The Theological Journal of Emanuel University

Perichoresis

PerichoresisONL

<abstract><title style='display:none'>Abstract</title>The beatific vision is widely perceived as a Roman Catholic doctrine. Many continue to view deification as a distinctively Eastern Orthodox doctrine incompatible with the Western theological tradition, especially its Protestant expressions. This essay will demonstrate that several Reformers of the first and second generation promoted a vision of redemption that culminates with deification and beatific vision. They affirmed these concepts without apology in confessional statements, dogmatic works, biblical commentaries, and polemical treatises. Attention will focus on figures in the Reformed tradition though one could produce similar surveys for the Lutheran and Anglican branches of the Reformation as well. John Calvin will receive extended treatment because some scholars dispute whether he affirmed deification. This essay presents important evidence thus far overlooked which should settle the question.</abstract>

Abstract

Keywords

<article-title>Recovering the Reformation’s Ecumenical Vision of Redemption as Deification and Beatific Vision</article-title>

Recovering the Reformation’s Ecumenical Vision of Redemption as Deification and Beatific Vision

<abstract><title style='display:none'>Abstract</title>The beatific vision plays a prominent role in the history of Christian ethics. Reformed ethics has an ambiguous relationship to this history, on two counts. First, it offers some qualified critiques of the role of vision in ordering ethical understanding, and second, on some accounts, Reformed ethics shares some responsibility for the loss of transcendence in the modern world, and the narrowing of the ethical field that has resulted from this loss. This essay argues that the vision of God in John Calvin’s understanding of the Christian life offers resources to defend a Reformed ethics from some recent detractors. Further, it provides a constructive contrast with the role of eschatology in a prominent strand of 20th century ethics. This argument is sustained through a close reading of Calvin’s biblical commentaries on the role of theophanies and the promise of the vision of God, and of Book III, chapters 6-10 of the <italic>Institutes</italic>.</abstract>

<article-title>Christ Our Light: The Expectation of Seeing God in Calvin’s Theology of the Christian Life</article-title>

Christ Our Light: The Expectation of Seeing God in Calvin’s Theology of the Christian Life

<abstract><title style='display:none'>Abstract</title>Union with Christ was a key doctrine for second-generation Reformed theologian Girolamo Zanchi. As a Thomist, Zanchi shared similar elements with Thomas Aquinas in his understanding of salvation as <italic>participatio</italic>, but his understanding of union with Christ differed with regard to the difference between infused and imputed righteousness. Unlike Aquinas’s doctrine of infused righteousness, Zanchi argued for imputed righteousness, which was both the foundation for one’s justification in this life as well as appearing before the divine bar at the final judgment. Zanchi’s doctrine of union with Christ has the utmost significance for personal eschatology and the judgment believers undergo at the great assize, insights that are worth retrieving for a clear understanding of the relationship between justification and the final judgement.</abstract>

<article-title>Girolamo Zanchi on Union with Christ and the Final Judgment</article-title>

Girolamo Zanchi on Union with Christ and the Final Judgment

{"article-title":"Girolamo Zanchi on Union with Christ and the Final Judgment"}

<abstract><title style='display:none'>Abstract</title>The present paper situates the Western and Eastern models of divine agency within their respective ontological frameworks. I show how the Western conception of divine agency as the production of ‘created effects’ is rooted in a particular understanding of the relationship between transcendence and immanence, but also in a trinitarian ontology which understands God as pure actuality. On the other hand, the Eastern understanding of divine agency through the conceptuality of uncreated energies is similarly rooted in the real distinction between God’s nature and energies. Without trying to critique the Eastern model, I demonstrate one particular strength of the Western approach, namely its ability to distinguish between divine actions, which are inseparable, and divine missions, which are proper to the triune persons. Such a distinction enables us to affirm both the inseparability of triune operations, as well as the possibility of relations to distinct triune persons.</abstract>

<article-title>Triune Agency, East and West: Uncreated Energies or Created Effects?</article-title>

Triune Agency, East and West: Uncreated Energies or Created Effects?

{"article-title":"Triune Agency, East and West: Uncreated Energies or Created Effects?"}

<abstract><title style='display:none'>Abstract</title>The recent interest in exploring whether authoritative figures of the Reformed tradition employed a concept of <italic>theōsis</italic> or deification in their soteriology continues to grow. However, it is yet unclear how the supposed implicit Reformed doctrine of deification relates to the more explicit concept of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Moreover, many of the arguments for <italic>theōsis</italic> in the theology of John Calvin, Jonathan Edwards, or T. F. Torrance seem to rely on confusing these two soteriological concepts. This makes it almost impossible to assess if it is <italic>theōsis</italic> or the indwelling of the Holy Spirit (or some interesting combination) that is being appealed to in Reformed thinking. This paper makes a step towards unpicking the knot between the indwelling of the Holy Spirit and <italic>theōsis</italic> in Reformed theology by offering five possible ways to demarcate these two concepts. It is concluded that the final ‘Mereological Demarcation’ is currently the most acceptable.</abstract>

<article-title>Demarcating Deification and the Indwelling of the Holy Spirit in Reformed Theology</article-title>

Demarcating Deification and the Indwelling of the Holy Spirit in Reformed Theology

<abstract><title style='display:none'>Abstract</title>This essay explores some of the dogmatic challenges involved in developing a distinctively evangelical account of the doctrine of <italic>theosis</italic>, that is, humanity’s participation in the life of God. After offering some preliminary clarifications regarding the terminology of <italic>theosis</italic>, the paper sketches in broad strokes how an account of <italic>theosis</italic> might take shape within the structures of evangelical theology. David Bebbington’s famous evangelical quadrilateral— biblicism, crucicentrism, conversionism, and activism—serves as the basic framework (Bebbington 1989: 1-19). It will be argued that evangelical theology can accommodate a version of <italic>theosis</italic> within this structure, but that evangelicals’ understanding of these categories may require some ‘flexing’ in order to make room for a more Christocentric and participatory conceptualization of redemption, one that culminates in the beatific vision of the redeemed when ‘God will be all in all’ (1 Cor 15:28). The final section of the paper points to a pair of important figures who may serve as resources for an evangelical retrieval of <italic>theosis</italic>.</abstract>

<article-title>Baptizing <italic>Theosis</italic>: Sketching an Evangelical Account</article-title>

Baptizing : Sketching an Evangelical Account

{"article-title":{"italic":"Theosis","content":["Baptizing",": Sketching an Evangelical Account"]}}

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en"> <html><head> <meta http-equiv=content-type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"> <meta content="mshtml 6.00.6000.17104" name=generator></head> <body> Perichoresis is covered by the following services: <UL><LI>ATLA Religion Database</LI><LI>Base d’information bibliographique en patristique / Bibliographic Information Base in Patristics (BIBP)</LI><LI>CEJSH (The Central European Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities)</LI><LI>CNKI Scholar (China National Knowledge Infrastructure)</LI><LI>CNPIEC - cnpLINKer</LI><LI>DOAJ (Directory of Open Access Journals)</LI><LI>EBSCO (relevant databases)</LI><LI>EBSCO Discovery Service</LI><LI>ERIH PLUS (European Reference Index for the Humanities and Social Sciences)</LI><LI>Google Scholar</LI><LI>Index Theologicus</LI><LI>J-Gate</LI><LI>JournalGuide</LI><LI>Microsoft Academic</LI><LI>Naviga (Softweco)</LI><LI>PhilPapers</LI><LI>Primo Central (ExLibris)</LI><LI>SCImago (SJR)</LI><LI>SCOPUS</LI><LI>Summon (ProQuest)</LI><LI>Ulrich's Periodicals Directory/ulrichsweb</LI><LI>Web of Science - Emerging Sources Citation Index</LI><LI>WorldCat (OCLC)</LI></UL></body></html>

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en"> <html><head> <meta http-equiv=content-type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"> <meta content="mshtml 6.00.6000.17104" name=generator></head> <body> Perichoresis ist in den folgenden Services indiziert: <UL><LI>ATLA Religion Database</LI><LI>Base d’information bibliographique en patristique / Bibliographic Information Base in Patristics (BIBP)</LI><LI>CEJSH (The Central European Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities)</LI><LI>CNKI Scholar (China National Knowledge Infrastructure)</LI><LI>CNPIEC - cnpLINKer</LI><LI>DOAJ (Directory of Open Access Journals)</LI><LI>EBSCO (relevant databases)</LI><LI>EBSCO Discovery Service</LI><LI>ERIH PLUS (European Reference Index for the Humanities and Social Sciences)</LI><LI>Google Scholar</LI><LI>Index Theologicus</LI><LI>J-Gate</LI><LI>JournalGuide</LI><LI>Microsoft Academic</LI><LI>Naviga (Softweco)</LI><LI>PhilPapers</LI><LI>Primo Central (ExLibris)</LI><LI>SCImago (SJR)</LI><LI>SCOPUS</LI><LI>Summon (ProQuest)</LI><LI>Ulrich's Periodicals Directory/ulrichsweb</LI><LI>Web of Science - Emerging Sources Citation Index</LI><LI>WorldCat (OCLC)</LI></UL></body></html>

<DIV align=left> Perichoresis is the theological journal of Emanuel University, the only government-accredited Baptist university in Europe. As an institution of higher learning, Emanuel University promotes a traditionally conservative and trinitarian theology, protestant and evangelical, which is reflected in the articles of the contributors who are part of its academic staff. Articles written by people who share different religious views are also welcome provided that they are scientifically argued and focused on academic issues. Perichoresis is published in conjunction with the "Ethics and Society" Research Centre, also part of Emanuel University, which allows for the dialogue between a specifically Protestant-Evangelical morality and the philosophy of contemporary society to take the shape of well-argued contributions for the journal. Perichoresis does not collect article processing charges (APCs) or submission charges. The journal has an editorial review policy for invited papers, as well as double blind peer review for non-invited articles. Why subscribe and read Perichoresis, the Theological Journal of Emanuel University, is the only Romanian Baptist academic review in the field of theology (and cognate subjects, such as philosophy, religious philosophy, ethics, and church history) published exclusively in English throughout Romania. As a scientific journal, Perichoresis has a double purpose: on the one hand, to introduce valuable academic contributions from the English-speaking world to the Romanian academy and, on the other hand, to promote Romanian theological research on the global academic market. Why submit Perichoresis focuses on academic papers in all fields of theology (biblical-exegetical, dogmatic-historical, and pastoral-practical) and is fully recognized by the Romanian National Council for Scientific Research as a B Category academic journal. Archiving Sciendo archives the contents of this journal in <A href="https://www.portico.org/">Portico</A> - digital long-term preservation service of scholarly books, journals and collections. Plagiarism Policy The editorial board is participating in a growing community of <A href="https://www.crossref.org/services/similarity-check/">Similarity Check System's</A> users in order to ensure that the content published is original and trustworthy. Similarity Check is a medium that allows for comprehensive manuscripts screening, aimed to eliminate plagiarism and provide a high standard and quality peer-review process. </DIV>

Editor-in-Chief Corneliu C. Simuţ, Emanuel University, Romania Deputy/ Managing Editor Ciprian Simuţ, Emanuel University, Romania International Advisory Board Torrance Kirby, McGill University, Canada Frank A. James III, Biblical Theological Seminary, United States of America Hamilton Moore, Irish Baptist College, United Kingdom André A. Gazal, North Greenville University, United States of America Ábráhám Kovács, Debrecen Reformed Theological University, Hungary Joshua R. Farris, University of St. Mary of the Lake, United States of America Frank G. Bosman, Tilburg University, the Netherlands †James McMahon, Albert Ellis Institute, United States of America Editors Systematic Theology Paul Negruţ, Emanuel University, Romania Patristics and Classical Languages Marius D. Cruceru, Emanuel University, Romania Applied Theology Adrian Giorgiov, Emanuel University, Romania Old and New Testament Studies Aurelian Botica, Emanuel University, Romania Language Editors Eunicia Ile, Emanuel University, Romania Technical Editors Ciprian Simuţ, Emanuel University, Romania Contact <A href="mailto:perichoresis@emanuel.ro">perichoresis@emanuel.ro</A> Publisher De Gruyter Poland Bogumiła Zuga 32A Str. 01-811 Warsaw, Poland T: +48 22 701 50 15

<DIV align=left> Please submit your manuscripts to Perichoresis via email to: <A href="mailto:perichoresis@emanuel.ro">perichoresis@emanuel.ro</A> Open Access Statement The journal is an Open Access journal that allows a free unlimited access to all its contents without any restrictions upon publication to all users. <A href="https://sciendo-parsed-data-feed.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/PERC/Open_Access_License.pdf">Open Access License</A> </DIV>

Cite Score

European Reference Index for the Humanities

SCImago Journal Rank

Source Normalized Impact per Paper

Volume 18 (2020): Issue 1 (March 2020) Baptist and Reformed Theologies of Vision and Deification (2). Constructive Issues in Contemporary Research. Editors: Joshua R. Farris and Ryan A. Brandt

Volume 18 (2020): Issue 2 (June 2020) De Corpore – ‘On the Body’ through the History of Idea, Views of the Body in Philosophy, Literature and Religion. Editor: Ramona Simuț

Volume 17 (2019): Issue 4 (December 2019) Patristic Thought in Byzantine and Protestant Theology. From Gregory Palamas and George Pachymeres to Luther, Calvin, Anglicans, and Anabaptists. Editor: Andre A. Gazal

Ediciones

Revista y Edición

Perichoresis

Buscar

Volumen 18 (2020): Edición 1 (March 2020)
Baptist and Reformed Theologies of Vision and Deification (2). Constructive Edicións in Contemporary Research. Editors: Joshua R. Farris and Ryan A. Brandt

Detalles de publicación y publicación

Buscar

Artículos

Planifique su conferencia remota con Sciendo

Ediciones

Revista y Edición

Perichoresis

Buscar

Volumen 18 (2020): Edición 1 (March 2020)Baptist and Reformed Theologies of Vision and Deification (2). Constructive Edicións in Contemporary Research. Editors: Joshua R. Farris and Ryan A. Brandt

Detalles de publicación y publicación

Buscar

Artículos

Planifique su conferencia remota con Sciendo

Volumen 18 (2020): Edición 1 (March 2020)
Baptist and Reformed Theologies of Vision and Deification (2). Constructive Edicións in Contemporary Research. Editors: Joshua R. Farris and Ryan A. Brandt