God became man so that man could become God

Christos Anesti

Junior Member
Oct 25, 2009
3,487
333
Michigan
✟20,114.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Saint Athanasius

stathanasius.jpg


I think he stepping on Arius here.


"For He was made man that we might be made God; and He manifested Himself by a body that we might receive the idea of the unseen Father; and He endured the insolence of men that we might inherit immortality. For while He Himself was in no way injured, being impassible and incorruptible and very Word and God, men who were suffering, and for whose sakes He endured all this, He maintained and preserved in His own impassibility."

-St Athanasius De incarnatione

I've heard a more literal translation would be : "he became en-fleshed so that we might become en-godded.
 
Upvote 0

Yoder777

Senior Veteran
Nov 11, 2010
4,782
458
✟22,581.00
Faith
Buddhist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Yoder, I think that you are starting to realize the fallacies that are found in Protestant theology. May God continue to lead you to the truth. God bless.

I don't think that Protestant theology is fallacious if one realizes that the five solas of the Reformation should be seen as five primas:

PRIMA SCRIPTURA, PRIMA GRATIA, PRIMA FIDE
Categories: Uncategorized
During the sixteenth century, three theological principles came to identify the Protestant Reformation: Sola gratia, sola fide, and sola scriptura. Sola gratia (Latin, ‘grace alone’ or ‘by grace alone’) emphasizes that salvation occurs by God’s ‘grace alone’ and not by human merit. Sola fide (Latin, ‘faith alone’ or ‘by faith alone’) is similar in that it emphasizes that people accept God’s gracious offer of salvation by (or through) ‘faith alone’ rather than by human will or good works. Sola scriptura (Latin, ‘scripture alone’) emphasizes that ‘scripture alone’, rather than ecclesiastical authority or human opinion, represents religious authority. As such, it is sometimes called the ‘formal principle’ of the Protestant Reformation, or the ‘scripture principle’.

However, there has always been debate with regard to the extent of exclusivity to which the Protestant Reformers, and others who followed in their tradition, held to the sola principles—to grace, faith, and scripture ‘alone’. In theory, sola gratia, sola fide, and sola scriptura became powerful slogans for identifying, defending, and promoting the Protestant Reformation. Protestants continue to tout them. However, in practice, there are many reasons to question the Protestant principles both in terms of how the founders used them and especially in terms of how Protestants have used them since the time of the Reformation. In many ways, Protestantism includes more than grace alone, more than faith alone, and more than scripture alone. The Latin word prima (‘primarily’) makes more sense in describing the complex understanding of Protestant Reformers and their nuanced articulation of salvation and religious authority. The concept of prima makes even more sense in describing the diversity of beliefs, values, and practices in the subsequent development of Protestant Christianity.

John Wesley is a pivotal example of a Protestant who affirmed the Reformation tradition, yet went beyond it in all three of its principles. Most notable is Wesley’s complex understanding of religious authority. Albert Outler says:
The great Protestant watchwords of sola fide and sola Scriptura were in fact fundamentals in Wesley’s formulation of a doctrine of biblical authority. But early and late in his career, Wesley interpreted solus to mean “primarily” rather than “solely” or “exclusively.”[1]
In Latin, prima—rather than solus—is the appropriate adjective for modifying nouns such as faith and scripture.

In addition to religious authority, Wesley’s complex understanding of salvation affirmed more than grace alone and faith alone. Grace worked in prevenient as well as justifying ways; and people’s acceptance of salvation involved more than just faith. Salvation was a lifelong process that required responsible thoughts, words, and actions on the part of believers. Wesley’s prima understanding of the Reformation principles is as important to the present age as it was to Wesley’s age. In fact, his theological contributions become increasingly important to the so-called postmodern trajectory of our age. Wesley’s complex, dynamic, and holistic understanding of grace, faith, and scripture are crucial to both our personal Christianity and to the nature and mission of the church.
Although the sola principles remain important for understanding the history of Protestant Christianity, they are best understood theologically from a Wesleyan perspective as representing prima principles because Protestants—past and present—think that salvation and religious authority include more than grace, faith, and scripture alone. Salvation should be thought of in terms of prima gratia—initiated primarily by God’s grace—and prima fide—accepted primarily through faith. Likewise, religious authority should be thought of in terms of prima scriptura; scripture represents the primary religious authority of Protestantism but not its exclusive religious authority. Church tradition, logical reflection, and relevant experience all play important and authoritative roles in the founding and continuation of Protestantism.

In order to better understand, teach, and advance the received tradition of Protestant Christianity, it is helpful to re-examine the sola principles in terms of a more realistic and relevant perspective as prima principles. The prima principles help us to understand the history of Protestantism; we need to understand them in their historical context. They also help us understand our personal Christian vocation and the nature and mission of the church in our present, global, inter-religious context. The prima principles, in fact, are crucial to fulfilling God’s redemptive mission in the world in the present age.
Prima Scriptura, Prima Gratia, Prima Fide | The Wesleyan Quadrilateral

There are some fallacies in Catholicism I see that prevent me from being Catholic, but I don't think this is the best day for Catholic-bashing.
 
Upvote 0

Yoder777

Senior Veteran
Nov 11, 2010
4,782
458
✟22,581.00
Faith
Buddhist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Marcus Borg's theology is unorthodox:

"The notion that God's only son came to this planet to offer his life as a sacrifice for the sins of the world, and that God could not forgive us without that having happened, and that we are saved by believing this story, is simply incredible...To many people it simply makes no sense" (Marcus Borg, Meeting Jesus Again for the First Time, p.131; quoted in Jesus in an Age of Controversy, Douglas Groothuis)

While some of Borg's theology is unorthodox, other parts are reviving that which is ancient to Christian faith. Panentheism, for example, rather than just seeing God as a distant being "up there," is very ancient. That the Christian life is primarily about a relationship with God and personal transformation than just believing in doctrines now for the sake of heaven later is very ancient.
 
Upvote 0

Jpark

Well-Known Member
Oct 11, 2008
5,019
181
✟13,882.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
It's not that man becomes God. It's man becomes perfect (i.e. we WILL be raised incorruptible and in heaven sin will not exist. We can only do good.)
Yes, man cannot become God but he can become perfect. However, that perfection can also be granted by God on earth (1 John 5:18). It is the result of God's intervention. Man cannot attain perfection. When God sees things such as striving to be obedient to Him or humility, then He will intervene and grant maturity.
 
Upvote 0

papaJP

Prophet
Nov 15, 2010
493
23
Kerrville, Texas
✟15,783.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
This thread makes a statement "God became man so that man could become God". It is a statement that is wrong in its statement. The correct expression should be "God became man so that man could do the work of God and slowly move toward perfection." Jesus was God but He gave up His divinity while in the flesh so that the Holy Spirit of God could flow through Him and accomplish the will of God the Father.
We should seek the filling of the Holy Spirit so we can do what Jesus commanded of us. We are to do the work He started and did and even more. This can only be done by men of flesh when they are filled with the Holy Spirit of God and allow Him to flow through them.
God bless all who truly seek the truth and to become like Jesus the Christ.
 
Upvote 0

Yoder777

Senior Veteran
Nov 11, 2010
4,782
458
✟22,581.00
Faith
Buddhist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
This is worth reading:

Thoughts on THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST (2004)
THE DIG: Thoughts on THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST (2004)

Emphasizing resurrection and spiritual renewal instead of death and punishing an innocent victim might be a way to reach people who've been turned off to the Christian faith.
 
Upvote 0

Yoder777

Senior Veteran
Nov 11, 2010
4,782
458
✟22,581.00
Faith
Buddhist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I think it's unfortunate that Western Christianity is often a death cult instead of a path of spiritual renewal.

Subject: Greek Orthodox leaders tell flock 'Passion' isn't
accurate

February 26, 2004
BY CATHLEEN FALSANI Religion Reporter

Leaders of the Greek Orthodox Diocese of Chicago have sent letters to all
of their parishes warning clergy and the faithful that some of the
theological ideas expressed in Mel Gibson's film "The Passion of the
Christ" are not part of their tradition.

"It distorts the gospel message," said the Very Rev. Demetri Kantzavelos,
chancellor of the Chicago diocese, which includes 59 parishes in Illinois
and five other Midwestern states. "The errors that deviate from the gospel
are profound."

"My fear is that this might be the only 'gospel' that people see or read,"
he said.

"The Passion" chronicles the final 12 hours of Jesus' life, including more
than an hour of graphic depictions of brutal scourging and crucifixion.
Gibson has said the film is based on New Testament accounts and other
scholarship.

A critique of the film also released by Kantzavelos for the diocese said
Gibson's interpretation of the death of Jesus "distorted the ultimate
meaning of Christ's passion" and was "beyond the embrace of Orthodox
Christianity."

"The Orthodox Christian tradition has never focused attention on nor
explicitly promulgated an 'atonement theology' as central to church
teachings," Kantzavelos wrote in the critique. "The point of Christ's
death was to triumph over death and make a way for each of us who come
after him to join with him.

"The film misses this point," he wrote. "In Orthodox Christianity, we are
asked to identify with his victory, not with his suffering alone."

Kantzavelos said that Metropolitan Iakovos, head of the Chicago diocese,
felt compelled to send the cautionary letters to parishes after many
called the diocese for guidance about youth and church groups viewing the
film.

"Having just the passion -- the 12 hours -- lifted and compacted into two
hours without Christ's social gospel message or his healings ... renders
the movie gratuitously violent for no reason," said Kantzavelos, who saw
the film Monday. "I was not profoundly moved. I was profoundly disturbed."

Gibson's spokesman did not return a request for comment.

"The Passion" focuses almost entirely on the suffering of Jesus, with a
short depiction of the resurrection -- about two minutes at the end of the
126-minute film.
Greek Orthodox leaders tell flock 'Passion' isn't accurate - msg#00568 - music.dadl.ot
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Johnnz

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Aug 3, 2004
14,082
1,002
82
New Zealand
✟74,521.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
This thread makes a statement "God became man so that man could become God". It is a statement that is wrong in its statement. The correct expression should be "God became man so that man could do the work of God and slowly move toward perfection." Jesus was God but He gave up His divinity while in the flesh so that the Holy Spirit of God could flow through Him and accomplish the will of God the Father.
We should seek the filling of the Holy Spirit so we can do what Jesus commanded of us. We are to do the work He started and did and even more. This can only be done by men of flesh when they are filled with the Holy Spirit of God and allow Him to flow through them.
God bless all who truly seek the truth and to become like Jesus the Christ.

We cannot do the work of God. We can only live in and through the Son, allowing His life expression through us, which will be to do the will of God. The Triune God within, having adopted us as sons and daughters, and having brought us into their intimacy, has buried and then resurrected us in Christ to live out of that amazing union. A gospel primarily emphasising Jesus as Saviour has missed some fundamental perspectives of the NT.

John
NZ
 
Upvote 0

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,250
10,567
New Jersey
✟1,148,308.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
Ever since the Middle Ages, Western Christianity has understood salvation as primarily a transaction in which the individual receives forgiveness of sins through Jesus being punished in his place. While there are hints of this doctrine in Scripture, it was not the primary emphasis of the early church. The first Christians understood salvation as a process, with forgiveness of sin as only the beginning and the salvation of the entire self as its goal.

As you know from other discussions, Calvin also saw salvation as a process, with justification as its basis, but the salvation of the entire self as a goal (which however won't be achieved completely in this life). [Note that there's a subtle difference between putting justification at the beginning and as a continuing basis.]

When Protestants rejected the doctrine of purgatory, sanctification became optional, especially if you'll be immediately perfected at death anyway, based on your faith alone. Yet Scripture closely links sanctification to justification. If we are not sanctified in this life, we might need to be in the age to come:

This looks like a non sequitur, although I guess I see the reasoning. Given the concept of grace, God isn't going to throw us into hell for sins, so I guess purgatory is the only credible threat. I'm just not sure that is the best approach to sanctification.

Many Protestants believe there will be varying levels of honor in heaven. There seems to be some Biblical basis for that, as opposed to purgatory.

More complicated is the question of what Jesus and Paul would say about this.

Jesus certainly warned people about the danger of hell. However it's unclear that he was thinking of quite the concept of purgatory. Paul's concept of faith seemed to be an entire orientation of our life. When you combine Jesus and Paul, I think the model is not reward and punishment for specific actions, but a priority on developing moral character that produces good actions.

Note that Reformed and Lutheran writers both saw several uses for the Law. One was to act as a standard for people to check themselves. I think there's good support in the Protestant tradition for demanding that faith produce results. I would prefer to leave Jesus' orientation on developing good trees that produce good fruit, rather than reward and punishment for specific actions. The latter is simply too likely to result in legalism, a result that became all too clear with Catholicism. I'd rather see accountability at the level of our life as a whole. I think we can assure people that anyone who thinks they have saving faith and who isn't living a Christian life is deluding themselves.
 
Upvote 0
T

Thekla

Guest
I think Eastern Orthodox Christians often get theosis wrong. They focus so much on asceticism and avoiding sin that they often neglect the importance of doing good in the world. I'll be reading this book soon, which may or not be fit well with Orthodox sensibilities:

The focus on asceticism is actually not distinct from "doing good". In fact, it is in part through the denial of self that we can become in Christ our authentic self and do the "good" of Christ, in Christ, that we were created for. IE, when the passions reign the good we do is what seems good to us in our 'distorted' state.

Asceticism is actually part of the "therapy" (therapeia/therapeuo), as Christ the physician seeks to heal us and make us whole in Him.
 
Upvote 0

Yoder777

Senior Veteran
Nov 11, 2010
4,782
458
✟22,581.00
Faith
Buddhist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
As you know from other discussions, Calvin also saw salvation as a process, with justification as its basis, but the salvation of the entire self as a goal (which however won't be achieved completely in this life). [Note that there's a subtle difference between putting justification at the beginning and as a continuing basis.]

Did Calvin and Calvinists after him see sanctification as a path toward spiritual oneness with God?

The latter is simply too likely to result in legalism, a result that became all too clear with Catholicism.

Belief in purgatory can amount to legalism is you see it as a form of punishment for sin, rather than a state of purification.

PURGATORY
Scripture
A State After Death of Suffering and Forgiveness
Purification After Death By Fire
Tradition / Church Fathers
The Early Church’s Belief in Purgatory
Scripture Catholic - PURGATORY

It's debatable whether the fire of purgatory is a literal fire, yet the theme of purification after death is common in the early church fathers, who based it on their reading of Scripture.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Yoder777

Senior Veteran
Nov 11, 2010
4,782
458
✟22,581.00
Faith
Buddhist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
The focus on asceticism is actually not distinct from "doing good". In fact, it is in part through the denial of self that we can become in Christ our authentic self and do the "good" of Christ, in Christ, that we were created for. IE, when the passions reign the good we do is what seems good to us in our 'distorted' state.

Asceticism is actually part of the "therapy" (therapeia/therapeuo), as Christ the physician seeks to heal us and make us whole in Him.

That reminds me of this book, which may or my not be recommended for someone with Orthodox sensibilities:

Jesus is emphatic in his insistence on kenosis (letting go); it is the tie-rod connecting his theology, his practice, and his sacramental selfoffering. But the kenosis he has in mind is not a stoic stance against a pitiless reality; rather, it is a direct gateway into a divine reality which can be immediately experienced as both compassionate and infinitely generous—as coherent Oneness. Abundance surrounds and sustains us like the air we breathe; it is only our habitual self-protectiveness that prevents us from perceiving it. Thus, the real problem with any constrictive motion (defending, hoarding, accumulating, clinging) is that it makes us spiritually blind, unable to see the dance of divine generosity that is always flowing toward us. In Jesus’s teaching, then, kenosis is first and foremost a visionary tool; its primary purpose is to cleanse the lens of perception. For it immediately restores the broken link with the dynamic ground of reality, and ushers us into unitive wholeness.
http://www.cacradicalgrace.org/resources/rg/2009/04_Oct-Dec/seeing.php

In my life, I've too often seen Orthodox churches that places all this emphasis on self-denial yet do not do anything for charity, and I mean literally nothing. Though I appreciate Orthodoxy, it's one reason I am not Orthodox. If you focus primarily on doing good instead of self-denial, you might actually sin less by focusing on actively doing something other than sin.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

razeontherock

Well-Known Member
May 24, 2010
26,545
1,480
WI
✟35,597.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Marcus Borg's theology is unorthodox:

"The notion that God's only son came to this planet to offer his life as a sacrifice for the sins of the world, and that God could not forgive us without that having happened, and that we are saved by believing this story, is simply incredible...To many people it simply makes no sense" (Marcus Borg, Meeting Jesus Again for the First Time, p.131; quoted in Jesus in an Age of Controversy, Douglas Groothuis)

I seriously doubt this sound byte represents what you're suggesting. Key words underlined. I certainly hope the author goes on to proclaim that is exactly what happened, but that believing the story is only the beginning of a process.
 
Upvote 0

Yoder777

Senior Veteran
Nov 11, 2010
4,782
458
✟22,581.00
Faith
Buddhist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
While I agree with Athanasius that Jesus is true God and true man, I believe the Nicene Creed goes too far into things that we can't know for certain from Scripture or plain reason. Either that or the creed has been misused. In order to simply accept the creed without questioning it, you'd need to have a prior belief that the council was divinely inspired, which is hard to believe in light of the persecution and division that happened as a result of the council.

I believe that the focus on three separate persons within the Godhead borders on tritheism, even though I confess God as Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

Concerning Barth’s particular conception of the trinity, there is much controversy. Barth is frequently charged with adhering to a heresy called modalism. Barth often is accused of this because of his disdain for the use of the term “person” when discussing the trinity. Barth believed that such usage in the modern world was at odds with its earlier intent when used. In the modern world, Barth argued, person implies three members of the trinity with their own wills and minds. To Barth, this is tritheism, which is heresy. Thus, since God is one, Barth preferred the term “mode of being (German: Seinsweise).”
Contemporary European Views of God (1): Karl Barth on the Trinity « Stubbed Toes

When Tertullian wrote about God being three persons, the Greek word meant "mask," rather than a distinct personality. While I firmly believe in the economic Trinity, I'm agnostic about the ontological Trinity. We can accept that God is triune without grasping for too much precision and certitude in our theology of the Trinity.
 
Upvote 0

razeontherock

Well-Known Member
May 24, 2010
26,545
1,480
WI
✟35,597.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Yoder, I think that you are starting to realize the fallacies that are found in Protestant theology. May God continue to lead you to the truth. God bless.

Guess what, what I'm seeing him discover is exactly what G-d has shown me all along. So much for your "Pr fallacies theory." The Holy Spirit is not confined to a building nor a denomination, neither is G-d any respecter of persons.

I would like to refine a minor point though:

Perhaps it should be that man becomes "god" with a lower-case "g". That might be a better translation of Athanasius. It's like the Scriptural idea in John when Jesus says "you are gods."

I don't think this is a good analogy, and rather that Christ was quoting something that speaks to something different. How 'bout this: Godliness is a fruit of the Spirit. It's the one next to cleanliness, right? :D No seriously, don't get side-tracked. He is the Head! We are the Body, not added to the Godhead, not gods, not separate from each other, nor separate from Him. W/o Him we can do nothing!
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Yoder777

Senior Veteran
Nov 11, 2010
4,782
458
✟22,581.00
Faith
Buddhist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
According to Marcus Borg, there are several meanings to Jesus' death in the New Testament, especially in the letters of Paul. Yet the Western church has only focused on it being the sacrifice of an innocent victim to appease the wrath of the Father, an idea which originated with Anselm, not with the Bible.
 
Upvote 0