The Orthodox Study Bible: Cooperation
Edited for an entry on academia.edu on November 6, 2022
Preface
I have written on the theological doctrine, within, in particular, Orthodoxy, of cooperation in regards to grace and the atoning and resurrection work of Jesus Christ applied to believers. This work also connects to my British, MPhil/PhD work with theodicy, free will, determinism and the nature of God.
The Orthodox theology of cooperation differs from my Reformed theological doctrine of the embracing by believers, of divine regeneration (John 3, Titus 3), and the applied atoning and resurrection work of Jesus Christ, in grace through faith for salvation.
John Hick and Soul-Making Theodicy
From my PhD thesis, John Hick as his Soul-Making Theodicy, rejected compatibilism and held to a view of human cooperation:
Human beings must, through uncompelled responses and co-operation with the creator, become children of God. Hick (1970: 291). Since Hick rejects compatibilism (Hick (1970: 381), ultimately God must inevitably convince human beings to freely follow him in a way that was amiss for many in their earthly lives. Hick (1970: 381).
Hick and his Soul-Making Theodicy holds to universalism, unlike Orthodoxy, which does not.
Orthodoxy versus Reformed
Edited
The Orthodox Study Bible, New Testament and Psalms, (1993) Saint Athanasius Orthodox Academy,Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, Tennessee.
The Orthodox Study Bible text states that Christ's righteousness is given to us and by our own cooperation with God, we continue to be righteous, in it. (338-339). This participation takes place via human faith.
A Protestant and especially Reformed concern with the concept of cooperation, is the danger (s) of works righteousness. I realize, having worked through a significant amount of the Study Bible, with a prayerfully open-mind, that official Orthodox doctrine does not hold to works righteousness toward obtaining salvation.
My Reformed theology views the human embracing of salvation, including justification and imputed righteousness of Jesus Christ, in a sense as philosophically and theologically, a human secondary cause; but very importantly, only the primary cause, the triune God creates the means and application of salvation through the atonement and resurrection.
I might coin the secondary cause here as a 'passive cause'.
Collins is rather helpful here:
secondary cause in British English
philosophy
a cause which is not the primary or ultimate cause
the distinction between the universal and primary cause and the particular and secondary cause
Not the ultimate cause, exactly.
In this way, those in Christ, being regenerated by God alone, only accept salvation as a divine gift and this also avoids the problem of divine force or coercion. People are not saved or damned through hard determinism (objections from philosophical theology, philosophy of religion), with no secondary agency involved. It is also not a (fallen) human work of salvation. Human righteousness (the human nature) is universally fallen and tainted in sin. Christ's righteousness as both God and man, is still divine righteousness and a gift of God (Ephesians 2: 8). It is a divine righteousness which is incarnated into a perfect human being. It is not universal, human righteousness as we know it in this present realm.
It might be more clear to state that a human being has secondary agency in embracing salvation. The secondary cause in secondary agencies, merely embraces the applied atoning and resurrection work of Jesus Christ, including justification and sanctification.
Philippians 2:12-13 New American Standard Bible
12 So then, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; 13 for it is God who is at work in you, both to [a]desire and to work for His good pleasure. Footnotes Philippians 2:13 Or be willing
As secondary causes, as secondary agents, we embrace and work through, by grace through faith, the salvific work that only God has completed and applied through Christ.
From my MPhil
John Calvin (1543) stated concerning free will: If freedom is opposed to coercion, I both acknowledge and consistently maintain that choice is free and I hold anyone who thinks otherwise to be a heretic. If, I say, it were called free in this sense of not being coerced nor forcibly moved by an external impulse, but moving of its own accord, I have no objection. Calvin (1543)(1996: 68).
---
By the leading of God the Holy Spirit, in regeneration, I have decided, as a secondary cause to grow in Christ, to work out my salvation. But there is no works righteousness on my part to create or apply salvation. God can be a primary cause by willing directly or allowing, a human being, that can be a secondary cause, by embracing what God has caused. God directly wills regeneration each time it occurs.
Again, to be clear, human secondary cause, is embracing and not creating salvation through any work of (fallen) human righteousness. There is the imputed, divine, righteousness of Jesus Christ, the perfect God-man (Romans, Galatians, as examples).
God alone, through the atoning and resurrection work of Jesus Christ, and regeneration and application to believers, is the primary and first cause of salvation. God alone provides and applies salvation.
Human secondary cause, within salvation, embraces the salvific work of God. This theology both avoids works righteousness (bible and theology) and hard determinism (philosophical theology, philosophy of religion).
But by my theological reasoning, although Orthodoxy does hold to a form of justification by faith (348, 801), by adding the concept of cooperation by his grace, it denies justification by grace through faith alone. This doctrine especially key from Romans, Galatians, Ephesians and Hebrews.
If by works righteousness, concepts within James and Romans 4 (4: 22 Therefore it was also credited to him as righteousness) are meant, as in showing salvific faith by works and obedience, I can accept that as embracing salvation, but I would not use the term 'cooperation'.
Additional Briefly
It could be stated that God the Son has infinite, divine righteousness (spirit of God). Without a mixing of natures, divine and human nature remain distinct, God the Son, and now God incarnate, has finite, perfect human righteousness in his human brain. But, as infinite nature surpasses the finite human, this makes the righteousness divine, biblically speaking. The source is divine (Romans, especially).
Romans 1:16-17 New American Standard Bible (NASB) 16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. 17 For in it the righteousness of God is revealed [a]from faith to faith; as it is written: “[b]But the righteous one will live by faith.”
STRONGS NT 1343: δικαιοσύνη
Righteousness, the condition acceptable to God
δικαιοσύνη
N-NFS= Noun, nominative, feminine, singular. From δίκαιος meaning righteous
---
BARCLAY, WILLIAM (1976) The Letters of James and Peter, Philadelphia, The Westminster Press.
BRUCE, F.F. (1987) Romans, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
CAIRD, GEORGE B. (1977) Paul's Letters from Prison Paperback, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
CALVIN, JOHN (1543)(1996) The Bondage and Liberation of the Will, Translated by G.I. Davies, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.
COAD, F. ROY (1986) ‘Galatians’, in F.F. Bruce (gen.ed.), The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Marshall Pickering/ Zondervan.
COURSON, JON (2005) Application Commentary, Thomas Nelson, Nashville.
CRANFIELD, C.E.B. (1992) Romans: A Shorter Commentary, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
DUNN, JAMES D.G. (1988) Romans, Dallas, Word Books.
ELLIS, DAVID J. (1986) 'John' in F.F. Bruce (gen.ed.), The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Marshall Pickering/ Zondervan.
GUNDRY, ROBERT (1981) A Survey of the New Testament, Grand Rapids, Zondervan.
HEWLETT, H.C. (1986) 'Philippians' in The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Zondervan.
HICK, JOHN(1970) Evil and The God of Love, London, The Fontana Library.
HICK, JOHN(1978) ‘Present and Future Life’, Harvard Theological Review, Volume 71, Number 1-2, January-April, Harvard University.
HICK, JOHN(1981) Encountering Evil, Stephen T.Davis (ed.), Atlanta, John Knox Press.
HICK, JOHN(1993) ‘Afterword’ in GEIVETT, R.DOUGLAS (1993) Evil and the Evidence for God, Philadelphia, Temple University Press.
HICK, JOHN(1993) The Metaphor of God Incarnate, Louisville, Kentucky, John Know Press.
HICK, JOHN(1994) Death and Eternal Life, Louisville, Kentucky, John Knox Press.
HICK, JOHN(1999) ‘Life after Death’, in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), A New Dictionary of Christian Theology ,Kent, SCM Press.
LUTHER, MARTIN. (1525)(1972) ‘The Bondage of the Will’, in F.W. Strothmann and Frederick W. Locke (eds.), Erasmus-Luther: Discourse on Free Will, New York, Frederick Ungar Publishing Co., INC.
MARTIN, RALPH P. (1987) Philippians, Grand Rapids, IVP.
MOUNCE, ROBERT H. (1995) The New American Commentary: Romans, Nashville, Broadman & Holman Publishers.
2010 Theodicy and Practical Theology: PhD thesis, the University of Wales, Trinity Saint David, Lampeter
