Theosis in Soloviev and Berdyaev

“Theosis in Soloviev and Berdyaev” will look at the deification concepts of these Russian philosophers. Deification ideas in both these writers had a strong social side and included a sharp critique of institutional churches. Sources that influenced each author will be examined. In speaking of deification, both thinkers drew upon the philosophy of Jacob Boehme. Both Soloviev and Berdyaev affirmed Orthodox principles but reacted against the authoritarianism of the Russian Orthodox hierarchy and wanted the church to return to its legitimate spiritual mission of fostering the Kingdom of God on earth. I first examine Soloviev, reacting, in part, to Jeremy Pilch’s penetrating study of Soloviev’s use of Maximus the Confessor during Soloviev’s middle and late periods. Soloviev pictures deification as a restoration of harmony with God. I argue that Soloviev also drew upon Origen’s concept of apokatastasis, which relates to theosis. Boehme’s philosophy is briefly examined in order to highlight what the two philosophers utilized from him. Berdyaev‘s philosophy is studied, including his usage of Boehme’s notion of the Ungrund. Ruth Coates offers a sophisticated analysis of Berdyaev. I argue that Berdyaev’s work is prophetic rather than Nietzschean. Berdyaev articulates a strongly theistic and anti-Nietzschean philosophy of cooperation with God. For both thinkers, deification is initiated by God, but free human cooperation is required for it to be realized. Both authors assert that Christ made deification possible. Both authors speak of a deification of the flesh, although their meaning is unclear.