Origen of Alexandria

But if in every detail of this outer covering, that is, the actual history, the sequence of the law had been preserved and its order maintained, we should have understood the Scriptures in an unbroken course and should certainly not have believed that there was anything else buried within them beyond what was indicated at a first glance. Consequently the divine wisdom has arranged for certain stumbling blocks and interruptions of the historical sense to be found therein, by inserting in the midst a number of impossibilities and incongruities. [This was done] in order that the very interruption of the narrative might as it were present a barrier to the reader and lead him to refuse to proceed along the pathway of the ordinary meaning. And so, by shutting us out and debarring us from that, [the writers] might recall us to the beginning of another way, and might thereby bring us, through the entrance of a narrow footpath, to a higher and loftier road and lay open the immense breadth of the divine wisdom.… The aim of the Holy Spirit was chiefly to preserve the connection of the spiritual, meaning, both in the things that are yet to be done and in those which have already been accomplished. [Thus] whenever he found that things which had been done in history could be harmonized with the spiritual meaning, he composed in a single narrative a texture comprising both kinds of meaning, always, however, concealing the secret sense more deeply. But wherever the record of deeds that had been done could not be made to correspond with the sequence of the spiritual truths, he inserted occasionally some deeds of a less probable character or which could not have happened at all, and occasionally some that might have happened but in fact did not. Sometimes he does this by a few words, which in their bodily sense do not appear capable of containing truth and at other times by inserting a large number.This is found to happen particularly in the law, where there are many things that as literal precepts are clearly useful, but also a considerable number in which no principle of utility whatever is disclosed, while sometimes even impossibilities are detected. All this, as we have said, the Holy Spirit supervised, in order that in cases where that which appeared at the first glance could neither be true nor useful we should be led on to search for a truth deeper down and needing more careful examination. And [we] should try to discover in the Scriptures which we believe to be inspired by God a meaning worthy of God.
And not only did the Holy Spirit supervise the writings which were previous to the coming of Christ, but because he is one and the same Spirit and proceeds from the one God, he has acted similarly in regard to the Gospels and the writings of the apostles. For even the narratives that he inspired through them were not woven together without the spell of that wisdom of his, the nature of which we explained above. And so it happens that even in them the Spirit has mingled not a few things by which the historical order of the narrative is interrupted and broken, with the object of turning and calling the attention of the reader, by the impossibility of the literal sense, to an examination of the inner meaning.

According to the law, "the adulterer and the adulteress were put to death." They could not say, "We seek repentance and we pray for mercy." There was no place for tears, and no opportunity was granted for any correction, but in every way it was necessary for those who had contravened the law to be punished. This was observed in certain individual offenses for which the death penalty was ascribed. But among Christians, if adultery has been committed, the precept is not that "the adulterer and adulteress" be punished by the destruction of the body. No power was given to episcopal authority to sentence an adulterer to immediate death, as had happened earlier according to the levitical law who gave this power to elders. What does this mean? That while the law of Moses takes adultery seriously enough to punish it unmercifully, the gospel of Christ through gentleness frees the adulterer to go from bad to worse? It is not so. For this reason, we brought forth the word of Paul, saying above, "How much worse punishment will be deserved by one who has spurned the Son of God," etc. Hear, therefore, how neither was the law cruel then, nor does the gospel now appear dissolute because of the abundance of mercy, but in both instances the benevolence of God is held in a different dispensation.

Give me your attention, you who have approached God, who believe yourselves to be faithful. Consider diligently how the faith of the faithful is proved from these words that have been read to us. “After these things,” the text says, “God tested Abraham and said to him, ‘Abraham, Abraham.’ And he said, ‘Here I am.’ ” Observe each detail that has been written. For, if one knows how to dig into the depth, one will find a treasure in the details. Perhaps also the precious jewels of the mysteries lie hidden where they are not esteemed.This man was previously called Abram. Nowhere do we read that God called him by this name or said to him, “Abram, Abram.” For God could not call him by a name that was to be abolished, but he calls him by this name which God gave; and not only does God call him by this name, but he also repeats it. And when he had responded, “Here I am,” God says to him, “Take your dearest son Isaac, whom you love, and offer him to me. Go,” the text says, “into the high land, and there you shall offer him for a holocaust upon one of the mountains which I shall show you.”
Why God gave him this particular name and called him Abraham, he himself has interpreted. “Because,” the text says, “I have made you a father of many nations.” God gave him this promise when he had his son Ishmael, but it is promised him that the promise will be fulfilled in a son who will be born of Sarah. He had kindled his soul, therefore, in love for his son not only because of posterity but also in the hope of the promises.
But this son, in whom these great and marvelous promises have been made, this son, I say, on whose account his name is called Abraham, “he is ordered to offer for a holocaust to the Lord on one of the mountains.”
What do you say to these things, Abraham? What kind of thoughts are stirring in your heart? A word has been uttered by God that is such as to shatter and try your faith. What do you say to these things? What are you thinking? What are you reconsidering? Are you thinking, are you turning over in your heart that, if the promise has been given to me in Isaac, but I offer him for a holocaust, it remains that that promise holds no hope? Or rather do you think of those well-known words, and say that it is impossible, for him who promised, to lie; be that as it may, the promise shall remain?
But I, because “I am the least,” am not able to examine the thoughts of such a great patriarch nor can I know what thoughts the voice of God which had proceeded to test him stirred in him, what feeling it caused, when he was ordered to slay his only son. But since “the spirit of prophets is subject to the prophets,” the apostle Paul, who, I believe, was teaching by the Spirit what feeling, what plan Abraham considered, has revealed it when he says, “By faith Abraham did not hesitate, when he offered his only son, in whom he had received the promises, thinking that God is able to raise him up even from the dead.”
The apostle, therefore, has reported to us the thoughts of the faithful man, that the faith in the resurrection began to be held already at that time in Isaac. Abraham, therefore, hoped for the resurrection of Isaac and believed in a future that had not yet happened. How, then, are they “sons of Abraham” who do not believe what has happened in Christ, which Abraham believed was to be in Isaac? No, rather, that I may speak more clearly, Abraham knew himself to prefigure the image of future truth; he knew the Christ was to be born from his seed, who also was to be offered as a truer victim for the whole world and was to be raised from the dead.

For indeed, even the apostles have not yet received their joy, but they also wait that I may be a partaker of their joy. For the saints, when they leave this place, do not immediately obtain the whole rewards of their merits. They also wait for us, though we delay, even though we remain. For they do not have perfect delight as long as they grieve for our errors and mourn for our sins. Perhaps you do not believe me when I say this. For who am I that I am so bold to confirm the meaning of such a doctrine? But I produce their witness about whom you cannot doubt. For the apostle Paul is "a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth." Therefore, in writing to the Hebrews, after he had enumerated all the holy fathers who were justified by faith, he adds after all that, "all these, though well attested by their faith, did not receive what was promised, since God had foreseen something better for us, that apart from us they should not be made perfect." You see, therefore, that Abraham is still waiting to obtain the perfect things. Isaac waits, and Jacob and all the prophets wait for us, that they may lay hold of the perfect blessedness with us.For this reason, therefore, that mystery of the delayed judgment is also kept until the last day. For there is "one body" that is waiting to be justified. There is "one body" that is said to rise from the dead in judgment. "As it is, there are many parts, yet one body. The eye cannot say to the hand, 'I have no need of you.' "

Many have produced lengthy discussions of God and God's essence. Some have even said that God has a bodily nature that is composed of fine particles and is like ether. Others have said that God is incorporeal and is of a different essence that transcends bodies in dignity and power. For this reason it is worthwhile for us to see if we have resources from the divine Scriptures to say something about God's essence. In John 4:24 it is stated as if God's essence were spirit, for it says, "God is spirit." But in the law, it is instead as if God's essence were fire, for it is written, "Our God is a consuming fire." In John, however, it is stated as if God were light, for John says, "God is light, and in him is no darkness at all." If, then, we should listen to these words literally, making no inquiry beyond the letter, we would have to say that God is a body.… But because we do not see the consequences if we attribute a body to God when we say, even on the basis of Scripture, that God is some such body as spirit, or consuming fire, or light, unless we accept the conclusions that necessarily follow these assertions, we will disgrace ourselves as foolish and contradicting the obvious. For every fire is subject to extinction because it needs fuel; and every spirit, even if we take the spirit to be simple, because it is a body, admits of change to what is coarser in its own nature. In these matters, then, we must either accept so many absurd and blasphemous things about God in preserving the literal meanings, or, as we also do in many other cases, examine and inquire what can be meant when it is said that God is spirit or fire or light. First we must say that just as when we find it written that God has eyes, eyelids, ears, hands, arms, feet, and even wings, we change what is written into an allegory, despising those who bestow on God a form resembling humans; and we do this with good reason. So also must we act consistently with our practice in the case of the names mentioned above.