Reformed Theosis?”
A Response to Gannon Murphy
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 14530814 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Myk Habets (0000-0003-0735-156X, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2009 |
| Volume | 65 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 489-498 |
| Publication date | 2009-01-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Theology Today (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0040-5736 • E-ISSN: 2044-2556 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publications (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1177/004057360906500407 |
| OpenAlex | W2316656418 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 2 |
Any attempt to reclaim Orthodox aspects of the “great tradition” for contemporary theology is to be applauded. In this light, Gannon Murphy has done the church a real service in stimulating discussion surrounding the compatibility of an Orthodox notion of theosis with contemporary Reformed theology. 1 Having argued the same thing previously, I stand beside Murphy as a brother in arms. 2 There are, however, differing views on how best to incorporate theosis and Reformed thought. In this essay, I point out areas of agreement between Murphy and myself, discuss a number of areas in which I disagree with Murphy's proposal, and finally offer a brief reflection on how I think Reformed theology and a doctrine of theosis are compatible. At the outset I wish to affirm my agreement with Murphy and make it clear that we share much in common despite our disagreements. 3
Brother · Doctrine · Environmental ethics · Epistemology · Sociology · Theology · Wish · American Constitutional Law and Politics · Philosophy · Religion and Society Interactions · Theology and Philosophy of Evil
| Citations per year | 0.17 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2014 - 2017 (4) |
| Highly cited | No |