[UntoHim]

Where is LSM’s Great ‘High Peak Revival’?
Lessons from Orthodoxy
Nigel Tomes

In his final years Witness Lee [Li Changshou 李常受 1905-97] adopted Orthodoxy’s deification dogma --‘God became man to make man God’ (theosis). He called it “the highest peak of the divine revelation in the entire Bible.”0 Deification, he proclaimed, is “the ‘diamond’ in the ‘box’ of the Bible,”1 and he roundly condemned Christians who “care for...the ‘box,’ but...have not seen and do not appreciate the ‘diamond’ [i.e., deification].” W. Lee also asserted that this doctrine would produce a “new revival, a revival which has never been seen in man's history,”2 “the greatest revival in the history of the church,”3 “the highest revival, and probably the last revival before the Lord’s coming back.”3 LSM’s deification dogma was supposed to issue in a great ‘high peak’ revival. Witness Lee proclaimed: “This truth...may be the last item that the Lord needs to recover...This will bring in a new revival which has never been seen in history, and this will end this age.”4 He also declared:5

“Since we have seen such a high peak of the divine revelation [i.e., deification], we need to put into practice what we have seen. Our practice will have a success, and that success will be a new revival—the highest revival, and probably the last revival before the Lord’s coming back...If we practice what we have heard, spontaneously a model will be built up. This model will be the greatest revival in the history of the church. I believe that this revival will bring the Lord back.”

Where’s the Revival?

Over two decades have elapsed since these words were spoken. In the interim Witness Lee’s ‘high peak’ teaching have been sliced & diced, regularly reiterated at LSM’s “Seven annual Feasts,” and republished as Holy Word for Morning Revival [HWMR], diligently memorized and loyally recited (“prophesied”) by the LSM faithful. We ask: where is LSM’s promised ‘great high peak revival’?

I am not well informed about the Local Church’s situation in the Orient—‘the Shouters’ [呼喊派* hūhǎn pài] in mainland China & the “Assembly Hall Churches” elsewhere in Asia. In the Occident, however, there are no observable signs of revival in the “Lord’s Recovery.” Of course LSM’s “blended brothers” could always blame “the saints,” charging “you have not practiced it;” but, that is unfair.

Orthodox Christianity--the Historical Data

I maintain that abundant data6 already exists supporting the null hypothesis that the deification dogma does not produce revival. These data are the 1,000-year historical record of the Orthodox Church. While deification was neglected by the Western Church (Catholic, Protestant, etc) it remained central to the Orthodox Church. Michael Horton says “Deification (theosis)...is a central theme of Eastern Orthodox soteriology.”7 If this doctrine is the “diamond in the box” (as W. Lee alleged) the Orthodox Church has focused on the deification “diamond,” while the rest of Christianity focused on the “box.” Therefore Orthodoxy ought to display some evidence of God’s blessing—vitality, revival, spread and/or increase—if these claims are correct. What does the historical record show?8

Eastern Orthodoxy vs. Western Christianity

The ‘Great Church’ split in two over a millennium ago. Patrick Johnston reports that “The ‘Great Schism’ of AD 1054 divided the Eastern & Western Church. Then [in AD 1054] 54% of all Christians were ‘Orthodox.’ But big losses to Islam and Catholicism followed and today [2000] only 10% of [global] Christians are Orthodox.”9 Scholars deduce that, at the time of the split, a majority (54%) of the global Christians belonged to the Eastern Church; at that juncture the Orthodox Church of the East out-numbered the Western Church. By 2000, however, the Orthodox Church represented only 10% of the world’s Christians. These trends are not indicative of vitality or revival in Orthodoxy. No doubt the Orthodox faced a greater challenge from Islam, but they also lost members to Catholicism.

Orthodoxy’s 20th-Century Decline

The overall downward trend of Orthodoxy continued in the 20th century. Researchers Todd Johnson, & Cindy Wu report that “Since 1900 Orthodox...[has] declined as percentages of the population, both within Christianity and globally. Orthodoxy, decimated by the rise of communism, dropped from over 7% of the global population [in 1900] to 4% today [2015]. At the same time the Orthodox fell from 21% (20.8%) [of all Christians in 1900] to less than 12% (11.7%) of all Christians [in 2015].”10 The precipitous decline of Orthodoxy’s representation—by nine percentage points--occurred against the backdrop of relative stability of Christianity’s share of the world’s population—“In 1900 it was 34.5% of the global population, and today (2015) it is 33.0%,”11 Johnson & Wu report.

By comparison, since 1900 Roman Catholics & mainline Protestants have been relatively stable both as a % of global population and as a % of Christianity. However, some ‘sectors’ of Christianity have grown dramatically. ‘Independent Christians’ (non-denominational ‘free groups’) “rose meteorically,” Johnson & Wu say.12 This group, ‘independents,’ “represented only 1.6% of Christians in 1900 but rose meteorically to over 17% in 2015. Their share of the global population also increased from 0.5% to 5.7%.” The data viewed from another angle show “Renewalists” (Pentecostals, Charismatics) grew from 0.2% to 26.6% of all Christians in the same period. They also grew as a % of global population.13

‘Old World’ Christianity—Europe

The figures above are global; they take into account the successful spread of the Christian faith from its historical centers in Europe and the Near East to Asia, Africa & the Americas. Over the ‘long haul’ Catholicism spread via the Portuguese, Spanish & French colonies; Protestants, evangelicals and Pentecostals spread via the ‘missionary movement’ of recent centuries. Notably absent is the global spread of the Orthodox Christian faith; mission is missing. “Orthodoxy has historically never been a missionary tradition,” observes John L. Allen.14 The 19th century was the “Great Century of Missions”15 for Protestant Christians; it had no equivalent among Orthodox Christianity in the East.

In the course of the 20th century the number of Christians in Europe grew at the low rate of 0.38%. Anglicans & mainline Protestants grew at below average rates. Orthodox rose only slightly above average (0.42%). Meanwhile, Roman Catholics grew at 1% (above average), while ‘independents’ (non-denominational) rose rapidly at 5.75%. Even on their European ‘home turf,’ Eastern Orthodoxy has not exhibited vibrant signs of growth, even accounting for communism’s collapse in E. Europe.16

‘Old World’ Christianity—Middle East

Orthodoxy’s share of the regional population in the Middle East fell from 11.8% in 1910 to 2.7% in 2010, due in part to emigration and also conversion to Protestant and Independent expressions of Christianity. Further Orthodox declines are anticipated. But not all forms of Christianity are in decline in the Middle East. Roman Catholic representation increased from 10% in 1910 to 30% in 2010, partly due to large numbers of Catholic guest workers (e.g. Filipinos in Saudi Arabia & Arab Emirates).17

‘New World’ Orthodoxy in the Americas

From the start America’s immigrants brought their faith and spread it. The US constitution’s Church-State separation produced a “level playing field” for all religions; none enjoyed a state-sponsored monopoly or ‘most-favored religion’ status. Some Christian groups prospered (e.g. evangelicals), others did not. Orthodoxy falls in the latter category. A 2007 Pew Research survey18 reported that only 0.6% of the US population [under 2M] adheres to the Orthodox Church, compared to 78.5% [236M] identifying as “Christian.” Catholics were 23.9% [72M] and Protestants 51.3% [154M]. In 2007 there were more Buddhists and Jehovah’s Witnesses than members of the US Orthodox Church. Orthodoxy has deification, but they don’t appear to have vitality or evangelism. Moreover, its moribund US condition can’t be attributed to Islam’s persecution or communism’s suppression. Dr. Antonois Kireopolos, observes, “The Orthodox [church] in the US...has often preoccupied itself more with ‘protecting’ a diaspora flock in a self-satisfied isolation than with intentional critical engagement.”19

Orthodoxy—No Signs of Revival

These figures indicate that, if we are looking for data suggestive of revival and vitality among Christian groups, the leading candidates are ‘independent” (e.g. African Independent churches, non-denominational congregations) & Pentecostal/Charismatic Christians. Orthodoxy, despite its deification dogma, is in (relative) decline; there are no (statistical) signs of revival or renewal here.

Looking to the future, Orthodoxy’s prospects are no brighter. For the 20-year period, 2005 to 2025, the world’s Christian population is projected to grow at 1.11%. Independents are projected to increase at 1.64%; Pentecostal/ Charismatics 1.54%; Protestants at 1.26%; evangelicals 1.08%; Roman Catholics at 1.01% and Orthodox (trailing the pack) at 0.6%.20

The Orthodox Church desperately needs revival. Professor Philip Jenkins, looking at population trends (e.g. low birth rates), observes that,21 “The Eastern Orthodox churches will suffer acutely from demographic changes given that the church’s numbers are so heavily concentrated in declining Europe...Without a substantial Orthodox revival, demographic trends mean that the long-term future of that church is in doubt.” Yet evidence suggests Orthodoxy’s deification dogma is an obstacle to renewal. The missionary influx into Russia after communism’s demise brought “wounded accusations from the Russian Orthodox Church—the new missionaries were forgetting Russia’s ancient Christian heritage...they proclaimed an inferior message of original sin and conversion in place of the historic Orthodox doctrine of theosis (divinization)...,”22 reports Professor Mark Noll. This also suggests that LSM’s ‘high gospel’ of deification will have very little purchase among Orthodox populations; it amounts to “shipping coal to Newcastle” (or “importing apples to Washington State.”) Plus Orthodoxy has proved resistant to Charismatic renewal. One observer notes “The Charismatic renewal movement in the Eastern Orthodox Church never exerted the influence that it did in other mainstream churches.”23

Conclusion: Deification — ‘Diamond,’ ‘Dud’ or ‘Distortion’?

Witness Lee portrayed his deification dogma as the “diamond in the box;” it was the last item of truth to be recovered, the capstone completing the Lord’s Recovery, initiating an unprecedented revival. But deification (theosis)—man becoming God—is not a new discovery. It has been at the center of Orthodoxy’s theology & teaching for centuries. If deification is the ‘diamond,’ as W. Lee claimed, there ought to be signs of revival and renewal in the Orthodox Churches (Greek, Russian, Syrian, Coptic, etc). The rest of Christianity (Witness Lee alleged) had only the ‘box.’

We have looked in vain for statistical evidence of vibrancy, revival & renewal in terms of gospel spread via missions & above-average growth for Orthodox variants of the church. We found none. Orthodoxy, despite deification, is in (relative) decline; we found no (statistical) signs of revival or renewal here. This suggests that LSM’s deification dogma is not a ‘diamond;’ rather it is a ‘dud’!

LSM’s Deification -- ‘Diamond’ or ‘Distortion’?

Yet a stronger conclusion seems justified. The Church Fathers’ era, which spawned deification, saw a subtle “shift in emphasis regarding the decisive saving event, from Jesus’ death as atonement for sin, to his birth & incarnation as the divine taking the human into itself. Despite the Pauline insistence that central to the gospel was the affirmation that ‘Christ died for our sins’ (1 Cor. 15:3), the creeds shift the focus from the atoning death to incarnation,”24 says Professor James Dunn. As a result justification was neglected; “In most patristic treatments of [deification] theosis justification plays next to no role at all,”25 Paul Gavrilyuk observes. As Orthodoxy evolved the gospel’s center was displaced due to the deification dogma from Christ’s death & resurrection (1 Cor. 2:2; 15:3-4) to his birth & incarnation. Thus scholars conclude “The incarnation…is the central redemptive event in Eastern Orthodoxy.”26 As a result Christ’s redemptive death is de-emphasized or (for some) dispensed with. Thus Orthodoxy’s Stephen Finlan advocates27 “highlighting...God’s near approach to humanity…through the incarnation of Jesus…but drop[ing] the idea of any magical transaction taking place at the cross [i.e., atonement].” Adam J. Johnson concludes that this shift makes “the incarnation the original and central doctrine of the Christian faith, relegating the atonement to the status of an impure accretion.”28

These observations warn us this is a serious matter; Witness Lee embraced deification, calling it “the diamond in the box,” making it “the thing.” The ‘diamond’ is deification; everything else is merely the ‘box.’ Athanasius’ maxim—“God became man to make man God,” obviously emphasizes incarnation (“God became man...”) and man’s deification (“to make man God”); it does not even mention Christ’s redemptive death on the cross or His resurrection. Hence it shifts the focus, the center of the gospel, away from Christ’s atoning death & resurrection to His birth & incarnation. This was not the Apostle Paul’s focus; compared to his gospel, this is a different gospel, a distorted gospel (Gal. 1:6-7). We maintain that an eviscerated gospel, drained of regenerative power, produces a moribund Church like Orthodoxy. By adopting Orthodoxy’s deification dogma, it appears LSM’s Local Church is following their footsteps. We found no evidence that deification is a catalyst for revival in Orthodoxy and (despite Witness Lee’s prophecies) we see no portents of a ‘high peak revival’ in LSM’s Local Church.

Nigel Tomes,
Toronto, CANADA.
April, 2016


Notes: As always the views expressed here are those of the author alone. They should not be attributed to the believers, elders or churches with whom he is associated. Thanks are extended to those who commented on earlier drafts. This paper reports statistics, hopefully not too many so as to overwhelm readers. Obviously many more statistics could be presented. This writing presents a “macro view using a long time-series of data.” More detailed “micro” analysis of various branches of Orthodoxy in different time periods (centuries) would be useful in providing a fuller picture of the overall “macro trends.” Yet our conclusions are unlikely to be overturned.
0. In context: “Today we have come to this high peak of God’s divine revelation...we have probably reached the highest peak of the divine revelation in the entire Bible. This is the divine revelation discovered by the believers thro’ the past 20 centuries...[1] The 1st divine revelation discovered by the church fathers was...the Triune God...God is three-one, triune... [2] Centuries later Martin Luther ...saw the matter of justification by faith (Rom. 3:28). He discovered that salvation is not by works but by faith. [3] After this, many other students of the Bible made further discoveries. [4] However, before us, no one ever discovered God’s economy with Christ as its centrality & universality & all its reality. It was not until the last 10 years that we put all these things together to have a full picture of God’s economy. This is the highest peak of the divine revelation.” [W. Lee, Living a Life According to the High Peak of God's Revelation, Ch. 5, Sect. 2 (emph. add)]
1. Suppose, W. Lee said, “a certain box, which is quite attractive, contains a large diamond. A child may be interested in the box but not in the diamond. An adult, however, would focus...on the diamond... Today, many Christians care for the Bible as the ‘box,’ but they have not seen & do not appreciate the ‘diamond’ ...and they may even condemn those who... [appreciate] the ‘diamond’ in the ‘box.’ The ‘diamond’ in the ‘box’ of the Bible is the revelation that in Christ God has become man in order that man might become God... The vast majority of today's Christians neglect [this] crucial point in the Bible...” [W. Lee, Life-study of 1 & 2 Sam., pp. 203-204, also in LSM’s Truth Concerning the Ultimate Goal of God's Economy, Ch. 1, Sect. 7] After quoting this passage, LSM’s Ron Kangas berates “J. S.” [John So?] for objecting to W. Lee’s deification dogma, saying, “he [J. S.] not only has an empty ‘box’; he even tries to use the ‘box’ to deny the existence of the ‘diamond’ and to condemn as heretical those who appreciate the ‘diamond’...” [Ron Kangas, Truth Concerning the Ultimate Goal of God's Economy, Ch. 1, Sect. 7] Ron Kangas’ rhetoric only works for the LSM-faithful.
2. “Recently I released...the high peak of God's revelation—the revelation that God became a man so that man may become God in life & in nature (but not in the Godhead)...Now we need to pray that the Lord will give us a new revival, a revival which has never been seen in man's history.” [W. Lee, Life-Study of 1 & 2 Chron., Ch. 1, Sect. 2 (emph. add)]
3. “Since we have seen such a high peak of the divine revelation, we need to put into practice what we have seen. Our practice will have a success, and that success will be a new revival—the highest revival, and probably the last revival before the Lord’s coming back... If we practice what we have heard, spontaneously a model will be built up. This model will be the greatest revival in the history of the church. I believe that this revival will bring the Lord back.” [W. Lee, Living a Life according to the High Peak of God's Revelation, Ch. 5, Sect. 3 (emphasis added)]
4. The quote in context reads: “In the 2nd to the 5th centuries, the church fathers found 3 high mysteries in the Bible: (1) the Triune God, the Divine Trinity, the highest mystery; (2) the person of Christ; & (3) the deification of man—that man could become God in life & in nature but not in the Godhead. However, after the 5th century the truth concerning this last mystery was gradually lost. Using the Nicene Creed, today's Christianity affirms the first 2 mysteries—the mystery of the Divine Trinity & the mystery of Christ's person—but much of Christianity does not see anything about the 3rd mystery.... There is no teaching regarding this among most Christians today. But I feel strongly the Lord is going to recover this truth. As far as the truth is concerned, this may be the last item that the Lord needs to recover... Christians today...do not dare admit that the believers in Christ are God. At the end of this age, we are teaching and preaching the truth that God became a man in order to make man God, the same as He is in life & in nature but not in the Godhead. It is a great blessing to hear this truth....This will bring in a new revival which has never been seen in history, & this will end this age.” [W. Lee, Life-Study of 1 & 2 Chron., Ezra, Neh., & Esther, Ch. 4, St. 3 (emph. added)]
5. W. Lee, Living a Life according to the High Peak of God's Revelation, Ch. 5, Sect. 3, July, 1994 (emphasis added)
6. We propose to examine data on the number of Christians to validate LSM’s claims. LSM themselves appeal to measurable data to quantify the legacies of Watchman Nee & Witness Lee. For e.g. a Congressional statement regarding the spread the Lord’s Recovery to Russia & Eastern Europe, says that as a result W. Lee/LSM & Local Church efforts there are “200 churches and several thousand believers in Russia and the Russian-speaking world.” [Statement by Joseph (Joe) R. Pitts of Pennsylvania in the US House of Representatives, Tuesday, April 29, 2014] An earlier statement regarding Watchman Nee’s impact in measurable terms notes “Today more than 3,000 churches outside of China, including several hundred in the United States, look to him as one of their religious and theological leaders.” [Hon. Christopher H. Smith, US Congressional Record—Extensions of Remarks, July 31, 2009, p. E2110]
7. Michael Horton says “Deification (theosis)...is the central theme of Eastern Orthodox soteriology.” [Michael Horton, The Christian Faith: A Systematic Theology for Pilgrims on the Way, p. ] Similarly Daniel L. Migliore, says “Deification Theosis is a central theme of Eastern Orthodox theology and spirituality, summed up in the familiar statement of Athanasius: ‘God became human that we might become divine’.” [Daniel L. Migliore, Faith Seeking Understanding: An Introduction to Christian Theology, 3rd ed. p. ] Burgess & Gros write, For the Orthodox theosis is a central theological & religious idea.” [Joseph A. Burgess, Jeffrey Gros, Growing Consensus: Church Dialogues in the United States, 1962-1991, Vol. 1, p. 359]
8. World Christian Database data show the impact of the Great Awakenings in the US & Europe. The “First Great Awakening” 1725 in New England. The “Second Great Awakening” 1792- The “Third Great Awakening” or “Evangelical Awakening” 1857/59- etc. [David B. Barrett, Todd M. Johnson, World Christian Trends, AD 30-AD 2200:..., Vol. 1]
9. Patrick Johnston, Future of the Global Church: History, Trends & Possibilities, p. 115. Note that in these data the category, “Orthodox Churches” describes two distinct church families: the Eastern Orthodox Church [14 independent Orthodox Churches, e.g. Greek Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, etc.] and Oriental Orthodox [e.g. Coptic Orthodox, Syrian Orthodox, etc] which do not share communion with each other. See for e.g. Maria Hämmerli, & Jean-François Maye (eds.) Orthodox Identities in Western Europe: Migration, Settlement & Innovation, p. 2
10. Todd M. Johnson, Cindy M. Wu, Our Global Families: Christians.. in a Changing World, Table 1.2, p. 8
11. Todd M. Johnson, Cindy M. Wu, Our Global Families: Christians ...in a Changing World, Table 1.2, p. 7
12. Todd M. Johnson, Cindy M. Wu, Our Global Families: Christians ...in a Changing World, Table 1.2, pp. 8-9
13. “Renewalists” (Pentecostals & Charismatics) grew from 0.1% of global population in 1900 to 8.8% in 2015. Todd M. Johnson, Cindy M. Wu, Our Global Families: Christians ...in a Changing World, Table 1.2, p. 9. “Renewalists” (Pentecostals & Charismatics) represent another ‘cut’ of the data many Charismatics are also ‘independent.’
14. John L. Allen, Future Church: How Ten Trends Are Revolutionizing the Catholic Church, pp. 169-170. The quote in context reads: “Unlike Catholicism, Methodism, Anglicanism & other Christian tradition, Orthodoxy has historically never been a missionary tradition.” [John L. Allen, Future Church: How Ten Trends Are Revolutionizing the Catholic Church, pp. 169-170 (emphasis added)]
15. Andrew F. Walls, the historian of missions, notes that Yale University Professor “Latourette rightly calls the 19th century ‘The Great Century of Missions.’ But in no part of the world did that century see such a striking outcome as in North America. The main missionary achievement of the 19th century was the Christianizing of the US.” [Andrew F. Walls, Missionary Movement in Christian History: Studies in the Transmission of Faith, p. ]
16. In the period 1970 to 1990/95 the number of Orthodox Christians in Europe rose significantly from 107.126 M in 1970 to 155.120 M in 1990 & 156.451 M in 1995. This one-time ‘step upwards’ appears to account for most of the century’s increase. Going forward Orthodox growth is projected at 0.19% (slightly above the overall average Christian growth of 0.15%). [David B. Barrett, Todd M. Johnson, World Christian Trends, AD 30-AD 2200..., Vol. 1, Table 10.1, p. 383]
17. Brian J, Grim, Todd M. Johnson, (eds.) Yearbook of International Religious Demography 2015, p. 159
18. Reported in United States Demographics - Part A, p. 87. The lack of growth in the Orthodox Church in the East (E. Europe & the Middle East) may be due to 20th century communism & the strength of Islam. But, neither of these factors comes into play in the US. The small size & lack of growth in the US Orthodox must be due to other factors.
19. Dr. Antonois Kireopolos, “Case Study” in Kirsteen Kim, Andrew Anderson (eds.) Edinburgh 2010: Mission Today and Tomorrow, p. 100 (emphasis added) The quote reads: “The Orthodox experience in the US...has often preoccupied itself more with ‘protecting’ a diaspora flock in a self-satisfied isolation than with intentional critical engagement.”
20. Todd M. Johnson, Peter F. Crossing, & Bobby Jangsun Ryu, Looking Forward: An Overview of World Evangelization, 2005-2025 (A special report for the Lausanne 2004 Forum on World Evangelization Center for the Study of Global Christianity) Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, pp. 8-9. In these data, “evangelicals” are “great commission Christians,” a broader category than “Evangelicals (theological definition)” who are projected to grow at 2.03%
21. Philip Jenkins, The Next Christendom: The Coming of Global Christianity, pp. 119-20
22. Mark A. Noll, The New Shape of World Christianity, p. 96
23. Author? , Church Schism & Corruption, p. 329
24. James D. G. Dunn, Neither Jew Nor Greek: A Contested Identity, p. 822. Elsewhere Professor James Dunn observes that the “Theosis, ‘deification,’ of humans is made much of in Orthodox Christianity...No doubt this can be attributed to the influence of Greek thought, particularly the Platonic idea that there is a spiritual part in humanity that really belongs to the heavenly world and that can recover its true, godlike nature.” [James D. G. Dunn, Did the First Christians Worship Jesus? The New Testament Evidence, p. 89] Dunn attributes theosis to pagan (Greek) thought.
25. Paul L. Gavrilyuk, “The Retrieval of Deification: How a Once-despised Archaism became an Ecumenical Disideratum,” Modern Theology, Vol. 25:4 (Oct. 2009) p. 653. “In most patristic treatments of theosis justification plays next to no role at all…” He also says “’deification by grace alone through faith alone’ has very little purchase in Eastern Orthodoxy.” Moreover, Gavrilyuk, questions Orthodoxy’s notion that deification applies to all God’s creatures/ creation, saying, “All things participate in God, but only rational beings can be justified…therefore the notion of justification cannot encompass deification.” [Paul L. Gavrilyuk, “The Retrieval of Deification: How a Once-despised Archaism became an Ecumenical Disideratum,” Modern Theology, Vol. 25:4 (Oct. 2009) p. 653]
26. Kelly M. Kapic, & Bruce L. McCormack, Mapping Modern Theology: A Thematic & Historical Introduction, p. 285
27. Adam J. Johnson reports that Stephen Finlan asks: “‘What happens if we restate the divine Incarnation of Jesus, thereby highlighting the fact of God’s near approach to humanity…through the Incarnation of Jesus…but drop the idea of any magical transaction taking place at the cross [i.e., any traditional theory of atonement]?’ Finlan touts [Adam J. Johnson says]…making the incarnation the original and central doctrine of the Christian faith, relegating the atonement to the status of an impure accretion.” [Adam J. Johnson, Atonement: A Guide for the Perplexed, pp. 84-85 quoting (interior quote) Stephen Finlan, “Problems with the Atonement: The Origins of, & Controversy About, the Atonement Doctrine,” p. 119, & also citing pp. 117-120 (emphasis added—indicates the portion quoted in main text)]
28. Adam J. Johnson, Atonement: A Guide for the Perplexed, pp. 84-85. Adam J. Johnson says (via this proposal) Stephen “Finlan touts …making the incarnation the original and central doctrine of the Christian faith, relegating the atonement to the status of an impure accretion.” [Adam J. Johnson, Atonement: A Guide for the Perplexed, pp. 84-85]

------------------------------------------------------------