@Lizbeth @marks @GodsGrace @MatthewG
Romans 7.
In returning to Romans 7, the correct interpretation of which is vital for one wishing to understand the doctrine this thread is about, and which is found in the early church writings as Theosis and much later in the west as entire sanctification, I will quote again from the OP:
Deification in the Early Church
In the introduction to
The Study of Holiness from the Early Church Fathers by J. B. Galloway(Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2014), we read: “If the teachings of the modern holiness movement are correct concerning the doctrine of holiness and the baptism with the Holy Ghost as an experience for the saints of God today, perfecting them in Christian love and freeing them form carnal sin, it seems that we should find some evidences of this faith and teachings in the period of the history of the Church where it was the closest to the days of Christ”
The
ordo salutis or order of salvation, was not as is commonly known in modern times. For the early church unanimously, there were three stages which
ended in Theosis or salvation. In effect it was the beginning of the Christian life as laid out in many scriptures which the unbelieving church says is 'position' and not reality.
The earliest writings take for granted the audience knew what it meant and:
"The earliest analysis of Christian development into these three ‘ways’ or phases derives from Dionysius the Pseudo-Areopagite, who ascribed a rhythm of purification, illumination, and union (or perfection) both to the hierarchies of angels and to the Church on earth. Medieval W. interpreters of Dionysius turned his scheme into an account of spiritual progress in terms of the three ways, beginning with the eradication of bad habits and the cultivation of the virtues, moving on to the illumination of the mind by meditation and contemplation, and culminating in unitive love. These three ways were adopted by later writers such as St John of the Cross and so became classic in systematic theories of Christian spirituality.
purgative, illuminative, and unitive ways
St. Gregory Nazianzen, one of the great theologians of the fourth century, calls out to us over the centuries and exhorts us with the following. To quote St. Gregory: “Let us not remain what we are, but let us become what we once were.” And from St. Peter, the chief of the apostles, through the first-century voice of St. Ignatius of Antioch, from Irenaeus of the second century through the great Cappadocian Fathers of the fourth century, of the great Desert Fathers of the fifth century, Maximus the Confessor of the sixth century to John of Damascus and John of
The Ladder in the ninth century, from Gregory Palamas in the 14th century to St. Silouan in the 20th century—the great Fathers of our Orthodox Church have echoed this exhortation of St. Gregory, reminding us and ever pointing us to the truth, that by God’s grace we
can become much more than we are.
So it is correct to state that the teachings were that Romans 7 is of an unsaved man. But this is not what unsaved means today because they are saying that this man is undergoing the two earlier stages and has already made a decision to follow Christ, as we see as our examples in the first disciples. He has not reached union with Christ/Theosis which occurred for them when they were baptized by the Spirit at Pentecost and we saw a transformation of them all as they turned the world upside down.
When this occurs, the church becomes so strong that society is turned upside down as we can see clearly in church history, and we hear of great tales as in the revivals especially in Wales UK. where people would be convicted of sin as they walked in the streets. Sadly we see the worldwide decline since this teaching 'went out of fashion' in the church.
There have been two teachings widely accepted on Romans 7 in modern times, but there are great difficulties with pesky verses that contradict these interpretations.
“The commentator Adam Clarke objected that the opinion that Paul was speaking of a regenerate person ‘has most pitifully and most shamefully lowered the Standard of Christianity, and even destroyed its influence and disgraced its character.’ A.H. Francke and J. Bengel (and, a little later, John Wesley, and, later still Moses Stuart) were among those who thought that Paul was describing a man who was under conviction of sin, but not yet regenerate. “
Rom 7:24 – Who is the ‘wretched man’? – Walking With Giants
In his celebrated book
Holiness, Ryle writes: ‘I am quite satisfied that it does not describe the experience of an unconverted man, or of a young and unestablished Christian; but of an old experienced saint in close communion with God. None but such a man could say, “I delight in the law of God after the inward man” (
Rom. 7:22).’
So here we have them - unsaved or normal saved man. However, if you believe one of these you will be highly unlikely to accept the doctrine this is about. I will go into the objections in my next post.
