Copyright © 2016 Athanasios Bardis
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Copyright © 2016 Athanasios Bardis All rights reserved. The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary has permission to reproduce and disseminate this document in any form by any means for purposes chosen by the Seminary, including, without limitation, preservation or instruction. AN EVANGELICAL CRITIQUE OF THE GREEK ORTHODOX DOCTRINE OF DEIFICATION __________________ A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary __________________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Ministry __________________ by Athanasios Bardis May 2016 APPROVAL SHEET AN EVANGELICAL CRITIQUE OF THE GREEK ORTHODOX DOCTRINE OF DEIFICATION Athanasios Bardis Read and Approved by: __________________________________________ Bruce A. Ware (Faculty Supervisor) __________________________________________ Joseph C. Harrod Date______________________________ You are my crown. Ruthy, I could not have completed this thesis without your support. Your wisdom, care, and love remind me that “house and wealth are inherited from fathers, but a prudent wife is from the LORD” (Prov 19:14). TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ………………………………………………………… vii PREFACE ……………………………………………………………………………. viii Chapter 1. INTRODUCTION …………………………………………………………….. 1 Familiarity with the Literature ……………………………………………… 2 Void in the Literature ………………………………………………………. 18 Thesis ………………………………………………………………………. 20 2. THE COSMOLOGY AND ANTHROPOLOGY OF EASTERN ORTHODOXY ………………..................................................... 21 Cosmological and Anthropological Considerations ………………………... 21 A Theology of Image and Likeness ……………………………………….. 35 A Necessary Distinction between Image and Likeness for Deification …..……………………………………………………… 41 A Biblical Interpretation of Genesis 1:26-27 ………………………………. 43 Sin, Synergism, and Semi-Pelagianism …………………………………….. 45 Further Critique of the Perils of Deification ……………………………….. 51 Concluding Remarks ……………………………………………………….. 57 3. THE EASTERN ORTHODOX VIEW OF REVELATION AND INTERPRETATION ……………………………………………………….. 59 Theosis and Apophaticism ………………………………………………… 59 iv Chapter Page Apophatic Theology ………………………………………………………. 60 Apophaticism and the Essence-Energies Distinction ……………………… 62 Further Problems of Apophaticism ……………………………………….. 71 Revelation and the Unknowability of God ……………………………….. 73 The Knowability of God and Theosis ……………………………………. 79 Deification as an Apophatic, Revelatory, and Mystical Ascent toward the Ineffable God …………………………………………… 81 Orthodox Apophatic Theology and Hermeneutics ……………………….. 87 Concluding Remarks ……………………………………………………..... 95 4. THE PLACE AND FUNCTION OF SYNERGISM IN DEIFICATION …………………………………………………………... 99 Deifying Grace in Eastern Orthodoxy ……………………………………... 99 The Nature of Grace ……………………………………………………… 101 Becoming Partakers of the Divine Nature ……………………………….. 102 Active and Passive Theosis …………………………................................. 111 Further Critique of Eastern Orthodox Views …………………………….. 113 A Sacramental Chasm ……………………………………………………. 118 Deification and Hesychasm ………………………………………………. 122 Methods and Theology of Hesychasm …………………………………… 123 Concluding Remarks …………………………………………………….. 140 5. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE BROADER CHURCH ………………………. 144 Is Theosis a Legitimate Motif of Salvation? ……………………………… 144 An Assault on the Doctrine of Justification ……………………………… 147 Confusing Salvation as Both Justification and Deification ………………. 154 v Page Confusing Communion and Union with Christ ………………………….. 157 Theosis, Holy Tradition, and Revelation …………………………………. 159 Theosis and Eastern Spirituality ………………………………………….. 162 A Ladder of Divine Ascent ………………………………………………. 166 Further Remarks ………………………………………………………….. 172 I Said You Are Gods ……………………………………………………… 174 Revisiting Psalm 82 ………………………………………………………. 178 Revisiting John 10:34-36 ………………………………………………… 181 Deification and Glorification ……………………………………………. 183 Conclusion ………………………………………………………………. 185 BIBLIOGRAPHY …………………………………………………………………… 191 vi LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS GOTR Greek Orthodox Theological Review IJOT International Journal of Orthodox Theology JES Journal of Ecumenical Studies JETS Journal of Evangelical Theological Society LXX The Septuagint TMSJ The Master’s Seminary Journal TRINJ Trinity Journal vii PREFACE This thesis is the culmination of a number of factors. Jim Gibson was my first theology lecturer back in Brisbane, Australia. He taught me that the beginning and end of all theological studies was the Word written and the Word incarnate. When I think of Jim Gibson, one word keeps reverberating in my mind, “Gospel.” My lecturer became my friend and mentor. He taught about the gospel with passion, preached the gospel with veracity, and lived the gospel. It was back then, that I started to comprehend and embrace the wonders of systematic theology. In 2011, my wife and I listened to a convocation address by Albert Mohler, and his handling of the Scriptures catalyzed our move to the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky. He is an example of a godly, unswerving, and unashamed worker who rightly handles the word of truth. The Lord has blessed the seminary with an army of such workers. With much indebtedness, I would like to thank Michael Wilder because he helped me to navigate through unknown terrain. He is a gentleman and a scholar. I am thankful to the Lord for guiding Michael Wilder to come and sit next to me during orientation back in August 2011. I know which door to knock at if I need some help. I pray that I will be to others what he has been to me. I consider it a privilege to have Bruce Ware as my supervisor. His enthusiasm, fervor, and astute theological mind inspire me. He is committed to the glory of God as revealed in the Scriptures. When I was young, I used to read of how the Spirit of God set aflame the hearts of God’s people by the preaching of biblical doctrine. What I used to read of, now I hear. Doctrine on fire! I also want to thank Joseph Harrod for his viii friendship, guidance, and support. He always reminded me that the gospel is the heart and soul of true biblical spirituality. Finally, I would like to thank my wife, Ruthy, from the bottom of my heart. I could write a dissertation about you, my love. You are far more precious than jewels. Thank you for loving me so much. If it were not for Christ, neither of us would be here today. “The LORD, the LORD, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness” (Ex 34:6). Athanasios Bardis Louisville, Kentucky May 2016 ix CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION The Protestant Reformation did not affect the Eastern Church in any significant way. Greek Orthodoxy and the Eastern Church in general had at their disposal many centuries to arrange and develop in an intricate fashion dogma such as the doctrine of theosis. For the Eastern Orthodox Church, theosis, or deification, is a unique doctrine that encompasses the whole divine economy of salvation. Deification is the essence of human existence and Christian life. Orthodoxy postulates that God made a commitment to humanity at the moment of creation. God implanted the divine image and likeness into humans with the purpose of participatory union and deification. The doctrine of theosis is the driving force of the theology and praxis of the Eastern Orthodox Church. The path of deification fuses the doctrines of justification, sanctification, and glorification into a mystifying amalgam. Such an approach leads the flock of the Eastern Orthodox Church away from identifying the glory of God as the chief end of all things. Eastern theologians ultimately resort to a positive anthropology rejecting the doctrines of complete depravity and total inability and propel a synergistic soteriology and sacramentalism as a main path to deification. An exposure to such man- centered distinctives explain the unbridgeable chasm that exists between Eastern Orthodox and evangelical theology.1 A careful investigation of the doctrine of theosis and analysis of writings from certain Greek Fathers, as well as subsequent prominent theologians, coupled by careful 1A number of evangelical theologians such as Veli-Matti Kärkkäinen, Robert V. Rakestraw, Joseph D. Driskill, Evan Howard, Thomas F. Torrance, and to some extent Robert Letham and Donald Fairbairn, have not seen the vast chasm between Eastern Orthodox and evangelical theology. 1 exegesis of relevant biblical texts, will reveal the true nature and ramifications of theosis.2 An evangelical critique of the doctrine of deification will expose whether Eastern Orthodoxy has deviated from the saving gospel of the Scriptures by concealing truths central to salvation under the mystical theology of the Eastern Church. Familiarity with the Literature The increasing engagement of Western scholars with Eastern Orthodox spirituality has started to stimulate further dialogue between the two traditions. The surge in scholarly interaction is raising questions and stimulating interest in the central doctrines of Eastern soteriology. The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church, written by Vladimir Lossky, has been one of the greatest contemporary catalytic agents and promoters of the doctrine of theosis. Lossky perceives all theology to be somewhat mystical as it connects spirituality with doctrine, and thus affirms that the Eastern Orthodox Church has never made a sharp differentiation between mysticism and theology. Both are necessary for the ultimate end of humans, namely union with God via the synergism of the divine and human wills.3 Apophaticism