John Chrysostom : And how this was, the Apostle himself has taught us, by saying, "accounting that God was able to raise Him up, even from the dead." By the same faith (he means) by which he believed that God gave what was not, and raised up the dead, by the same was he persuaded that He would also raise him up after he had been slain in sacrifice. For it was alike impossible (to human calculation, I mean) from a womb which was dead and grown old and already become useless for child-bearing to give a child, and to raise again one who had been slain. But his previous faith prepared the way for things to come. And see; the good things came first, and the hard things afterwards, in his old age. But for you, on the contrary, (he says) the sad things are first, and the good things last. This for those who dare to say, "He has promised us the good things after death; perhaps He has deceived us." He shows that "God is able to raise up even from the dead," and if God be able to raise from the dead, without all doubt He will pay all that He has promised. But if Abraham so many years before, believed "that God is able to raise from the dead," much more ought we to believe it. Thou seest (what I at first said) that death had not yet entered in and yet He drew them at once to the hope of the resurrection, and led them to such full assurance, that when bidden, they even slay their own sons, and readily offer up those from whom they expected to people the world. — Homily on Hebrews 25 John Chrysostom : And hence he was not afraid to say, that God was "able to raise him up, even from the dead." "From whence also he received him in a figure," that is in idea, by the ram, he means. How? The ram having been slain, he was saved: so that by means of the ram he received him again, having slain it in his stead. But these things were types: for here it is the Son of God who is slain. And observe, I beseech you, how great is His lovingkindness. For inasmuch as a great favor was to be given to men, He, wishing to do this, not by favor, but as a debtor, arranges that a man should first give up his own son on account of God's command, in order that He Himself might seem to be doing nothing great in giving up His own Son, since a man had done this before Him; that He might be supposed to do it not of grace, but of debt. For we wish to do this kindness also to those whom we love, others, to appear first to have received some little thing from them, and so give them all: and we boast more of the receiving than of the giving; and we do not say, We gave him this, but, We received this from him. "From whence also" (are his words) "he received him in a figure," i.e. as in a riddle (for the ram was as it were a figure of Isaac) or, as in a type. For since the sacrifice had been completed, and Isaac slain in purpose, therefore He gave him to the Patriarch. — Homily on Hebrews 25 Oecumenius : "considering that God was able even to raise him from the dead." Do you see how by faith Abraham did everything? For he believed that God could even raise him from the dead after he was sacrificed. "from which, figuratively speaking." And Abraham himself and Isaac himself. For it is fitting concerning the two. But see this, "figuratively." Abraham was a type of God the Father, and Isaac, of the Son of God. For since God was about to provide us with something great, the sacrifice of His Son, being very compassionate, so that we might not think that we are saved by grace alone, He made it necessary to deliver Christ. And the necessity is thus: "Just as," he says, "Abraham was willing to deliver his only-begotten for me to death, so also I," he says, "must deliver my Only-begotten to death for the sake of men." And the "figuratively," we can also understand this way, connecting it to the person of Isaac: He brought Isaac, and made him a figure and a type and an example of Christ, so that just as Isaac was sacrificed according to Abraham's intention, so also Christ was sacrificed, in truth. And thus, the "figuratively," understand; that is, he says, he brought Isaac in a figure, that is, instead of the type and the example. For he indicated the ram, and having given it instead of him, he received Isaac. But the first interpretation, as I think, is much better. — The Pseudo-Oecumenian Catena on Hebrews Oecumenius : That is, "from which, figuratively speaking," it is possible to understand it this way: From where Abraham also brought Isaac in a figure. For he says, he demonstrated some overwhelming obedience, and faith that overcame even the laws of nature, he again receives the son, not as one who offered him, but with a great addition and value of his own faith. For he brought him bearing a figure and a likeness to the Son of God and God. Such things faith is able to accomplish. If, however, you take the common point in the figure from both Abraham and Isaac, that one served as a type of the Father and as a figure and likeness through the offering of the child, while Isaac served as a type of the Son, thus the aforementioned understanding is fulfilled. So great a gain, he says, faith brought to Abraham, that having offered his son, he received him back with the greatest addition. Of which addition was this? The one in the figure, both in relation to the Father and in relation to the Son to be brought forth. That is to say, He brought forth the Son for such a gain, in which the Father willed for both to be made a type of approach to be accomplished upon the Son. In the figure, God brought forth Isaac; that is, because of the faith and willingness of Abraham, although a ram was presented, and then not brought forth by Abraham, but by God Himself, who also brought forth. Thus, God accepted the sacrifice, as if bringing forth Isaac Himself through the figure and the substitution of the ram. Therefore, it is said, from where He brought him forth, as Isaac, in the parable and substitution of the ram, that is, as the purpose was fulfilled, and the willingness of his faith, therefore, God accepted the sacrifice of Abraham. — The Pseudo-Oecumenian Catena on Hebrews Photios I of Constantinople : One can understand the statement "hence, figuratively speaking, he did receive him back" in the following sense: "Abraham received Isaac in a figurative way." For, as he says, since he showed some untold obedience and a faith that conquers even the laws of nature itself, he received his son again, not merely because he offered his son but because he offered him with great assent and his worthy faith. For Abraham received Isaac, who bore a figure and likeness to the Son of God and God himself. For such faith can set matters aright. But if you understand "in a figurative way" to apply to Abraham and Isaac, in that Abraham acted as a type of the Father and as a figure and likeness of him, while Isaac acted as a type of the Son, this interpretation would accord well with the understanding we have already stated. Abraham's faith brought him such a gain, he says, because after offering him he received him back with great addition. What sort of addition? That he would receive him again "in a figurative manner" and likeness of the action with the Father and the Son, that is, he received his son with so great profit, since both became a type of the offering with which the Father thought it good to be completed in his Son.Or one can understand it as follows. God "in a figurative way received" Isaac, that is, because of the faith and zeal of Abraham. To be sure, later a ram was offered, and even then it was not brought out of Abraham's flock but was also provided by God. Nonetheless, God received the sacrifice in this way, as if Abraham had offered Isaac himself albeit in a symbolic manner and through the substitution of the ram. Therefore he says, "He received him," namely, Isaac, "in a figurative way" and substitution of the ram, that is, the intended and fulfilled purpose of Abraham and the desire of his faith. Thus God received the sacrifice of Abraham in this manner. — FRAGMENTS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE Hebrews 11.19 Theodore of Mopsuestia : He obtained it in accordance with his faith. For believing in the resurrection, he received him who had died symbolically. For the fact that he suffered nothing, although he fully expected to die, was a symbol of the one who would truly rise, inasmuch as, "having tasted death for a short time," he rose, having suffered nothing under death's power. For this was done "in a parable" instead of in symbols. — FRAGMENTS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE Hebrews 11.19