“We have been considering the fact the great conviction expressed in the Church’s confession of the oneness of the Son with the Father arose out of the evangelical and doxological approach of the Nicene fathers. They found they had to make explicit, in exact and accurate ways, the relation of the Son in being and act to the Father, in order to conserve the very essence of the Gospel of God’s saving and redeeming work in Jesus Christ. But the consubstantial or homoousial relation of the Son to the Father was asserted to be between the incarnate Son, Jesus Christ, and the Father. Both ends of the homoousion, the divine and the human, had to be secured. Everything would be emptied of evangelical and saving import if Jesus Christ were not fully, completely, entirely man, as well as God. I was to make this indubitably clear that clauses and expressions were added to the original Creed of Nicaea relating to the humanity of the Son. However, when we turn to consider the clauses of the Creed that speak of the incarnation we find that they are dominated by a soteriological concern, ‘for us men and for our salvation.’ The basic approach of these Church fathers at Nicaea and Constantinople was that of the worship of redeemed sinners who rejoiced in the message of the Gospel and who, like St Paul, believed in Christ as God and Saviour.”
2. John 10.33 The Jews answered Him, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to be God.”
3. Athanasius, De decr., 1; cf Con Ar., 1.39f; Con Apol., 2.7. This was evidently indebted to Alexander of Alexandria, De an et cor., 5 & 7. It was surely to this Athanasian question διατὶ σὺ θεὸς ὤν ἄνθρωπος γέγονας; that the Anselmian Cur Dues homo? must be traced.
5. Athanasius De Decr., 1
6. E.g., Athanasius Con Ar., 2.55
9. Athanasius Ad Epic., 5-9
11. See again the discussion by Athanasius in De syn., 51
16. Cyril of Alexandria, Ep. ad Nest., MPG, 77.3 (N/A), 116BC; Adv. Nest., MPG, 76.1, 17B; 20D; 21AB; 28C; 35A, etc.; or Quod unus sit Christus, MPG, 75, 1257A 1272B; 1277C, etc. For further references see Theol. in Reconcil., 163ff.
17. This is very evident in the way that Athanasius in his later writings spoke of Christ’s body as his own personal instrument (ὅργανον) in effecting the restoration and sanctification of our nature in himself — Con. Ar., 2.30; 3.31, 35, 53. Cf. also Con. Apol., 1.2, 15; Gregory Naz., Ep., 102.
20. See especially Con Apol., 1 & 2, which are of Athanasian provenance and probably Athanasian authorship. The theory they were not written by Athanasius has not been subjected to a convincing critical examination by George Dragas, St Athanasius Contra Apollinarem, Athens, 1985.
21. Cited by Athanasius in Con Apol., 1.2. The extant fragments of Apollinarus have been compiled by Hans Leitzmann, Apollinaris von Laodicea und seiner Schule, Texte und Untersuchungen, 1904. See also Theol. in Reconcil., pp. 143-50.
22. Athanasius Ad Epict., 7
23. Athanasius Ad Ant., 7
25. Basil Ep., 261.2
26. Gregory Nyss., Or. cat., 14
28. Cf. Alexander of Alexandria: ‘For they, retaining in their memory all that they can collect concerning the passion, his abasement, his κένωσις, and what they call his poverty, and in short all those things to which the Saviour submitted as Saviour for our sakes, bring them forward to refute his eternal existence and Godhead.’ Theodoret, Hist. eccl., 1.3.
32. Athanasius Con Ar., 4.6; also 2.7ff, 16, 31, 71; 3.31f, 38f; 43ff. For an earlier instance on this two-fold activity of God, see Irenaeus, Adv. haer., 3.19.6 (3.18.7), vol 2, p.100f; 4.34.5 & 7 (4.20.4), pp. 215f, 218; 5.17.1, p. 369
37. Athanasius De inc., 7-10. See the discerning exposition of these chapters by G. D. Dragas, op cit., pp. 228-242.
38. Athanasius De inc., 54.3
39. Irenaeus Adv. haer., 1.2.1 (1.10.1), vol 1, p. 90f; 2.33.2 (2.22.4), p. 330f; 3.11.1f (3.10.2), vol. 2 p. 35f; 3.11.10 (3.11.8), p. 47f; especially 3.17.6-3.24.2 (3.16.6–3.21.3), pp. 87-133; 4.11.2 (4.6.2), p. 159; 4.18.1 (4.9.1), pp. 168f; 4.34.4f (4.20.4), pp. 215f; 4.62-63.2 (4.38.1ff), pp. 292ff; 5.1.1ff, pp.314ff; 5.2.1ff, pp. 317ff; 5.14.2ff, pp. 360ff; 5.16.1-17.1 (5.16.2ff), pp. 368ff; 5.19.1f , pp. 375f; 5.21.1f, pp. 380f; 5.23.2, p. 387f; Dem., 31ff.