My family and I moved to Durham, England in August 2006 for me to do PhD studies at University of Durham. I’m studying under John Barclay (primary) and Loren Stuckenbruck (secondary) as my supervisors. Lord willing, we’ll be here for 3 years.
A little background about me…
I most recently studied at Dallas Theological Seminary. I originally wanted to go to DTS for it’s biblical language programs, but my first semester I got hooked by a couple of classes in historical and systematic theology (thanks to Jeff Bingham and Kent Berghuis). I got a ThM and primarily focused on historical theology. With the help of Bingham and Scott Horrell, I wrote my thesis on “The Two Natures in Christ and Deification in Maximus the Confessor,” a cozy night-time read I’m sure. While at DTS, I also worked at Watson Wyatt as an actuarial consultant, working with pension and retiree medical plans (from a corporate perspective). I ended up working there 3 more years after I graduated while we had our second son and tried to figure out what I wanted to do with my life. You can see a little more on the end stages of that process here. In Dallas we spent quite a bit of time at Fellowship Church, where I helped coordinate local missions.
Before DTS, I lived in Arkadelphia, AR. I’m sure most of you know where that is, but just in case you don’t, it’s about an hour southwest of Little Rock towards Texas. I did my undergrad work at Ouachita Baptist University (pronounced Wa-shi-taw), where I double-majored in Accounting and Biblical Studies. I married my lovely wife Heather when I graduated, but she still had a semester or two left. So, with not much else to do in Arkadelphia (I’m sure you are surprised), I did an MBA at Henderson State University, which happens to be nicely situated (practically) across the street from Ouachita. I had a great time at both schools. Key things that I took away from OBU: that I should probably pursue an academic career (particularly thanks to the Pew Scholars program there), a great introduction to Greek and Hebrew exegesis (thanks to Scott Duvall and Danny Hays), and a desire to never divorce academics from the church (thanks to Scott Duvall). I spent 4 years working with the Monticello Children’s Home and also got to help with drafting the way the national welfare reform would be applied to Arkadelphia (Clark County, AR). At Henderson, I got the opportunity to present my first academic paper (”Earnings Managemen and Institutional Ownership”) and also got to teach several undergrad business classes.
Here’s a bit about my thesis here at Durham…
Protestants tend to primarily focus upon Paul’s view of justification by faith, which has been interpreted as a judicial or forensic concept. However, others have commented upon his use of the concept of being “in Christ” as an important key to his understanding of salvation. In this way believers have a union with Christ, experiencing in a real way his death and resurrection. Several other themes in his theology can fit underneath this rubric, such as suffering as dying with Christ and sharing in the Spirit as rising with him. The problem is that it is not clear how the forensic and participation categories fit together in Paul’s thought.
Several authors have noted this tension. Albert Schweitzer devoted his Mysticism of the Paul the Apostle explaining this mystical union with Christ, but on the whole Protestants have remained attached to justification by faith. More recently, E.P. Sanders and others have also raised the issue of the importance of participation in Paul’s theology, but Sanders also humbly mentions that he and others really don’t know what that means. It is the deeper meaning of Paul’s participation statements that is our interest and not that of thinly veiled restatements of Paul’s language. As such, I agree with Sanders’ argument that Paul’s letters speak of a reality that is not fully captured in categories or explanations given by scholars to date.
However, we are not without a place to look for help in understanding this area. The Orthodox church has had the doctrine of theosis, or union with God, as its primary soteriological understanding since the early fathers. In their view, there is a union with God without confusion. Believers share in the divine life and through their union with God take on the divine attributes. This union with God was effected by Christ’s incarnation and death-resurrection. A common phrase to describe this is that “In Christ God became man so that we can become gods.” This obviously takes one far beyond the forensic categories of justification by faith, and is foreign to many western believers. However, theosis as the “missing” category for Protestants seems to provide a philosophical, historical, and (potentially) exegetical solution to our problem of how to understand Paul’s participation statements.
As such, theosis would provide a unifying soteriological model that incorporates several aspects of Paul’s letters. In particular, our union with God would include participation in both Christ and the Spirit. Also theosis could unify the already/not yet aspects of Paul’s soteriology as believers begin to share in God’s life now and are later fully transformed as they find greater union in his life at the resurrection. Scholars have also noted the direct connection between Paul’s participation language and his ethical imperatives. When making this affirmation, two issues should be remembered—one regarding other soteriological models and one regarding the extent of the participationist language in Paul.
In prior discussions related to the role of participation in Paul’s theology, two routes are followed. On one side, justification is often downplayed or argued away as only polemical. On the other side, participation is neglected or only flatly treated. My estimation is that one soteriological metaphor should probably not take center stage with Paul with the neglect of others. The emphasis on participation cannot be denied with its broad distribution and frequent mention. However, the role of justification also cannot be denied in Paul’s writings. As a result, one model or the other need not be denied when affirming the other. However, when analyzing Paul’s letters, it behooves scholars to make decisions about relative importance. So with these affirmations, a measure of balance must be incorporated.
Regarding the extent of the explicit language in Paul, we should probably not expect to find a summary of theosis such as that of a systematic theology. Paul’s letters were occasional and centered around his personal experience and the experience of the church. As such, Paul often assumes theological premises from which he argues for more location specific applications. As a result, finding support for theosis, if it exists, will be like that of finding the doctrine of the Trinity in the NT. That doctrine is evident in the NT primarily through the experience of the church but was not explicitly defined and categorized until later debates using Greek philosophical categories. As a result, a (potential) lack of direct evidence should not induce systematic theologians to discount theosis as a soteriological model.
With the emphasis on participation in Christ, Paul’s soteriology may more rightly be termed “Christosis.” As a result, to be understood as theosis, a high Christology would be required. Accordingly, as a development in the early church’s understanding of the Trinity is recorded in the NT, we would have to qualify the extent of theosis that could be found in Paul. For instance, Dunn posits a slow development in christological thought in Paul’s letters, whereas Hengel and Hurtado note an early development evidenced in Paul’s letters. The level of development will require a nuanced understanding of Paul’s soteriology as theosis. Like that of the development of the doctrine of the Trinity, this nuanced understanding of theosis in Paul would be foundational and not the fully developed theology clarified centuries later.
Paul’s use of participation language is prevalent in his letters but still remains to be fully investigated and understood. Theosis may be the missing key to understand Paul’s participation language. My aim is to determine what extent Paul’s language supports the concept of theosis and explore the ramifications of that. I believe this study will not only provide a fruitful study of Paul’s soteriology but also provide a better understanding of Orthodox theology by Protestants.
To see better see how theosis may be understood in Paul, I am not only looking at Paul but also Irenaeus and Cyril of Alexandria. These later writers that develop the idea of theosis will provide heuristic device to understand Paul. By comparing and contrasting their interpretation of Paul and their development of apostolic teaching, we will better see what within Paul was agreeable to a later more fully developed view of theosis but what was also discarded in that development. So in the end, I am doing a history of interpretation analysis of Paul rather than a history of religions approach.
Thursday, 19 October 2006 at 8:49 pm
Ben I happened to come across your blog just looking for info on Durham.
I noticed that you just finished at DTS. I too just completed my Thm and I am visiting Durham in a couple of weeks (Nov. 3 or so) to look into postgraduate research opportunities.
I am looking to do patristics work and I wanted to say that i really enjoyed reading your blog it was very helpful.
Monday, 15 January 2007 at 4:44 am
Ben
I was wondering if I could email you with some questions regarding studying at Durham with Dr Barclay.
Peter Orr
Wednesday, 21 March 2007 at 10:09 pm
let us know when more on your journey to orthodoxy. most who look into it in any degree, end up converting.
I like your thoughts though.
Tuesday, 29 May 2007 at 8:28 pm
Ben,
I’m fascinated with this topic of Paul and theosis, and have done some work on it myself (though solely from an exegetical approach, instead of a history-of-interpretations approach). Currently I’m looking to do so more research on the topic, and am wondering if you know of scholars in England or America who are working on deification (as it relates to the NT or otherwise)?
Many thanks!
David
Emory U
Tuesday, 29 May 2007 at 8:59 pm
David, I believe Mike Gorman just recently passed on your email address to me. I’ve been a little out of things with prep for my Berlin trip, and my wife’s grandparents just arrived today. So glad you’ve made contact. It seems like an area rich for more study that should have implications not just on exegesis but ecumenical discussions.
Off the top of my head, I can only think of Mike Gorman (at St. Mary’s) and Stephen Finlan (at Drew) that have done or are planning anything exegesis focused. I suppose you could tentatively add John Barclay (here at Durham) since he has seemed pretty receptive to this area of study with me. As far as protestants go, most seem (at this point) to be looking at it more from a systematics point of view, as I’m sure you’re aware, but I haven’t really looked at that side of it too much.
Friday, 20 July 2007 at 3:22 pm
Ben,
I was quite pleased to find your blog as my family and I are moving to Durham in September! I just finished my Th.M at DTS and will be studying with Loren Stuckenbruck. The information you have provided is great! This is very helpful for anyone moving to the UK. Hopefully we will be able to meet up when we arrive. BTW, when did you graduate from DTS?
Mark Mathews
Friday, 20 July 2007 at 9:59 pm
Cool. Looking forward to meeting y’all. I graduated in 2003.
Monday, 27 August 2007 at 6:53 pm
It’s dated and too much Reformed introspective, but you should look at Richard B. Gaffin’s, Resurrection and Redemption, in which you will find an articulation not unlike your own.
Wednesday, 29 August 2007 at 8:58 pm
I thought his By Faith Not By Sight was also right down my alley, but as lectures it didn’t provide any footnotes to give a broader interaction than Vos and Ridderbos. So I’ll check it out.
Wednesday, 31 October 2007 at 8:35 pm
Ben:
I really appreciated your “My Thesis” description. I am very interested in the your questions about union with Christ/theosis. I come from an USA Evangelical background and feel than my background has not helped me focus on the goal of salvation, since it is stuck at the door into salvation - justification by faith.
I have read some E. Orthodoxy literature, after visiting Romania several times and realizing that I knew next to nothing about them, but am just starting. I have read a lot in the New Paul Perspective field but have not found many who deal with Union with Christ in depth, other than Lewis Smedes. Do you have reading list suggestions on E. Orthodox and Evangelical/Protestant authors who are writing in this area?
Thursday, 1 November 2007 at 10:20 pm
Hey Paul,
You probably already know but Vladmir Lossky is a classic in this area. John Meyendorf is always good too. On the protestant side, Stephen Finlan has been doing some work on theosis, particularly on the biblical studies side. Veli-Matti Karkainen (sp?) also gives a decent introduction in his One with God book from a systematic point of view, and he wants to view justification as a larger category. I also think that justification has a lot more to do with new life and resurrection than protestants give weight to, and it doesn’t need to be separated from more participationist categories.
I’ve got my head buried in Irenaeus right now, and I’m sure there are more good works out there. If you find some you like, definitely pass the titles along to me.
Cheers,
Ben
Friday, 2 November 2007 at 2:26 pm
Thanks for the reply.
I have seen references to the E.O. authors you mentioned. I will check them out. I have read a lot of Ware and some Meyendorf. Colin Gunton is one author who is trying to combine the best of the E. Fathers and the best of Calvin. I like Colin’s writings.
I intend to look at John Zizioulas’s work, “Being as Communion” and “Communion and Otherness”. Have you looked at his work?
I have started reading your other postings and will follow your references to other authors. Thanks for sharing your journey.
…paul j
Monday, 24 December 2007 at 9:08 pm
Can you direct me to where there is a nice picture of Prof. C.K. Barrett on the internet …. or even email one to me, if you have such.
Many thanks indeed,
(Dr.) Patrick Rogers
Dublin
Saturday, 29 December 2007 at 1:33 am
Ben-
I came across your blog “What I Wish I Did To Prepare For PhD Studies” and found it helpful as I look ahead to starting doctoral studies. I’ll graduate from Asbury Seminary this spring with an MA in Theological Stuides and am praying that Duke or Notre Dame will accept me for 2009. I’ll be taking the year between “off,” using that time to (as you suggest) learn/enhance my language skills.
On the matter of your thesis, you’re certainly right about the protestant emphasis on justification. I, however, come from the Wesleyan tradition with its special emphasis on holiness/sanctification. Wesley was influenced by the Eastern tradition to a large extent, so you are in good company examining theosis within the Pauline framework of salvation.
I’m particularly interested in how one’s (or a group’s) Christology influences their understanding of holiness. Without going on much further-I’m thinking about how Adam-Christology (the humanity of Christ) effects the way we think about our lives here and now? Is a “high” Christology necessary for us to emphasize sanctification (even entire)? Has the high Christology that dominates American evangelicals caused a disconnect between the awakening of our humanity in light of Jesus-the True Man?
All the best
Curtis
Sunday, 30 December 2007 at 6:08 pm
I entered the word “Paulinist” into a search and your page was one of the links that came up. I’m not really sure why I clicked on your link, but after reading a little, I have a few thoughts.
(1) I think you have it, as my grandfather used to say, basackwards. I should be a belief (in) Christ (with)Paul. Not the other way around.
(2) I’m not really sure why you went to England, to further your academic degree or to try to understand what the apostle Paul was really teaching in his letters.
(3) If the latter was the reason, you went in the wrong direction. To get the most accurate teaching of what Paul wrote you should have gone to California and studied under my teacher Dr. Gene Scott. Probably the most prolific expositor of GOD’s word and Paul’s writting since Paul himself, and I dare you to prove me wrong. It can’t be done. Go to http://www.drgenescott.com or http://www.pastormelissascott.com his widows’ website. You can still get the teaching even in England.
By the way, the website above is my blog, not necessarily religious oreinted, but after you hear some of his teaching, you can recognize his influence in some of it. Best wishes in your studies. And, don’t worry, I wont bother you againl
Harry
Tuesday, 29 January 2008 at 3:37 pm
Ben,
I am a recent MDiv. graduate from Baylor University and studied under Daniel Williams for Patristics. This fall I will be attending the University of Nottingham to study under John Milbank and Mary Cunningham. My doctoral thesis will be on Grace, Theosis, and Ethics in the Metaphysics of Maximus Confessor. Your work on Paul is definitely something I am planning to investigate for my thesis. There will be a section on the New Testament background that will deal with your topic. I would really like to be in touch with you to discuss your work. Also, is there a way to get a copy of your ThM. thesis? It has not come up in my dissertation searches.
Daniel
Tuesday, 19 February 2008 at 1:35 pm
Ben,
Thanks for all the info on Durham. Very helpful. I graduated from Denver Seminary two years ago and am heading to Durham in the fall. I’ll be in the philosophy department and was wondering if you knew any students there.
Tony
Tuesday, 19 February 2008 at 9:36 pm
Hey Tony, Unfortunately, I’ve only briefly met a couple of people doing philosophy. But, I’d be happy to claim you as the first! Give me a shout out when you get over. We’d love to have you over for dinner.
Tuesday, 19 February 2008 at 9:43 pm
Will do, thanks Ben.
Sunday, 16 March 2008 at 7:26 pm
Dear Ben,
Good luck with your thesis. I am a Bulgarian cleric and lecturer and I am looking for visiting theology fellowships in the UK or US. Are you aware of any? Please respond via my e-mail. Thank you in advance.
In Christ,
Fr Pavel
Thursday, 29 May 2008 at 4:57 pm
Dear Ben,
I have just finished an MA in art history in the States and am now applying to MA/PhD philosophy programs with the intent to start in Fall of ‘09. Your website has been so helpful in making this decision. There were some who discouraged the idea of going abroad for postgrad work, but I have been lucky to find people like you and others who are very encouraging. Thanks
-Jon
Monday, 30 June 2008 at 11:56 pm
hi Ben,
i was so excited to see your blog after Carrie Myers sent me a link! i’ll be starting at durham in the fall, studying with Walter Moberly. thanks so much for the wealth of information… you’ve been quite a help and answered many a question for me.
so kinda a crazy connection– i’m from texas but grew up going to arkadelphia a couple of times a year, as it’s my mom’s hometown.
i’ll look forward to meeting you and your family this fall! grace and peace, angie
Tuesday, 1 July 2008 at 10:31 pm
Definitely a small world. Give us a shout out when you get over, we’d love to meet you in person.
Ben