Dr. Cooper - really appreciate you addressing this with such care and consideration. Putting it within the protestant context and also appreciating the modern day aversions towards mystery, while clearly citing the ties to orthodoxy, really landed it well sir. Thanks for putting out earnest effort for bridging divides on our critically important topics.
Theosis is a theological word that means describes our mystical union with God, the Divine Nature as Peter says that we participate in the Divine Nature.
My take is that the mystical nature of what is beyond or at best only hinted at in scripture is to be left to the inscrutable will, justice and providence of God. "Theosis" as enticing existential experience has claimed many to the East, with its incomplete soteriology; not because there is either a substantial Biblical or patristic warrant, but because it is "exotic" and outside of the historic and proverbial western wheelhouse - much like the appeal of Buddhist or Hindu mysticism that while ancient also and relatively exotic, is chic and new to the west. I urge you to consider that for all of the motifs of the cross in scripture, that of the 'Lord laying on Him the iniquity of us all' is absolutely primary. The message of reconciliation entrusted to the Apostles is nothing less than the complete propitiatory forgiveness of sins, for whatever else new life in Christ might be, entail or become in this life and beyond. Solus Christus, sola gratia, sola fide. Soli Deo gloria! EDIT: Since posting and watching many of your videos on this and related theological topics, I now believe with certainty that you do hold it in proper relation to Justification. Very glad to see that!
God's Glory is Eternal and by faith we share in His Eternal Glory - even right now. "Christ in you, the hope of Glory... When Christ who is your life appears, then you also will appear with him in Glory." (Col 1:27, 3:4) By faith in "His precious and very great promises" (2Pet 1:4) of the hope of appearing with Him in Glory, God's divine nature is ours through His Holy Spirit in us. If we "make every effort" (v.5), the qualities of Christ will increase in us (v.8) and help us to be effective and fruitful (v.8) and stable in our walk (v.10) during the growing process called sanctification.
The Mormon Joke was funny. Two observations: 1) The Mormon explanation is far more succinct. Catholics and Orthodox tend to describe Theosis in these vague generalities and comparisons. 2) The Mormon explanation would require a God more powerful, more loving, and more omniscient than a God who delivers a watered down version of Theosis. I don't think people are asking the right questions about this doctrine.
Despite all evidences right before his very eyes, speaker fails to understand the true nature of our final union with the God. Lord Jesus Christ is the template for us - to His divine nature He attached fallen human nature, that was deified by the divine one and thus produced full God and full human in its original form Adam was in before the fall. In a similar way, but starting from fallen human nature, we are called to partake in divine nature (2 Peter 1, 4) in a way that we will, by God's Grace, receive His divine nature in us, attach it to our fallen human nature, and in turn, have our sick fallen nature deified, healed from corruption caused by Original Sin, so that it becomes once again healthy, in a same way Adam's nature was before the fall. That is why it is said that we have received Sonship (Rom 8, 12), we are called to become brothers of Christ through adoption (Gal 4). Jesus Christ is Son of God by nature, and we are called to be sons of God by Grace. In the end, as the Holy Three are three persons of God, eternal and uncreated, we are called to add our persons to the Holy Three thus becoming through His offerings to us, one with Him in God (1 Cor 15, 28). Hope this clarifies Eastern Orthodox doctrine of Theosis - Deification. PS 1: It is pretty astonishing to see calling we humans have received - to walk the path from NOTHING to god. PS 2: It is unfair to compare our doctrine with the LDS just because they have something similar in name, but are in fact two totally different doctrines.
Hi. Thank you for the clear explanation. I wonder if there are things in the OT which you'd say point to this idea, and if so could you provide a couple examples? Thank you.
@@AnHebrewChild Yes, there are references in the OT books. First one is not a direct, but indirect, when God created man in His own likeness, indicating His intentions going forward. Creatures that are not in His likeness could have never been called to become His sons - that we can witness in our daily lives, as our sons are always in likeness of parents, for example. More direct references are found in the Psalm 82, where in the v6 we read: "I said, You are gods, and all of you are children of the Most High." This particular ref. some think are referring to the angels, but Lord Himself quoted that verse in relation to the people of Israel thus tossing away such wrong interpretations (John 10,34). Last point... During the OT times, Theosis was not a prominent goal of the Old Israel due to the fact that fallen human nature was yet to be salvaged by the Lord incarnate on the Calvary. Before His achievements Theosis was for a time put aside until Savior coming. That is why after His death, He went down into the Hades to preach the Gospel to all those who died previously (1 Pet 3,19).
Some of scripture explains, some must be explained, and some scripture must be explained away. The constant measure is the theological template with which men overlay the text. Just like a cookie cutter, it contains and shapes what it can, but severs and rejects what will not fit within the bounds. Lutheranism does this just like every other system, just not as well as Catholicism.
Dr. Cooper - really appreciate you addressing this with such care and consideration. Putting it within the protestant context and also appreciating the modern day aversions towards mystery, while clearly citing the ties to orthodoxy, really landed it well sir.
Thanks for putting out earnest effort for bridging divides on our critically important topics.
Theosis is a theological word that means describes our mystical union with God, the Divine Nature as Peter says that we participate in the Divine Nature.
My take is that the mystical nature of what is beyond or at best only hinted at in scripture is to be left to the inscrutable will, justice and providence of God. "Theosis" as enticing existential experience has claimed many to the East, with its incomplete soteriology; not because there is either a substantial Biblical or patristic warrant, but because it is "exotic" and outside of the historic and proverbial western wheelhouse - much like the appeal of Buddhist or Hindu mysticism that while ancient also and relatively exotic, is chic and new to the west.
I urge you to consider that for all of the motifs of the cross in scripture, that of the 'Lord laying on Him the iniquity of us all' is absolutely primary. The message of reconciliation entrusted to the Apostles is nothing less than the complete propitiatory forgiveness of sins, for whatever else new life in Christ might be, entail or become in this life and beyond.
Solus Christus, sola gratia, sola fide. Soli Deo gloria!
EDIT: Since posting and watching many of your videos on this and related theological topics, I now believe with certainty that you do hold it in proper relation to Justification. Very glad to see that!
In what way its soteriology incomplete?
iykyk
God's Glory is Eternal and by faith we share in His Eternal Glory - even right now. "Christ in you, the hope of Glory... When Christ who is your life appears, then you also will appear with him in Glory." (Col 1:27, 3:4)
By faith in "His precious and very great promises" (2Pet 1:4) of the hope of appearing with Him in Glory, God's divine nature is ours through His Holy Spirit in us. If we "make every effort" (v.5), the qualities of Christ will increase in us (v.8) and help us to be effective and fruitful (v.8) and stable in our walk (v.10) during the growing process called sanctification.
up
The Mormon Joke was funny.
Two observations:
1) The Mormon explanation is far more succinct. Catholics and Orthodox tend to describe Theosis in these vague generalities and comparisons.
2) The Mormon explanation would require a God more powerful, more loving, and more omniscient than a God who delivers a watered down version of Theosis. I don't think people are asking the right questions about this doctrine.
Despite all evidences right before his very eyes, speaker fails to understand the true nature of our final union with the God. Lord Jesus Christ is the template for us - to His divine nature He attached fallen human nature, that was deified by the divine one and thus produced full God and full human in its original form Adam was in before the fall. In a similar way, but starting from fallen human nature, we are called to partake in divine nature (2 Peter 1, 4) in a way that we will, by God's Grace, receive His divine nature in us, attach it to our fallen human nature, and in turn, have our sick fallen nature deified, healed from corruption caused by Original Sin, so that it becomes once again healthy, in a same way Adam's nature was before the fall. That is why it is said that we have received Sonship (Rom 8, 12), we are called to become brothers of Christ through adoption (Gal 4). Jesus Christ is Son of God by nature, and we are called to be sons of God by Grace. In the end, as the Holy Three are three persons of God, eternal and uncreated, we are called to add our persons to the Holy Three thus becoming through His offerings to us, one with Him in God (1 Cor 15, 28). Hope this clarifies Eastern Orthodox doctrine of Theosis - Deification.
PS 1: It is pretty astonishing to see calling we humans have received - to walk the path from NOTHING to god.
PS 2: It is unfair to compare our doctrine with the LDS just because they have something similar in name, but are in fact two totally different doctrines.
Hi. Thank you for the clear explanation. I wonder if there are things in the OT which you'd say point to this idea, and if so could you provide a couple examples? Thank you.
@@AnHebrewChild Yes, there are references in the OT books. First one is not a direct, but indirect, when God created man in His own likeness, indicating His intentions going forward. Creatures that are not in His likeness could have never been called to become His sons - that we can witness in our daily lives, as our sons are always in likeness of parents, for example. More direct references are found in the Psalm 82, where in the v6 we read: "I said, You are gods, and all of you are children of the Most High." This particular ref. some think are referring to the angels, but Lord Himself quoted that verse in relation to the people of Israel thus tossing away such wrong interpretations (John 10,34).
Last point... During the OT times, Theosis was not a prominent goal of the Old Israel due to the fact that fallen human nature was yet to be salvaged by the Lord incarnate on the Calvary. Before His achievements Theosis was for a time put aside until Savior coming. That is why after His death, He went down into the Hades to preach the Gospel to all those who died previously (1 Pet 3,19).
If you've not actually become one of Christ's immortal gods, you have NO idea what you are talking about. It first requires EXPANDED CONSCIOUSNESS ..
Some of scripture explains, some must be explained, and some scripture must be explained away.
The constant measure is the theological template with which men overlay the text.
Just like a cookie cutter, it contains and shapes what it can, but severs and rejects what will not fit within the bounds.
Lutheranism does this just like every other system, just not as well as Catholicism.
>Catholic Perennialist
Yeah okay. Sure, bud.
@@bobjoe3520 Those who know nothing should say nothing.
@@Catholic-Perennialist You should take your own advice.
@@Adrian-si1gz I know much more than nothing; therefore, I speak.
@@Catholic-Perennialist So does that person but you still said they know nothing or implied it are you denying that?