Saint Augustine of Hippo and Saint Athanasius of Alexandria were both Church Fathers that had a renowned impact on Christian philosophy and Christian theology. In their works, these first century theologians wrestled with issues such as divine providence, the will of God, God’s relationship with the human race, salvation, and many more topics of discussion still relevant to theologians in the present day. Like many of their peers in the church, they agreed on certain matters, one of which is that the purpose of humans is to love God unconditionally and to respond to God’s Grace that he gave to humanity. They also agreed that evil and human sin pulls one away from the relationship he is meant to have with God. However, when reading their works,
…show more content…
Athanasius talks about human’s sinful transgressions as they “despised and overturned the comprehension of God, devising and contriving evil for themselves, receiving the previously threatened condemnation of death” (On the Incarnation, 53). Here, Athanasius is defining sin as turning away from God’s favor and Grace. This is significant in that it stresses the importance of free choice within humans. They either have the choice to guard God’s Grace and reap the benefits of “abiding in blessedness” in paradise with God, or they can choose to “transgress and turn away, enduring the corruption of death” (On the Incarnation, 52). The result of the latter option is a key argument for Athanasius in that by consciously deciding to turn from God and entering into sin, one returns to the natural state, “so that, just as they, not being, came to be, so also one might rightly endure in time the corruption unto non-being” (OTI pg. 53). By this, Athanasius is saying that because humans were called into being by God’s word, turning away from God and his word cuts the ties with God and sends them into non-being. This implies that humans cannot be in existence without God and that by sinning, they condemn themselves into …show more content…
Athanasius tells his readers that “from the beginning there were inventors of evil and called death and corruption down upon themselves… for there were adulteries and thefts everywhere, the whole earth was full of murders and plundering” (On the Incarnation, 54). Athanasius does not view sin on the personal level, but rather on the level of the entire human race as he is discussing generalized sin of various people throughout time. This, in turn, makes salvation less personal and brings into question God’s intention for salvation. Instead of a God that cares for individual human souls and is concerned for the type of human beings he saves, Athanasius depicts a God that intends for salvation simply to renew order and save his creation in that he “avenges and saves it as his own work, having regard not for the carelessness of the inhabitants, but for his own honor” (On the Incarnation, 58-59). This is not a God that loves people based on who they are or what is in their hearts, but rather a God that is just, and not even to his creation, but to himself first and foremost. This is very demotivating for a human to want to correct his wrong doings because by viewing sin in this way, individual action means nothing to God, but rather the status of the world in general. Therefore, the human as no incentive to
Athanasius talks about human’s sinful transgressions as they “despised and overturned the comprehension of God, devising and contriving evil for themselves, receiving the previously threatened condemnation of death” (On the Incarnation, 53). Here, Athanasius is defining sin as turning away from God’s favor and Grace. This is significant in that it stresses the importance of free choice within humans. They either have the choice to guard God’s Grace and reap the benefits of “abiding in blessedness” in paradise with God, or they can choose to “transgress and turn away, enduring the corruption of death” (On the Incarnation, 52). The result of the latter option is a key argument for Athanasius in that by consciously deciding to turn from God and entering into sin, one returns to the natural state, “so that, just as they, not being, came to be, so also one might rightly endure in time the corruption unto non-being” (OTI pg. 53). By this, Athanasius is saying that because humans were called into being by God’s word, turning away from God and his word cuts the ties with God and sends them into non-being. This implies that humans cannot be in existence without God and that by sinning, they condemn themselves into …show more content…
Athanasius tells his readers that “from the beginning there were inventors of evil and called death and corruption down upon themselves… for there were adulteries and thefts everywhere, the whole earth was full of murders and plundering” (On the Incarnation, 54). Athanasius does not view sin on the personal level, but rather on the level of the entire human race as he is discussing generalized sin of various people throughout time. This, in turn, makes salvation less personal and brings into question God’s intention for salvation. Instead of a God that cares for individual human souls and is concerned for the type of human beings he saves, Athanasius depicts a God that intends for salvation simply to renew order and save his creation in that he “avenges and saves it as his own work, having regard not for the carelessness of the inhabitants, but for his own honor” (On the Incarnation, 58-59). This is not a God that loves people based on who they are or what is in their hearts, but rather a God that is just, and not even to his creation, but to himself first and foremost. This is very demotivating for a human to want to correct his wrong doings because by viewing sin in this way, individual action means nothing to God, but rather the status of the world in general. Therefore, the human as no incentive to