In this small space, I can only say two simple things:

First, I have learned too much from non-Orthodox sources to agree with his perspective. Can we learn nothing from Saint Francis? Can I learn nothing of the Trinity from my Fred Sanders?

Fred, for example, has given me deep help in becoming a more faithful student of Sacred Scripture. I refuse to believe that I am a “greater” Christian, because I am Orthodox and he is Evangelical Free.

I am an evangelical and thankful for my Evangelical heritage.

How much ingratitude would it take to deny the work of the Holy Spirit in so much of my life?

My father in Christ said wisely, “I know where the Church is and will leave it to Christ to say where it is not.”

We have enough to do to evangelize our own to worry about other sheep!

Second, who is it that has achieved “theosis?” Let us see an example so we can test the idea.

When I was a little boy, there were Wesleyan folk who claimed total holiness. They were (to paraphrase my grandfather) so “straight they leaned a little.” I suspect the same is true of those claiming “total theosis.”

Pray for me a sinner.

John Mark

I really like your work and I have learned a lot from your blogs. I recently bought your book “When Athens Met Jerusalem”. It makes a lot of sense to me. What I’m struggling with is a book based on lectures by Fr. John Romanides. It’s called “Patristic Theology”. He seems to have a very different view of philosophy and he is VERY critical of anything that isn’t uniquely Orthodox. Probably my biggest struggle is what seems to me to be esotericism. In essence, God can only be known by those who have achieved theosis. Yes, he says “achieved” rather than “those who are experiencing” or “those who are participating in”, setting up a clear distinction between regular Christians and those who have achieved said state. That just doesn’t seem right to me. I’m really trying to learn all I can in order to grow. Am i reading him wrongly?

Your opinion on the matter is appreciated.