Few theological questions carry the weight of practical urgency that attaches to the question of what it means to be human, for the answer one gives shapes not only one’s doctrine of creation and salvation but also one’s ethical commitments toward other persons, the natural world, and future generations. First of all, I would like to emphasize the theological and academic depth of Dr Mark Elliott’s paper. I would also like to acknowledge the initiative of the Ecumenical Institute at Bossey — especially of its director, Professor Fr Ioan Sauca — in organizing this dialogue between Evangelicals and Orthodox which enables members of each tradition from different national contexts to meet and explore areas of convergence on major Christian themes. Such discussion between the two different traditions might bring to light common points of doctrine and bring them closer to one another. The Orthodox need to draw nearer to the Evangelicals, and the Evangelicals need to see the Orthodox world with more confidence. Recent ecumenical documents, including the joint statement issued by the World Evangelical Alliance and the Orthodox Church’s Ecumenical Patriarchate in 2021, suggest that this convergence is not merely aspirational but is already being worked out at the institutional level. The time has already come for us to be no longer divided.
[bod]The theme of this year’s seminar, “What it means to be Human,” will enable Orthodox and Evangelicals to explore, compare and contrast their understandings of what it means to be human (theological anthropology), and to reflect on how the extent of convergence in this area might bring us closer together theologically and facilitate our joint practical action.
[hed]Convergence and Divergence
[hed1]1. The four distinctive characteristics
[1st]In the first part of his paper, Dr Elliott outlines present day Evangelicalism both from a historical and a doctrinal perspective. I have noted the four distinctive characteristics of Evangelicalism — those of conversionism, Biblicism, crucicentrism and activism, to which the Evangelical Alliance has added that of Christocentrism, “for [as Dr Elliott says] it is hard to imagine any Christian movement or denomination that would not call itself Christocentric.”
[bod]The first four characteristics are also found in the Orthodox doctrinal framework in a more or less nuanced form. However, the Orthodox might have some problems with the fifth element — Christocentrism — in the sense in which the author has mentioned it. The author writes, “I think Evangelicals do have a particular way of understanding the incarnation as being less about the assumption of ‘humanity’ than as the activity of the God-man individual, who is more a substitute than a representative.”
For the Orthodox, Jesus Christ, through his incarnation, has assumed our humanity in his divine hypostasis. In Jesus Christ our human nature has received its real existence, not as being its own centre but in a pre-existent centre, namely in the unity of the divine hypostasis of the Logos. Through his incarnation the hypostasis of the divine Logos did not unite with another human hypostasis; rather, he assumed human nature in his eternal divine hypostasis, becoming, by means of this event, the hypostasis of our own human nature. Hence, through his incarnation, Jesus Christ as Son of God became united in a supreme manner with our humanity. In other words, he came into the closest possible proximity with us. This process is a consequence of the “hypostatic union.” That is why he is called God-Man.
[bod]From this point of view, our humanity has been healed from all the effects and consequences of the original sin by Jesus’s sacrifice and resurrection. It is important to emphasize in this context that the sacrifice of Jesus was directed not only towards his Father but also towards his own human nature and, implicitly, towards us human beings. Through his sacrifice offered to God, Jesus Christ is made perfect as a human being, sanctifying or perfecting other human beings through this. The author of the Epistle to the Hebrews writes clearly on this matter: “and having been made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey him” (Heb. 5:9). Christ has become through his cross and resurrection the first-fruits of those who have fallen asleep (1 Cor. 15:20). Therefore, he is not a substitute for humankind, but the one who fully assumed and fulfilled it. From this perspective, we as human beings do not remain external to the incarnation, but are truly present in it.
[hed1]2. Atonement: one of the three issues in Evangelical theological anthropology
[1st]For the Orthodox, Christ’s sacrifice and his death on the cross are not understood as “penal substitutionary atonement.” From this point of view, statements like “sin incurs divine wrath and judgment” and “on the cross, Jesus sacrificially atoned for sin by dying in our place and paying the price of such sin” are problematic for Orthodox soteriological doctrine. Orthodox theologian John Behr (2020) has argued that the Western church’s preoccupation with juridical categories of guilt and punishment obscures the more fundamentally ontological understanding of salvation as healing and deification that characterizes the patristic tradition.
[bod]The Orthodox understand Jesus’s death on the cross as more a healing of the human nature disfigured by sin, and not as a price that Jesus had to pay in our place in order to satisfy God, whose honour is offended by our sin. In view of the fact that we have been created as an overflow of God’s love, our sin has caused him more sadness than offence. The concept of a substitutionary sacrifice by means of which the offended honour of God was re-established has more to do with a juridical act (sin-punishment-redemption) than with one which would express divine love or sympathy. According to the theology of the church fathers, we consider the cross as the way to resurrection. From this point of view, Orthodox theology is more resurrectional than Evangelicalism, although this does not mean that the Orthodox put less emphasis on the sacrifice of Christ than on his resurrection. This is wonderfully illustrated in a liturgical hymn: “We worship your Cross, Jesus Christ, and your holy Resurrection we praise and honour.”
[hed1]4. The true image of God
[1st]The idea that human beings are created by and in Christ — as the true image of God (Heb. 1:1-4) — with the hope of a blessed and immortal life is a point of convergence between our traditions. Yet church fathers do not speak only of the image of God, but also of the resemblance (likeness) to God. In this sense St John of Damascus says, “the phrase ‘according to the image’ means the ‘reason’ and ‘freedom,’ whereas ‘according to the resemblance’ means ‘likeness’.” He continues, “the image is developed into likeness through the practice of virtues.” Therefore, the image of God is something which is given to us and the resemblance is something that we have to achieve. This is beautifully expressed in the words of the Orthodox funeral service: “I am the image of your ineffable glory, though I bear the marks of my transgressions.”
[bod]Since the man is created not only from dust but also through God’s breath of life, it becomes obvious that he has a special relationship with the nature from which he is formed, and also with God his Creator. As St Gregory of Nazianzus affirms, “Since from dust I have been created, I belong to the earthly life; but being also a small divine part, I also carry in my life the desire for eternal life.” Therefore, because he is made in the image of God, man is rooted and anchored in eternity.
[hed1]9. Deification (Theosis)
[1st]Dr Elliott argues that Evangelicals may have problems with deification. From an Orthodox point of view, deification is more than being in the image of God or being adopted as God’s children. Being renewed by God’s grace, we become partakers of the divine nature: “Thus he has given us, through these things, his precious and very great promises, so that through them you may escape from the corruption that is in the world because of lust, and may become participants in the divine nature” (2 Pet. 1:4). This does not mean that we become divine by nature. What this means is that we participate in God’s divine grace, described in scripture in a number of ways, such as glory, love, virtue and power. We are to become like God by his grace, and truly his adopted children, but we never become God by nature.
Theosis means the transformation of being into true personhood in the person of Christ. It is a process that should be understood in a carefully qualified sense, as an ongoing process, going from one realm of glory to another (2 Cor. 3:18). Deification is a descriptive term for God’s redemptive activity towards human beings. When human beings respond to this activity, the ultimate transformation of a human being without losing personhood is made possible.
[hed]Conclusions
[list]In terms of a definition of what it means to be human, we may assert the following: The human being is the image of God and at the same time is called to his resemblance (likeness).
Jesus’ incarnation, cross and resurrection do not only make possible the salvation of human beings, but also herald the starting point (beginning) of their deification.
The justification and sanctification of human beings are two different processes with three distinct stages:
[list2] I have been saved — started in faith, repentance, baptism and Eucharist;
b. I am being saved — achieved by means of the life in Christ;
c. I shall be saved — continued in the process of deification in eternity.
5. The death of the body does not mean the dissolution of the human being, but it represents the entry into a new existence in God’s presence. From this perspective, human beings are immortal.
References
Behr, J. (2020). The mystery of Christ: Life in death. SVS Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvxrptbs
Louth, A. (2021). Introducing Eastern Orthodox theology. IVP Academic.
Meyendorff, J. (2018). Byzantine theology: Historical trends and doctrinal themes (Reprint ed.). Fordham University Press.
Zizioulas, J. D. (2019). Being as communion: Studies in personhood and the church (Reprint ed.). SVS Press.