Theosis

Man, Sin, & Salvation
User avatar
jaydam
Posts: 343
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 8:29 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Theosis

Post by jaydam » Sat Feb 13, 2016 3:49 pm

I am having to do a paper on theosis. The idea that salvation brings us to be partakers in the divine nature - in spiritual union with God.

It is fitting since I have been uncomfortable from day one regarding the cold contractual basis upon which western church has established salvation without relationship. The balancing of accounts payable and receivable to God the wrathful accountant.

In studying theosis in depth, it seems to better line up with where my personal studies were taking me, and I have been surprised to learn it was the prevailing belief of the early church, until western society got a hold of theology and turned every into contractual agreements.

For those who have studied much more than myself, what are your feelings on theosis?

I have only truly scratched the surface on it, but it seems to make much more sense than the legal transaction theology of the west. Additionally, I think it might be able to better explain how all humanity is fallen and suffers due to Adam. I don't know yet.

Anyone else considered it? I know the previous seminary I went to breezed over the topic as simply an Eastern Orthodox idea which is heretical. From then until now I never really had a chance to look into it further, and now I'm not so sure it can be written off so easily.

dwilkins
Posts: 647
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2012 2:54 pm

Re: Theosis

Post by dwilkins » Mon Feb 15, 2016 12:07 pm

One of the things that amazes me is how ignorant the evangelical American church (generally following seminaries the line of Moody or DTS) is of Christianity in the rest of the world. I grew up in Baptist churches, with a heavy dose of Calvary Chapel instruction over the radio, but it wasn't until a few years ago that I knew of the existence of more than half of the church in the first 1,000 years (the Syriac Church of the East was larger by population and geography until Islam destroyed it). I think my understanding of the Eastern Orthodox church was that they were the Roman church's loser cousin.

Obviously, it turns out there is some really good stuff in these other traditions. The problem is that EO theology is hard to read. They tend to write very esoterically. I think theosis is one of their doctrines that we should embrace. It seems to me that we underestimate the literalness of Paul's teaching about Christ being "in" us, or us being "in" him. As I read about the use of the term pneumas in Paul's day it dawned on me that he was trying to say that the Holy Spirit as he indwells provides a literal a connection between God and our spirit, and that this connection allows for a renovation or growth of our spirit. As we stay in touch with his spirit, our spirit becomes more and more like his. In that sense, we are creatures of a different physical order from regular flesh humans, which is the rationale behind Paul telling the Corinthians not to be connected too closely with those simple flesh creatures. It sounds odd, but the more I read Paul from this point of view the more obvious his point became. The EO church picked this up as theosis, which we have unfortunately lost in our theology.

Doug

User avatar
jaydam
Posts: 343
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 8:29 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Re: Theosis

Post by jaydam » Mon Feb 15, 2016 2:59 pm

Thanks for the reply. I have enjoyed checking out Eastern Orthodoxy, and believe there is much benefit to it. Essentially, I see much of it as what Christianity started with until the Reformed/Calvinists got a hold of it.

Christianity was a lifestyle until the west turned it into a system.

I'm finding that much of the direction my studies were taking me are to be found in EO. Mostly, I believe, because EO is not founded in a scientificaly minded and legalized culture. Not to say Christianity and science cannot line up, or that legalese cannot describe aspects of sin, but EO is much more comfortable existing in relationship rather than articles of contractual obligation.

dwilkins
Posts: 647
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2012 2:54 pm

Re: Theosis

Post by dwilkins » Mon Feb 15, 2016 3:13 pm

The EO approach to the essence of God will illustrate the point you just made. Instead of describing God like we do the food pyramid, with love or perfection at that top, and other characteristics categorically cited underneath, they start by chipping away at what it's not. So, they'll say God is not unjust, or implacable, or arbitrary. In the end, they have a bucket with positive attributes left, but they don't seem to try to catalog them the way that western theology does. I think they are difficult to understand because of their style of thought, but they don't find themselves painted into a corner as occasionally happens in western theology.

Doug

User avatar
Paidion
Posts: 5452
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:22 pm
Location: Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: Theosis

Post by Paidion » Mon Feb 15, 2016 4:47 pm

I think my understanding of the Eastern Orthodox church was that they were the Roman church's loser cousin.
Interesting, Doug, that you thought that. In reality, the Orthodox Church is most like the early Catholic Church, wheras the Roman Catholic Church is more like the split off as far as doctrine is concerned. I suppose one could conceive of the Catholic Church as having been divided into two branches in 1050 A.D., but if so, the Orthodox branch resembled it more than the RC branch.

I am surprised that you consider Orthodox theology as esoteric. I have no background in the Orthodox Church, but I find their theology makes a lot of sense, and is easy to listen to. Though it differs markedly from RC and Protestant theology, I tend to agree with more of its tenets—for example, Divine Justice. Consider listening to Hany Mikhail (of the Coptic Orthodox Church) on the subject. Part 1 is less than 11 minutes long, and I think if you do listen to it, you will want to listen to parts 2 to 12 as well:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D28MWNYGYAU
Last edited by Paidion on Fri Feb 19, 2016 1:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.

PR
Posts: 73
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 6:11 am

Re: Theosis

Post by PR » Wed Feb 17, 2016 5:59 am

Your topic reminds me of the teaching of Norman Grubb, who helped to found Intervarsity Fellowship (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Grubb). His emphasis was on what he called "Union Life", which centered around Galatians 2:20 and Romans 6-8.

Also I believe the teaching of Major Ian Thomas had a similar emphasis.

Phil

User avatar
willowtree
Posts: 100
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2014 1:56 pm
Location: Sooke BC Canada

Re: Theosis

Post by willowtree » Wed Feb 17, 2016 3:58 pm

Thanks Jaydam for raising this discussion. I too, have looked at it the last few days, and have enjoyed what I have read. Here are a couple of random thoughts that have come to my mind.

In the record of Jesus' one on one discussions with people (Nicodemus, Samaritan woman et al), Jesus does not hardly mention sin and repentance (as in being sorry for all the wrong things), but new life and peace. The woman taken in adultery is not made to feel (more) guilty before hearing that Jesus did not condemn her.

It was when I began to see sin, not as something to get rid of, but as a condition of not having something that we had lost, which we had when originally created, that my understanding of salvation immediately made a lot more sense. Both sin as in 'missing the mark' and the carnal nature, reflect negatively on our ability to please God or to stand in his presence. Salvation's primary message must be to restore what we lost.
If you find yourself between a rock and a hard place, always head for the rock. Ps 62..

User avatar
jaydam
Posts: 343
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 8:29 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Re: Theosis

Post by jaydam » Thu Feb 18, 2016 5:52 pm

willowtree wrote:Thanks Jaydam for raising this discussion.
You are welcome. I've become swamped these last couple of weeks, so I have not been able to revisit the topic much, but I will likely post more on here as I consider the topic further.

I am finding a great appreciation for the more mystical approach of eastern orthodoxy which can leave much open to interpretation rather than have to have everything spelled out to a "t" and split denominations over the minutia.

Also, from what little I know so far, it appears eastern orthodoxy can point more to having its roots in early church beliefs than the west. In other words, it appears the east remained on a certain trajectory from the origin of the church, while the west is the side which allowed its trajectory to be thrown off by the pull of western influence.

Not to say there are not significant flaws in each, but I find the east to perhaps be closer than the west to what I would envision church should be given my personal conclusions.

User avatar
dwight92070
Posts: 1550
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2011 12:09 am

Re: Theosis

Post by dwight92070 » Thu Feb 18, 2016 11:08 pm

So in your opinion, how is the Eastern Orthodox church closer to what the church should be than the west?

Dwight

User avatar
Paidion
Posts: 5452
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:22 pm
Location: Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: Theosis

Post by Paidion » Fri Feb 19, 2016 3:01 pm

I regret that I didn't properly format Hany Mikhail's part one of "Divine Justice". I have corrected that now. Also here is the link again:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D28MWNYGYAU

In this video, Hany expresses two essential differences between the theology of the Eastern Church (and the earlier Church) and the Western Church (now the Roman Catholic and Protestant Churches).

1. Western: God is just and must punish sin with eternal torment in hell fire.
— Eastern: Sinners are spiritually separated from God and dwell in the hellish fire of their own being.

2. Western: Christ was punished by God in place of sinners— penal substitution to appease the anger of God.
— Eastern: The purifying sacrifice of Christ is to purge people's sins and bring them to God. The divine nature is combined with the human nature.
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.

Post Reply

Return to “Anthropology, Hamartiology, Soteriology”