Deification in the Reformed Tradition

God’s best gift is Himself. That is a small sentence that will take the saints all eternity to fully grasp.

Jonathan Edwards and Deification: Reconciling Theosis and the Reformed Tradition, by James R. Salladin

I came across this book when looking into the notion of the necessity of good works for salvation within the Reformed tradition. Too often, Reformed pastors and theologians pound too heavily on the table of sola fide and sola gratia, limiting salvation to what is called in this tradition “justification.”

Guess what? I found many quotes on the topic from many Reformers from the sixteenth through eighteenth century that said, “yes, good works are necessary for salvation.”

Then, one step further: Jonathan Edwards finds deification in the Reformed tradition as well. and Salladin describes that what Edwards has found is not substantially different than theosis in the Eastern Orthodox Church.

So, what’s my interest? After all, I can get all the theosis I want by looking into Eastern Church Fathers and other Orthodox sources. My interest is simple: I was raised in a Reformed-adjacent church and still regularly attend one – albeit with visits to an Orthodox Church once every month or two. I want to know if this idea of deification, or theosis is found in the Reformed tradition. It will make this tradition more “whole” to me.

So, Salladin offers that this claim – God’s best gift is Himself – is the bold claim that Christianity makes. In my view, much bolder than the get-out-of-jail free card that is how I have found all of salvation is very often described in Reformed churches.

Salladin points to this passage in John, Jesus’s prayer immediately before His arrest:

John 17: 20 “I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word; 21 that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me. 22 And the glory which You gave Me I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one: 23 I in them, and You in Me; that they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that You have sent Me, and have loved them as You have loved Me.

24 “Father, I desire that they also whom You gave Me may be with Me where I am, that they may behold My glory which You have given Me; for You loved Me before the foundation of the world. 25 O righteous Father! The world has not known You, but I have known You; and these have known that You sent Me. 26 And I have declared to them Your name, and will declare it, that the love with which You loved Me may be in them, and I in them.”

“That they also may be one in Us.” In this prayer, Jesus integrates His believers into His relationship with the Father – right alongside Him and also one with the Father. It doesn’t get more deification or theosis than that, it seems to me.

Further, the apostle Paul brings the Holy Spirit into this oneness relationship:

Ephesians 3: 14 For this reason I bow my knees to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, 15 from whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named, 16 that He would grant you, according to the riches of His glory, to be strengthened with might through His Spirit in the inner man, 17 that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith; that you, being rooted and grounded in love, 18 may be able to comprehend with all the saints what is the width and length and depth and height— 19 to know the love of Christ which passes knowledge; that you may be filled with all the fullness of God.

The saints are filled with the fullness of God. It is clear: the Son knows that the Father will withhold nothing of value for those who believe in Him. The fullness of the Trinity is what God makes available to believers.

It is the purpose of Christ’s redemption to procure this fullness, the purpose of the Spirit to impart it, the aim of Scripture to reveal it, and the role of the church to enjoy its reality forever in constant adoration.

Salladin focuses on the work of Jonathan Edwards, (1703 – 1758), who is well-known (notoriously so, depending on your perspective) for his sermon, “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God.” I have heard that the sermon itself is not nearly as damning as the title suggests (I have never read it), and, perhaps, the side of Edwards presented by Salladin in this book may help shed light on a better picture of Edwards.

Edwards describes this deification as “divine fullness.” He does this while maintaining the Creator-creature distinction and respecting the meaning of grace within the Reformed tradition. This divine fullness is not vested in creation, but comes from above. Christ is given “in measure” to the saints. Using language that is familiar in the East, what is given does not impart the divine essence.

Thus, when God gives special grace, God gives himself to the creature, imparting a profound and even infinite union between Creator and creature. Yet, this communication never fuses the creature with the Creator.

This bond will increase in perpetuity, for all eternity, but still never violate the Creator-creature distinction.

Edwards believed that God’s great gift is himself, and that God designed creation to receive this grace and redeemed humanity in order to give this grace.

Christians understand this idea using different terms – not identical in meaning, but close enough as to inform us of God’s purpose: deification, theosis, or divinization. Such words create a tension within the Reformed tradition: deification language is not common in Reformed circles. Edwards abstained himself from using such words – again, usually using “divine fullness” to express his meaning.

So, he didn’t use the words, but…a rose by any other name and all that. His concept of grace delivers the same substance. He does this while remaining true to his Reformed heritage.

…Edward’s doctrine of special grace represents a resource for contemporary Reformed theology’s engagement with participation soteriology and deification.

Conclusion

Of a sort. This is just part one of two parts to cover Salladin’s introduction.

As Western scholars have been better informed of the Eastern idea of deification, they have looked more deeply into their own traditions:

This has led many Western scholars to use the category of deification to describe their own tradition’s views on salvation.

Which captures precisely why I have come to this book at this moment. Hearing too many sermons about salvation being little more than avoiding hell and entering heaven, I knew that Protestant thinking could not be this shallow – but if it was, it was a major shortcoming. This led me to the many quotes I have cited elsewhere from the early Reformers on the necessity of good works for salvation, which, inherently, led to the necessity of a doctrine of deification.

Then…this book.