A BIBLICAL AND CHRISTIAN CONCEPT

James W. Fogal
Theological Anthropology (THEO 635)
February 26, 2011
CONTENTS

I. INTRODUCTION3
II. THE BIBLICAL CASE FOR ....7
1

III. THE PATRISTIC CASE FOR .....9

IV. CONCLUSION....12 V.
WORKS CITED.......................................................................................................................13

INTRODUCTION
The ancient Christian concept of permeated much of early Christian thought. One
author refers to this concept as the golden thread linking the Bible to patristic and to modern

Orthodox thought.1 Other Christian writers have referred to it as the very essence of Christianity 2
and as the telos (i.e., end, purpose) of human life.3 Why is this apparent important doctrine virtually
unknown in Western Christianity while retaining massive significance in Eastern Christianity
theology?
It has to do with the translation of the words. The first theological definition of was in
the sixth century by Pseudo-Dionysius: Divinization consists of being as much as possible like and
in union with God.4 There actually a cluster of Greek words that are used in this context.
Sometimes it is translated divinization while other times it is phrased as sanctification and
ethical perfection. Some of the church fathers referred to this as a process of restoring believers
into the likeness of God.5 Robert Rakestraw claims that the primary definition is the restoration and
reintegration of the Imago Dei or likeness of God which was seriously distorted by the Fall.6 There
were Greek philosophical concepts that were related, but in all the Christian authors it was used in a
1 Bernie A. Van De Walle. How High of a Christian Life? A.B. Simpson and the Classic

Doctrine of Theosis. Wesleyan Theological Journal 43 (September 2008): 136.

2 Lossky, Vladimir. In the Image and Likeness of God. (Crestwood: St. Vladimirs Seminary,

1974), 97.
3 Stavropoulos Christoforos. Partakers of the Divine Nature, in Daniel B. Clendenin, ed.,Eastern

Orthodox Theology: A Contemporary Reader 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2003), 184.

4 Pseudo-Dionysius, Ecclesiastical Hierarchy 1.3; Pseudo-Dionysius: The Complete Works. The

Classics of Western Spirituality (New York: Paulist, 1987), 198.

5 Stephen Finlan and Vladimir Kharlamov. Theosis: Deification in Christian Theology. (Eugene,

OR: Pickwick, 2006), 1.

6 Robert V. Rakestraw. Becoming like God: An Evangelical Doctrine of Theosis. JETS 40 (June

1997): 261.
3

distinctively Christian context attempting to avoid the errors of paganism, while being faithful to
Scripture. Stephen Finlan lists many verses of Scripture to document Biblical teaching of this
concept in doing this he outlines some headings for the verses: imitation of God, taking on Gods
nature, indwelt by God, being re-formed by God, and being con-formed to Christ.7 H. CunliffeJones made the comment that has to do with the transformation and re-creation of mankind
by the power of God.8 Andrew Louth defined this concept as: Deification, then, is not a
transcending of what it means to be human, but the fulfillment of what it is to be human.9 Nikolai
Berdyaev, an apologist for the Orthodox doctrine of human deification, states that it should not be
surprising that the almighty God, Creator of this world, is the greatest of artists and it should not be
questioned that He can create something so divine and lofty as the human telos divinization.10
One aspect of this concept that is not as new to Western Christianity is when it is defined as
new birth or as sanctification. These phrases have been ubiquitous in Western theology yet are
a large part of understanding the Eastern ideas. Andrew Louth states that Christian divinization is
something fundamental and ontological language is often used to express this. This change restores
human nature to its true purpose, to be companions of God.11
Another attribute of this concept that must be remembered is that, as it is with the Trinity and
other profound mysteries of Christian doctrine, many doctrines are mysteries. Human finite minds
7 Ibid., 2.
8 H. Cunliffe-Jones. Christian Theology since 1600 (Duckworth, 1970), 124.
9 Andrew

Louth. The Place of Theosis in Orthodox Theology, in Partakers of the DivineNature.

Michael Christensen ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007), 39.

10 Nicolai Berdyaev. The Destiny of Man (London: Geoffrey Bles, 1937), 27.
11 Louth, 40.

are incapable of truly understanding the infinite. This applies also to theosis and human
divinization. We believe it not because it is logical but because God has revealed it to us. Louth
writes that deification is not becoming something we know and understand, it is to enter into a
mystery, beyond anything we can understand. This is often called an apophatic approach, attitude,
or way of union.12 Due to the mysterious nature of this concept, it is also referred to as
philosophical antinomy.13
This being explained, Stephen Finlan affirms that Christianity (i.e., monotheism):
goes against any literal god making of believers. Rather, the NT speaks of a
transformation of mind, a metamorphosis of character, a redefining of selfhood, and an
imitation of God. Most of these passages are tantalizingly brief, and none spells out the
concept in detail.14
This paper will give a brief understanding of some of the major biblical passages and patristic
arguments that support the concept of theosis, divinization of humans, and the human partaking of
the divine nature. There is a ten-page limit so this massive topic will be condensed and stated
succinctly as possible while covering biblical and patristic arguments.
This concept in theological anthropology has been ubiquitous in the early church and has
continued in Eastern Christian thought (i.e., Eastern Orthodox theology). But after the medieval
period, it was discussed much less in the West than in the East. But, in 2004, Drew University
Graduate School hosted a seminar entitled Partakers of the Divine Nature in which this topic (i.e.,
, divinization of humans, human partaking of the divine nature). Since this conference, there
has been resurgence in Western Christian thought in this area.
12 Ibid., 41.
13 John Meyendorf. The Orthodox Church: Its Past and Its Role in the World Today. (Crestwood:

St. Vladimirs Seminary, 1995), 186.

14 Finlan, 1.

A few important points should be made before proceeding. When studying this topic, it is very
clear that proponents of divinization/theosis mandate that the eternal, ontological Creator/creation
distinction must be kept in mind at all times.15 The moment that one veers from this center path is
when the concept changes into a New Age/pantheistic idea. Such a diversion is not Christian and
the Christians who argue for this are careful to maintain this crucial distinction. is at no
time teaching that humans have a divine spark within themselves that only needs to be actualized
like Gnosticism or the New Age philosophy. Such a belief is foreign to Christian divinization.16
Another point to remember at all times is that divinized humans remain essentially human.
Humanity becomes god by grace, but not God in essence . Humanity remains fully human and is
not swallowed up or annihilated, human it is and human it will remain . it does not become a
tertium quid. This divine union never becomes a synthesis human nature is changed, but not to
what it was not essentially.17 The deified human never stops being human.18 Carr Collins states
that man ever remains what he is, that is creature but he is promised and granted, in Christ
Jesus, an intimate sharing in what is Divine: life everlasting and incorruptible.19 Because the
deified human never become God in essence, no human is ever to be an object of worship.20 No

15 Van de Walle, 139.

16 Ron Kangas. Becoming God. Affirmation & Critique 7 (October 2002):9.
17 Van De Walle, 140.
18 Finlan, 6.
19 Carr Collins. Theosis: Deification of Man. Diakonia 15 (1980): 230.
20 Kangas. 3.

human can ever evolve into divinity21 -- it is only by Gods grace that this transformation can occur.
And, the charismatic concept of the Christian being Little Gods is not consistent with
(i.e., preachers like Kenneth Copeland, Paul Crouch, Kenneth Hagan and Benny Hinn are known
for this concept).22 Another point to be made is that this is not a polytheistic or henotheistic belief.
It is completely a monotheistic concept. The divinized human is not God in essence there has
always been only one God and there will always be one God. This helps to differentiate the belief
from pagan religions and modern-day Mormonism.23
Also, there are some key themes to recognize before proceeding. The concept of is
completely Christocentric, flowing out of the Incarnation24 this was a primary point made by
Athanasius. Also, this doctrine is not Calvinist or Reformed there is no belief in Christs limited
atonement. It is central to this concept that divinization is intended for all of humanity, and it is
not an elective addendum to salvation which humanity is free to take up or not. Ultimately,
salvation is and is salvation.25 But, at all times, is the gift of God, even if
it requires the free and conscious cooperation of man with God.26

THE BIBLICAL CASE FOR

21 Kangas, 10.
22 Kangas, 11.
23 Ibid.
24 Van De Walle, 140.
25 Van De Walle, 141-2.
26 Collins, 234.

Many verses in the Old Testament and the New Testament are cited by proponents of this
concept. This brief paper will not be able to perform an analysis of the verses, or provide an
exhaustive listing of all Bible verses commonly cited by proponents of this concept. This section is
here to give a very brief illustration of many verses (among various genre of the Bible) cited in
defense of the concept. In short, patristic and Eastern theologians argued strenuously that is
as biblical of a doctrine as is the Trinity, or the Nicene Creed, or the Chalcedonian Definition.
One of the most often cited Old Testament passages referring to this concept is Psalm 82:627
(NET: I thought, You are gods, all of you are sons of the Most High ).28 C.S. Lewis, a
modern western Christian thinker, defended the deification concept in this puzzling verse. In
providing a brilliant interpretation of the passage, he stated:
The command Be ye perfect is not idealistic gas. Nor is it a command to do the impossible.
He is going to make us into creatures that can obey that command. He said (in the Bible)
that we were gods and He is going to make good His words. If we let Him for we can
prevent Him, if we choose He will make the feeblest and filthiest of us into a god or
goddess, dazzling, radiant, immortal creatures, pulsating all through with such energy and
joy and wisdom and love as we cannot now imagine, a bright stainless mirror which reflects
back to Him perfectly (though, of course, on a smaller scale) His own boundless power and
delight and goodness. The process will be long and in parts very painful; but that is what we
are in for. Nothing less. He meant what He said.29

27 Daniel B. Clendenin. Partakers of Divinity: The Orthodox Doctrine of Theosis. Journal of the

Evangelical Theological Society 37 (September 1994): 369. Also see Jaroslav Pelikan, The Spirit of
Eastern Christendom (600-1700), The Christian Tradition, vol. 2 (Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 1974), 10.
28 The author of this paper is not attempting to engage in proof-texting. It is acknowledged that

many Western Christian thinkers will dispute the usage of this verse to support the concept of
. That is acknowledged. The choice to include these verses is merely to illustrate what
biblical support that the proponents of this doctrine claim.
29 C.S. Lewis. Mere Christianity. (New York: Macmillan, 1960), 174-5.

There is a substantial amount of exegesis that could be conducted on this verse and that would be
beyond the scope of this paper. In the next section of the paper, patristic authors will refer to this
verse.
The primary New Testament reference for is II Peter 1:430: (NET: you may become
partakers of the divine nature). New Testament scholar, Ernst Kasemann, agrees with the
deification interpretation of this verse. In fact, he states that this is the clearest passage in the Bible
of a relapse of Christianity into Hellenistic dualism.31 He takes a Harnackian perspective on this
(i.e., in which Harnack believed that early Christianity incorporated too many Hellenistic concepts
with deviated from the true mission of Christianity). James Starr, at Johannelund Theological
Seminary in Sweden, argues that this passage means that it is possible for humans to participate in
and enjoy specific divine attributes and qualities, part now and fully later at Christs return. He
claims that the passage does claim that deification is possible but not in an ontological
understanding of deification.32
Also, in Matthew 5:48, Jesus tells his disciples to be perfect as God is perfect. The concept of
perfection was considered to be synonymous to deification in the early church.33 Stephen Finlan

3030 Kurt E. Marquart. Luther and Theosis. Concordia Theological Quarterly 64 (July 2000):

184.
31 Ernst

Kasemann, An Apologia for Primitive Christian Eschatology, in Essays on

NewTestament Themes (London: SCM,1964), 179-80.

32 James

Starr, Does 2 Peter 1:4 Speak of Deification? in Partakers of the Divine Nature.
Michael Christensen, ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007), 90.

33 Michael Christensen.

Partakers of the Divine Nature. (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007),

25.

argues that II Cor. 3:18 is the most theotic passage in Pauls writing.34 This verse states: And we
all, with unveiled faces reflecting the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image
from one degree of glory to another, which is from the Lord, who is the Spirit. (NET)
Other New Testament verses used to support this concept is Philippians 2:12-13 in which Paul
tells us to continue working out your salvation with awe and reverence (NET). Also cited is John
10:34-36 in which Jesus quoted the above Old Testament verse. Acts 17: 28-29 is quoted in which
Paul quoted (approvingly) of Greek poets which state that we are Gods offspring. Ephesians
chapter 1 (as well as 3:19 and 4:13, 15) are also often cited as a New Testament description of
. Romans 5:2 and all of Romans 6 are used to support this concept. Colossians 3:10 is cited
in which Paul states: clothed with the new man that is being renewed in knowledge according to
the image of the one who created it (NET). I John 3:2b is a perfect illustration of the new birth
aspect of divinization (NET: ...we will be like him, because we will see him just as he is.) There
are many other New Testament verses cited to support this theological concept35, but due to the
length requirements of this paper it will be not be within the scope of this paper to perform an
exegetical analysis of these verses.

THE PATRISTIC CASE FOR

The church fathers did not develop a doctrine of , rather they argued for a concept that
they believed was scriptural.36 In fact, all the earlier church fathers would mention it as a passing
34 Stephen Finlan, Can We Speak of Theosis in Paul? in Partakers of the Divine Nature.

Michael Christensen ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007), 75-6.

35 All the verses in this paragraph were taken from Mark Shuttleworths article, Theosis:

Partaking of the Divine Nature. http://www.antiochian.org/node/16916 accessed 2/22/2011).

36 Finlan, 4.

10

comment with no explanation. Norman Russell explains that the early church understood this and
there was no need for explanation in writing.37
The term, , was coined by Gregory of Nazianzus (c. 329 389),38 an Archbishop of
Constantinople. He referred to as the polishing of a mirror by doing so can make the
Imago Dei so clear that it can perfectly reflect God. Irenaeus, bishop of Lyons, (2nd century AD
c. 202) stated that if the Word was made man, it is that men might become gods.39 Adolf von
Harnack identified that deification was a leading theme in the writings of Irenaeus.40
Titus Flavius Clemens (c.150 - c. 215), known as Clement of Alexandria, also known as the
Christian Gnostic was leader of the catechetical school in Alexandria. He was the first of the
church fathers to use a technical discussion of deification, but he did not attempt to explain or
define it.41 It was the Alexandrians, starting with Clement, to connect to the Incarnation.42
His belief of deification was that from gnosis we see God face to face, and thus we are deified. Of
course, only the top class of person is able to attain this (he taught three classes of people due to
their ability to understand the gnosis the unconverted, the converted but immature, and the mature

37 Norman Russell. The Doctrine of Deification in the Greek Patristic Tradition. (New York:

Oxford, 2004), 1.
38 Finlan, 1.
39 Against

Heresies, Book V; cited in Michael J. Christensen, Theosis and

SanctificationWesleyan Theological Journal 31 (Fall 1996): 72.

40 Russell, 3.
41 Russell, 1.
42 Christensen, Partaking, 97.

11

Christian who is able to understand the gnosis).43 He referred to it as assimilation to God as far as
possible.44
Origen of Alexandria (145254), Clements successor at the school, also taught but
with his own nuancing. Michael Christensen calls him the Christian Platonist because he was
deeply influenced by Middle Platonism and Neoplatonism.45 It was in his systematic theology
work, On First Principles, that he outlined his belief in . He believed that rational beings
are reflections of Gods Image (i.e., reason constitutes the Imago Dei). Because of the Incarnation
of the Logos, the Imago Dei will be restored in all humans, bringing about salvation for all.46 His
vision for was to educate souls, transformation of nature, then unification with God.47
Athanasius (293 373), the black dwarf, was Archbishop of Alexandria during the Nicene
debate. For him deification was a central and fundamental concept48, since the definition of the
Trinity and the Incarnation and Christology were very important to him. Deification fit within these
topics. While discussing II Peter 1:4, he made the famous quote:

For He has become man that He might deify us in Himself, and He has been born of a
woman and begotten of a Virgin in order to transfer to Himself our erring generation, and
that we may become henceforth a holy race and partakers of the divine nature.49

43 Christensen, Theosis and Sanctification, 76 7.

44 Christensen, Partakers of the Divine Nature, 25.
45 Ibid., 78.
46 Ibid., 79.
47 Christensen, Partakers, 25.
48 Finlan, 104.

12

Cyril of Jerusalem (313 386) referred to the Holy Spirit as the deifier, possibly similar to
modern evangelical born again terminology.50 It is not known if he used this concept again.
Gregory Nyssa (335-99) stated that there are no limits to degree of perfection, knowledge of
God, or Godlikeness that can be progressively achieved in this life or the next. Gods grace restores
His image and likeness as far as possible.51
John Chrysostom (c. 349407) was Archbishop of Constantinople and nicknamed
(Golden-mouthed) due to his eloquence in preaching. He also had a belief in
. He taught that it makes no sense to speak of God becoming flesh if humans could not
become divine. Also, how could God enter humanity if humanity could not enter God? He also
taught that it was because of the Incarnation that real change (i.e., sanctification) could take place
in human nature, not merely the relative change (i.e., justification) that was taught in the West.52
It was not until the sixth century that a church father actually gives a formal definition in
writing of Christian . That was done by Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite. It was defined as
the attaining of likeness to God and union with him so far as is possible.53

CONCLUSION
49 Ibid., 109.
50 Christensen, Partakers, 115.
51 Ibid.,

26-7.

52 K. Steve McCormick. Theosis in Chrysostom and Wesley. Wesleyan Theological Journal 26

(1991): 52 3.
53 Russell, 1.

13

This paper has briefly traced the usage of the concept of and divinization of humans. It
should be clear by now that this was not a polytheistic doctrine. It is consistent with monotheism in
that humans have a telos to become what God intended us to be humans who are striving through
the grace of God to become holy and godlike in character. Western Christianity has shunned this
concept while it has thrived in Eastern Orthodoxy. But in the past decade, this idea has been
gaining interest among Western theologians, even among evangelicals.
The concept of differs from Calvinist protestant theology in that there is no concept of
limited atonement. When is discussed, it is made clear that God designed this soteriological
principal for all humanity.54 Just as the call of salvation is offered to all, so also is the call to
pursue theosis addressed to all humanity.55 In this way, it also differs from Gnosticism since this
heresy purports that the gnosis is only for a select few who can grasp it. Adam made a mistake in
trying to aspire to divinity because he tried to attain without God.56 When that is tried, it
will fail. As mentioned in the introduction, not only is available to all mankind, but it is
not an elective addendum to salvation. Salvation is theosis and theosis is salvation.57 It lies at
the very heart of soteriology. Vladimir Lossky claims that it was Anselm who dissociated this
doctrine from the concept of salvation. 58
5454

Bernie Van De Walle. How High of a Christian Life? A.B. Simpson and the ClassicDoctrine
of Theosis. Wesleyan Theological Journal 43 (September 2008): 141.

55 Christoforos, Stavropoulos. Partakers of the Divine Nature, in Daniel B. Clendenin, ed.,

Eastern Orthodox Theology: A Contemporary Reader 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2003), 184.
56 Ross Aden. Justification and Divinization. Dialog 32 (Spring 1993): 106.
57 Van De Walle, 141-2.
58 Lossky, Vladimir.

In the Image and Likeness of God. (Crestwood: St. Vladimirs Seminary,

1974), 99.
14

As ecumenical dialogue continues on this topic, it becomes one more area in which Christians
around the world work to become one body of Christ. The theological anthropological concept of
is one that is grounded in Scripture and in the tradition of theology. This is not a topic that
should be causing dissension within the church.

15

WORKS CITED
Aden, Ross. Justification and Divinization. Dialog 32 (Spring 1993): 102 107.
Berdyaev, Nicolai. The Destiny of Man, London: Geoffrey Bles, 1937.
Christensen, Michael J. Partakers of the Divine Nature. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic,
2007.
---. Theosis and Sanctification: John Wesleys Reformulation of a Patristic Doctrine. Wesleyan
Theological Journal 31 (Fall 1996): 71 94.
Christoforos, Stavropoulos. Partakers of the Divine Nature, in Daniel B. Clendenin, ed.,
Eastern Orthodox Theology: A Contemporary Reader 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Baker,
2003.
Clendenin, Daniel B. Eastern Orthodox Christianity. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2003.
---. Partakers of Divinity: The Orthodox Doctrine of Theosis. Journal of
the Evangelical Theological Society 37 (September 1994): 365 379.
Collins, Carr. Theosis: Deification of Man. Diakonia 15 (1980): 229 235.
Cunliffe-Jones, H. Christian Theology since 1600 Duckworth, 1970.
Kangas, Ron. Becoming God. Affirmation & Critique 7 (October 2002): 3 - 30.
Lewis, C.S. Mere Christianity. New York: Macmillan, 1952.
Lossky, Vladimir. In the Image and Likeness of God. Crestwood: St. Vladimirs Seminary,
1974.
Louth, Andrew. The Place of Theosis in Orthodox Theology, in Partakers of the Divine
Nature. Michael Christensen ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007.
Marquart, Kurt E. Luther and Theosis. Concordia Theological Quarterly 64 (July 2000): 182
205.
McCormick, K. Steve. Theosis in Chrysostom and Wesley: An Eastern Paradigm of Faith and
Love. Wesleyan Theological Journal 26 (1991): 38 103.
Meyendorf, John. The Orthodox Church: Its Past and Its Role in the World Today. Crestwood:
St. Vladimirs Seminary, 1995.
Pelikan, Jaroslav. The Spirit of Eastern Christendom (600-1700), The Christian Tradition, vol. 2.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1974.
16

Rakestraw, Robert V. Becoming Like God: An Evangelical Doctrine of Theosis. Journal of

the Evangelical Theological Society 40 (June 1997): 257 269.
Russell, Norman. The Doctrine of Deification in the Greek Patristic Tradition. New York: Oxford,
2004.
Shuttleworth, Mark. Theosis: Partaking of the Divine Nature.
http://www.antiochian.org/node/16916 (accessed 2/22/2011).
Starr, James. Does 2 Peter 1:4 Speak of Deification? in Partakers of the Divine Nature. Michael
Christensen ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007, 81 - 92.
Van De Walle, Bernie. How High of a Christian Life? A.B. Simpson and the Classic Doctrine
of Theosis. Wesleyan Theological Journal 43 (September 2008): 136 153.

17