You say that your theories do not obviate the necessity of the events +John Chrysostomos gave his Paschal Homily on. Yet the very purpose of the Incarnation was to save mankind from a bondage which by its own efforts and power it was unable to do. +Leo the Great wrote on this very subject in Sermon XXIV On the Feast of the Nativity, IV, 2:
"Let the righteous then rejoice in the Lord, and let the hearts of believers turn to God’s praise, and the sons of men confess His wondrous acts; since in this work of God especially our humble estate realizes how highly its Maker values it: in that, after His great gift to mankind in making us after His image, He contributed far more largely to our restoration when the Lord Himself took on Him “the form of a slave.” For though all that the Creator expends upon His creature is part of one and the same Fatherly love, yet it is less wonderful than man should advance to divine things than that God should descend to humanity. But unless the Almighty God did deign to do this, no kind of righteousness, no form of wisdom could rescue any one from the devil’s bondage and from the depths of eternal death. For the condemnation that passes with sin from one upon all would remain, and our nature, corroded by its deadly wound, would discover no remedy, because it could not alter its state in its own strength. For the first man received the substance of flesh from the earth, and was quickened with a rational spirit by the in-breathing of his Creator , so that living after the image and likeness of his Maker, he might preserve the form of God’s goodness and righteousness as in a bright mirror. And, if he had perseveringly maintained this high dignity of his nature by observing the Law that was given him, his uncorrupt mind would have raised the character even Of his earthly body to heavenly glory. But because in unhappy rashness he trusted the envious deceiver, and agreeing to his presumptuous counsels, preferred to forestall rather than to win the increase of honour that was in storefor him, not only did that one man, but in him all that came after him also hear the verdict: “earth thou art, and unto earth shalt thou go ;” “as in the earthy,” therefore, “such are they also that are earthy ,” and no one is immortal, because no one is heavenly."
Was this Holy and early Father wrong, S?
No. I see nothing changed in that sermon.
"Yet the very purpose of the Incarnation was to save mankind from a bondage which by its own efforts and power it was unable to do."
His original conclusion and love never wavered. The gift of life He bestowed was never to be abandoned. John 3:16 "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life." It's the same now as it was in the beginning.
I gave Matt 13:35, which is Isaiah 6:9-10. Another parable is relevant here. Luke 20:9-18
He went on to tell the people this parable: "A man planted a vineyard, rented it to some farmers and went away for a long time. At harvest time he sent a servant to the tenants so they would give him some of the fruit of the vineyard. But the tenants beat him and sent him away empty-handed. He sent another servant, but that one also they beat and treated shamefully and sent away empty-handed. He sent still a third, and they wounded him and threw him out.
Then the owner of the vineyard said, 'What shall I do? I will send my son, whom I love; perhaps they will respect him.'
But when the tenants saw him, they talked the matter over. 'This is the heir,' they said. 'Let's kill him, and the inheritance will be ours.' So they threw him out of the vineyard and killed him.
"What then will the owner of the vineyard do to them? He will come and kill those tenants and give the vineyard to others." When the people heard this, they said, "May this never be!"
Jesus looked directly at them and asked, "Then what is the meaning of that which is written:
" 'The stone the builders rejected
has become the cornerstone[Psalm 118:22]? Everyone who falls on that stone will be broken to pieces, but he on whom it falls will be crushed."
Verse 19 goes on to say, "The teachers of the law and the chief priests looked for a way to arrest him immediately, because they knew he had spoken this parable against them. But they were afraid of the people." God spoke the parable to include them, and all the descendent's of Adam like them. The fruit was His harvest.
Let's look at this phrase from Genesis 1:26, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness,..." That's how the creation of man begins. That is the Father and the Son. Man was not created with the Holy Spirit. They would develop their own spirits. John 6:45, "It is written in the Prophets: 'They will all be taught by God.' Everyone who listens to the Father and learns from him comes to me." [Isaiah 54:13] Without the Holy Spirit, both the Father and the Son are simply sentient bodies with potential. The Holy Spirit is the spirit these 2 persons developed to make them the Persons they are.
Let's look at part of your excerpt from the Paschal Sermon of +John Chrysostomos.
"Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen from the grave. Let no one fear death, for the Death of our Savior has set us free.
He has destroyed it by enduring it.
He destroyed Hades when He descended into it.
He put it into an uproar even as it tasted of His flesh.
Isaiah foretold this when he said,
"You, O Hell, have been troubled by encountering Him below."
Hell was in an uproar because it was done away with.
It was in an uproar because it is mocked.
It was in an uproar, for it is destroyed.
It is in an uproar, for it is annihilated.
It is in an uproar, for it is now made captive.
Hell took a body, and discovered God.
It took earth, and encountered Heaven.
It took what it saw, and was overcome by what it did not see.
O death, where is thy sting?
O Hades, where is thy victory?
Now God came, of a virgin birth. He was fully man. That means He was conceived and born an empty slate. Now if He really was fully man, how could that be, if He was w/o the propensity to sin attributed by the doctrine of original sin? He was fully man, so God lived the consequences of the garden as all Adam's progeny. He underwent the same temptation as other men, yet He did not sin.
What does wipe out both logic and the impact of the reality of St. John's sermon, is if all of man, except the virgin Mary (some say, that she is the immaculate conception) and Jesus were both different and w/o the propensity to sin given in the doctrine. That's the doctrine, that I already pointed out I don't find in the Bible. The majesty of GOd is that He didn't need to do anything special, or different to develope the Person that He is- the Holy Spirit.