Eastern Orthodox Soteriology

[Puritanhead]

St. Athanasius of Alexandria wrote, "The Son of God became man, that we might become God." What is the Reformed response to the EO concept of theosis, meaning divinization (or deification or, to become god.

Thoughts?

 

[DTK]

Originally posted by Puritanhead
St. Athanasius of Alexandria wrote, "The Son of God became man, that we might become God." What is the Reformed response to the EO concept of theosis, meaning divinization (or deification or, to become god.

Thoughts?

I think Calvin gives a good response, which might initially shock us, but it's helpful. While commenting on the pivotal text for this concept in 2 Peter 1:4, Calvin wrote...

For we must consider from whence it is that God raises us up to such a height of honor. We know how abject is the condition of our nature; that God, then, should make himself ours, so that all his things should in a manner become our things, the greatness of his grace cannot be sufficiently conceived by our minds. Therefore this consideration alone ought to be abundantly sufficient to make us to renounce the world and to carry us aloft to heaven. Let us then mark, that the end of the gospel is, to render us eventually conformable to God, and, if we may so speak, to deify us.

But the word nature is not here essence but quality. The Manicheans formerly dreamt that we are a part of God, and that, after having run the race of life we shall at length revert to our original. There are also at this day fanatics who imagine that we thus pass over into the nature of God, so that his swallows up our nature. Thus they explain what Paul says, that God will be all in all (1 Corinthians 15:28,) and in the same sense they take this passage. But such a delirium as this never entered the minds of the holy Apostles; they only intended to say that when divested of all the vices of the flesh, we shall be partakers of divine and blessed immortality and glory, so as to be as it were one with God as far as our capacities will allow. Calvin´s Commentaries, Vol. XXII, trans. John Owen (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, reprinted 1979), p. 371.

I don't understand Athansius to be saying anything essentially different than Calvin. God intends for us to be creaturely reflections of the glory of God, whose image was defaced by Adam's sin. Calvin is essentially saying that God's purpose in the gospel is to restore that image, and to transform us, as much as is possible for redeemed creatures to be, into Christ's likeness. There are any number of NT pericopes that underscore this spiritual reality, Rom 8:29, 2 Cor 3:18, 1 John 3:2, etc.

But bear in mind, not even Eastern Orthodoxy would posit that the Christian actually becomes God.

DTK

 

[Puritanhead]

Originally posted by DTK
But bear in mind, not even Eastern Orthodoxy would posit that the Christian actually becomes God.

DTK

So, they didn't prefigure Kenneth Copeland after all? Em-kay. Good enough answer.

 

[py3ak]

There is a James White debate where against two mormons he maintains that he believes in the concept of theosis. It is rather absurd: the mormons try to argue on the basis of similarity of language that the ECF had something in common with them, while rejecting as irrelevant all of White's attempts to expound the view of God held by the ECF. You'd think that if we are going to talk about becoming God, we ought to understand what we mean by God.