Theosis in Eastern Orthodox Theology and Practice
Theosis, often translated as "deification" or "divinization," is a central concept in Eastern Orthodox theology, describing the process by which humans can become like God through union with Him [1]. This concept is rooted in the belief that God became human so that humanity might become divine, a theme articulated by early Church Fathers such as Athanasius. John of Damascus, an influential Eastern Orthodox theologian, emphasizes the incomprehensibility of the Deity, stating that "No one hath seen God at any time; the Only-begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, He hath declared Him" [1]. Despite this divine transcendence, theosis posits a real, though not ontological, participation in the divine life.
Theosis is not understood as a transformation of human nature into the divine essence, which would be considered pantheistic or heretical. Instead, it refers to a participation in God's uncreated energies, not His inaccessible essence [1]. This distinction is crucial for understanding the Orthodox perspective. Through the work of the Holy Spirit and participation in the sacraments of the Church, particularly the Eucharist, believers are believed to grow in likeness to Christ [1]. This process involves purification (catharsis), illumination (theoria), and ultimately glorification (theosis). The goal is to achieve homoiosis theou, or likeness to God, reflecting His attributes such as love, goodness, and holiness.
In contrast, Reformed theology, as represented by figures like Charles Hodge, approaches the relationship between God and humanity with different emphases. While Reformed theology affirms the believer's union with Christ and spiritual transformation, it typically avoids the language of "deification" or "divinization" due to concerns about blurring the Creator-creature distinction [2, 3]. Hodge's Systematic Theology frequently addresses topics such as the nature of God, the person of Christ, and the work of the Holy Spirit, but within a framework that maintains a clear ontological separation between God and humanity [3, 4]. For instance, Hodge discusses the "mystical method" in theology, which he defines as a matter of feeling rather than thought, and cautions against systems that rely solely on feelings, suggesting a different epistemological approach to divine knowledge [2].
Reformed thought emphasizes justification by faith, sanctification, and adoption as key aspects of the believer's relationship with God [5]. While sanctification involves a progressive growth in holiness and conformity to Christ's image, it is generally understood as a moral and spiritual transformation rather than a participation in divine nature [5]. Hodge, for example, discusses the indwelling of the Spirit and the transformation of the believer's character, but these are framed within the context of God's sovereign grace and human responsibility, without implying a sharing in God's essence [5]. The idea of a human being "taken into the adorable Trinity," as mentioned in some theological discussions Hodge references, is presented as a distinct and sometimes problematic concept, particularly when discussing various Christological views [6].
The historical development of theosis in the East can be traced through the writings of early Church Fathers. John Chrysostom, for example, while not explicitly using the term "theosis" in every instance, speaks of the transformative power of Christ's incarnation and the believer's participation in divine life [7]. The concept became more fully articulated by later Byzantine theologians, who systematized the understanding of humanity's potential to become "gods by grace" [1]. This understanding is deeply intertwined with the Orthodox doctrine of creation, which sees humanity as created in the image and likeness of God, with the potential for growth into full likeness [1].
The differences between Eastern Orthodox theosis and Reformed perspectives highlight distinct theological trajectories concerning the nature of salvation and the ultimate destiny of humanity. While both traditions affirm the transformative power of God's grace, they articulate the extent and nature of this transformation in different ways, reflecting their unique theological frameworks and historical developments [1, 5].
Sources
- CCEL (Eastern Orthodox) “John of Damascus, An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith, section 1: 1b An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith. ———————————— Book I. Chapter I .— That the Deity is incomprehensible, and that we ought not to pry into and meddle with the things which have not been delivered to us by the holy Prophets, and Apostles, and Evangelists. No one hath seen God at any time; the Only-begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, He hath declared Him 1406 1406 St. John i. 18 (R.V.). . The Deity, therefore, is ineffable and incomprehensible. For no one knoweth the Father, save the Son, nor the So”
- CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 1, section 7: § 4. The Mystical Method . Few words have been used with greater latitude of meaning than mysticism. It is here to be taken in a sense antithetical to speculation. Speculation is a process of thought; mysticism is matter of feeling. The one assumes that the thinking faculty is that by which we attain the knowledge of truth. The other, distrusting reason, teaches that the feelings alone are to be relied upon, at least in the sphere of religion. Although this method has been unduly pressed, and systems of theology have been constructed under”
- CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 2, section 151: Heretical Doctrines on the Person of Christ. 6. Doctrine of the Reformed Churches. 7. Lutheran Doctrine. 8. Later Forms of the Doctrine. 9. Modern Forms of the Doctrine. Chapter IV. The Mediatorial Work Of Christ. 1. Christ the only Mediator. 2. Qualifications for the Work. 3. The Threefold Office of Christ. Chapter V. Prophetic Office. 1. Nature of the Prophetic Office. 2. How Christ executes the Office of a Prophet. Chapter VI. Priestly Office. 1. Christ is truly, not figuratively, a Priest. 2. Christ our only Priest. 3. Definition of ”
- CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 2, section 1: 407 Different Views among the Lutherans. — Remarks on the Lutheran Doctrine 418 § 8. Later Forms of the Doctrine 418 Socinianism. — Swedenborg. — Dr. Isaac Watts. — Objections to Dr. Watts’ Theory 427 § 9. Modern Forms of the Doctrine 428 Pantheistical Christology. — Theistical Christology. — The Doctrine of Kenosis. — Ebrard 434 Gess 435 Remarks on the Doctrine of Kenosis 437 Schleiermacher’s Christology 441 Objections to Schleiermacher’s Theory. — Founded on Pantheistical Principles. — Involves Rejection of the Doctrine of the Trinity. —”
- CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 1, section 9: the doctrine of the Bible, and such is the teaching of our religious consciousness when under the influence of the Spirit of God. The true method in theology requires that the facts of religious experience should be accepted as facts, and when duly authenticated by Scripture, be allowed to interpret the doctrinal statements of the Word of God. So legitimate and powerful is this inward teaching of the Spirit, that it is no uncommon thing to find men having two theologies, — one of the intellect, and another of the heart. The one may find ex”
- CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 2, section 85: Since his ascension, as Gess expresses it, a man has been taken into the adorable Trinity. “As the glorified Son remains man, a man is thus received into the trinitarian life of the Deity from and by the glorification of the Son.” 361 361 The Scripture Doctrine of the Person of Christ. Freely translated from the German of W. F. Gess, with many additions, by J. A. Reubelt, D. D., Professor in Indiana University, Bloomington, Ind. Andover: Warren F. Draper, 1870, p. 414. This work is admirably translated, and presents the clearest outline o”
- CCEL/NPNF (Eastern Orthodox) “John Chrysostom, Homilies on Matthew: between the Godhead and Manhood in Christ, his opinions respecting the final restoration of mankind, which were almost equivalent to a denial of eternal punishment, were reproduced mainly by Theodore.” 2 2 Stephens St. Chrysostom , p. 31; comp. pp. 27–32, on Diodorus. On the Antiochian School, see Schaff , Church History , III. pp. 935–7; Reuss History of the New Testament , II., pp. 542–6, American edition. While the influence of the Antiochian school seems transient, it has achieved much in stating more clearly the correct principles of interpretation; i”