Divinization: Partakers of the Divine Nature

[GaryTaylor]

I think also that we are cross referencing Eastern and Western theology/philosophy. Which isn’t a wrong or right, but merely a difference in emphasis.

orthodoxwiki.org/Theosis

"The statement by St. Athanasius of Alexandria, “The Son of God became man, that we might become god”, [the second g is always lowercase since man can never become a God] indicates the concept beautifully. "

 

[Vouthon]

I should draw attention to this section also. Please note in particular the sentences in bold:

godconsciousness.com/bookofsupremetruth.htm

CHAPTER XII

OF THE HIGHEST UNION, WITHOUT DIFFERENCE OR DISTINCTION

And after this there follows the union without distinction. For you must apprehend the Love of God not only as an outpouring with all good, and as drawing back again into the Unity; but it is also, above all distinction, an essential fruition in the bare Essence of the Godhead. And in consequence of this enlightened men have found within themselves an essential contemplation which is above reason and without reason, and a fruitive tendency which pierces through every condition and all being, and through which they immerse themselves in a wayless abyss of fathomless beatitude, where the Trinity of the Divine Persons possess Their Nature in the essential Unity. Behold, this beatitude is so onefold and so wayless that in it every essential gazing, tendency, and creaturely distinction cease and pass away. **For by this fruition, all uplifted spirits are melted and noughted in the Essence of God, Which is the superessence of all essence. There they fall from themselves into a solitude and an ignorance which are fathomless; there all light is turned to darkness; there the three Persons give place to the Essential Unity, and abide without distinction in fruition of essential blessedness. **This blessedness is essential to God, and superessential to all creatures; for no created essence can become one with God’s Essence and pass away from its own substance. For so the creature would become God, which is impossible; for the Divine Essence can neither wax nor wane, nor can anything be added to It or taken from It. Yet all loving spirits are one fruition and one blessedness with God without distinction; for that beatific state, which is the fruition of God and of all His beloved, is so simple and onefold that therein neither Father, nor Son, nor Holy Ghost, is distinct according to the Persons, neither is any creature. But all enlightened spirits are here lifted up above themselves into a wayless fruition, which is an abundance beyond all the fulness that any creature has ever received or shall ever receive. For there all uplifted spirits are, in their superessence, one fruition and one beatitude with God without distinction; and there this beatitude is so onefold that no distinction can enter into it. And this was prayed for by Christ when He besought His Father in heaven that all His beloved might be made perfect in one, even as He is one with the Father through the Holy Ghost: even so He prayed and besought that He in us and we in Him and His heavenly Father might be one in fruition through the Holy Ghost. And this I think the most loving prayer which Christ ever made for our blessedness.

 

[onegirlinchrist]

On Mount Sinai Moses asked God to tell Him who He is, His name. God said He is I am that I am. God is existence. Jesus reveals God is Three Divine Persons, the Father, Son and Holy Ghost. This is who God is. We are baptized in the name of the Trinity.

There is a difference between who God is and what God is.

God is good. God is love. God is life, God is truth. God is just. God is infinite. God is omniscient. God is omnipotent. These are the infinite divine perfections, what God is. The three divine persons share the same nature.

The three persons lack nothing of what the other is. If one possessed something another lacked one would not be infinite.

All humans share human nature. We are not the same. We have unique personalities, physical characteristics, etc. In our human nature we do what we do, speak, sing, see, walk, laugh, cry, breathe, eat, drink, pray, sin. If I lacked sight I would still be human.

We can not do what a fish does, lacking fish nature.

We can do what God does. We can love, be truthful, create new life, be just, have knowledge, be merciful, etc. We are spiritual and material beings.

We can be what God is, but not who God is.

God allows us and empowers us by grace to do what He does. He shares His nature with us. In heaven you will see God who is light. On earth we see reflections of light. In heaven we will see Him face to face.

Jesus who is who God is took on human nature. He became incarnate. He took His human nature with Him when He left earth. He sits at the right hand of the Father incarnate. He is God-man, sharing our nature.

God participates in human nature so that we can participate in divine nature. He lowered Himself and raises us. This does not make us who God is. It makes us what God is.

In the person of Jesus human nature and divine nature are joined, married. God marries His creation. The two become one.

We already do participate in divine nature when we love. We participate fully in heaven.
Life here is a foretaste, or it can be so if we choose.

The father knows and loves the Son. He gives Himself to the Son entirely. Jesus says everything the Father has is mine. The Son gives Himself back to the Father. Love gives love to love. God is trinitarian.

We are made to participate in the life of the Holy Trinity.

We learn from the beginning we are made in the image and likeness of God. The temptation was to become like God. Eve already was like God, made in His image.

So are we.

The difference between God and us is we are made. Jesus is not made. He is eternally begotten of the Father.

When a woman marries a man she takes his name, at least until this confused age. The Church is the bride of Christ. The two become one. We are called by His name, Christian.

A fish can not marry a tree. In order to marry, become one with, two beings must share the same nature. God marries us.

Wow! Awesome summary. I’m investigating Catholicism. This was very helpful.

 

[onegirlinchrist]

I should draw attention to this section also. Please note in particular the sentences in bold:

godconsciousness.com/bookofsupremetruth.htm

Thanks for the quotes! Very helpful. I’m investigating Catholicism and coming to love it more by the day.

 

[onegirlinchrist]

The Catholic and Orthodox doctrine of divinization/deification/theosis is perfectly biblical, and predates Mormonism by well over a thousand years.

Incidentally, I was Mormon born and raised. My Dad cherishes “theosis” as taught by the Mormon Church because in his view, it shows God to be generous and wanting us to becoming “like” Him, in the same way that a father would want to share his prosperity/wisdom/knowledge with his kids. In Mormon theology, Mormons will still worship God the Father as a Head God, but they will become God’s themselves, and they believe this best shows a parent/child relationship between deity and us. My Dad understands the Catholic heaven to be very boring, where God will save us and then expect us to worship Him in a servile way. We will be obliged to stare at Him in a static vision that will involve the erasure of our personality and any intelligence on our part. The primary obstacle to my Dad ever leaving Mormonism and investigating Catholicism is his negative stereotype of the Catholic Heaven.

It’s hard for Mormons to refute the charge that they’re polytheistic, although they do. There are many causes for concern when it comes to Mormon theology, however there are aspects of their after-life scenario that I found attractive. Mainly the idea that God has a vision of us “growing” into something, that he doesn’t see us as servile creatures.

These descriptions of theosis from a Catholic perspective are encouraging! It doesn’t sound like God wants us worshiping Him in a way that will be boring or servile. Instead, he is “sharing” the best of who (or what I should say) He is with us. And then, it’s safe to say that our human minds can’t really understand what that will be like. I’m content to put this one on the back burner!

My Dad often says that the Eastern Orthodox idea of theosis is closer to the Mormon perspective, hence why they apostatized less

Do you or anyone on this thread know more about that?

 

[Counterpoint]

It’s hard for Mormons to refute the charge that they’re polytheistic, although they do.

Well, both Jews and Muslims have argued that the Christian doctrine of the Trinity is polytheistic (or more specifically, tri-theistic). Of course, Christians deny this charge.

Also, the CCC explicitly states that the “only-begotten” wants to share his divinity in order that he “might make men gods.”

“The only-begotten Son of God, wanting to make us sharers in his divinity, assumed our nature, so that he, made man, might make men gods.” (source: Article 460, “The Catechism of the Catholic Church”)

 

[Linusthe2nd]

I cited the Catholic Catechism. It explicitly states: “For the Son of God became man so that we might become God.”

You must distinguish between the mystical language of the Apostles, the Fathers, the Saints, which are often quoted in the CCC and how the Church explains our relationship with God. The sections dealing with grace and the Sacraments explain that through the Sacraments and through living the way we are supposed to, God becomes present to us in a special way. But we will never become God, we simply become pleasing to God and as long as we remain in His good graces, he remains in us in a special way, you can call it the " way of Love. " But the Essence or Nature or Being of God will never be mixed with our essence, nature, or being. They remain ever separate realities, both here and in Heaven.

By the way I have objected in Catechism classes when the instructor failed to draw this distinction. I think the distinction should always be made when we encounter such quotations since, otherwise, many will get the wrong idea.

Linus2nd

 

[Counterpoint]

You must distinguish between the mystical language of the Apostles, the Fathers, the Saints, which are often quoted in the CCC and how the Church explains our relationship with God. The sections dealing with grace and the Sacraments explain that through the Sacraments and through living the way we are supposed to, God becomes present to us in a special way. But we will never become God, we simply become pleasing to God and as long as we remain in His good graces, he remains in us in a special way, you can call it the " way of Love. " But the Essence or Nature or Being of God will never be mixed with our essence, nature, or being. They remain ever separate realities, both here and in Heaven.

By the way I have objected in Catechism classes when the instructor failed to draw this distinction. I think the distinction should always be made when we encounter such quotations since, otherwise, many will get the wrong idea.

It says what it says. And what it says is that “the Son of God became man so that we might become God.”

 

[RyanBlack]

But we will never become God, we simply become pleasing to God and as long as we remain in His good graces, he remains in us in a special way, you can call it the " way of Love. " But the Essence or Nature or Being of God will never be mixed with our essence, nature, or being. They remain ever separate realities, both here and in Heaven.

Linus2nd

I don’t entirely agree. Theosis is more than “simply becoming pleasing to God.” I agree that we will not participate in God on the level of essence, and there will forever remain a distinction between God and creatures. However, we undergo a transformation that involves a real participation in the life of God. This is affirmed in Holy Scripture, which speaks of us as becoming “partakers of the divine nature.”

 

[Vouthon]

I don’t entirely agree. Theosis is more than “simply becoming pleasing to God.” I agree that we will not participate in God on the level of essence, and there will forever remain a distinction between God and creatures. However, we undergo a transformation that involves a real participation in the life of God. This is affirmed in Holy Scripture, which speaks of us as becoming “partakers of the divine nature.”

Amen!

How one can simply view this as “pleasing God” is beyond me:

“…Jesus is the new man (see Eph 4:24; Col 3:10) who calls redeemed humanity to share in His divine life. The mystery of the Incarnation lays the foundations for an anthropology which, reaching beyond its own limitations and contradictions, moves towards God Himself, indeed towards the goal of divinization.** This occurs through the grafting of the redeemed on to Christ and their admission into the intimacy of the Trinitarian life.** The Fathers have laid great stress on this soteriological dimension of the mystery of the Incarnation: it is only because the Son of God truly became man that man, in him and through him, can truly become a son of God…”

- Blessed Pope John Paul II (Novo Millennio Ineunte, no. 23)

There are people who misconstrue theosis and take it to an extreme misunderstanding in terms of absorption in the essence, which is impossible, but there are also people who veer too much towards the opposite extreme. What this leads us to is a perspective more akin to Evangelical Protestantism than to traditional Christianity, where the relationship between God and his children is viewed merely in terms of servitude.

Nor do I like the seeming dismissal of mystical language. These were skilled theological minds using precise language.

 

[Vouthon]

See:

"…This is the central truth of all Christian soteriology that finds an organic unity with the revealed reality of the God-Man. God became man that man could truly participate in the life of God—so that, indeed, in a certain sense, he could become God. The Fathers of the Church had a clear consciousness of this fact. It is sufficient to recall St. Irenaeus who, in his exhortations to imitate Christ, the only sure teacher, declared: “Through the immense love he bore, he became what we are, thereby affording us the opportunity of becoming what he is…”

- Blessed John Paul II, Jesus, Son and Savior, 1996, p. 215 - General audience address September 2, 1987

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/audiences/alpha/data/aud19870902en.html

 

[Vouthon]

See:

youtube.com/watch?v=V-1JByV0K0E#t=215

The priest above explains deification well from a Catholic perspective.

Also see Ludwig Ott’s “Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma,” (pp. 256-7). This is a standard text for courses on Dogmatic Theology, published in 1952. In his section on “sanctifying grace” we find this:

Lugwig Ott

“Supernatural grace is a participation in the divine nature…From the scriptural texts cited, and from others (Ps.81, 1.6; John 10, 34, et seq.), the Fathers derived the teaching of the deification of man by grace (deificatio). It is a firm conviction of the Fathers that God became man so that man might become god, that is, to be deified. Cf. St. Athanasius, Or. De incarn. Verbi 54: ‘The Word became man, so that we might become god (be deified)’…Ps. Dionysius declares deification to be the ‘greatest possible assimilation to and unification with God’ (De eccl. Hierl, I, 3)…

In view of the nature and degree of the participation in the divine nature, two extremes are to be avoided: it must not be conceived in the pantheistic sense of the transformation of the soul into the Divinity; the infinite distance between Creator and created remains. D433, 510, 1225. Neither must it be conceived as a mere moral communion with God, which consists in the imitation of the moral perfections of God…Positively, it represents a physical communion of man with God. This consists in an actual unification which is accomplished by a created gift of God; this assimilates the soul to God and unifies it with him in a manner transcending all created powers. Man, who is, by nature, in his body, an incorporation of the Divine Idea, a vestigium Dei, and in his spirit, an image of the Divine Spirit, imago Dei, becomes by sanctifying grace, similitudo Dei, that is, becomes elevated to a higher supernatural grade of assimilation to God.”

The Church prays in the Offertory of the Holy Mass : “Grant that by the mystery of this water and wine, we may be made partakers of His divinity, who vouchsafed to become partaker of our humanity.” Similarly in the Preface of the Feast of Christ’s Ascension into Heaven : “He was assumed into Heaven in order that we might be partakers in His divinity.” Cf. D 1021.

According to 2 Peter 1, 4 the Christian is elevated to participation in the Divine nature…Again, the scriptural texts which represent justification as generation or birth from God (John 1, 12 et seq. ; 3, 5 ; 1 John 3, 1. 9 ; Tit. 3. 5 ; James 1, 18 ; 1 Peter 1, 23), indirectly teach the participation of man in the Divine nature, as generation consists in the communication of the nature of the generator to the generated.

From the scriptural texts cited, and from others (Ps. 81, 1. 6 ; John 10, 34 et seq.), the Fathers derived the teaching of the deification of man by grace (theiOis, deificatio). It is a firm conviction of the Fathers that God became man so that man might become God, that is, defied. (Dr. Lugwig Ott, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, p. 256 - German ed. 1952; English 1955.)

 

[tonyrey]

Tell that to St. Athanasius who said “God became man that man might become God,” Athanasius (ca 298–373).

And St. Catherine of Genoa:

NB:

I. God Reveals His "Plan of Loving Goodness"
51 "It pleased God, in his goodness and wisdom, to reveal himself and to make known the mystery of his will. His will was that men should have access to the Father, through Christ, the Word made flesh, in the Holy Spirit, and thus become sharers in the divine nature."2
52 God, who “dwells in unapproachable light”, wants to communicate his own divine life to the men he freely created, in order to adopt them as his sons in his only-begotten Son.3 By revealing himself God wishes to make them capable of responding to him, and of knowing him and of loving him far beyond their own natural capacity.
53 The divine plan of Revelation is realized simultaneously "by deeds and words which are intrinsically bound up with each other"4 and shed light on each another. It involves a specific divine pedagogy: God communicates himself to man gradually. He prepares him to welcome by stages the supernatural Revelation that is to culminate in the person and mission of the incarnate Word, Jesus Christ.
St. Irenaeus of Lyons repeatedly speaks of this divine pedagogy using the image of God and man becoming accustomed to one another: the Word of God dwelt in man and became the Son of man in order to accustom man to perceive God and to accustom God to dwell in man, according to the Father’s pleasure.

There is a vast difference between sharing in God’s nature and literally becoming absolutely identical with God in every respect… We identify ourselves with Jesus in His humanity.

It is the height of absurdity to believe a creature can become the Creator.

 

[Vouthon]

NB:

There is a vast difference between literally becoming absolutely identical with God in every respect and sharing in God’s nature. We identify ourselves with Jesus in His humanity.

It is the height of absurdity to believe a creature can become the Creator.

May I ask, with all due respect, where I have suggested such? You are misinterpreting St. Catherine if you believe that is what she meant.

I have went to great lengths to demonstrate that man can never lose his created human nature nor merge into the Divine Essence, while also stressing that by grace we are given a true sharing in the life of the Holy Trinity.

 

[grandfather]

If Jesus’ prayer is to be answered, then we are to be made one with the Father even as the Son is one with the Father. We are to become sons of God even as Jesus was a son of God. We are to become gods even as Jesus was a god.

“Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.” - John 17:20-21

Jesus is not a god. Jesus is God.

 

[Counterpoint]

Jesus is not a god. Jesus is God.

Jesus never claims to be God. But he did claim to be a god (at least, the implication is there in his words).

“The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God. Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?” - John 10:33-36

And it would appear that the CCC teaches that believers “might become God” and/or “gods.” (This actually does qualify as polytheism.)

“For the Son of God became man so that we might become God.” “The only-begotten Son of God, wanting to make us sharers in his divinity, assumed our nature, so that he, made man, might make men gods.” (source: Article 460, “The Catechism of the Catholic Church”)

 

[tonyrey]

May I ask, with all due respect, where I have suggested such? You are misinterpreting St. Catherine if you believe that is what she meant.

I have went to great lengths to demonstrate that man can never lose his created human nature nor merge into the Divine Essence, while also stressing that by grace we are given a true sharing in the life of the Holy Trinity.

My post is intended to clarify the meaning of “become God” in the light of Counterpoint’s assertion that “We are to become gods even as Jesus was** a god**”:

Well, both Jews and Muslims have argued that the Christian doctrine of the Trinity is polytheistic (or more specifically, tri-theistic). Of course, Christians deny this charge.

Also, the CCC explicitly states that the “only-begotten” wants to share his divinity in order that he “might make men gods.”

 

[grandfather]

Jesus never claims to be God. But he did claim to be a god (at least, the implication is there in his words).

“The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God. Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?” - John 10:33-36

And it would appear that the CCC teaches that believers “might become God” and/or “gods.” (This actually does qualify as polytheism.)

“For the Son of God became man so that we might become God.” “The only-begotten Son of God, wanting to make us sharers in his divinity, assumed our nature, so that he, made man, might make men gods.” (source: Article 460, “The Catechism of the Catholic Church”)

When pointedly asked WHO He is, how He is related to God, the answer He gave that drove the Jews mad, that was the crime deserving death, was I AM. He took the name of God for Himself, making Himself God.

When He called Himself the truth, life, the way, the resurrection He was saying He is God.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Jesus never claims to be God. But he did claim to be a god (at least, the implication is there in his words).

Yet you produce another double standard in that explicit is reduced to implicit to support your thinking.

To clarify implicit is concluded in Apostolic teaching “also”. What Jesus did not say for certain is.

“I am not God, do not worship Me.”

“I am not the Son of God.”

"I didn’t come to die for your sins or lay my life as a ransom for many.”

The last being the mission of Christ and understood from Genesis 3:15 forward.

biblehub.com/genesis/3-15.htm

Thus we reach the double standard which is nothing more than simple polemics.

Why Jesus didn’t simply come out explicitly and say, “I AM-God” Noted New Testament Scholar and Catholic Theologian Raymond E. Brown states it best:

“The question concerns Jesus a Galilean Jew of the first third of the first century, for whom ‘God’ would have a meaning specified by his background and the theological language of the time. By way of simplification (and perhaps oversimplification) let me say that I think by a Jew of that period ‘God’ would have been thought of as One dwelling in the heavens - among many attributes. Therefore, a question posed to Jesus on earth, ‘Do you think you are God?’ WOULD MEAN, DID HE THINK HE WAS THE ONE DWELLING IN HEAVEN. And you can see that would have been an inappropriate question, since Jesus was visibly on earth. As a matter of fact the question was never asked of him; at most he was asked about his relationship to God.” (Brown, Responses to 101 Questions on the Bible [Paulist Press, Mahwah, N.J., 1990], p. 98)

 

[Linusthe2nd]

I cited the Catholic Catechism. It explicitly states: “For the Son of God became man so that we might become God.”

Why am I not surprised that you refuse to be instructed? Listen to your brothers and sisters who are explaining the Truth.

Linus2nd.