St Augustine Admits That Deification Was Taught

[Drewm777]

Read it for yourself:

But God forbid that we should meet him with such an assertion as he says certain persons advance against him: "That man is placed on an equality with God, if he is described as being without sin;" as if indeed an angel, because he is without sin, is put in such an equality. For my own part, I am of this opinion that the creature will never become equal with God, even when so perfect a holiness shall be accomplished in us, that it shall be quite incapable of receiving any addition. No; all who maintain that our progress is to be so complete that we shall be changed into the substance of God, and that we shall thus become what He is, should look well to it how they build up their opinion; for myself I must confess that I am not persuaded of this.

(On Nature and Grace, chapter 37)

What do you think of this?

[phaedrus ut]

Drew,

I don't have the text but I was wondering in the broader context of the paragraph you quoted. It's clear that St. Augustine is speaking about his disagreement with those that believe that but who are "they"? Is it clear that these are fellow Christians and not pagans?

Phaedrus

[urroner]

I find it interesting that, at least here, he said "I must confess that I am not persuaded of this" and he didn't say he rejected it.

[Drewm777]

This is from his book "On Nature and Grace" which was written against Pelagius (a fellow Christian).

I quoted "chapter 37" in its entirity.

[urroner]

This is from his book "On Nature and Grace" which was written against Pelagius (a fellow Christian).

I quoted "chapter 37" in its entirity.

Here is the whole thing: On Nature and Grace

On Nature and Grace

A TREATISE ON NATURE AND GRACE, AGAINST PELAGIUS; BY AURELIUS AUGUSTIN, BISHOP OF HIPPO; CONTAINED IN ONE BOOK, ADDRESSED TO TIMASIUS AND JACOBUS. WRITTEN IN THE YEAR OF OUR LORD 415.

[3DOP]

Drewm777

No; all who maintain that our progress is to be so complete that we shall be changed into the substance of God, and that we shall thus become what He is, should look well to it how they build up their opinion; for myself I must confess that I am not persuaded of this.

(On Nature and Grace, chapter 37)

What do you think of this?

3DOP

First, I think that beyond all question deification was and always has been taught. (I Jn. 3:2,3) St Augustine apparently was not convinced that all of the divine attributes are communicable. But notice that he didn't pronounce them wrong. I think it is good advice to "look well as to how they build their opinion" who hold that all of the divine attributes will be communicated to the deified. As a Catholic, my position is the same as Augustine's. But I must note there is no canonical authority which has ever condemned "full deification" to my knowledge, and I would say that it is permitted for Catholics to hold an opinion counter to St Augustine and myself. I remain skeptically open to well-built opinions in favor of "full deification".

But secondly, I think if Mormons would consider well what he describes as being "changed into the same substance" (consubstantial, one in being with, or homoousious) means, you will find that you should have no quibble with the Nicene Creed when it says that Jesus is the same substance as the Father. If you think that you can have the same being as the Father, how can you doubt that Jesus has it?

3DOP

[Pantsman]

I believe that this is speaking of Theosis which has always been a doctrine of the Church and still is. Although more prominantly focused on in the Eatern Orthodox and Eatern Catholic Churches (Eastern Catholic are in full union with the Bishop of Rome), but still an orthodox teaching of the historic Christian Churches. To what level I don't know, we never become greater than God of course but when we partake of the presence of God how does one partake in some of God in Heaven? Are we made one with God, consubstantial? If we are one with God then we are fully within God, and God fully within us. The Mormon doctrine of becoming a seperate god and being a subordinate god to God while running your own planet is something completely different from what St. Augustine is speaking of.

More on Theosis:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theosis

The idea of Theosis is not some long lost secret, if you think it is you can speak to any Greek Orthodox and he'll tell you all about it. My landlord John the Greek will tell you all about it.

This is the mystery of Christianity, God will make man higher than before the fall, we become like God in all ways except God's divine essence. And this is not a solely LDS concept it's been around for 2,000 years.

[David Waltz]

From my compilation file on deification in the CF's:

Augustine - The City of God 21.16 Accordingly vices are then only to be considered overcome when they are conquered by the love of God, which God Himself alone gives, and which He gives only through the Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who became a partaker of our mortality that He might make us partakers of His divinity. (PNF 2.465)

Augustine â?? On Forgiveness of Sins, and Baptism 2.38 He goes on to add, â??And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us;â? as much as to say, A great thing indeed has been done among them, even that they are born again to God of God, who had before been born of the flesh to the world, although created by God Himself; but a far more wonderful thing has been done that, although it accrued to them by nature to be born of the flesh, but by the divine goodness to be born of God, â?? in order that so great a benefit might be imparted to them, He who was in His own nature born of God, vouchsafed in mercy to be also born of the flesh; â?? no less being meant by the passage, â??And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us.â? Hereby, he says in effect, it has been wrought that we who were born of the flesh as flesh, by being afterwards born of the Spirit, may be spirit and dwell in God; because also God, who was born of God, by being afterwards born of the flesh, became flesh, and dwelt among us. For the Word, which became flesh, was in the beginning, and was God with God. But at the same time His participation in our inferior condition, in order to our participation in His higher state, held a kind of medium in His birth of the flesh; so that we indeed were born in sinful flesh, but He was born in the likeness of sinful flesh, â?? we not only of flesh and blood, but also of the will of man, and of the flesh, but He was born only of flesh and blood, not of the will of man, nor or the will of the flesh, but of God: we, therefore, to die on account of sin, He, to die on our account without sin. So also, just as His inferior circumstances, into which He descended to us, were not in every particular exactly the same with our inferior circumstances, in which He found us here; so our superior state, into which we ascend to Him, will not be quite the same with His superior state, in which we are there to find Him. For we by His grace are to be made the sons of God, whereas He was evermore by nature the Son of God; we, when we are converted, shall cleave to God, though not as His equals; He never turned from God, and remains ever equal to God; we are partakers of eternal life, He is eternal life. He, therefore, alone having become man, but still continuing to be God, never had any sin, nor did he assume a flesh of sin, though born of a maternal flesh of sin. For what He then took of flesh, He either cleansed in order to take it, or cleansed by taking it. His virgin mother, therefore, whose conception was not according to the law of sinful flesh (in other words, not by the excitement of carnal concupiscence), but who merited by her faith that the holy seed should be framed within her, He formed in order to choose her, and chose in order to be formed from her. How much more needful, then, is it for sinful flesh to be baptized in order to escape the judgment, when the flesh which was untainted by sin was baptized to set an example for imitation? (PNF 5.59, 60.)

Augustine - On the Psalms 50.2 It is evident then, that He hath called men gods, that are deified of His Grace, not born of His Substance. For He doth justify, who is just through His own self, and not of another; and He doth deify who is God through Himself, not by the partaking of another. But He that justifieth doth Himself deify, in that by justifying He doth make sons of God. "For He that given them power to become sons of God". If we have been made sons of God, we have also been made gods: but this is the effect of Grace adopting, not of nature generating. For only the Son of God, God, and one God with the Father, Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, was in the beginning the Word, and the Word with God, the Word God. The rest that are made gods, are made by His own Grace, are not born of His Substance, that they should be the same a He, but that by favour they should come to Him, and be fellow-heirs with Christ. ..."But we know," he saith,"that when He shall have appeared, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is." The Only Son is like him by birth, we like by seeing. (PNF 8.178.)

Augustine - On The Psalms 119.79 Indeed, it is He who above also hath interposed His own words, saying, â??I am a partaker with all them that fear Thee.â? Because He was made sharer in our mortal state, that we might also become par-takers in His Divine Nature, we became sharers in One unto life, He a sharer in many unto death. (PNF 8.573.)

Augustine - On The Psalms 139.1 For the Psalms were sung long before the Lord was born of Mary, yet not before He was Lord: for from everlasting He was the Creator of all things, but in time He was born of His creature. Let us believe that Godhead, and, so far as we can, understand Him to be equal to the Father. But that Godhead equal to the Father. was made partaker of our mortal nature, not of His own store, but of ours; that we too might be made partakers of His Divine Nature, not of our store, but of His. (PNF 8.635.)

Augustine - Sermon 81 But in order to lift them out of these iniquities, to redeem, to cure, to heal, to change the sons of men, he gave them the power and right to become sons of God. So whatâ??s so surprising about this text? You were men, if you were sons of men; you were all liars, because every man is a liar. The grace of God came to you, it gave you the power and right to become sons of God. Listen to the voice of my Father saying, I said you are gods, and all of you sons of the Most High (Ps. 82:6). Because you are sons of men, you are liars, if you are not sons of the Most High, because every man is a liar. If you are sons of God, if redeemed by the grace of the Savior, if bought by his precious blood, if born again by water and the Spirit, if predestined to the heavenly inheritance, then of you are sons of God. Son you are already gods. (The Works of Saint Augustine - Part III - Sermons, vol. 3, p. 363.)

Augustine - Sermon 166 God you see, wants to make you a god; not by nature of course, like the one whom he begot; but by his gift and by adoption. For just as he through being humbled came to share your mortality; so through lifting you up he brings you to share his immortality...and thus the whole man being deified and made divine may cleave forever to everlasting and unchangeable truth. (The Works of Saint Augustine - Part III - Sermons, vol. 5, pp. 210, 211.)

Augustine - Sermon 23B (Mainz 13) We carry mortality about with us, we endure infirmity, we look forward to divinity. For God wishes not only to vivify us, but also to deify us. When would human infirmity ever have dared to hope for this, unless divine truth had promised it? But divine truth did promise this, as we have said; and that we are going to be gods, not only did it promise thisâ??and because it made the promise, it is of course true, because such a faithful maker of promises does not deceive, and such and omnipotent giver is not prevented from fulfilling what he has promised. Still, it was not enough for our God to promise us divinity in himself, unless he also took on our infirmity, as though to say, â??Do you want to know how much I love you, how certain you ought to be that I am going to give you my divine reality? I took to myself your mortal reality.â? We mustnâ??t find it incredible, brothers and sisters, that human beings become gods, that is, that those who were human beings become gods. More incredible still is what has already been bestowed on us, that on who was God should become a human being. And indeed we believe that that has already happened, while we wait for the other thing to happen in the future. The Son of God became a son of man, in order to make sons of men into sons of God. (The Works of Saint Augustine - Part III - Sermons, vol. 11, p. 37.)

Grace and peace,

David

[johnny]

Pantsman,

The Mormon doctrine of becoming a seperate god and being a subordinate god to God while running your own planet is something completely different from what St. Augustine is speaking of.

I would agree the Mormon doctrine is completely different from what St. Augustine is speaking of. The article below goes into more detail, it says:

Can Human Beings Become God?

http://www.affcrit.com/pdfs/2002/02/02_02_a2.pdf

The Mormon concept of deification must be rejected: God is God both outside of creation and within creation; human beings can at best be joined to God and thereby become God within the confines of creation, but even here, they will not usurp the unique identity that the sole God has. Human beings will never lose their attributes as creatures, they will never be the Creator or the creative and boundless power of the Creator. Human beings will forever posses the human form and the human nature; thus, they will be limited to the confines of the created universe and never be omnipresent as the unique God is.

[urroner]

Human beings will forever posses the human form and the human nature; thus, they will be limited to the confines of the created universe and never be omnipresent as the unique God is.

Does Christ still have a physical body?

[johnny]

urroner,

Does Christ still have a physical body?

Christ has a glorified body ... see article below for more information, it says:

God Has No Body

http://www.catholic.com/library/God_Has_No_Body.asp

"What of Christâ??s body?" you may ask. It is true that Jesus, who is God, assumed an earthly body when he was born of the Blessed Virgin, and that this body, now glorified, continues to exist. But since the Lord only took on human flesh in these "last days," and since God has always existed, without beginning or end, we must still conclude that having a body is not part of Godâ??s unchangeable nature: he exists in eternity as pure spirit, even though he chose for the Son to also take on a human nature in addition to his bodiless, timeless, divine nature.

[urroner]

urroner,

Does Christ still have a physical body?

Christ has a glorified body ... see article below for more information, it says:

God Has No Body

http://www.catholic.com/library/God_Has_No_Body.asp

"What of Christâ??s body?" you may ask. It is true that Jesus, who is God, assumed an earthly body when he was born of the Blessed Virgin, and that this body, now glorified, continues to exist. But since the Lord only took on human flesh in these "last days," and since God has always existed, without beginning or end, we must still conclude that having a body is not part of Godâ??s unchangeable nature: he exists in eternity as pure spirit, even though he chose for the Son to also take on a human nature in addition to his bodiless, timeless, divine nature.

I'm sorry Johnny, but this sure sounds like a lot of double talk. God is unchangable, yet He changed.

[johnny]

urroner,

I'm sorry Johnny, but this sure sounds like a lot of double talk. God is unchangable, yet He changed.

It is not double talk when you understand Jesus Christ possesses two natures, one divine and the other human, not confused, but united in the one person of God's Son.

The only Son of the Father, the eternal Word, became incarnate; without losing his divine nature he has assumed human nature. The distinction between the natures was never abolished by their union, but rather the character proper to each of the two natures was preserved as they came together in one person.

I will stop here ... since this mostly likely will take us off the topic of Augustine.

[johnny]

3DOP,

But I must note there is no canonical authority which has ever condemned "full deification" to my knowledge,

I am not clear what you mean by "full deification" ... below is a related Catholic teaching:

318 - No creature has the infinite power necessary to "create" in the proper sense of the word.

[3DOP]

3DOP,

But I must note there is no canonical authority which has ever condemned "full deification" to my knowledge,

I am not clear what you mean by "full deification" ... below is a related Catholic teaching:

318 - No creature has the infinite power necessary to "create" in the proper sense of the word.

3DOP

"Full deification" would be the opinion which St Augustine did not reprove, but was unpersuaded by. He was saying that they should be careful in their formulations. They could in return urge that we should "look well to our opinions" who would on the other hand, place limits on deification. I agree with both sides about that. If I understand him correctly, I am in agreement with St Augustine. In any case, I do not hold that all of God's attributes are communicable. But to my knowledge, I cannot insist that the Church upholds my opinion with a condemnation. #318 doesn't seem to address the question in my opinion since part of the argument of those who would hold to "full deification" is that in some sense, God communicates to the deified His attribute of uncreatedness. You have surely seen the quotes from St. Irenaeus where he says words to the effect that the created shall become uncreated. I have argued and continue to argue that he doesn't mean to be taken literally in every respect. However, from his words I can very easily see how someone else could hold an alternative interpretation from mine.

I am not going to quote it but you said in a different post on this thread that Mormon deification is "completely different" from the Catholic understanding. I don't think you are measuring your words well at that point. You see no similarity, no relationship, no common ground at all? I know you didn't mean what you said, although they will tend to take you literally and get annoyed. You know it isn't "completely" different. It is merely different without the qualifier. There are at least some similarities even for those Catholics like me, and you who presumably agree with St Augustine.

Well, I am off to Mass this Saturday morning, Happy Feast of St Charles Borromeo (in the Traditional calendar anyway)! God bless, johnny.

Regards,

3DOP

[Bill Hamblin]

Those seeking further light and knowledge should consult:

Chae, Issac. â??Justification and Deification in Augustine: A Study of His Doctrine of Justification.â? Ph.D. diss., Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, 1999.

and

Gerald Bonner, â??Augustineâ??s Conception of Deification,â? Journal of Theological Studies, n.s. 37 (1986) 369-86.

[Drewm777]

I've never had a big problem with the nicene creed's explain Christ and the Father as being of one substance. I think the authors of the creed used that as a technical term to mean that they were both "divine." They were both fully divine. That we can then, according to at least some early Christians, become of one substance with God, then I guess that means we can become as fully divine as Christ and God (in their opinion). Notice, Augustine explained that becoming of one substance equated to "being made into what He is."

It's the later creeds and theologians that evolved the meaning of the Nicene Creed. My only problems with it are the authority placed on it and its invention of non-biblical termonilogy to explain God.