Early Christian Theosis Quotes

[e=mc2]

Johnny:

Irenaeus put a limit upon the final state of a man,

Thank goodness Christ didn't!

[e=mc2]

Johnny:

Men are different than the Son of God. Men can partake of the divine nature, the Son of God is the divine nature, he was fully divine.

Yes and with his FULL Divinity, we are promised to be HEIRS with him in this, to receive *all* that the Father has. I see no divergence from this when it comes to becoming what Christ and the Father is, namely fulfilled humanity being given full godhood with our heavenly parents. That is the point of Christ's mission, and certainly constitutes the Good News.

[johnny]

e=mc2,

Yes and with his FULL Divinity, we are promised to be HEIRS with him in this, to receive *all* that the Father has.

Which verses says "all" ... and which verse describes this "all"?

Men can become heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ.

I see no divergence from this when it comes to becoming what Christ and the Father is, namely fulfilled humanity being given full godhood with our heavenly parents.

I see a divergence ... The Father is infinite. Christ did not become God, in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. Men are finite, they are created and can only partake of the divine nature.

[e=mc2]

Johnny:

I see a divergence ... The Father is infinite. Christ did not become God, in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. Men are finite, they are created and can only partake of the divine nature.

Are you actually saying God can't over come this mere technicality, while at the same time he can produce from nothing, everything that is?! Are you saying God has limits to His power to do with His creation what He wishes? He set it up that way, but now can do nothing to change it?

Johnny:

Men can become heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ.

Kerry:

Yes, my point and LDS doctrine precisely. HEIRS of God, and JOINT HEIRS with Christ. Tell me, what do they possess? Can you say Godhood?

[TOmNossor]

TOmNossor,

Men are different than the Son of God. Men can partake of the divine nature, the Son of God is the divine nature, he was fully divine. Jesus was God before his incarnation and he assumed an earthly body when he was born.

I think you are ignoring what the Bible says.

For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren" (Rom. 8:29)

To be â??conformedâ? is to be made into the same form.

And of course we know that Christ is in the â??image of God.â?

If â??image of Godâ? does not make Christ a weak copy, why does â??image of Christâ? make us a weak copy (the words are the same).

Much thanks to that fellow the 3DOP and I learn from for the above Biblical linkage.

I read a wonderful book that discussed Arius vs. Athanasius in a unique way. According to the book, Arius and Athanasius were both convinced that God, like the Greeks believed, was impassible. Arius argued that if we are to be like Christ, then Christ must be passible like us else how could we become what He is. Athanasius argued that Christ must be God to have the power to deify us.

After Nicea, I see in some Athanasiusâ??s thought some weakening of the deification of man through Christ, but only after.

I suggest that Arius and Athanasius were both wrong in their concept of impassibility (and J. Pelikan suggests that the Early Church departed from the original Jewish understanding of Godâ??s â??impassibilityâ? (unchanging-ness) as faithfulness to the Covenant â?? I agree).

So Arius was correct that Christ had to be such that we could become as He is. And Athanasius was correct that Christ had to be God so that He might be able to lift us to divinity. They just failed to tie together those two truths because they had embraced a Hellenistic view of divinity (rather than the Jewish view of the Apostles and Christ).

Charity, TOm

[johnny]

e=mc2,

Are you actually saying God can't over come this mere technicality, while at the same time he can produce from nothing, everything that is?! Are you saying God has limits to His power to do with His creation what He wishes? He set it up that way, but now can do nothing to change it?

I am saying that Man has limits because he can only partake of the divine nature.

Yes, my point and LDS doctrine precisely. HEIRS of God, and JOINT HEIRS with Christ. Tell me, what do they possess? Can you say Godhood?

Can you describe this "Godhood" using some Bible verses ...

[johnny]

TOmNossor,

For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren" (Rom. 8:29)

Romans 8:29 is simply speaking of image ... this verse does not entail the power of a deified man.

[TOmNossor]

TOmNossor,

Romans 8:29 is simply speaking of image ... this verse does not entail the power of a deified man.

Did you read my post in its entirety? Christ is called the image of God. If Rom 8:29 is simply speaking of â??imageâ? and does not entail the power of God, then would not the image of God that Christ is called open Christ to the accusation of being less than divine?

You, Johnny, are on the way to the position that Arius embraced. The Bible speaks of Christ as what we are to become. The Christ of the New Testament and clearly us humans are passible and changing and â?¦. Thus, Christ is not fully divine and we are to become like Christ. This is a fairly consistent view, but not a very Christian view.

Charity, TOm

[David Waltz]

Hi Johnny,

You wrote:

>> Romans 8:29 is simply speaking of image ... this verse does not entail the power of a deified man.>>

Me: The Greek suggests otherwise. Here is a portion from the book I have been working onâ??

Turning now to the Christianâ??s relationship to their Redeemer, Jesus Christ, we read: â??For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethrenâ? (Rom. 8:29). One very important concept embedded in this text is the teaching that the redeemed are predestined to be â??conformedâ? (symmorphos â?? literally: â??having the same formâ? ), â??to the image of his Son.â? This portion of the passage is directly related to theosis, and we find solid conformation of this in the following quote:

The passage presupposes that Christ is the → image of God. In Christ God is really present. Again symmorphos means that we shall not only be similar to or like Christ but that we shall come into the same realm of power as he. We shall be identified with the same substance as he, and enter into the same essential nature as Christ. One might even speak in the same vein as the Hel. mystery religions and speak of a â??divinizationâ? of â??Christeningâ?. (Emphasis mine.)

As we have already seen in Jesusâ?? case, one should be careful not to construe the term â??imageâ? as a â??weakening or a feeble copy of somethingâ?, and the apostle Paul wants to make sure that we do not miss this point, for he conjoins symmorphos (an adjectival form of morphē) with eikōv. A famous Lutheran commentator wrote:

But we should not overlook morphē, in the adjective â??conformed.â? This conformation to which we are predestined involves the reception of a form that is not a mere outward resemblance but one that is native to the essence. 1 John 3:2. Hence also we have eikōn, imago, and not homoiōma, similitudoâ?¦We are to be copies of Christ, the original: â??conformed as the copy of the Son.â?

The Catholic New Testament scholar Fitzmyer reinforces Lenskiâ??s assessment stating that Christians will â??bear the shape of the form of Godâ??s own Son,â? and are â??not just adopted children.â? The full context follows:

to be conformed to the image of his Son. According to the divine plan, Christians are destined to reproduce in themselves an image of Christ by a progressive share in share in his risen life (see 8:17; Gal 4:4-6; Phil 3:20, 21); â??all of us, with unveiled face, are beholding the glory of the Lord (and) being changed into his likeness from one degree of glory to anotherâ? (2 Cor 3:18; cf. 4:4b-6). In other words, through faith and baptism the sinner becomes a Christian, who bears the shape of form of Godâ??s own Son. Christians are not just adopted children (8:15). But are being continually transformed or metamorphosed into an eikōn, â??image, likeness,â? of the Son of God. Paulâ??s expression is redundant: conformed to an image, i.e., to share in the formative image of his Son. This transformation comes about through the power that enables the Son to subject all things to himself (1 Cor 15:27, 49).

Fitzmyer has made another important point in the above quote: this change, transformation into the image of Christ is â??progressive,â? and though the full transformation will not take place until the saints are glorified after Christâ??s second coming, the transformation begins in Christâ??s redeemed disciples during their earthly sojourn. The apostle Paul makes this quite clear in 2 Cor. 3:18: â??But we all, with unveiled face beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as from the Lord, the Spiritâ? (NAS). Concerning this transformation (Gr. metamorphoumetha), Ralph Martin observed that the â??verb metamorphoumetha, â??are being transformed,â?? strongly suggests a link with Christ as Godâ??s â??imageâ?? who is the prototype.â?

The implications are clear: Jesus Christ, being the â??image of Godâ? is by nature divine, and when the redeemed become fully â??conformed to the image of his Son (Jesus)â? they too shall share in the same divine natureâ??i.e. theosis . (David Waltz, unpublished work - footnotes left out and some Greek words in quotes have been translitered.)

Grace and peace,

David

[e=mc2]

Johnny:

I am saying that Man has limits because he can only partake of the divine nature.

And I am agreeing with you, man, as God created him has limits. But man when God adopts him into His Sonship will then be one with the infinite, and hence without limits. Is God too weak to do this? I know man has limits, but does God. God can make us Divine including every particle of our bodies and spirits, with all the powers, rights, priviledges, powers, and offices that God holds. That is Deification. We become One with God as Christ prayed (so it's obviously possible, else why pray in this manner?) in John 17.

[Jerubaal]

David:

This board has difficulties with quotes within quotes. Perhaps you could post what that Lutheran scholar said seperately?

[Severian]

"With the blessed Cheeses, we shall become like unto Goats"

- from the Gospel of the Life of Brian

[johnny]

TOmNossor,

Did you read my post in its entirety? Christ is called the image of God. If Rom 8:29 is simply speaking of â??imageâ? and does not entail the power of God, then would not the image of God that Christ is called open Christ to the accusation of being less than divine?

Christ is the image of invisible God, Christ is the Word(God) that became flesh. When men partake of the divine nature they are conformed to the image of Son of Man, men can become the branches of the true vine.

A branch(man) can beome like the image of the vine(the Son of Man), but the branches(men) DO NOT become like the Father, the vine grower.

The Bible speaks of Christ as what we are to become.

We can become partakers of the divine nature, men DO NOT become like the Father, the vine grower (John 15). Men become clean like the Son by partaking of the Word (John 15:3).

John.15

[1] I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman.

[2] Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away: and every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit.

[3] Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you.

[4] Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me.

[5] I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.

The Christ of the New Testament and clearly us humans are passible and changing and â?¦.

Christ' divine nature is unchanging, his human nature changes.

Thus, Christ is not fully divine and we are to become like Christ.

Christ is fully divine, in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. Men will be be fully divinized by God in glory.

The pure in heart will be like him, they will be perfect and holy to do God's will. They shall reign forever and ever with christ.

[johnny]

David Waltz,

Again symmorphos means that we shall not only be similar to or like Christ but that we shall come into the same realm of power as he.

Will men have same realm of power as the Father, the Son received his power from the Father?

The Catholic Church teaches the Father as the source and origin of the whole divinity. 1Cor 8 says,

1Cor.8

[6] But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

Christians are not just adopted children (8:15). But are being continually transformed or metamorphosed into an eikōn, â??image, likeness,â? of the Son of God.

Do you think that Christians(branches) will be metamorphosed into a vine grower or will they stay a branch (see John 15 below)?

John.15

[1] I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman.

[5] I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.

[johnny]

e=mc2,

And I am agreeing with you, man, as God created him has limits. But man when God adopts him into His Sonship will then be one with the infinite, and hence without limits.

Man can become one with the infinite, but even though he is one the creature is still dependent on his Creator because man can only partake of the divine nature through the grace of God.

Is God too weak to do this? I know man has limits, but does God.

God is not weak, God is omnipotent. A infinite creature is mutually repellent element just like a square circle is a mutually repellent element. A creature is dependent on external causes and conditions. The infinite is independent of external causes and conditions.

God can make us Divine including every particle of our bodies and spirits, with all the powers, rights, priviledges, powers, and offices that God holds.

Thank you for making my point ... you say "God can make us Divine" ... men are dependent on God for the divine nature they can partake of.

We become One with God as Christ prayed (so it's obviously possible, else why pray in this manner?) in John 17.

We can become one spirit with the Lord (see 1Cor 6 below). United with Christ and with the power of his Holy Spirit, we can surrender our will to him. We are called to become one with him, for he enables us as the members of his Body.

1Cor 6

[15] Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid.

[16] What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh.

[17] But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.

[19] What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?

[David Waltz]

Hi Jerubaal,

You posted:

>>David:

This board has difficulties with quotes within quotes. Perhaps you could post what that Lutheran scholar said seperately?>>

Lenski, one more time:

But we should not overlook morphē, in the adjective â??conformed.â? This conformation to which we are predestined involves the reception of a form that is not a mere outward resemblance but one that is native to the essence. 1 John 3:2. Hence also we have eikōn, imago, and not homoiōma, similitudoâ?¦We are to be copies of Christ, the original: â??conformed as the copy of the Son.â?

Grace and peace,

David

[David Waltz]

Hi Johnny,

Thanks for responding; you posted:

>> Will men have same realm of power as the Father, the Son received his power from the Father?

The Catholic Church teaches the Father as the source and origin of the whole divinity. 1Cor 8 says,

1Cor.8

[6] But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.>>

Me: The clear teaching of the Bible and the early CFâ??s is that God the Father, as you have stated, is â??the source and origin of the whole divinityâ?; this is expressed by the Latin phrase: FONS TOTIUS DIVINITATIS.

Christ, the Son of God, received His divinity from the Father; Godâ??s adopted Sons will receive their divinity from the Father, through the Son (by grace).

You also wrote:

>> Do you think that Christians(branches) will be metamorphosed into a vine grower or will they stay a branch (see John 15 below)?

John.15

[1] I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman.

[5] I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.>>

Me: Good question; to be totally honest, I donâ??t know for sure. On the one hand, as Christâ??s divinity is inextricably linked to the Father, I think the Scriptures indicate that the redeemed Saints divinity is inextricably linked to Christ; on the other hand, if God chooses to bestow His full divinity to His adopted Sons, what would prevent them from becoming â??vine growersâ? in their own right?

Grace and peace,

David

[johnny]

David Waltz,

Christ, the Son of God, received His divinity from the Father; Godâ??s adopted Sons will receive their divinity from the Father, through the Son (by grace).

Can a man ever become a source and origin of divinity if they are partakers of divinity?

Can a man become like the Father who is the source and origin of divinity ... how man origins can there be?

if God chooses to bestow His full divinity to His adopted Sons, what would prevent them from becoming vine growers in their own right?

What prevents it is that one is a "vine" and the other is a "vine grower".

[David Waltz]

Hello again Johnny,

You posted:

>>Can a man ever become a source and origin of divinity, in other words can a man become like the Father who is the source and origin of divinity ... how man origins can there be?>>

Me: No, there is only one ultimate â??source and origin of divinityâ?â??God the Father; and yet, this truism does not prevent God the Son from being â??fullyâ?? God.

Grace and peace,

David

[johnny]

David Waltz,

Me: No, there is only one ultimate "source and origin of divinity" God the Father; and yet, this truism does not prevent God the Son from being fully God.

The Son of Man is "fully God" because of the fulness of the Godhead that dwells within him but the Son is not like the Father in terms of being the source and origin of divinity .

[David Waltz]

David

Hey Johnny,

You said:

>>The Son of Man is "fully God" because of the fulness of the Godhead that dwells within him but the Son is not like the Father in terms of being the source and origin of divinity .>>

Me: Uhhhâ?¦thatâ??s what I said in the quote from me that you provided in the your post.

Grace and peace,

David

[TOmNossor]

Me: No, there is only one ultimate â??source and origin of divinityâ?â??God the Father; and yet, this truism does not prevent God the Son from being â??fullyâ?? God.

David Waltz,

The Son of Man is "fully God" because of the fulness of the Godhead that dwells within him but the Son is not like the Father in terms of being the source and origin of divinity .

Johnny,

Unless, you are saying that Christ is less than â??fully divine,â? (which I cannot fathom is your position), we have reached an agreement. Yeah!!!!

We will have differences as to the original state of man since as a Catholic you believe that God created ex nihilo, but the final state of man is no longer something we need to debate upon. And, I think this is quite important since our original state has less direct (as opposed to philosophical) impact upon our current and future state than does our perception of our future state. We should celebrate.

Again, yeah!!!

Christ is divine because of, â??the fullness of the Godhead that dwells within him.â? We are called to become divine because we will have â??the fullness of the Godhead that dwells withinâ? us. The Father is the fount of divinity and it is through union with Him that we are to become divine.

Here is a wonderful expression of this (part of it was quoted in our priesthood manual about 3 years ago):

LDS6. John Taylor, Mediation and Atonement, Ch.20

A man, as a man, could arrive at all the dignity that a man was capable of obtaining or receiving; but it needed a God to raise him to the dignity of a God. For this cause it is written, "Now are we the sons of God; and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that when he shall appear we shall be like him." And how and why like Him? Because, through the instrumentality of the atonement and the adoption, it is made possible for us to become of the family of God, and joint heirs with Jesus Christ; and that as He, the potential instrument, through the oneness that existed between Him and His Father, by reason of obedience to divine law, overcame death, hell and the grave, and sat down upon His Father's throne, so shall we be able to sit down with Him, even upon His throne. Thus, as it is taught in the Book of Mormon, it must needs be that there be an infinite atonement; and hence of Him, and by Him, and through Him are all things; and through Him do we obtain every blessing, power, right, immunity, salvation and exaltation. He is our God, our Redeemer, our Savior, to whom, with the Father and the Holy Spirit, be eternal and everlasting praises worlds without end.

Charity, TOm

[johnny]

David Waltz,

Me: Uhhhâ?¦thatâ??s what I said in the quote from me that you provided in the your post.

I was emphasizing the idea that the Son is like the Father but the Son is not identical to the Father.

[johnny]

TOmNossor,

Unless, you are saying that Christ is less than â??fully divine,â? (which I cannot fathom is your position), we have reached an agreement. Yeah!!!!

I would say that we are not in agreement.

The Mormon Church teaches that a man can become a creator like the Father. I believe that a man cannot become a creator like the Father because only the Father is the source and origin of divinity. Our heavenly Father is the source of our life in Christ Jesus. The Mormon Church teaches that the Father become God, the Father as taught by the Mormon Church is NOT the source and origin of divinity.

I believe that the created "vine" will NOT become the "vine grower", our Creator. A created being cannot become an infinite creature. A infinite creature is a mutually repellent element just like a square circle is a mutually repellent element. A creature is dependent on external causes and conditions. The infinite is independent of external causes and conditions.

We are called to become divine because we will have â??the fullness of the Godhead that dwells withinâ? us.

Men can partake of divinity, partaking is not a fulness.

Christ has a fulness, men have something less than fulness because their divinity comes from the Father who is the source and origin of divinity.

[TOmNossor]

TOmNossor,

I would say that we are not in agreement.

Disappointed a little, but not shocked. You are being inconsistent and non-scriptural.

The Mormon Church teaches that a man can become a creator like the Father. I believe that a man cannot become a creator like the Father because only the Father is the source and origin of divinity. Our heavenly Father is the source of our life in Christ Jesus.

Rather than arguing with you about LDS doctrine here lets think about what the scriptures say in light of what you have previously acknowledged.

First you previously acknowledged:

Me: No, there is only one ultimate â??source and origin of divinityâ?â??God the Father; and yet, this truism does not prevent God the Son from being â??fullyâ?? God.

David Waltz,

The Son of Man is "fully God" because of the fulness of the Godhead that dwells within him but the Son is not like the Father in terms of being the source and origin of divinity.

The above is of course something that you came up with after seemingly acknowledging that David was correct that we are to become those who are the image of Christ AND that Christ is the image of the Father. Here are your questions in response to Davidâ??s scriptural argument:

David Waltz,

Christ, the Son of God, received His divinity from the Father; Godâ??s adopted Sons will receive their divinity from the Father, through the Son (by grace).

Can a man ever become a source and origin of divinity if they are partakers of divinity?

Can a man become like the Father who is the source and origin of divinity ... how man origins can there be?

if God chooses to bestow His full divinity to His adopted Sons, what would prevent them from becoming vine growers in their own right?

What prevents it is that one is a "vine" and the other is a "vine grower".

So the response from a Catholic and a LDS perspective is that God the Father is the Font of divinity for Christ and for the deified man.

Now back to your current post:

The Mormon Church teaches that a man can become a creator like the Father. I believe that a man cannot become a creator like the Father because only the Father is the source and origin of divinity. Our heavenly Father is the source of our life in Christ Jesus.

Here you are arguing that since manâ??s divinity is a derived divinity depending upon God the Father that man cannot be a creator. The problem is that Christ who we have previously established as divine through the Father, is called a creator in the New Testament.

See Col 1:16, John 1:3, and Heb 1:10.

So clearly those who are divine, but not the Font of Divinity, can be creators.

Following this in your post there are aspects you ascribe to LDS theology that I find little scriptural support for and actually do not embrace, but present or absent they do not change the fact that our divinity is to be as Christâ??s divinity is.

Next you say:

A created being cannot become an infinite creature. A infinite creature is a mutually repellent element just like a square circle is a mutually repellent element. A creature is dependent on external causes and conditions. The infinite is independent of external causes and conditions.

Here LDS theology nicely sidesteps your criticism because as those in possession of that which is eternal, we are not solely created creatures.

I see no logic in denying that creatures can not participate fully in the singular infinite which is God, but this is not a LDS issue. It would seem that the ECF who boldly declared men could become gods did not take issue with it either. If David finds some strong reason that your anti-created position here should be demonstrated as flawed, I will leave that to him, but I personally do not see it as near as problematic for the Catholic view as it seems you do (and like I said, the CoJCoLDS sidesteps your criticism).

You should also recognize that as folks who believe that becoming fully gods is something that happens through uniting with God the Father, through Jesus Christ, â?¦ there will not be two separate divinities or two separate infinites or two separate omnipotences or â?¦

Men can partake of divinity, partaking is not a fulness.

So, it is your position that Christ is fully divine because He partakes of the fullness of the Father who is the Font of Divinity. But we are not fully divine, because when we partake of the Fatherâ??s divinity, we do not partake fully.

I think you are ignoring what David previously established through the New Testament. In short, while Davidâ??s Catholic theology is following the Bible, you are not following the Bible.

Christ has a fulness, men have something less than fulness because their divinity comes from the Father who is the source and origin of divinity.

But earlier you made a point of establishing that Christâ??s divinity comes from the Father. How is Christ fully divine and yet his divinity comes from the Father and men (whose divinity comes from the Father, expresses with identical words in the New Testament) are not fully divine.

I hope it is obvious that you are being inconsistent here Johnny.

Charity, TOm