GORDON-CONWELL THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY

For an Evangelical Theosis: A Historical Theology of Theosis in Athanasiuss De Incarnatione Verbi Dei
Dr. Donald Fairbairn CH/TH668
Antonio L Arsenal 7/27/2011

Opening Remarks Ancient Greek mythology tells of a mysterious food that can make one a god. When consumed, this food conveys immortality and power to otherwise normal humans. It changes the very nature of the being from that of corruptible and temporal, to that of eternal and incorruptible. This divine food was known as ambrosia, and it represents an urge that all humans long for. That urge is for eternality. Humans know instinctively that we can be more, and that we should be more. Now, many Christians would point to the Garden of Eden in which Adam and Eve were created with eternal life. They would argue that eternal life was an aspect of human nature that was lost in the Fall as a result of sin, and that our primal instincts are to seek ways to regain it. This, they would argue, accounts for the fact that nearly every ancient culture has a mythology that includes mortals becoming immortal. From the stories of ambrosia, to the stories of the Fountain of Youth, we see this theme repeated throughout history. While some may disagree as to the origin of these stories and the urge that drives them into existence, the good news is that the immortality that they offer is available. That immortality is the topic of this brief theological exploration. While many, rightly so, believe that the concepts of Penal Substitution, Vicarious Propitiation, and Christus Victor are the primary explanations of salvation, we find a very different picture when we open the pages of the Church Fathers. For them, salvation was about the very essence of life. One can certainly point to passages in Athanasius and find Penal Substitution, or point to aspects of the Capaddocian Fathers which speak in terms of the great victory of Christ. There is no denying that these concepts, at least in their prototypical forms, were present from the very writings of Paul the Apostle. However, what we see is that the Church Fathers viewed salvation as the very rehabilitation of our human nature, and the exaltation of it. The word they chose to describe this

1|Page

is Theosis.1 While the concept of theosis has largely been lost in modern Evangelicalism, I believe that it is essential for understanding salvation in a holistic sense. In this essay I shall argue for an appropriation of theosis into our modern Evangelical soteriology. I shall do this by exploring the topic of theosis in Athanasiuss De Incarnatione Verbi Dei.2 I shall then offer some thoughts on how this theological framework might be applied to Evangelical theology, particularly Evangelical soteriology. Theosis in De Incarnatione Verbi Dei Theosis3 is prominently found in On the Incarnation, written by Athanasius before the break of the Arian Controversy in 319.4 This book serves as Athanasiuss early systematic5 statement of Christology and explains the theological underpinnings of the incarnation, crucifixion, and resurrection. It is in this work that we see that theosis itself is the very purpose of the previously mentioned events. The very incarnation itself, for Athanasius, is for the salvation of us men, and this salvation occurs through theosis.6 The first issue that Athanasius approaches in the work is to relate to his reader how the nature of humanity is connected to the incarnation of the Word. He begins by stating that human beings were created initially in a state of incorruption, and that it was a result of the transgression
1

Although this word is translated as deification in English, I prefer to retain the original Greek transliteration as to avoid potential connotations that deification carries with it. For more information see Donald Fairbairn, Life in the Trinity (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2009), 7. 2 Latin: On the Incarnation of the Word of God. Refered to as On the Incarnation throughout. Athough the theme of theosis is present and developed throughout the Athanasian corpus, my opinion is that the most complete presentation of the theory is in On the Incarnation. For the sake of space I am limiting this essay to that work. 3 Theosis is sometimes refered to as Conditional Immortality. However, I do not believe this moniker is inaccurate as it limits theosis to immortality. Theosis in the Fathers extends beyond immortality into other aspects of the divine nature. 4 Donald Fairbairn, "Trinitarian and Christological Controversies" (lecture, Class Lecture, Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, South Hamilton, June 7, 2011). 5 Although slightly inaccurate to apply the term systematic to a Patristic work, this work serves to cohesively tie together several aspects of Christian theology, specifically the work of Christ, into a system of theological thought. I believe it is therefore appropriate to apply this term. 6 Athanasius, On the Incarnation of the Word, trans. A Religious of C.S.M.V (Crestwood: St Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1996), 26.

2|Page

of Adam and Eve that they had come inevitably under the law of death.7 Now, for many modern Evangelicals the understanding is that God created Adam and Eve as eternal beings, that is to say that immortality was a part of their very nature. This nature was then lost when the couple sinned. Most commonly this is expressed as a sort of damage that was done to the image of God in the Fall. At first blush, it appears that Athanasius is saying the same thing. However if we read a little further we see that this is not the case. He writes For the transgression of the commandment was making them turn back again according to their nature; and as they had at the beginning come into being out of non-existence, so were they now on the way to returning, through corruption, to non-existence again.8 This is stated more explicitly only a few sentences later when Athanasius asserts that by nature, of course, man is mortal.9 Although many Evangelicals view this as primarily a spiritual Fall, Athanasius sees this as affecting the very physical nature in such a profound way that while human flesh will not decay when in union with Christ, when that union is broken it becomes corruptible and inevitably will fail and decay. For this reason Athanasiuss views on theosis are often called the physical view.10 Contrary to modern Evangelical understanding, man was not created immortal. Rather, they were created mortal but through their union with the Word they were granted immortality. Although this union was not part of their nature, it was indeed the intended mode of existence for humanity. 11 In addition, this union was the very purpose of creation itself. The doctrine of deification preserves this sense that God created the world to unite it to himself; it preserves the sense that the purpose of creation is to achieve union with God.12 Athanasius summarizes this state of
7 8

Ibid, 29. Ibid, 29-30. 9 Ibid, 30. 10 Emil Bartos, Deification in Eastern Orthodox Theology (Carlisle: Paternoster Press, 1999), 186. 11 Ibid, 186.187 12 Andrew Louth, "The Place of Theosis in Orthodox Thought," in Partakers of the Divine Nature, ed. Michael J. Christensen and Jeffery A. Wittung (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007), 36.

3|Page

humanity succinctly when he writes: They were by nature subject to corruption, the grace of their union with the Word made them capable of escaping from the natural law, provided that they retained the beauty of innocence with which they were created.13 However, we know that after Genesis chapter two, comes Genesis chapter three and the primordial couple broke fellowship with the Word and lost His protection. With the loss of that relationship they became corruptible and subject to death once more. In the second chapter of On the Incarnation, Athanasius begins to unfold Gods plan for redemption. Athanasius notes that the very fact that humanity once shared in the divine nature of the Word made it impossible for God simply to allow humanity to perish, however It would have been unthinkable that God should go back upon His word and that man, having transgressed should not die.14 After noting that repentance alone, although not illogical to think so, would not reverse the effects of transgression, he proceeds to explain that only the Word could bring about the restoration of this divine nature in humanity. For He alone [] was in consequence both able to recreate all, and worthy to suffer on behalf of all.15 It is important to note that Athanasius does not stand in contradiction with Penal Substitution or Vicarious Satisfaction theories. Neither does Athanasius deny the importance of obedience to Christ. 16 We clearly see overtones of these models in this work and it would be an inaccurate simplification to eliminate these theories in favor of theosis.17 However, for Athanasius this is not the primary effect of the Words work in the incarnation or crucifixion. For Athanasius, in contrast to many modern thinkers, Christs death does not serve to rescue us from death. Rather, it serves to fulfill
13 14

Athanasius, On the Incarnation of the Word, 30. Ibid, 32. 15 Ibid, 33. 16 Jeffrey Finch, "Athanasius on the Deifying Work of the Redeemer," in Theosis, ed. Stephen Finlan and Vladimir Kharlamov, Princeton Theological Monograph Series (Eugene: Pickwick Publications, 2006), 110. 17 Chapter IV of On the Incarnation, deals with Athanasius theological understanding of the death of Christ on the Cross and takes on a much more Penal Substiution or Vicarious Satisfaction stance than the rest of his works.

4|Page

our obligation to die, by taking our death and extending to us his immortal nature. This is most clearly stated when he writes: Taking a body like our own, because all our bodies were liable to the corruption of death, He surrendered His body to death in place of all, and offered it to the Father.18 It is in this death, which the Word endured, that all humans fulfill this obligation. Although Athanasius does seem to place more emphasis on the incarnation than on the crucifixion, it is important to note that the death of Christ is essential to theosis, in that it serves as the death that human nature is obligated to die. One author comments on this topic when he writes Athanasius may not have integrated the atoning death of Christ on the cross with his doctrine of divinization as fully as he could have done, he does repeatedly aver that the cross was necessary to fulfill the sentence of death imposed on humanity.19 In addition to this death, we are again unified with the Word and able to participate in the divine nature. This participation brings us back to a state of immortality as the divine nature is bestowed upon us again. Through this union of the immortal Son of God with our human nature, all men were clothed with incorruption in the promise of the resurrection.20 However, for Athanasius theosis does not conclude with immortality. Although this is arguably the primary benefit endowed upon humanity through the incarnation, we see through the rest of his argument that theosis bestows other aspects of the divine nature onto us as well. In the third chapter of On the Incarnation, Athanasius begins to explore other elements of this impact. The primary implication, other than immortality, is in the very ability to understand who God is. Athanasius notes that in the human nature they, owing to the limitation of their nature,

18 19

Athanasius, On the Incarnation of the Word, 33. Jeffrey Finch, "Athanasius on the Deifying Work of the Redeemer," in Theosis, 20 Athanasius, On the Incarnation of the Word, 35.

5|Page

could not of themselves have any knowledge of their Artificer, the Incorporeal and Uncreate.21 For although we may know something about God based on the fact that we are made in his Image, or based on the echo of the Word in creation, we may never truly know God. Athanasius argues that this inability to know God, combined with the turning away from God in the Garden of Eden, is what lead humanity into idol worship. He explains men, foolish as they are, thought little of the grace they had received,22 and turned away from God. It was because of this then that they defiled their own soul so completely that they not only lost their apprehension of God, but invented for themselves other gods of various kinds. 23 In fact, salvation itself is not only the provision of immortality afforded through theosis, but is the very reorientation of fallen humanity toward the divine.24 Athanasius continues to elaborate that God provided some ability to know Him through creation, the Law and Prophets, and through what might be considered a sense of the divine. 25 However, because of the sinfulness of humanity this knowledge was only ever partial and was continually fleeting. It is again through the incarnation and theosis that man regains true knowledge of God. Athanasius equates this knowledge of God with the imago dei itself. That is to say that the image of God in man is the knowledge of God through union with the Word. He writes What else could [God] possibly do, being God, but renew His Image in mankind, so that through it men might once more come to know Him?26 In addition to the restoration of the imago dei in humanity, the incarnation also served as a sort of sensory experience of the divine. The Saviour of us all, the Word of God, in His great
21 22

Ibid, 38. Athanasius is referring to the grace bestowed upon Adam and Eve through their original union with the Word in the Garden of Eden. 23 Ibid, 38. 24 Norman Russell, The Doctrine of Deification in the Greek Patristic Tradition (New York: Oxford University Press, 2004), 169. 25 Athanasius, On the Incarnation of the Word, 39. 26 Ibid, 41.

6|Page

love took to Himself a body and moved as Man among men, meeting their senses, so to speak, half way.27 Again we see that the key to salvation, in this case the knowledge of God, is the union of the divine and human natures in Christ. We see the culmination of this stream of thought when Athanasius, summarizing the prior chapter, writes All these things the Saviour thought fit to do, so that recognizing His bodily acts as works of God, men who were blind to His presence in creation might regain knowledge of the Father.28 Striving for a Modern Evangelical Theosis While understanding the historical theology of an era past, or even how it has developed over the ages, is valuable in itself, I believe that the true value of approaching historical theology is in the application of this knowledge to the modern Church. As such, I shall now offer some thoughts on how this understanding of theosis, given to us by Athanasius, in On the Incarnation might be useful to modern Evangelicals. Although the application is certainly not limited to the following three categories, for the sake of brevity I shall limit my discussion. First I shall explore the application as a matter of ecumenical common ground with Catholics and Eastern Orthodox theologians. Next I shall discuss theosis as a means of a rehabilitated soteriological model. Finally, I shall approach the topic as a means of epistemological insight. It only seems fitting that we discuss the ecumenical implications of theosis, since the doctrine itself was a significant factor in the resolution of both the Council of Nicaea and the Council of Constantinople. As I have mentioned in passing in this paper, theosis does not supplant or replace substitutionary models of atonement, nor Christus Victor or other theories. However, these theories of atonement are often times the major point of disagreement between

27 28

Ibid, 43. Ibid, 48.

7|Page

Protestant and Catholic29 theologies. From these theories of atonement we see other doctrines flow forth. In Protestant models we often see that the three primary models that are discussed are the Penal Substitution model, the Christus Victor model, and the Moral Government View. A simple observation of the introductory theology text Across the Spectrum reveals this to be the case. In this work the authors emphasize these models as the most significant theories, with a passing head-nod to the Subjective View of the Atonement.30 A simple glance at other Evangelical theology resources reveal similar biases. Doctrine: What Christians Should Believe speaks in terms of Propitiation, Justification, Gift Righteousness, or even Ransom but makes no reference whatsoever to the fact that we are unified with Christ in His life as well as in his death.31 Even the so-called dictionary of Essential Theological Terms by Justo Gonzalez, who is known for a more ecumenical approach, is vacuous of any sense of union with Christ in the entry on atonement.32 However, union with Christ is central to Catholic theology of atonement and salvation. While their understanding of original sin is significantly different than the Evangelical position, it is their concept of theosis which redeems humanity. If Protestants truly desire to have fellowship with Catholics and engage in ecumenical dialogue, integrating theosis into our atonement theories is a significant first step. The second major area that I believe theosis will benefit modern Evangelical theology is in providing a rehabilitation for what may be potentially a flawed soteriological model. I say that it is flawed not so much because the components of the model are incorrect. Rather, it seems to me that they are incomplete. Often times the model is framed using terms like God had to or

29

For the sake of this section, I am combining Catholic and Eastern Orthodox thought. Although the two are distinct and have many theological differences, they are similar enough to form the second half of a dichotomy with Protestantism being the other half. 30 Gregory A. Boyd and Paul R. Eddy, Across the Spectrum (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2002), 114-115. 31 Mark Driscoll and Gerry Breshears, Doctrine (Wheaton: Crossway, 2010), 257-264. 32 Justo L. Gonzalez, Essential Theological Terms (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2005), 20.

8|Page

it was required which paint a picture of a God who is subject to the laws of justice, as if somehow God could not simply have chosen to do it a different way. While no one intends to place this limitation on Gods omnipotence, it is often a logical conclusion that one must come to if only viewing the atonement through penal substitution lenses. One author, although deeply flawed in his theological approach and conclusions, points out one of the inaccurate pictures that come from a purely substitutionary perspective. Rob Bell, in his book Love Wins, calls into question the image of God that the standard Evangelical models paint.33 Perhaps most poignantly, he comments in a publicity video that What gets subtly sort of taught and caught is that Jesus rescues you from God. But what kind of God is that, that we need to be rescued from this God? How could that God ever be good? How could that God ever be trusted? And how could that ever be good news?34 While Bells conclusions are tragically lacking, his questions are valuable for us. However, if we understand salvation in light of theosis many of these questions are unnecessary. For rather than rescuing us from God, a conclusion that Penal Substitution may lead to, theosis clearly paints a picture of the Word rescuing us from ourselves. It paints a picture of a loving God who died to restore us to our originally created state, that is perfect and complete ontological union with our Creator. In addition, the language of theosis can be used to give us a more robust picture of categories that are already in play in Protestant soteriology. One such example is that of imputed righteousness. Although this category stands on its own, when we consider the fact that in theosis the righteous nature of God is extended to us, the concept of imputed righteousness is a logically compatible aspect of this doctrine. This view, traditionally called justification, can also be called theosis according to the ancient
33 34

Rob Bell, Love Wins (New York: HarperOne, 2011), 64. Love Wins Publicity Video. Performed by Rob Bell. Love Wins: A Book About Heaven, Hell, and the Fate of Every Person Who Ever Lived by Rob Bell. Accessed July 27, 2011. http://www.harpercollins.com/books/Love-Wins-RobBell?isbn=9780062049643&HCHP=TB_Love+Wins.

9|Page

doctrine of the fathers with whom Luther agreed.35 Furthermore, there are biblical texts that simply make more logical sense from a theosis perspective than from a strictly forensic soteriology. One such example is the various Pauline statements regarding clothing ourselves in Christ, putting on Christ, or metaphors of clothing ourselves in the attributes of Christ. 36 Although these metaphors may be forced into a substitutionary model, they most naturally flow from a theosis foundation. In addition to these metaphors, the very High Priestly Prayer of our Lord, found in John 17 reveals Christs desire for the Church. Rather than praying May they recognize that I have died in their place as a substitutionary atonement, the Lord prays That they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me. The glory that you have given me I have given to them, that they may be one even as we are one, I in them and you in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that you sent me and loved them even as you loved me. (John 17:21-23, ESV) If the very prayer of our Lord and Savior for us is rooted in theosis then it behooves us to integrate the concept into our theological systems. Finally, theosis may serve as an epistemological foundation for the Evangelical. Epistemology is the philosophical inquiry into the nature of human knowledge. It asks the questions: How do we know what we know? How do we apprehend and retain knowledge? Is knowledge possible? For the Evangelical, the answer to this question historically has been be rooted exclusively in the authority of Scripture and the revelatory power of the Holy Spirit. However, I believe that theosis itself gives us another foot to stand on in terms of epistemological ability. As Athanasius roots the knowledge of God in our participation in the divine nature through theosis we see that the origin of true knowledge is in itself the divine nature. When coupled with the Athanasian statements that God alone exists, while all non-divine
35 36

Veli-Matti Karkkainen, One with God (Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 2004), 46. See Rom 13:14, Gal. 3:26, and Col. 3:12-14

10 | P a g e

natures derive their existence from the Word, we see that for Athanasius reality only exists in light of God. It seems a logical conclusion then that knowledge of such things must also be equally dependent on the knowledge of God, which we obtain through theosis. This has a multitude of implications for theology, but in addition to theological knowledge this impacts those working in science and the market place as well. Finally, this also provides us a framework from which to draw ethical and moral absolutes. Although the Scripture is sufficient for moral and ethical knowledge, we see that even our ability to apprehend and comprehend Scripture is dependent on our unity with God, traditionally seen as the work of the Holy Spirit but through theosis it can also be seen as the very work of Christ in reuniting us with the divine nature. Concluding Thoughts In this brief essay I have explored the work of Athanasius in developing theosis in On the Incarnation. In addition to this work of historical theology, I have exhorted the Evangelical world to integrate theosis into the systems of theology that we presently hold to. Specifically I urged the Protestant Church to recognize that theosis provides us with an ecumenical common ground with which to begin Protestant/Catholic dialogue. It also serves as a rehabilitation aid for potentially faulty and dangerous soteriological conclusions, and serves to further bolster the epistemological claims of objective knowledge. The doctrine of theosis is a rich and valuable doctrine that I fear is too often overlooked by Evangelicals, and my hope and prayer is that we would recognize this treasure in the Church Fathers work. For although the Son of God did serve as our penal substitute on Calvarys cross, he also became man that we might become divine; and he revealed himself through a body that we might receive an idea of the invisible Father; and he endured insults from men that we might inherit incorruption.37

37

Athanasius, On the Incarnation of the Word, trans. Robert W. Thomson (Oxford: Clarendon, 1971), 269. Quoted in Donald Fairbairn, Life in the Trinity, 6.

11 | P a g e

Bibliography Athanasius. On the Incarnation of the Word. Translated by A Religious of C.S.M.V. Crestwood: St Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1996. Athanasius. On the Incarnation of the Word. Translated by Robert W. Thomson. Oxford: Clarendon, 1971. Bartos, Emil. Deification in Eastern Orthodox Theology. Carlisle: Paternoster Press, 1999. Bell, Rob. Love Wins. New York: HarperOne, 2011. Boyd, Gregory A., and Paul R. Eddy. Across the Spectrum. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2002. Driscoll, Mark, and Gerry Breshears. Doctrine. Wheaton: Crossway, 2010. Fairbairn, Donald. Life in the Trinity. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2009. Fairbairn, Donald. "Trinitarian and Christological Controversies." Lecture, Class Lecture, Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, South Hamilton, June 7, 2011. Finch, Jeffrey. "Athanasius on the Deifying Work of the Redeemer." In Theosis, edited by Stephen Finlan and Vladimir Kharlamov, 104-21. Princeton Theological Monograph Series. Eugene: Pickwick Publications, 2006. Gonzalez, Justo L. Essential Theological Terms. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2005. Karkkainen, Veli-Matti. One with God. Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 2004. Louth, Andrew. "The Place of Theosis in Orthodox Thought." In Partakers of the Divine Nature, edited by Michael J. Christensen and Jeffery A. Wittung, 32-44. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007. Love Wins Publicity Video. Performed by Rob Bell. Love Wins: A Book About Heaven, Hell, and the Fate of Every Person Who Ever Lived by Rob Bell. Accessed July 27, 2011. http://www.harpercollins.com/books/Love-Wins-RobBell?isbn=9780062049643&HCHP=TB_Love+Wins. Russell, Norman. The Doctrine of Deification in the Greek Patristic Tradition. New York: Oxford University Press, 2004.

12 | P a g e