What was accomplished by Christ's death and resurrection?

[David Lindblom]

As a former Prot. I've been struggling over this question. From the Prot Calvinist view Christ's death accomplished salvation only for the pre-chosen elect and no one else. The more standard view is that while Christ's death was for everyone it accomplishes nothing until an individual accepts Him by faith, then it accomplishes forgiveness, justification etc. Am I correct in stating that in the Orthodox view Christ did not technically die for each individual but that through His death and resurrection He conquered death, sin and the devil on our behalf and is now the new Adam, the first in a new creation of man and that we each benefit from His victory insofar as each individual is in Christ by faith and obedience. His death and resurrection objectively gained forgiveness for mankind from God, access to God and victory over death, sin and the devil but each individual must subjectively make it an individual reality in their own life through faith. Is this right? Please correct as you see the need.

[Scott Pierson]

My understanding* of this issue is that by His death he conquered death for all of mankind. We all receive this gift of resurrection. Some of us will experience the resurrected state as joy and others may experience it as hell.

St Isaac of Syria notes:

“Those who find themselves in Gehenna will be chastised with the scourge of love. How cruel and bitter this torment of love will be! For those who understand that they have sinned against love undergo greater sufferings than those produced of the most fearful tortures. The sorrow which takes hold of the heart which has sinned against love is more piercing than any other pain. It is not right to say that sinners in hell are deprived of the love of God. ... But love acts in two different ways, as suffering in the reproved, and as joy in the blessed.”

* for whatever that's worth.

[Paul Cowan]

Christ died for everyone, not just those that "are in Him". Yes, we have free will to choose Life or Death, but He died for us all to allow us that choice. This is a protestant e-story, but it makes the point.


There was a certain Professor of Religion named Dr. Christianson, a studious man who taught at a small college in the Western United States.

Dr. Christianson taught the required survey course in Christianity at this particular institution. Every student was required to take this course his or her freshman year regardless of his or her major.

Although Dr. Christianson tried hard to communicate the essence of the gospel in his class, he found that most of his students looked upon the course as nothing but required drudgery. Despite his best efforts, most students refused to take Christianity seriously.

This year, Dr. Christianson had a special student named Steve. Steve was only a freshman, but was studying with the intent of going onto seminary for the ministry. Steve was popular, he was well liked, and he was an imposing physical specimen. He was now the starting center on the school football team, and was the best student in the professor's class.

One day, Dr. Christianson asked Steve to stay after class so he could talk with him. "How many pushups can you do?"

Steve said, "I do about 200 every night."

"200? That's pretty good, Steve," Dr. Christianson said. "Do you think you could do 300?"

Steve replied, "I don't know . . . I've never done 300 at a time."

"Do you think you could?" again asked Dr. Christianson.

"Well, I can try," said Steve.

"Can you do 300 in sets of 10? I have a class project in mind, and I need you to do about 300 pushups in sets of ten for this to work. Can you do it? I need you to tell me you can do it," said the professor.

Steve said, "Well . . . I think I can . . . yeah, I can do it."

Dr. Christianson said, "Good! I need you to do this on Friday. Let me explain what I have in mind."

Friday came, and Steve got to class early and sat in the front of the room. When class started, the professor pulled out a big box of donuts. Now these weren't the normal kinds of donuts, they were the extra fancy BIG kind, with cream centers and frosting swirls.
Everyone was pretty excited it was Friday, the last class of the day, and they were going to get an early start on the weekend with a party in Dr. Christianson's class.

Dr. Christianson went to the first girl in the first row and asked, "Cynthia, do you want to have one of these donuts?"

Cynthia said, "Yes."

Dr. Christianson then turned to Steve and asked, "Steve, would you do ten pushups so that Cynthia can have a donut?"

"Sure." Steve jumped down from his desk to do a quick ten. Then Steve again sat in his desk. Dr. Christianson put a donut on Cynthia's desk.

Dr. Christianson then went to Joe, the next person, and asked, "Joe, do you want a donut?"

Joe said, "Yes."

Dr. Christianson asked, "Steve would you do ten pushups so Joe can have a donut?" Steve did ten pushups, and Joe got a donut.

And so it went, down the first aisle, Steve did ten pushups for every person before they got their donut, and down the second aisle, till Dr. Christianson came to Scott. Scott was on the basketball team, and in as good condition as Steve. He was very popular and never lacking for female companionship. When the professor asked, "Scott do you want a donut?"

Scott's reply was, "Well, can I do my own pushups?"

Dr. Christianson said, "No, Steve has to do them."

Then Scott said, "Well, I don't want one then."

Dr. Christianson shrugged and then turned to Steve and asked, "Steve, would you do ten pushups so Scott can have a donut he doesn't want?" With perfect obedience Steve started to do ten pushups.


Scott said, "HEY! I said I didn't want one!"

Dr. Christianson said, "Look, this is my classroom, my class, my desks, and these are my donuts. Just leave it on the desk if you don't want it." And he put a donut on Scott's desk.

Now by this time, Steve had begun to slow down a little. He just stayed on the floor between sets because it took too much effort to be getting up and down. You could start to see a little perspiration coming out around his brow. Dr. Christianson started down the third row. Now the students were beginning to get a little angry.

Dr. Christianson asked Jenny, "Jenny, do you want a donut?"

Sternly, Jenny said, "No." Then Dr. Christianson asked Steve, "Steve, would you do ten more pushups so Jenny can have a donut that she doesn't want?" Steve did ten, and Jenny got a donut.

By now, a growing sense of uneasiness filled the room. The students were beginning to say "No" and there were all these uneaten donuts on the desks. Steve also had to really put forth a lot of extra effort to get these pushups done for each donut. There began to be a small pool of sweat on the floor beneath his face, his arms and brow were beginning to get red because of the physical effort involved.

Dr. Christianson asked Robert, who was the most vocal unbeliever in the class, to watch Steve do each pushup to make sure he did the full ten pushups in a set because he couldn't bear to watch all of Steve's work for all of those uneaten donuts. He sent Robert over to where Steve was so Robert could count the set and watch Steve closely.

Dr. Christianson started down the fourth row. During his class, however, some students from other classes had wandered in and sat down on the steps along the radiators that ran down the sides of the room. When the professor realized this, he did a quick count and saw that now there were 34 students in the room.

He started to worry if Steve would be able to make it.

Dr. Christianson went on to the next person and the next and the next. Near the end of that row, Steve was really having a rough time. He was taking a lot more time to complete each set. Steve asked Dr. Christianson, "Do I have to make my nose touch on each one?"

Dr. Christianson thought for a moment, "Well, they're your pushups . . . You are in charge now. You can do them any way that you want." And Dr. Christianson went on.

A few moments later, Jason, a recent transfer student, came to the room and was about to come in when all the students yelled in one voice, "NO! Don't come in! Stay out!" Jason didn't know what was going on.

Steve picked up his head and said, "No, let him come."

Professor Christianson said, "You realize that if Jason comes in you will have to do ten pushups for him?"

Steve said, "Yes, let him come in. Give him a donut"

Dr. Christianson said, "Okay, Steve, I'll let you get Jason's out of the way right now.

Jason, do you want a donut?" Jason, new to the room hardly knew what was going on.

"Yes," he said, "give me a donut."

"Steve, will you do ten pushups so that Jason can have a donut?" Steve did ten pushups very slowly and with great effort. Jason, bewildered, was handed a donut and sat down.

Dr. Christianson finished the fourth row, then started on those visitors seated by the heaters. Steve's arms were now shaking with each pushup in a struggle to lift himself against the force of gravity. Sweat was profusely dropping off of his face and, by this time, there was no sound except his heavy breathing, there was not a dry eye in the room.

The very last two students in the room were two young women, both cheerleaders, and very popular. Dr. Christianson went to Linda, the second to last, and asked, "Linda, do you want a doughnut?"

Linda said, very sadly, "No, thank you."

Professor Christianson quietly asked, "Steve, would you do ten pushups so that Linda can have a donut she doesn't want?" Grunting from the effort, Steve did ten very slow pushups for Linda.

Then Dr. Christianson turned to the last girl, Susan. "Susan, do you want a donut?" Susan, with tears flowing down her face, began to cry. "Dr. Christianson, why can't I help him?"

Dr. Christianson, with tears of his own, said, "No, Steve has to do it alone, I have given him this task and he is in charge of seeing that everyone has an opportunity for a donut whether they want it or not.

When I decided to have a party this last day of class, I looked at my grade book. Steve, here is the only student with a perfect grade. Everyone else has failed a test, skipped class, or offered me inferior work.

Steve told me that in football practice, when a player messes up he must do pushups. I told Steve that none of you could come to my party unless he paid the price by doing your pushups. He and I made a deal for your sakes.

Steve, would you do ten pushups so Susan can have a donut?" As Steve very slowly finished his last pushup, with the understanding that he had accomplished all that was required of him, having done 350 pushups, his arms buckled beneath him and he fell to the floor.

Dr. Christianson turned to the room and said. "And so it was, that our Savior, Jesus Christ, on the cross, plead to the Father, 'into thy hands I commend my spirit.' With the understanding that He had done everything that was required of Him, he yielded up His life. And like some of those in this room, many of us leave the gift on the desk, uneaten."

Two students helped Steve up off the floor and to a seat, physically exhausted, but wearing a thin smile. "Well done, good and faithful servant" said the professor, adding "Not all sermons are preached in words."

Turning to his class the professor said, "My wish is that you might understand and fully comprehend all the riches of grace and mercy that have been given to you through the sacrifice of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, who spared not the only Begotten Son, but gave Him up for us all for the whole Church, now and forever.

Whether or not we choose to accept His gift to us, the price has been paid. Wouldn't you be foolish and ungrateful to leave it laying on the desk?"

[David Lindblom]

My understanding* of this issue is that by His death he conquered death for all of mankind. We all receive this gift of resurrection. Some of us will experience the resurrected state as joy and others may experience it as hell.

St Isaac of Syria notes:

“Those who find themselves in Gehenna will be chastised with the scourge of love. How cruel and bitter this torment of love will be! For those who understand that they have sinned against love undergo greater sufferings than those produced of the most fearful tortures. The sorrow which takes hold of the heart which has sinned against love is more piercing than any other pain. It is not right to say that sinners in hell are deprived of the love of God. ... But love acts in two different ways, as suffering in the reproved, and as joy in the blessed.”

* for whatever that's worth.

But is each person's sins forgiven as a result of the cross or just the possibility of that forgiveness? Is everyone w/o exception now reconciled to God? If so, then is salvation at the last day the result of an individual's participation and cooperation w/ God whereas those who are damned are those who rejected Christ and did not cooperate w/ God?

[Antonios]

But is each person's sins forgiven as a result of the cross or just the possibility of that forgiveness? Is everyone w/o exception now reconciled to God? If so, then is salvation at the last day the result of an individual's participation and cooperation w/ God whereas those who are damned are those who rejected Christ and did not cooperate w/ God?

Dear David,

I unfortunately cannot quote any specific quotes from the Fathers, but my understanding in reading them is that Christ's death and resurrection has defeated once and for all mankind's slavery to sin due to Adam's disobedience. Now, any blame we could have attributed to Adam has been abolished. Any potential protest, silenced. It has been revealed to us where the counsel of the deceiver leads to and what the wages of sin are. The Living Word of God, Jesus Christ, has shown the Way to Truth and Life. And even though the serpent still lurks in the garden, conniving and conspiring, we have been given our own chance to follow His lead and imitate Him and share in His eternal Light and Glory.

But how can I, such an ungrateful sinner and denier, ever possibly follow Him to true Life when my will is so weak and my actions full of transgressions?

By repentance and praying for mercy.

By purifying our will and body, we become temples of the Holy Spirit. The Comforter, Who proceeds from the Father and is sent by the Son, has been sent to assist us in participating in the glory of the Resurrected Christ, to become ourselves like sons of God. To further assist us, the Lord has established a Church on earth to feed us and guide us and heal us, and He is the Head of this Church and it's High Priest.

And we ungrateful sinners,,, Do we thank Him? Do we pray to Him?? Do we pray He prays in us? Do we surrender ourselves to His bossom with total faith and total love, casting aside all fear and, like Mary, sit lovingly at His feet and hear about the Kingdom of Heaven?

Christ accomplished and we have benefited.

On the last day, what we did with this gift and how we spent our talents will make up our witness before the heavenly choir of angels and all of mankind. And on that day as we face the Awesome Judge at the Final Judgment, and He opens the Book of Life, what will He find inside? What will He read aloud?

This should strike fear in us sinners, for all our sins will be revealed and our conscience (which we have managed to silence through practice and effort) will be unrestrained in the face of God. On that day, will we wail with the sinners or rejoice with the saints at the prospects of eternal Life? How we live here and now will prepare us. May the Lord have mercy on us.

In Christ,
Antonios

[Scott Pierson]

I don't think hell is necessarily a matter of God not forgiving people. Christ even asked His Father to forgive those who were crucifying Him (it's hard to think of a sin worse then that ). I've found the teachings of St Isaac the Syrian on hell and salvation very helpful in my life.

Archbishop Hilarion Alfeyev has a great article on St Isaac and universal salvation that you might like to read.
Universal salvation (http://en.hilarion.orthodoxia.org/6_6_10)

http://en.hilarion.orthodoxia.org/6_6_10

[David Lindblom]

Dear David,

I unfortunately cannot quote any specific quotes from the Fathers, but my understanding in reading them is that Christ's death and resurrection has defeated once and for all mankind's slavery to sin due to Adam's disobedience. [...]

Thanks for your great reply. Coming from 30 years as a Protestant I'm just playing catch up and trying to get my head around the Church's understanding of salvation and the work of Christ. With Protestants it can be very minimalist and simplistic. Yet the one thing I continually find a little disturbing w/in Orthodoxy is the lack of discussion on faith. The Bible, to me, seems quite clear that everything must be built upon faith. Along w/ repentance, faith is both the starting point and is at the core of all that we do. It is, after all, impossible to please God w/o it. Where do you see faith fitting into the picture?

[David Lindblom]

I don't think hell is necessarily a matter of God not forgiving people. Christ even asked His Father to forgive those who were crucifying Him (it's hard to think of a sin worse then that ). I've found the teachings of St Isaac the Syrian on hell and salvation very helpful in my life.

Archbishop Hilarion Alfeyev has a great article on St Isaac and universal salvation that you might like to read.
Universal salvation (http://en.hilarion.orthodoxia.org/6_6_10)

http://en.hilarion.orthodoxia.org/6_6_10

Hmm, while I see standard Church teaching in much of this article it is my understanding that the Church clearly teaches that Universal Salvation is heretical. There are several scriptures that clearly teach that Gehenna is eternal and that there is no repentance after death. It is from the mouth of Jesus Himself that we see that the saved will be less in number than those who reject His salvation and that the torment of the damned is eternal. I'm not disputing that the source of the torments in the Lake of Fire are those people's reaction or experience of God's love but it is the wish of the damned themselves to hate that love. As C.S. Lewis said the Gates of Hell are locked from the inside.

Thanks for your response though.

[Scott Pierson]

To my understanding the Church has never condemned the idea of universal salvation in general. Origens specific understanding of universal salvation which appears to have been based on certain philosophical presuppositions may have been condemned at an ecumenical council but that doesn't imply that all "theories" (for lack of a better term) of universal salvation have been condemned.


I say "may" have been condemned because there is some debate as to if the condemnations of Origen and Evagrius were done properly and if they were accepted as authoritative by the Church. I believe someone has already pointed out some of the "irregularities" in this condemnation on another thread. Personally I have trouble believing Evagrius was a heretic when he was quoted as an authority by so many of the Holy Fathers and one of his writings is in even in the Philokalia . Origen was honored by even more of the Fathers including such pillars of Orthodoxy as Sts Athanasius and Chrysostem. How could the Church condemn someone (hundreds of years after their death) when they were previously accepted by so many of the Fathers as great men of the Church? It seems that these condemnations was spearheaded not by the Bishops but by the emperor as well.

As a side note I should say that I'm not trying to defend Origens specific theory apocatastasis.

[Antonios]

Coming from 30 years as a Protestant I'm just playing catch up and trying to get my head around the Church's understanding of salvation and the work of Christ.

Dear David,

We are all playing catch up!


With Protestants it can be very minimalist and simplistic. Yet the one thing I continually find a little disturbing w/in Orthodoxy is the lack of discussion on faith.Perhaps because without faith, there is no foundation! If it appears to be barely mentioned in Orthodox discussion forums or in the writings of modern Orthodox authors, it's because in orthodox theology, faith is a given. The Kingdom of God has its foundation in faith. It is what Christ said He would build His Church on.

In many of the patristic writings, it was the same. How else would they have entered the Colosseum to be eaten by lions or live in the middle of deserts, mortifying their wills, if they did not have complete and angelic faith? For those who were doing these things, faith was a given. Likewise, if we are willing to give our lives confessing Christ is the Lord, than let us talk of greater things. Let us spend our time together speaking of the Majesty and Glory of God! You believe. So do I! Now let us live in Christ, becoming martyrs for one another, and share in His Love and in His Light! Wouldn't this be a greater way to use our time?


Without faith, The Bible, to me, seems quite clear that everything must be built upon faith. Along w/ repentance, faith is both the starting point and is at the core of all that we do. It is, after all, impossible to please God w/o it.This is the Apostolic Faith.


Where do you see faith fitting into the picture?At it's very core.

[David Lindblom]

To my understanding the Church has never condemned the idea of universal salvation in general. Origens specific understanding of universal salvation which appears to have been based on certain philosophical presuppositions may have been condemned at an ecumenical council but that doesn't imply that all "theories" (for lack of a better term) of universal salvation have been condemned.


I say "may" have been condemned because there is some debate as to if the condemnations of Origen and Evagrius were done properly and if they were accepted as authoritative by the Church. I believe someone has already pointed out some of the "irregularities" in this condemnation on another thread. Personally I have trouble believing Evagrius was a heretic when he was quoted as an authority by so many of the Holy Fathers and one of his writings is in even in the Philokalia . Origen was honored by even more of the Fathers including such pillars of Orthodoxy as Sts Athanasius and Chrysostem. How could the Church condemn someone (hundreds of years after their death) when they were previously accepted by so many of the Fathers as great men of the Church? It seems that these condemnations was spearheaded not by the Bishops but by the emperor as well.

As a side note I should say that I'm not trying to defend Origens specific theory apocatastasis.

Be that as it may, it doesn't deal w/ the many glaring scriptures that state that damnation is eternal. I don't see this fact as being a sign that God is merciless but that He respects human freedom. It's like my priest said in a homily a few weeks back...if you really want to go to hell, you can. But then again, I don't want to debate the point but would prefer to stay w/ the subject of my OP. Again, thanks for replying and by all means keep posting!

[David Lindblom]

Dear David,

We are all playing catch up!

Perhaps because without faith, there is no foundation! If it appears to be barely mentioned in Orthodox discussion forums or in the writings of modern Orthodox authors, it's because in orthodox theology, faith is a given. The Kingdom of God has its foundation in faith. It is what Christ said He would build His Church on.

In many of the patristic writings, it was the same. How else would they have entered the Colosseum to be eaten by lions or live in the middle of deserts, mortifying their wills, if they did not have complete and angelic faith? For those who were doing these things, faith was a given. Likewise, if we are willing to give our lives confessing Christ is the Lord, than let us talk of greater things. Let us spend our time together speaking of the Majesty and Glory of God! You believe. So do I! Now let us live in Christ, becoming martyrs for one another, and share in His Love and in His Light! Wouldn't this be a greater way to use our time?

This is the Apostolic Faith.

At it's very core.

Thanks, that's makes sense. Now that you say it seems like I've heard this very thing stated by my priest back when I was attending catechumin classes. It's very hard to get the Protestant teaching and thinking outta my head but am trying.

[Nicolaj]

Hmm, while I see standard Church teaching in much of this article it is my understanding that the Church clearly teaches that Universal Salvation is heretical. There are several scriptures that clearly teach that Gehenna is eternal and that there is no repentance after death. It is from the mouth of Jesus Himself that we see that the saved will be less in number than those who reject His salvation and that the torment of the damned is eternal. I'm not disputing that the source of the torments in the Lake of Fire are those people's reaction or experience of God's love but it is the wish of the damned themselves to hate that love. As C.S. Lewis said the Gates of Hell are locked from the inside.

Thanks for your response though.

If you had read the article you would have read this:
"We would not identify Isaac’s idea of the universal salvation with Origen’s teaching on the apokatastasis ton panton (restoration of all). In Origen, universal restoration is not the end of the world, but a passing phase from one created world to another, which will come into existence after the present world has come to its end. This idea is alien to Christian tradition and unknown to Isaac."

So please do read something before making noise!

In Christ, Nicolaj

[Scott Pierson]

the many glaring scriptures that state that damnation is eternal.It uses the term "aionion" (or age enduring) which does not necessarily (and in fact often doesn't) have the same meaning as the English term "eternal".

St Gregory of Nyssa apparently didn't understand it as implying "eternal" or "everlasting" and he had a good grasp of both the Greek language and the Christian faith.

"Whoever considers the divine power will plainly perceive that it is able at length to restore by means of the aionion purging and atoning sufferings, those who have gone even to this extremity of wickedness." St Gregory of Nyssa

Interestingly Bible translation that translate it as eternal in relation to hell often do not consistently translate it as such in other instances . Ex Romans 16:25 "Now to him who is able to strengthen you(B (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%2016:25&version=ESV#cen-ESV-28345B)) according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ,(C (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%2016:25&version=ESV#cen-ESV-28345C)) according to the revelation of the mystery(D (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%2016:25&version=ESV#cen-ESV-28345D)) that was kept secret for(E (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%2016:25&version=ESV#cen-ESV-28345E)) long ages" (ESV). Here aionion is "long ages" because obviously it couldn't have been kept secret everlastingly if we know it now!

[David Lindblom]

If you had read the article you would have read this:
"We would not identify Isaac’s idea of the universal salvation with Origen’s teaching on the apokatastasis ton panton (restoration of all). In Origen, universal restoration is not the end of the world, but a passing phase from one created world to another, which will come into existence after the present world has come to its end. This idea is alien to Christian tradition and unknown to Isaac."

So please do read something before making noise!

In Christ, Nicolaj

And perhaps you could display a slightly more patient tone to your posts as would be fitting your ending phrase ..in Christ..

I did indeed read that part of the article. Nevertheless, while I'm only a year old convert to Orthodoxy, I have yet to hear anything that would indicate the Church believes that at some point in time all will be saved, quite the opposite. If I'm wrong I'm ready to be shown.

[David Lindblom]

It uses the term "aionion" (or age enduring) which does not necessarily (and in fact often doesn't) have the same meaning as the English term "eternal".

St Gregory of Nyssa apparently didn't understand it as implying "eternal" or "everlasting" and he had a good grasp of both the Greek language and the Christian faith.

"Whoever considers the divine power will plainly perceive that it is able at length to restore by means of the aionion purging and atoning sufferings, those who have gone even to this extremity of wickedness." St Gregory of Nyssa

Interestingly Bible translation that translate it as eternal in relation to hell often do not consistently translate it as such in other instances . Ex Romans 16:25 "Now to him who is able to strengthen you(B (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%2016:25&version=ESV#cen-ESV-28345B)) according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ,(C (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%2016:25&version=ESV#cen-ESV-28345C)) according to the revelation of the mystery(D (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%2016:25&version=ESV#cen-ESV-28345D)) that was kept secret for(E (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%2016:25&version=ESV#cen-ESV-28345E)) long ages" (ESV). Here aionion is "long ages" because obviously it couldn't have been kept secret everlastingly if we know it now!

But this can be the problem w/ word studies. Something like Strongs only shows a range of meanings for a given word, context then will show which of these meanings are the correct one. For example using the word aionion in this vs.:

Matt. 25:46
46 And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.

Both instances of the word eternal are the greek word aionion. The text is equating the eternal nature of the righteous as being the same for the damned. Like they say, what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

[Aidan Kimel]

David, perhaps you may find this article of interest: Salvation by Christ (http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/frag_salv.aspx).

[Owen Jones]

I have come to appreciate An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith more and more, and yet it's interesting that there is no chapter on salvation as such. It's more like something that is woven into the fabric of the whole.

[Owen Jones]

So this is an inexact exposition by Owen Jones:

To be saved implies we are being saved from SOMETHING or SOMEONE. What or Who? We are saved from the Devil and his demons who attempt to control our every thought and effort and twist our minds into rationalizing and justifying our evil thoughts and actions. The Fathers knew that the Devil is very cunning and so just being Baptised is no guarantee of this. One must engage in ascetical warfare. However, this cannot be conducted with our power or will, but only with God's power and will. Which requires, first and foremost, obedience to the commandments. So there is no salvation apart from voluntarily practicing the virtues that Christ Himself practiced.

We are also saved from the results of the demonic powers and their grip over us: corruption and death. We die to the world. We exist in the world as if already dead and thereby participate in Christ's resurrected, glorified body, and when our material bodies fall asleep, our souls, combined with our spiritual bodies, ascend with Him. What saves us? God uses every means at his disposal, which is why there is no systematic, dogmatic treatment of salvation by an Orthodox Synod, Council or theologian, to my knowledge. The preached Word saves. The sacraments save. Christ's sacrifice on the Cross saves. God's mercy saves. Our prayers and ascetical efforts save. And so on...

But the best short definition? Salvation is God's Beauty applied to ourselves.

[David Lindblom]

David, perhaps you may find this article of interest: Salvation by Christ (http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/frag_salv.aspx).

Thanks for the link. I've seen it before and read part of it but I will re-read it.

What I'm trying to nail down is what is the dividing line between what Christ accomplished and what we are, individually, to accomplish. What's His part and what's our part.

[Mary]

Thanks for the link. I've seen it before and read part of it but I will re-read it.

What I'm trying to nail down is what is the dividing line between what Christ accomplished and what we are, individually, to accomplish. What's His part and what's our part.

This has also been a constant question of mine, because my protestant brain cells need to know something in exactness.

I think, the answer is - 100%. His part is all of it - and He accomplished it. Our part is also all of it, and we fail to accomplish it, all the time. He gave His all, in return - we give our all. We don't do it because we have to, we do it because we love Him. So everytime we don't, we have to find out what it is that is stealing our love from Him. (He said somewhere, that if we love Him, we will obey Him.)

Sorry I can't come up with a more brilliant answer. Only simple things stick to me. =)

In Christ,
Mary.

[Aidan Kimel]

You may also find these podcasts of interest: Fr Thomas Hopko on the Wrath of God (http://fatherstephen.wordpress.com/2009/10/26/hopko-on-the-wrath-of-god/).

[Herman Blaydoe]

Thanks for the link. I've seen it before and read part of it but I will re-read it.

What I'm trying to nail down is what is the dividing line between what Christ accomplished and what we are, individually, to accomplish. What's His part and what's our part.

His part was to give the Gift. Our part is to accept it.

Or so it seems to this bear of little brain.

Herman the Pooh

[Michael Stickles]

What I'm trying to nail down is what is the dividing line between what Christ accomplished and what we are, individually, to accomplish. What's His part and what's our part.

Just wanted to note that two words in that statement can be hidden traps when looking at salvation - "individually" and "accomplish". If thinking of what I must do "individually" shifts my perspective on salvation so I see Jesus and myself, but not the Church, I've lost the proper perspective. And if focusing on what I must "accomplish" leads me to only treat "success" as valuable rather than the struggle itself, I've again lost the proper perspective.

In Christ,
Michael

[David Lindblom]

You may also find these podcasts of interest: Fr Thomas Hopko on the Wrath of God (http://fatherstephen.wordpress.com/2009/10/26/hopko-on-the-wrath-of-god/).

I've listened to the first one and will probably listen to part 2 tomorrow. Unfortunately, I found his teaching on a number of points to be incoherent and different from the classic Orthodox view. I'd be curious as to how others here think of his teaching.

[David Lindblom]

Just wanted to note that two words in that statement can be hidden traps when looking at salvation - "individually" and "accomplish". If thinking of what I must do "individually" shifts my perspective on salvation so I see Jesus and myself, but not the Church, I've lost the proper perspective. And if focusing on what I must "accomplish" leads me to only treat "success" as valuable rather than the struggle itself, I've again lost the proper perspective.

In Christ,
Michael

I see what you mean. Choosing the right words to convey one's meaning can be tricky. No where is this more true than in theological matters. This whole series here is helping me to fine tune my words to not only get across what I'm trying to say but in learning how to express the Faith in an accurate manner.

I like what you said about accomplish. That's a very good and comforting point. Thank you. As far as my use of the word individually I guess I'm trying to figure out and put into words what it is that we must do. I realize that salvation is a corporate thing but nonetheless there is that which I/you must struggle to do/be. So in a sense, what is for me to work at is the same as that which the Church must work at. No?