Open Theism Discussion Board
  HomeLog InRegisterSearch the ForumHelp
   
Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Theological Q&A > (No Subject)
 
Forum Quick Jump
 
New Topic Post Reply Printable Version
85 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page :
 1  2  3  4 
[ << Previous Thread | Next Thread >> | Show Newest Post First ]

PotOnWheel
Registered Member




Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
 
   Posted 1/15/2008 7:05 PM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.

A Common Faith

January 15, 2008 by fatherstephen

There are doubtless many differences to be found between groups of Christians - though there is probably more that all Christians share than not. Orthodox Christianity generally holds to those doctrines that were at one time universal and continues to be a watershed of classical Christian faith. It is interesting that some things that many think of as distinctives of Orthodox Christianity have a wider attestation than most people know. These common essentials are often blurred by an emphasis on distinctives or the fact that certain things which have remained central within Orthodoxy have become marginalized in other places.

Perhaps no single doctrine is more classically expressive of the Orthodox faith than the doctrine of the Divine exchange (divinization or theosis). First offered in its most classical form by St. Irenaeus in the 2nd century (though there is ample Scriptural support for the doctrine), it is generally stated: God became man so that man could become god. This same statement of faith, in varying forms can be found in fathers, both East and West.

Daniel Keating has produced a small book on the topic: Deification and Grace. He says:

Following Irenaeus - and probably dependent upon him - we find wide attestation to this formula throughout the patristic period. It is noteworthy that some form of this expression can be found in writers from Alexandria, Constantinople, Antioch, Syria, North Africa, and Rome….

St. Clement of Alexandria:

the Word of God became man, that you may learn from man how man may become God.

St. Athanasius of Alexandria:

For he was made man that we might be made God…and…he himself has made us sons of the Father, and deified men by becoming himself man.

St. Gregory the Theologian:

Let us become as Christ is, since Christ became as we are; let us become gods for his sake, since he became man for our sake.

St. Gregory of Nyssa:

…the Word became incarnate so that by becoming as we are, he might make us as he is.

St. John Chrysostom:

he became Son of man, who was God’s own Son, in order that he might make the sons of men to be children of God.

St. Ephrem the Syrian:

He gave us divinity, we gave him humanity.

St. Hilary of Poitiers (in the West):

For when God was born to be man the purpose was not that the Godhead should be lost, but that, the Godhead remaining, man should be born to be god.

St. Ambrose of Milan:

For [the Son] took on him that which he was not that he might hide that which he was; he hid that which he was that he might be tempted in it, and that which he was not might be redeemed, in order that he might call us by means of that which he was not to that which he was.

St. Augustine of Hippo:

God wanted to be the Son of Man and he wanted men to be the Sons of God.

Pope St. Leo the Great (5th century):

[The Savior] was made the son of man, so that we could be the sons of God…and…He united humanity to himself in such a way that he remained God, unchangeable. He imparted divinity to human beings in such a way that he did not destroy, but enriched them, by glorification.

Even in Protestant writers…

Martin Luther in a Christmas sermon:

For the Word becomes flesh precisely so that the flesh may become word. In other words: God becomes man so that man may become God.

John Calvin, rather eloquently:

This is the wonderful exchange which, out of his measureless benevolence, he has made with us; that, by his descent to earth, he has prepared an ascent to heaven for us; that, by taking on our mortality, he has conferred his immortality upon us; that, accepting our weakness, he has strengthened us by his power; that, receiving our poverty unto himself, he has transferred his wealth to us; that, taking the weight of our iniquity upon himself (which oppressed us), he has clothed us with his righteousness.

This is a wonderful testimony, of almost universal appeal, to one of the central tenets of the Christian faith. Often obscured by other doctrinal formula, it remains central in the Christian East, where the principle of exchange - that God took upon Himself our human condition that we might share in His divinity - runs throughout the whole of doctrine.

Keating’s book is a refreshing read. It was a Christmas present to me from Fr. Alvin Kimel (aka the Pontificator). My deepest thanks.



(o)

Post Edited (PotOnWheel) : 1/16/2008 4:15:20 PM (GMT-6)

Back to Top
 

One Love
Registered Member




Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
 
   Posted 1/15/2008 7:44 PM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Why in the world don't we teach this in our American evangelical churches and seminaries?


So God created human beings in his own image, in the image of God he created them...

Back to Top
 

PotOnWheel
Registered Member




Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
 
   Posted 1/15/2008 7:50 PM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Imago Dei said...
Why in the world don't we teach this in our American evangelical churches and seminaries?

Bethel:
 
Theosis
As with most areas of theology, the doctrine of theosis began to develop ..... Robert Rakestraw is professor of theology at Bethel Theological Seminary, ...
www.bethel.edu/~rakrob/files/THEOSIS2.html - 51k


(o)

Back to Top
 

One Love
Registered Member




Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
 
   Posted 1/15/2008 7:51 PM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Right. Now is this a course at Bethel?


So God created human beings in his own image, in the image of God he created them...

Back to Top
 

One Love
Registered Member




Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
 
   Posted 1/15/2008 7:53 PM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
If theosis is important as I'm SEEING it is, there's no excuse for not having a whole class on this. Seriously.
 
Going to a Christian school to become a Christian ministerial leader...and NOT learning the deep importance of inhominization and theosis...is like a person who wants to be an astrophysicist, but given a substandard understanding of mathematics.  It won't work.


So God created human beings in his own image, in the image of God he created them...

Post Edited (Imago Dei) : 1/15/2008 6:58:43 PM (GMT-6)

Back to Top
 

PotOnWheel
Registered Member




Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
 
   Posted 1/15/2008 8:21 PM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.

A Faith Worth Believing

Posted Friday, January 11, 2008

Play

Fr. Stephen describes the one-storey universe as a faith worth believing and addresses the difficulty that people in the modern world have in transitioning from the secularized religions that dot our landscape to a truly integrated religion such as the Orthodox faith.

 
Back to Top
 

One Love
Registered Member




Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
 
   Posted 1/15/2008 8:58 PM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Amen, yo.


So God created human beings in his own image, in the image of God he created them...

Back to Top
 

PotOnWheel
Registered Member




Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
 
   Posted 1/15/2008 9:05 PM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Vespers Saturday?


(o)

Back to Top
 

Sahid
Megistered Rember




Date Joined Jun 2004
Total Posts : 2013
 
   Posted 1/16/2008 12:46 AM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Seminary... teaching in churches... right... that's gonna take some doing.


Watch me fly. Freedom like wings and I will use them. Freedom like wings and I will spread them wide. - Stavesacre

Back to Top
 

Tom
Registered Member




Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
 
   Posted 1/16/2008 8:19 AM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Hate to rain on the party, but I've read the NT a few times. Can somebody tell me where it says we "become God"? Gimme a clear, non-controversial, explicity claim. And 1Pet's "participating in the divine natur" ain't it.

Shoudn't our "common faith" be expressed in common terms?

I'd NEVER use "God became man that man may become God." Sorry.

T


 

Back to Top
 

One Love
Registered Member




Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
 
   Posted 1/16/2008 8:25 AM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Tom:
I'd NEVER use "God became man that man may become God." Sorry.

Wow. Don't you think this reticence of yours is going to play out in our theological discussion?  Because the reality being described by the statement is foundational in my understanding of things.


So God created human beings in his own image, in the image of God he created them...

Back to Top
 

One Love
Registered Member




Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
 
   Posted 1/16/2008 8:37 AM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Tom:
Shoudn't our "common faith" be expressed in common terms?

If we understood the epicletic reality behind BAPTISM, KOINONIA, and the EUCHARIST, then we'd have all the "common terms" that we needed.

While our pneumatologies are piecemeal and unsubstantial (and to that degree, our trinitarian belief as a whole), how can we expect anything else but ecclesial problems? (Amos Yong was RIGHT on that!)


So God created human beings in his own image, in the image of God he created them...

Post Edited (Imago Dei) : 1/16/2008 7:44:04 AM (GMT-6)

Back to Top
 

One Love
Registered Member




Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
 
   Posted 1/16/2008 4:59 PM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Bruce:
Vespers Saturday?

If the Wifey lets me...definitely.

Vespers Saturday. Woodland Sunday.


So God created human beings in his own image, in the image of God he created them...

Back to Top
 

PotOnWheel
Registered Member




Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
 
   Posted 1/16/2008 5:12 PM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.

Like a bowl of trail mix, just take what you can chew and leave the rest for someone else.

PotOnWheel said...

A Common Faith

January 15, 2008 by fatherstephen

St. Athanasius of Alexandria:

...he himself has made us sons of the Father...

St. Gregory the Theologian:

Let us become as Christ is...

St. John Chrysostom:

...in order that he might make the sons of men to be children of God.

St. Ephrem the Syrian:

He gave us divinity, we gave him humanity.

St. Augustine of Hippo:

...he wanted men to be the Sons of God.

Pope St. Leo the Great (5th century):

...we could be the sons of God…   ...He imparted divinity to human beings...

Even in Protestant writers…

Martin Luther in a Christmas sermon:

For the Word becomes flesh precisely so that the flesh may become word. In other words: God becomes man so that man may become God.

John Calvin, rather eloquently:

This is the wonderful exchange which, out of his measureless benevolence, he has made with us; that, by his descent to earth, he has prepared an ascent to heaven for us; that, by taking on our mortality, he has conferred his immortality upon us; that, accepting our weakness, he has strengthened us by his power; that, receiving our poverty unto himself, he has transferred his wealth to us; that, taking the weight of our iniquity upon himself (which oppressed us), he has clothed us with his righteousness.

That we should be called the Children of God...


(o)

Back to Top
 

PotOnWheel
Registered Member




Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
 
   Posted 1/16/2008 5:21 PM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
HumanHypostasis said...
Hate to rain on the party, but I've read the NT a few times. Can somebody tell me where it says we "become God"? Gimme a clear, non-controversial, explicity claim. And 1Pet's "participating in the divine natur" ain't it.

Shoudn't our "common faith" be expressed in common terms?

I'd NEVER use "God became man that man may become God." Sorry.

T

 

 

Pick and choose as you wish.
 
I like 1 John 3:1 __ "See how great a love the Father has bestowed/lavished on us, that we would be called children of God; and such we are."


(o)

Back to Top
 

One Love
Registered Member




Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
 
   Posted 1/16/2008 5:23 PM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
I consider that our present sufferings are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us. The creation waits in eager expectation for the children of God to be revealed. For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the freedom and glory of the children of God.

We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time.
Back to Top
 

PotOnWheel
Registered Member




Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
 
   Posted 1/16/2008 5:40 PM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Imago Dei said...
   epicletic reality
I'm only going to keep those two words from D.'s post. Kind of like in Scrabble. You know, when you trade in the rest?
 
Epiklesis reminds us -- if we forget -- that its ALL grace. We are adopted. We are not only-begottens. We are on-grafted.
 
So, when we read that we are children of God, its because of Christ that the Spirit grafts us on. And because of Christ that the Spirit is sent. And we can read that Calvin -- they guy who almost quarentined Jesus Body in heaven so as to prevent the bread and wine from becoming the body and blood, while keeping the real presence BY THE SPIRIT as we "lift up our hearts" to Jesus in heaven BY the Spirit's work. Need a new sentence. We can read that Calvin that says "he has prepared an ascent to heaven for us." That's good Calvin. HE has prepared for out ascent IN MAKING HIS OWN. "One of US is in heaven. One of us is totally deified!
 
We should pause and reflect at THAT point in our reading. Worth doing.
 
So, first, initially, when Calvin says "he has conferred his immortality upon us" the least it can mean is that ONE OF US is immortal. And its good to pause for a moment on that least. It's not inferior, or lacking. (and it would be a good thing, a good lense through which to read Irenaus and Athanasias: God incarnated so that flesh IS inGODed -- even if Jesus were the only human it would be true. I suppose...)
 
Calvin:  ...[our humanity is] strengthened. . .by his power...
Calvin:  ...he has transferred his wealth to us
Calvin:  ...he has clothed us with his righteousness."
 

reading   reading   reading   reading   reading  

The incarnation and our deification/engoding/adoption naturally go together.


(o)

Back to Top
 

One Love
Registered Member




Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
 
   Posted 1/16/2008 5:49 PM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Bruce:
The incarnation and our deification/engoding/adoption naturally go together.

Right. Inhominization and theosis.  Two "poles" of the same reality.


So God created human beings in his own image, in the image of God he created them...

Back to Top
 

PotOnWheel
Registered Member




Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
 
   Posted 1/16/2008 6:02 PM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Imago Dei said...
Two "poles" of the same reality.
 
 
I'd say they are more like the two hands that make the shaking possible.


(o)

Back to Top
 

PotOnWheel
Registered Member




Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
 
   Posted 1/16/2008 6:13 PM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
PotOnWheel said...
Imago Dei said...
   epicletic reality
I'm only going to keep those two words from D.'s post. Kind of like in Scrabble. You know, when you trade in the rest?
 
Epiklesis reminds us -- if we forget -- that its ALL grace. We are adopted. We are not only-begottens. We are on-grafted.
 
So, when we read that we are children of God, its because of Christ that the Spirit grafts us on. And because of Christ that the Spirit is sent. And we can read that Calvin -- they guy who almost quarentined Jesus Body in heaven so as to prevent the bread and wine from becoming the body and blood, while keeping the real presence BY THE SPIRIT as we "lift up our hearts" to Jesus in heaven BY the Spirit's work. Need a new sentence. We can read that Calvin that says "he has prepared an ascent to heaven for us." That's good Calvin. HE has prepared for out ascent IN MAKING HIS OWN. "One of US is in heaven. One of us is totally deified!
 
We should pause and reflect at THAT point in our reading. Worth doing.
 
So, first, initially, when Calvin says "he has conferred his immortality upon us" the least it can mean is that ONE OF US is immortal. And its good to pause for a moment on that least. It's not inferior, or lacking. (and it would be a good thing, a good lense through which to read Irenaus and Athanasias: God incarnated so that flesh IS inGODed -- even if Jesus were the only human it would be true. I suppose...)
 
Calvin:  ...[our humanity is] strengthened. . .by his power...
Calvin:  ...he has transferred his wealth to us
Calvin:  ...he has clothed us with his righteousness."
 

reading   reading   reading   reading   reading  

The incarnation and our deification/engoding/adoption naturally go together.

 
Did that help, Tom?


(o)

Back to Top
 

One Love
Registered Member




Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
 
   Posted 1/17/2008 7:18 AM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Repost for Tom. Nesteruk on what it means to be a "son of God"

-------------------------

Tom:
The key hermeneutical issue is how we are to understand Christ as paradigmatic for all divine-human relationality. What’s unique, or sui generis, about the ‘hypostatic union’ (the union of divine and human natures in the one ‘hypostasis’ or ‘person’ of Christ)? What on the other hand is paradigmatic? In other words, in what sense is the ‘human’ in Christ representative of what all human beings are destined for.

The "singularity" (utter uniqueness) of Christ is the fact that he IS the Archetype. It's like what Nesteruk said. Nesteruk, page 243, "Humanity as Hypostatis of the Universe" about the ULTIMATE DIFFERENTIATION between Christ and the rest of humanity.

Christ, our idea about Christ, is the perfect model by reference to which we can answer the question about who we are. He is the man, "the first-born of every creature," (Col. 1:15), the archetype of which every human being is, in terms of his or her potentialities, the image. The difference between Christ and us is that Christ is eternally God's son, while we are God's sons because we are created in the image of Christ's divine humanity. To be a son of God is to have the Divine as the determining element (TOM!) of our being, that is, to be inherent in the divine hypostasis (Imago's Note: God the Son). It is precisely this that makes us human and that constitutes our humanity. To the degree to which we fail to attain a full realization of this, we fail to be human.

Christ is THE "one man" upon whom ALL CREATION was based. He is THE Archetype of God's Image...and we are all "images of the Image." His Sonship was DIRECT and came from no human "begetting". We are "sons in the Son" because we are "created in the image of Christ's divine humanity."

----------------------------------------------

What does this mean to you, Tom?


So God created human beings in his own image, in the image of God he created them...

Post Edited (Imago Dei) : 1/17/2008 6:27:31 AM (GMT-6)

Back to Top
 

Sahid
Megistered Rember




Date Joined Jun 2004
Total Posts : 2013
 
   Posted 1/17/2008 5:29 PM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
"...the firstborn among many brothers."

That's the one I like. It also touches on the oneness thing.


Watch me fly. Freedom like wings and I will use them. Freedom like wings and I will spread them wide. - Stavesacre

Back to Top
 

feelinahole
Registered Member


Date Joined Jan 2004
Total Posts : 754
 
   Posted 1/18/2008 1:27 AM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Certainly, it would be on how you define it. If you define it as a glorification of the individual in Christ, then I would agree with that. If, however, you define it as somehow becoming a part of God, or joining into the divine nature, then, no, I don't believe it is the common faith shared by all, nor do I believe that is what Calvin meant. Nor do I believe it would be what most Protestants or Catholics would mean. Certainly we are children of God, but by adoption, not nature. That is what the Bible speaks of.


Back to Top
 

PotOnWheel
Registered Member




Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
 
   Posted 1/18/2008 5:36 PM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
feelinahole said...
Certainly, it would be on how you define it. If you define it as a glorification of the individual in Christ, then I would agree with that. If, however, you define it as somehow becoming a part of God, or joining into the divine nature, then, no, I don't believe it is the common faith shared by all, nor do I believe that is what Calvin meant. Nor do I believe it would be what most Protestants or Catholics would mean. Certainly we are children of God, but by adoption, not nature. That is what the Bible speaks of.

Thanks, H.
 
Good job.


(o)

Back to Top
 

PotOnWheel
Registered Member




Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
 
   Posted 1/18/2008 6:03 PM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.

I was thinking about Harold's post today, and I decided to post this.

 

I'll try to use the same motif used here for Tom --- HOPE YOU COME BY, TOM --- where I *pause* early in the development of the "theosis" idea to try to both get well oriented and to get all we can out of it. I decided to pause at "Children of God" as a handy roadmark for "theosis." Again, that is both to glean details which might be overlooked by lack of contemporary drama, and to get us well oriented.

'Orientated-ness' would be the accomplishment where complicated or "out there" ideas are first well situated in relationship to more basic and central biblical concepts. Picture if you can a 'mothermold' holding several smaller molds for details for a soon to be bronze sculpture. The mother mold holds all of then in a safe, static relationship to each other. Concepts do the same. "Children of God" defines both our relatedness and our uniquenss -- which Harold summarized quite well as "Certainly we are children of God, but by adoption, not nature." ANY, any, any notions of "oneness" must be enveloped and defined by what Harold wrote!
 
So with my mofit and methodolgy explained....here goes. 
 
 
 
I think that we, or at least me-myself-and-I, should pause on the phrase "became man that man might become God." This is an election year. Lets simply ask for the facts. Did man become God? I mean, did "a" man become God? Well, yes and no. We have to say "yes and no" right away. A human of a very, very, very special and unique sort, who IS the very Only-begotten Word of the Father and always was so "became flesh, suffered and died, rose and ascended, and reigns, and will come to judge. And his "worthiness" is based on the fact that "in the flesh" he did all these things. He was wounded, and he is worthy. He suffered, and he is worthy. He bowed his head, and he is worthy. Worthy is the lamb!
 
God by nature and man by creation by the Spirit, he is worthy. And we see that man and God are compatable "IN HIM" by the hypostatic union in him. That union would become the railroad of grace! (i just made that up.) And we should pause there for a moment. Because when we say that man can become God we will be saying that every human can benefit from the human-divine union in Christ. But we should pause first to notice all those very detailed and forcefully said caveats said about it; like the fact that the hypostatic union is "without confusion, mixture, or change in either nature. Those are not just run-away philosophy (like I think part of Calvinism is, especially the Westminster Confession). As Harold said, "Certainly we are children of God, but by adoption, not nature." That's by grace rather than by nature. Salvation has come to flesh, and Christ is the first-fruits. Flesh was not in him changed, mixed or obliterated. And so, by the same token, in our own saving out humanity is not changed, obliterated or mixed.
 
So, God became man. And in so doing one man's humanity became the benifactor of divinity. And that man's humanity belonged to God the Son himself.
 
We should pause at that point for a while.
 
B.


(o)

Post Edited (PotOnWheel) : 1/18/2008 5:55:24 PM (GMT-6)

Back to Top
 
New Topic Post Reply Printable Version
85 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page :
 1  2  3  4 
   
Forum Information
Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 2:16 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads