Defenses of Torrance’s theosis focus on showing that it (1) preserves Creator–creature distinction, (2) can be coordinated with Reformed justification and non‑universalism, and (3) is responsibly patristic rather than speculative.
## 1. Creator–creature distinction is preserved
– Habets emphasizes that for Torrance the hypostatic union means that in Christ “the Triune God and humanity dwell in each other in mutual personal satisfaction” *without loss of creaturely status, nor blurring of the Creator–creature distinctives*.[1]
– Torrance’s preferred grammar is union, communion, participation, atoning exchange, not “becoming God”; theosis names a participatory relation grounded in Christ’s incarnate person, not an elevation of human essence into the Godhead.[2][1]
## 2. Theosis and Reformed justification
– Defenders argue that Torrance’s heavy “objective” emphasis (Christ justifies, sanctifies, and adopts humanity in himself) is *Calvinian in structure*: union with Christ is primary; justification by faith is the Spirit‑given subjective participation in what is already true in Christ.[3][1]
– Habets grants that Torrance under‑develops the subjective side, but maintains that a coherent model is available once one reads his theosis as a “controlling metaphor” coordinated with classic Reformed union‑with‑Christ theology rather than as a replacement for justification.[4][1]
## 3. Against charges of implied universalism
– Oliver Crisp famously argues that Torrance’s structures tend toward universalism, but acknowledges that Torrance explicitly and repeatedly rejects universalism as a rationalist “blasphemy” parallel to limited atonement.[5][6][7]
– Defenses reply that for Torrance the universal range and sufficiency of Christ’s reconciling work do not entail its universal *effectiveness*; faith‑union (by the Spirit) is still necessary for personal participation, and the “mystery” of unbelief cannot be logically domesticated.[7][8][9]
## 4. Patristic grounding and dogmatic controls
– Habets and others stress that Torrance’s theosis is tightly controlled by Athanasian and Nicene commitments: homoousion, unassumed‑unhealed, and a non‑negotiable Creator–creature distinction shape his soteriology from the outset.[1][2][3]
– This patristic grounding, plus his insistence on divine freedom and the contingency of salvation history, is cited to show that his theosis is not speculative metaphysics but a disciplined development of classic Trinitarian–Christological dogma.[10][3]
## 5. Internal, constructive self‑critique
– Habets’s own work is often read as a *friendly defense with refinements*: he affirms Torrance’s basic model of theosis while calling for stronger pneumatology, clearer account of Christ’s assumption of fallen nature, and a more explicit integration of subjective faith and sanctification.[11][4][1]
– The upshot: most defenders do not deny the pressure points critics identify; they argue these are areas for further development rather than indications that Torrance’s theosis is incompatible with Nicene or Reformed orthodoxy.[4][1]
Sources
[1] Theosis in the Theology of Thomas Torrance: A Review | https://jasongoroncy.com/2010/
[2] Theosis in the Theology of Thomas Forsyth Torrance – By Myk Habets https://onlinelibrary.wiley.
[3] [PDF] THE TRINITARIAN SOTERIOLOGY OF THOMAS F. TORRANCE A … https://pure.manchester.ac.uk/
[4] Theosis in the Theology of Thomas Torrance https://elmhurst.ecampus.com/
[5] [PDF] T. F. Torrance on theosis and universal salvation https://research-repository.
[6] T. F. Torrance on theosis and universal salvation https://research-portal.st-
[7] Revisiting J. A. T. Robinson and T. F. Torrance on Universal Salvation https://afkimel.wordpress.com/
[8] Torrance, Universalism and the Limited Atonement https://growrag.wordpress.com/
[9] Universalism vs. participation in Christ – The Surprising God https://thesurprisinggodblog.
[10] Atonement by Union: Probing Crisp’s Union Account with John Owen https://www.
[11] ‘The danger of vertigo’ : an evaluation and critique of Theosis in the … https://ourarchive.otago.ac.
[12] Theosis in the Theology of Thomas Torrance – 1st Edition – Myk Habets https://www.routledge.com/
[13] Theosis in the Theology of Thomas Torrance | Myk Habets https://www.taylorfrancis.com/
[14] The Patristic Calvinists versus the Medieval … – Athanasian Reformed https://growrag.wordpress.com/
[15] Three Persons, One Being (by T.F. Torrance) – The Surprising God https://thesurprisinggodblog.
[16] Theosis in the Theology of Thomas Torrance: Special Offer https://growrag.wordpress.com/
[17] Thomas Forsyth Torrance | Qualitative Theology https://qualitativetheology.
[18] Defining Theosis | Theology Forum – WordPress.com https://theologyforum.
