ICA,
I must say that it is clear that the EO belief, though stated in terms sounding much like those of he LCM, is nothing like it. And it is probably easiest to see that, as intended, it is essentially true. But, like the LCM, it is the unique way of stating it that is the problem. The scripture really does not provide as statement that we obtain divinity, but rather that we become like him (Christ). Like. Not of similar essence or stature.
In other words, I am not sure but what the way the EO speaks of it may be obscuring the true intent and turning the focus.
But this one statement I do really like:
Quote:
|
Sin is sickness, a self-perpetuating illness which distorts the whole human being and corrupts the image of God.
|
This is the truth of the purpose of man as the one bearing the image of God that is mostly ignored. It is understood as spiritually so and left at that. It is mostly ignored that the failure to live the image of God and not just claim eternally to have it is the purpose of man "from the beginning."
While God is present in the world, and it is possible to realize him from the created world, the real presence of God is in the people who claim to be his followers. The followers of Christ. But we to often do not follow Christ. We learn the best doctrines and can debate them with learned theologians. But how are we living before man? What is the God that is seen in the world?
We were not created to bear the image of God back to Himself. Rather we were created to bear the image of God to the world.
To borrow from a TV psychologist, "How's that workin'?"
And for the EO, it would seem that there is not much to say. They seem so consumed with being separate from the world around them. Hard to see any kind of image there. Lots of talk about being incarnated. But for what?