Query Regarding 2 Peter 1.4 And Theosis

[diglot]

I recently read James Starr's dissertation, Sharers in Divine Nature: 2 Peter 1:4 in its Hellenistic Context. In a nutshell, Starr first examines the meaning of the verse from "text-immanent" features in the epistle, from which he identifies a bunch of ideas related to this verse pertaining to the author's usage of the phrase "sharers in the divine nature". He then examines other texts for those same ideas (e.g. Josephus, Plutarch, Philo, Stoicism, the Pauline corpus, etc). Unfortunately, it is not an exhaustive survey of Jewish Hellenistic works, but I think Starr ably demonstrates that the author of 2 Peter is influenced by Middle Platonism in regards to this divine nature business. To summarize Starr's conclusions, he believes that 2 Peter 1.4 does not refer to the actual divinization of Christians, but only to the acquisition of certain divine characteristics (e.g. immortality, righteousness).

This is essentially the conclusion I came to in my more limited studies on this verse before reading Starr. The main problem I have with Starr's work is that it is an incomplete examination of the Hellenistic context. I mean, there are more texts that could be examined which derived from Hellenistic influences (e.g. Wisdom of Solomon).

Anyway, my query regarding 2 Peter 1.4 is twofold:

1) I have seen Mormons interpret this verse as being supportive of the prevalence of the LDS view of deification in early Christianity. Is this a common perspective amongst Mormons?

2) Following on from the first question, can anyone point me in the direction of any LDS literature on divinization that examines 2 Peter 1:4 in its literary and socio-religious context?

Edited October 26, 2011 by diglot

[Kevin Christensen]

I see it as supportive, FWIW.

There is Jordan Vadja here.

http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/papers/?paperID=7

Although, he was not LDS when he wrote it, but he is now.

And while this from Margaret Barker does not mention 2 Peter 1:4, it does provide context:

http://jbburnett.com/resources/barker/barker_secret%20tradition.pdf

Kevin Christensen

PIttsburgh, PA

Kevin Christensen

Pittsburgh, PA

[thesometimesaint]

http://www.jefflindsay.com/LDSFAQ/FQ_theosis.shtml

[diglot]

I see it as supportive, FWIW.

There is Jordan Vadja here.

http://maxwellinstit...pers/?paperID=7

Although, he was not LDS when he wrote it, but he is now.

Thanks, that actually answered a couple questions I had about LDS exaltation that the missionaries were not able to answer for me.

And while this from Margaret Barker does not mention 2 Peter 1:4, it does provide context:

http://jbburnett.com...20tradition.pdf

Margaret Barker's works are interesting. I remember when I first read her "The Great Angel: A Study of Israel's Second God". It was quite an eye-opener for me at that time.

[diglot]

http://www.jefflinds...Q_theosis.shtml

Not the scholarly examination of 2 Peter 1.4 I was looking for, but interesting to read nonetheless. Thanks

[sennahoj]

Somewhat OT: the very word "theosis" sounds like a mental disorder... haha.

[diglot]

This is essentially the conclusion I came to in my more limited studies on this verse before reading Starr. The main problem I have with Starr's work is that it is an incomplete examination of the Hellenistic context. I mean, there are more texts that could be examined which derived from Hellenistic influences (e.g. Wisdom of Solomon).

To add to what I said in the OP, it would be interesting to examine how the concept of sharing in the divine nature (as understood by the author of 2 Peter) is expressed in the OT pseudepigrapha, the Greco-Roman mystery religions, and Gnostic texts. I wonder what (dis)similarities there would be.

Edited October 29, 2011 by diglot

[diglot]

Somewhat OT: the very word "theosis" sounds like a mental disorder... haha.

Well, it does sorta rhyme with psychosis

Edited October 29, 2011 by diglot

[wenglund]

Could it also be that the passage in question may have been influenced by Christ and the gospel he may have restored during his mortal ministry and perhaps also during post-mortal visitations (though not all of which may have been written down or preserved), only visages of which had survived from more ancient times in various forms, and may have found their way into a variety of religious traditions in Peter's day--not excluding Hellenized Egyptian cults.

This happens to be my belief.

Are you following my thread on Deification, Theosis, Divinization, Christify, etc.? I ask because in it we are examining various ascension rituals throughout the ages and across religious, which may today be viewed as portending to kind of limited or diluted (Hellenized) perception of deification you suggest, but in earlier times may have portended of full blown deification--where the recipients of the rituals became not only Kings and Priests and Prophets, but also Gods (partakers of the divine nature).

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[wenglund]

When attempting to understand the meaning of the phrase "partaker of the divine nature," please keep in mind that Peter was numbered among the disciples at the last supper, about which is written:

"And as they were eating, Jesus took ^abread, ^band blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my ^cbody. And he took the ^acup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, ^bDrink ye all of it For this is my ^bblood of the new ^ctestament, which is shed for many for the ^dremission of sins." (Mt. 26:26-28)

Before then, Peter was also with Jesus in the synagogue when he declared:

"Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye ^aeat the flesh of the ^bSon of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you." (John 6:53)

This sacramental emblem of deification (i.e. where one partakes of the divine nature such that Christ becomes a part of one, and therein one becomes divine--see verses 56, 58, 62-63), is not an easy principle for some, though not all, people to swallow. (pun intended) For, as indicated in verses 60 - 68:

Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it? When Jesus ^aknew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this ^boffend you?...But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should ^abetray him....From that time many of his ^adisciples went back, and ^bwalked no more with him.Then said Jesus unto the twelve, Will ye also go away? Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the ^awords of eternal life.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-