- Feb 24, 2019
- 1,031
- 867
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Single
Penal Substitution in Church History
The concept of penal substitution in which Christ’s death is viewed as being on behalf of sinners to satisfy divine justice was a common belief of the church of the 1st 1000 years. Many theologians of the early church held to a penal substitution view.12
In a survey of these statements, one point should be understood. Many of the statements do not come within extended discussions of salvation. They appear to be noncontroversial at the time uttered. The nature of the atonement was not a major item of CONTROVERSY or debate in the early church. Thus, the statements are most probably declarations of generally accepted truths, adding more credibility for the case that the early theologians held to penal substitution.
13Steve Jeffery, Michael Ovey, Andrew Sach, Pierced for our Transgressions: Rediscovering the Glory of Penal Substitution (Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway, 2007) 163.
14Ibid.
15Clement,First Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians 49, in The Ante-Nicene Fathers (hereafter ANF), eds. Alexander Roberts & James Donaldson, 10 vols. (Peabody, Mass: Hendrickson, 1994) 1:18.
16Ignatius, Epistle of Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans 2, ANF 1:87.
As Jeffery, Ovey & Sachobserve, “f a writer makes a passing, but nonetheless explicit, reference to the doctrine of penal substitution in a work largely devoted to another subject, this probably indicates that penal substitution was both widely understood & fairly uncontroversial among his contemporaries.”13
Plus, it would have confused the readers for the author to bring up any other view of the atonement.14
Clement of Rome (d. 96)
Clement was a bishop in Rome. Eusebius says Clement became bishop in AD 92. Like the apostle Paul, Clement wrote a letter to the Corinthians to deal with their schisms. His Epistle to the Corinthians(c. 95) is the earliest extant Christian writing after the NT. Clement declared that Jesus gave His life in His atonement:“Because of the love he felt for us, Jesus Christ our Lord gave his blood for us by the will of God, His body for our bodies & His soul for our souls.”15
Ignatius (d. 107)
Ignatius was the 3rd bishop of Antioch in Syria. He may have been a personal disciple of the apostle John & had a special fondness for Paul whom he quoted & of whom he spoke highly. Ignatius is known for refuting Docetism, an early heresy that claimed that Jesus only appeared to be human. Ignatius believed that Jesus died on behalf of sinners when he declared: “Now, He suffered all these things for our sakes, that we might be saved.”16
Epistle of Barnabas
The Epistle of Barnabas is a Greek treatise with features of an epistle. It has been traditionally ascribed to Barnabas who is mentioned in the Book of Acts, though some ascribe it to Barnabas of Alexandria or another unknown early Christian teacher. The epistle was probably written in Alexandria, Egypt, between AD 70 & 135.
In it are several explicit statements concerning Jesus’ sacrificial death for sins: "For to this end the Lord endured to deliver up His flesh to corruption, that we might be sanctified through the remission of sins, which is effected by His blood of sprinkling."
"For it is written concerning Him, partly with reference to Israel & partly to us; & [theScripture] saith thus: 'He was wounded for our transgressions & bruised for our iniquities; with His stripes we are healed. He was brought as a sheep to the slaughter & as a lamb which dumb before its shearer."17
17Epistle of Barnabas 5, ANF 1:139.
18Epistle of Barnabas 7, ANF 1:141.
19Mathetes, The Epistle to Diognetus 9, ANF 1:28.
20Ibid.
"Moreover, when fixed to the cross, He had given Him to drink vinegar & gall. Hearken how the priests of the people gave previous indications of this. His commandment having been written, the Lord enjoined, that whosoever did not keep the fast should be put to death, because He also Himself was to offer in sacrifice for our sins the vessel of the Spirit, in order that the type established in Isaac when he was offered upon the altar might be fully accomplished."18
Epistle to Diognetus (2nd century)
The Epistle of Mathetes to Diognetus is a 2nd-century work that some believe is one of the earliest examples of Christian apologetics. It also reveals early thinking in regard to Christ’s atonement. This epistle declared that “when our wickedness had reached its height...He Himself took on Him the burden of our iniquities, He gave His own Son as a ransom for us, the Holy One for transgressors, the blameless One for the wicked, the righteous One for the unrighteous.”19
It then goes on to say, “O sweet exchange! O unsearchable operation, O benefits surpassing all expectation: that the wickedness of many should be hid in a single righteous One & that the righteousness of One should justify many transgressors.”20
This epistle stands as a clear example of early belief that Jesus paid the price for unjust sinners so that they could be forgiven of their sins.
Justin Martyr (c. 100-165)
Justin was arguably the greatest apologist of the 2nd century, defending Christianity from both Jewish & pagan critics. He also emphasized that Christ became a curse for the whole human race.
"For the whole human race will be found to be under a curse. For it is written in the law of Moses, ‘Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things that are written in the book of the law to do them’ [Deut 27:26].
"And no one has accurately done all, nor will you venture to deny this; but some more & some less than others have observed the ordinances enjoined. But if those who are under this law appear to be under a curse for not having observed all the requirements, how much more shall all the nations appear to be under a curse who practice idolatry, who seduce youths & commit other crimes?"
If,then, the Father of all wished His Christ for the whole human family to take upon Him the curses of all, knowing that, after He had been crucified & was dead, He would raise Him up, why do you argue about Him, who submitted to suffer these things according to the Father's will, as if He were accursed & do not rather bewail yourselves? For although His father caused Him to suffer these things in behalf of the human family, yet you did not commit the deed as in obedience to the will of God.21
21Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho 95, ANF 1:247.22Eusebius, Demonstratio Evangelica 10.1, trans. W. J. Ferrar, Eusebius of Caesarea: Demonstratio Evangelica. Tr. W.J. Ferrar (1920) -- Book 10 (accessed June 29, 2009).
23Ibid.
24Eusebius of Emesa, “Catena,” in Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture NT XI (hereafterACCS), ed. Gerald Bray (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 2000) 96.
Eusebius of Caesarea (c. 275-339)
Eusebius was the most important church historian of his time & a religious advisor to the emperor Constantine. He evidenced his belief that Christ became a curse for sinners when he stated,
"Thus the Lamb of God, that taketh away the sins of the world, became a curse on our behalf.” He then stated, “And the Lamb of God not only did this, but was chastised on our behalf & suffered a penalty He did not owe, but which we owed because of the multitude of our sins."
"And so He became the cause of the forgiveness of our sins, because He received death for us & transferred to Himself the scourging, the insults & the dishonour, which were due to us & drew down upon Himself the appointed curse, being made a curse for us."22
He also declared: “But since being in the likeness of sinful flesh He condemned sin in the flesh, the words quoted are rightly used. (Rom 8:3; Acts 13:39; Heb 2:14,17, etc.) And in that He made our sins His own from His love & benevolence towards us.”23
Eusebius of Emesa (c. 300–360)
This bishop of Emesa & leader in the Greek church said in regard to 1 Pet2:24: “But his wounds became our saviors.”24
Hilary of Poitiers (c. 300-368)
Hilary was Bishop of Poitiers and one of the more important Latin writers before Ambrose. In his Homily on Psalm 53, Hilary affirms Christ’s sacrificial death & how Jesus became a curse for other human beings:
'For next there follows: I will sacrifice unto Thee freely. The sacrifices of the Law, which consisted of whole burnt-offerings & oblations of goats & of bulls, did not involve an expression of free will, because the sentence of a curse was pronounced on all who broke the Law.'
"Whoever failed to sacrifice laid himself open to the curse. And it was always necessary to go through the whole sacrificial action because the addition of a curse to the commandment forbade any trifling with the obligation of offering. It was from this curse that our Lord Jesus Christ redeemed us, when, as the Apostle says: Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made curse for us, for it is written: cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree" [Gal. 3:13].
"Thus He offered Himself to the death of the accursed that He might break the curse of the Law, offering Himself voluntarily a victim to God the Father, in order that by means of a voluntary victim the curse which attended the discontinuance of the regular victim might be removed."25
This statement from Hilary includes the major elements of the penal substitution view. Jesus offered Himself on behalf of sinners becoming a curse on their behalf.
Athanasius (c. 300-373)
Athanasius is probably the most important Christian theologian before Augustine. This theologian of the Eastern church is recognized as the champion of orthodox Christology as he defended the deity of Christ against Arianism that was so influential in the 4th century. Yet Athanasius was also an explicit promoter of penal substitution.
As William C. Weinrich states, “Athanasius frequently says that Christ suffered & died ‘for all’ or ‘in the stead of all.’”26
For instance, Athanasius stated, "Thus, taking a body like our own, because all our bodies were liable to the corruption of death, He surrendered His body to death in place of all & offered it to the Father. This He did out of sheer love for us, so that in His death all might die & the law of death thereby be abolished because, having fulfilled in His body that for which it was appointed, it was thereafter voided of its power for men."
"This He did that He might turn again to incorruption men who had turned back to corruption & make them alive through death by the appropriation of His body & by the grace of His resurrection. Thus He would make death to disappear from them as utterly as straw from fire."27
Athanasius also said, "The Word perceived that corruption could not be got rid of otherwise than through death; yet He Himself, as the Word, being immortal & 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, through belonging to the Word Who is above all, might become in dying a sufficient exchange for all & itself remaining incorruptible through His indwelling, might thereafter put an end to corruption for all others as well, by the grace of the resurrection."
It was by surrendering to death the body which He had taken, as an offering & sacrifice free from every stain, that He forthwith abolished death for His human brethren by the offering of the equivalent."
"For naturally, since the Word of God was above all, when He offered His own temple & bodily instrument as a substitute for the life of all, He fulfilled in death all that was required."28
25Hillary,Homilies on the Psalms 13, The Nicene & Post-Nicene Fathers (hereafter NPNF), Series2, ed. Philip Schaff, 12 vols. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1976) 9:246.
26William C. Weinrich, “God Did Not Create Death: Athanasius on the Atonement,” ConcordiaTheological Quarterly 72 (2008):301.
27Athanasius,De Incarnatione Verbi Dei, trans. and ed., A Religious of C.S.M.V., Intr. by C. S.Lewis (Crestwood, N.Y.: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1996) 34
In his Four Discourses Against the Arians, he said: “Formerly, the world, as guilty, was under judgment from the Law; but now the Word has taken on Himself the judgment & having suffering in the body for all, has bestowed salvation to all.”29
And then, For, as when John says, ‘The Word was made flesh we do not conceive the whole Word Himself to be flesh, but to have put on flesh & become man & on hearing, ‘Christ hath become a curse for us,’ & ‘He hath made Him sin for us who knew no sin,’ we do not simply conceive this, that whole Christ has become curse & sin, but that He has taken on Him the curse which lay against us.
(As the Apostle has said), ‘Has redeemed us from the curse,’ & ‘has carried,’ as Isaiah has said, ‘our sins’ & as Peter has written, ‘has borne them in the body on the wood.’30
Athanasius also said, “He also carried up our sins to the Tree.”31
In Ad Epictetum he said, “For what John said, ‘The Word was made flesh’ has this meaning, as we may see by a similar passage; for it is written in Paul: ‘Christ has become a curse for us.’ And just as He has not Himself become a curse, but is said to have done so because He took upon Him the curse on our behalf, so also He has become flesh not by being changed into flesh, but because He assumed on our behalf living flesh & has become Man.”32
Thus, Athanasius stands as a clear promoter of penal substitution.
Basil the Great (330-379)
Basil was one of the most important defenders of the Trinity in the 4th century.
In regard to Christ’s death he declared, “By the blood of Christ, through faith, we have been cleansed from all sin.”33
28Ibid., 35.
29Athanasius, Four Discourses Against the Arians, NPNF² 4:341.
30Ibid., 4:374.
31Athanasius, Letter to Maximus, NPNF²2:4:578.32Athanasius, Ad Epictetum, NPNF²4:573.33Basil, “On Baptism,” in ACCS NT XI, 96.
Gregory of Nazianzus (c. 330-390)
Known as the “Trinitarian Theologian,” Gregory also argued that Jesus became a curse for humanity & took human disobedience upon Himself: "Take, in the next place, the subjection by which you subject the Son to the Father."
"What, you say, is He not now subject, or must He, if He is God, be subject to God? You are fashioning your argument as if it concerned some robber, or some hostile deity.
But look at it in this manner: that as for my sake He was called a curse, Who destroyed my curse & sin, who taketh away the sin of the world & became a new Adam to take the place of the old {Adam}, just so He makes my disobedience His own as Head of the whole body."
"As long then as I am disobedient & rebellious, both by denial of God & by my passions, so long Christ also is called disobedient on my account. But when all things shall be subdued unto Him on the one hand by acknowledgment of Him, & on the other by a reformation, then He Himself also will have fulfilled His submission, bringing me whom He has saved to God."
For this, according to my view, is the subjection of Christ; namely,the fulfilling of the Father’s Will."34 (to be continued)
The concept of penal substitution in which Christ’s death is viewed as being on behalf of sinners to satisfy divine justice was a common belief of the church of the 1st 1000 years. Many theologians of the early church held to a penal substitution view.12
In a survey of these statements, one point should be understood. Many of the statements do not come within extended discussions of salvation. They appear to be noncontroversial at the time uttered. The nature of the atonement was not a major item of CONTROVERSY or debate in the early church. Thus, the statements are most probably declarations of generally accepted truths, adding more credibility for the case that the early theologians held to penal substitution.
13Steve Jeffery, Michael Ovey, Andrew Sach, Pierced for our Transgressions: Rediscovering the Glory of Penal Substitution (Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway, 2007) 163.
14Ibid.
15Clement,First Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians 49, in The Ante-Nicene Fathers (hereafter ANF), eds. Alexander Roberts & James Donaldson, 10 vols. (Peabody, Mass: Hendrickson, 1994) 1:18.
16Ignatius, Epistle of Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans 2, ANF 1:87.
As Jeffery, Ovey & Sachobserve, “f a writer makes a passing, but nonetheless explicit, reference to the doctrine of penal substitution in a work largely devoted to another subject, this probably indicates that penal substitution was both widely understood & fairly uncontroversial among his contemporaries.”13
Plus, it would have confused the readers for the author to bring up any other view of the atonement.14
Clement of Rome (d. 96)
Clement was a bishop in Rome. Eusebius says Clement became bishop in AD 92. Like the apostle Paul, Clement wrote a letter to the Corinthians to deal with their schisms. His Epistle to the Corinthians(c. 95) is the earliest extant Christian writing after the NT. Clement declared that Jesus gave His life in His atonement:“Because of the love he felt for us, Jesus Christ our Lord gave his blood for us by the will of God, His body for our bodies & His soul for our souls.”15
Ignatius (d. 107)
Ignatius was the 3rd bishop of Antioch in Syria. He may have been a personal disciple of the apostle John & had a special fondness for Paul whom he quoted & of whom he spoke highly. Ignatius is known for refuting Docetism, an early heresy that claimed that Jesus only appeared to be human. Ignatius believed that Jesus died on behalf of sinners when he declared: “Now, He suffered all these things for our sakes, that we might be saved.”16
Epistle of Barnabas
The Epistle of Barnabas is a Greek treatise with features of an epistle. It has been traditionally ascribed to Barnabas who is mentioned in the Book of Acts, though some ascribe it to Barnabas of Alexandria or another unknown early Christian teacher. The epistle was probably written in Alexandria, Egypt, between AD 70 & 135.
In it are several explicit statements concerning Jesus’ sacrificial death for sins: "For to this end the Lord endured to deliver up His flesh to corruption, that we might be sanctified through the remission of sins, which is effected by His blood of sprinkling."
"For it is written concerning Him, partly with reference to Israel & partly to us; & [theScripture] saith thus: 'He was wounded for our transgressions & bruised for our iniquities; with His stripes we are healed. He was brought as a sheep to the slaughter & as a lamb which dumb before its shearer."17
17Epistle of Barnabas 5, ANF 1:139.
18Epistle of Barnabas 7, ANF 1:141.
19Mathetes, The Epistle to Diognetus 9, ANF 1:28.
20Ibid.
"Moreover, when fixed to the cross, He had given Him to drink vinegar & gall. Hearken how the priests of the people gave previous indications of this. His commandment having been written, the Lord enjoined, that whosoever did not keep the fast should be put to death, because He also Himself was to offer in sacrifice for our sins the vessel of the Spirit, in order that the type established in Isaac when he was offered upon the altar might be fully accomplished."18
Epistle to Diognetus (2nd century)
The Epistle of Mathetes to Diognetus is a 2nd-century work that some believe is one of the earliest examples of Christian apologetics. It also reveals early thinking in regard to Christ’s atonement. This epistle declared that “when our wickedness had reached its height...He Himself took on Him the burden of our iniquities, He gave His own Son as a ransom for us, the Holy One for transgressors, the blameless One for the wicked, the righteous One for the unrighteous.”19
It then goes on to say, “O sweet exchange! O unsearchable operation, O benefits surpassing all expectation: that the wickedness of many should be hid in a single righteous One & that the righteousness of One should justify many transgressors.”20
This epistle stands as a clear example of early belief that Jesus paid the price for unjust sinners so that they could be forgiven of their sins.
Justin Martyr (c. 100-165)
Justin was arguably the greatest apologist of the 2nd century, defending Christianity from both Jewish & pagan critics. He also emphasized that Christ became a curse for the whole human race.
"For the whole human race will be found to be under a curse. For it is written in the law of Moses, ‘Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things that are written in the book of the law to do them’ [Deut 27:26].
"And no one has accurately done all, nor will you venture to deny this; but some more & some less than others have observed the ordinances enjoined. But if those who are under this law appear to be under a curse for not having observed all the requirements, how much more shall all the nations appear to be under a curse who practice idolatry, who seduce youths & commit other crimes?"
If,then, the Father of all wished His Christ for the whole human family to take upon Him the curses of all, knowing that, after He had been crucified & was dead, He would raise Him up, why do you argue about Him, who submitted to suffer these things according to the Father's will, as if He were accursed & do not rather bewail yourselves? For although His father caused Him to suffer these things in behalf of the human family, yet you did not commit the deed as in obedience to the will of God.21
21Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho 95, ANF 1:247.22Eusebius, Demonstratio Evangelica 10.1, trans. W. J. Ferrar, Eusebius of Caesarea: Demonstratio Evangelica. Tr. W.J. Ferrar (1920) -- Book 10 (accessed June 29, 2009).
23Ibid.
24Eusebius of Emesa, “Catena,” in Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture NT XI (hereafterACCS), ed. Gerald Bray (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 2000) 96.
Eusebius of Caesarea (c. 275-339)
Eusebius was the most important church historian of his time & a religious advisor to the emperor Constantine. He evidenced his belief that Christ became a curse for sinners when he stated,
"Thus the Lamb of God, that taketh away the sins of the world, became a curse on our behalf.” He then stated, “And the Lamb of God not only did this, but was chastised on our behalf & suffered a penalty He did not owe, but which we owed because of the multitude of our sins."
"And so He became the cause of the forgiveness of our sins, because He received death for us & transferred to Himself the scourging, the insults & the dishonour, which were due to us & drew down upon Himself the appointed curse, being made a curse for us."22
He also declared: “But since being in the likeness of sinful flesh He condemned sin in the flesh, the words quoted are rightly used. (Rom 8:3; Acts 13:39; Heb 2:14,17, etc.) And in that He made our sins His own from His love & benevolence towards us.”23
Eusebius of Emesa (c. 300–360)
This bishop of Emesa & leader in the Greek church said in regard to 1 Pet2:24: “But his wounds became our saviors.”24
Hilary of Poitiers (c. 300-368)
Hilary was Bishop of Poitiers and one of the more important Latin writers before Ambrose. In his Homily on Psalm 53, Hilary affirms Christ’s sacrificial death & how Jesus became a curse for other human beings:
'For next there follows: I will sacrifice unto Thee freely. The sacrifices of the Law, which consisted of whole burnt-offerings & oblations of goats & of bulls, did not involve an expression of free will, because the sentence of a curse was pronounced on all who broke the Law.'
"Whoever failed to sacrifice laid himself open to the curse. And it was always necessary to go through the whole sacrificial action because the addition of a curse to the commandment forbade any trifling with the obligation of offering. It was from this curse that our Lord Jesus Christ redeemed us, when, as the Apostle says: Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made curse for us, for it is written: cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree" [Gal. 3:13].
"Thus He offered Himself to the death of the accursed that He might break the curse of the Law, offering Himself voluntarily a victim to God the Father, in order that by means of a voluntary victim the curse which attended the discontinuance of the regular victim might be removed."25
This statement from Hilary includes the major elements of the penal substitution view. Jesus offered Himself on behalf of sinners becoming a curse on their behalf.
Athanasius (c. 300-373)
Athanasius is probably the most important Christian theologian before Augustine. This theologian of the Eastern church is recognized as the champion of orthodox Christology as he defended the deity of Christ against Arianism that was so influential in the 4th century. Yet Athanasius was also an explicit promoter of penal substitution.
As William C. Weinrich states, “Athanasius frequently says that Christ suffered & died ‘for all’ or ‘in the stead of all.’”26
For instance, Athanasius stated, "Thus, taking a body like our own, because all our bodies were liable to the corruption of death, He surrendered His body to death in place of all & offered it to the Father. This He did out of sheer love for us, so that in His death all might die & the law of death thereby be abolished because, having fulfilled in His body that for which it was appointed, it was thereafter voided of its power for men."
"This He did that He might turn again to incorruption men who had turned back to corruption & make them alive through death by the appropriation of His body & by the grace of His resurrection. Thus He would make death to disappear from them as utterly as straw from fire."27
Athanasius also said, "The Word perceived that corruption could not be got rid of otherwise than through death; yet He Himself, as the Word, being immortal & 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, through belonging to the Word Who is above all, might become in dying a sufficient exchange for all & itself remaining incorruptible through His indwelling, might thereafter put an end to corruption for all others as well, by the grace of the resurrection."
It was by surrendering to death the body which He had taken, as an offering & sacrifice free from every stain, that He forthwith abolished death for His human brethren by the offering of the equivalent."
"For naturally, since the Word of God was above all, when He offered His own temple & bodily instrument as a substitute for the life of all, He fulfilled in death all that was required."28
25Hillary,Homilies on the Psalms 13, The Nicene & Post-Nicene Fathers (hereafter NPNF), Series2, ed. Philip Schaff, 12 vols. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1976) 9:246.
26William C. Weinrich, “God Did Not Create Death: Athanasius on the Atonement,” ConcordiaTheological Quarterly 72 (2008):301.
27Athanasius,De Incarnatione Verbi Dei, trans. and ed., A Religious of C.S.M.V., Intr. by C. S.Lewis (Crestwood, N.Y.: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1996) 34
In his Four Discourses Against the Arians, he said: “Formerly, the world, as guilty, was under judgment from the Law; but now the Word has taken on Himself the judgment & having suffering in the body for all, has bestowed salvation to all.”29
And then, For, as when John says, ‘The Word was made flesh we do not conceive the whole Word Himself to be flesh, but to have put on flesh & become man & on hearing, ‘Christ hath become a curse for us,’ & ‘He hath made Him sin for us who knew no sin,’ we do not simply conceive this, that whole Christ has become curse & sin, but that He has taken on Him the curse which lay against us.
(As the Apostle has said), ‘Has redeemed us from the curse,’ & ‘has carried,’ as Isaiah has said, ‘our sins’ & as Peter has written, ‘has borne them in the body on the wood.’30
Athanasius also said, “He also carried up our sins to the Tree.”31
In Ad Epictetum he said, “For what John said, ‘The Word was made flesh’ has this meaning, as we may see by a similar passage; for it is written in Paul: ‘Christ has become a curse for us.’ And just as He has not Himself become a curse, but is said to have done so because He took upon Him the curse on our behalf, so also He has become flesh not by being changed into flesh, but because He assumed on our behalf living flesh & has become Man.”32
Thus, Athanasius stands as a clear promoter of penal substitution.
Basil the Great (330-379)
Basil was one of the most important defenders of the Trinity in the 4th century.
In regard to Christ’s death he declared, “By the blood of Christ, through faith, we have been cleansed from all sin.”33
28Ibid., 35.
29Athanasius, Four Discourses Against the Arians, NPNF² 4:341.
30Ibid., 4:374.
31Athanasius, Letter to Maximus, NPNF²2:4:578.32Athanasius, Ad Epictetum, NPNF²4:573.33Basil, “On Baptism,” in ACCS NT XI, 96.
Gregory of Nazianzus (c. 330-390)
Known as the “Trinitarian Theologian,” Gregory also argued that Jesus became a curse for humanity & took human disobedience upon Himself: "Take, in the next place, the subjection by which you subject the Son to the Father."
"What, you say, is He not now subject, or must He, if He is God, be subject to God? You are fashioning your argument as if it concerned some robber, or some hostile deity.
But look at it in this manner: that as for my sake He was called a curse, Who destroyed my curse & sin, who taketh away the sin of the world & became a new Adam to take the place of the old {Adam}, just so He makes my disobedience His own as Head of the whole body."
"As long then as I am disobedient & rebellious, both by denial of God & by my passions, so long Christ also is called disobedient on my account. But when all things shall be subdued unto Him on the one hand by acknowledgment of Him, & on the other by a reformation, then He Himself also will have fulfilled His submission, bringing me whom He has saved to God."
For this, according to my view, is the subjection of Christ; namely,the fulfilling of the Father’s Will."34 (to be continued)
Upvote
0