described by a_ntv.

C.S. Lewis argued against total depravity using the definition for the term I would call deep depravity, so I may be off. I haven't finished Institutes, and I'd be open to correction from someone who has.
 
Upvote 0

Macrina

Macrinator
Sep 8, 2004
10,896
775
✟22,415.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
That seems very likely to me. I have spoken to self-professed Calvinists who seem to think that the core of what it is to be human is corrupt. But I'd coin the term "deep depravity" to describe this idea. I think it is inconsistent with "total depravity" as described by Calvin, himself. Total depravity seems to be more like what you have been describing as tainted or "in need of cleaning" as described by a_ntv.

C.S. Lewis argued against total depravity using the definition for the term I would call deep depravity, so I may be off. I haven't finished Institutes, and I'd be open to correction from someone who has.

I don't actually know Lewis's take on total depravity -- I've read more of his fiction than his non-fiction. The "bent" idea comes from "Out of the Silent Planet," the first in his Space Trilogy.

All I can tell you is that more than one seminary professor taught this difference between the popular conception of total depravity and its genuine meaning. My hunch is that the misconception developed as someone's very successful strawman. And then, of course, some Calvinists take it to heart not realizing it's inaccurate. Such is the development of theology.


But at any rate, I cordially invite you all to join me in the new thread. :)
 
Upvote 0