Is Deification compatible with Lutheranism?

Is Deification compatible with Lutheranism?

  • Yes

    Votes: 3 42.9%
  • No

    Votes: 4 57.1%

  • Total voters
    7

Resha Caner

Expert Fool
Sep 16, 2010
9,171
1,398
✟148,100.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
Yes I do but you have to keep in mind there are different sects within Lutheranism so you will get different answers to that question.

I get the impression the OP is only looking for confirmation and doesn't want to hear comments to the contrary.

I just feel Christification is under developed in Lutheranism and Pr Cooper is a bit of an outliner when it comes to this subject and I appreciate it about him.

I didn't so much object to the essence of what Cooper said, as to the terms used to frame it. Cooper agreed the Lutheran view differs from the EO view, that terms such as "deification" are EO terms, and that those terms are confusing to the extent he had to identify a new label for the Lutheran view. But I still don't like the label he uses. It's a simple repackaging of the same terms he acknowledges are misleading.

Why not use the Biblical phrase? "partakers of Christ" If he has to Greekify the phrase to make it opaque so he can sell books, then call it metokhoi or something.
 
Upvote 0

Tigger45

Romans 12:2…be transformed…
Supporter
Aug 24, 2012
20,713
13,149
E. Eden
✟1,264,086.00
Country
United States
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Constitution
I do prefer the term Christification because it intrinsically carries a physical element that we are not only in now but culminates in its perfection at the resurrection. Where the term theosis might not only be helpful in demonstrating the process it’s would also be useful when utilizing the ECF writings. Not forgetting Luther’s input whether we retain all of what he wrote or only portions.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: anna ~ grace
Upvote 0

FireDragon76

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Apr 30, 2013
30,474
18,454
Orlando, Florida
✟1,249,090.00
Country
United States
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
Politics
US-Democrat
Among certain kinds of Christians looking to fill a perceived void in spirituality, deification is a concept with some currency so it is not arbitrary that Pr. Cooper is seeking to address it within a Lutheran context.
 
Upvote 0

Tigger45

Romans 12:2…be transformed…
Supporter
Aug 24, 2012
20,713
13,149
E. Eden
✟1,264,086.00
Country
United States
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Constitution
Last edited:
Upvote 0

MarkRohfrietsch

Unapologetic Apologist
Supporter
Dec 8, 2007
30,381
5,253
✟816,720.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
Here’s a quick little read that might be helpful from Martin Luther himself.


http://www.ctsfw.net/media/pdfs/marquartlutherandtheosis.pdf
Thanks for posting this; a quote from Luther from the link you provided sums it up:
The difference in terminology between Luther and the Formula should not seduce us into the optical illusion of a difference in doctrine. Luther insists just as rigidly, as does the Formula, on a radical differentiation between imputed and inchoate righteousness, only his terms for this are "passive" and "active" righteousness. Luther devotes a whole introductory section to this topic, under the title, "The Argument of St. Paul's Epistle to the ~Galatians."~~ The distinctively "Christian righteousness," by which alone we are justified and saved, "is heavenly and passive," that is, All the various forms of earthly, active righteousness are excluded from this.
 
Upvote 0

zippy2006

Dragonsworn
Nov 9, 2013
6,772
3,371
✟241,835.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Thanks for posting this; a quote from Luther from the link you provided sums it up:
The difference in terminology between Luther and the Formula should not seduce us into the optical illusion of a difference in doctrine. Luther insists just as rigidly, as does the Formula, on a radical differentiation between imputed and inchoate righteousness, only his terms for this are "passive" and "active" righteousness. Luther devotes a whole introductory section to this topic, under the title, "The Argument of St. Paul's Epistle to the ~Galatians."~~ The distinctively "Christian righteousness," by which alone we are justified and saved, "is heavenly and passive," that is, All the various forms of earthly, active righteousness are excluded from this.

So deification is a form of inchoate or active righteousness and is therefore not the righteousness by which one is saved?
 
Upvote 0

Tigger45

Romans 12:2…be transformed…
Supporter
Aug 24, 2012
20,713
13,149
E. Eden
✟1,264,086.00
Country
United States
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Constitution
Thanks for posting this; a quote from Luther from the link you provided sums it up:
The difference in terminology between Luther and the Formula should not seduce us into the optical illusion of a difference in doctrine. Luther insists just as rigidly, as does the Formula, on a radical differentiation between imputed and inchoate righteousness, only his terms for this are "passive" and "active" righteousness. Luther devotes a whole introductory section to this topic, under the title, "The Argument of St. Paul's Epistle to the ~Galatians."~~ The distinctively "Christian righteousness," by which alone we are justified and saved, "is heavenly and passive," that is, All the various forms of earthly, active righteousness are excluded from this.
Exactly, I’m looking forward to further exposition of Christification through a monergestic hermeneutic where the manifestation of the fruits of the Spirit is the result of God’s relationship with believers.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: anna ~ grace
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

A Shield of Turquoise

Active Member
Apr 29, 2019
72
37
Southeastern Pennsylvania
✟15,080.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I'm surprised no one brought up the Lutheran theologian Tuomo Mannermaa and his "New Finnish interpretation of Luther" which argues that Luther taught a kind of theosis. He of course has his critics among Lutherans but there is not a unanimous Lutheran position on this.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: anna ~ grace
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
37,341
26,782
Pacific Northwest
✟728,085.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
What do others think? Is deification compatible with Lutheranism? @ViaCrucis, @FireDragon76, @Newtheran, @MarkRohfrietsch?

I vote yes. Where I probably disagree with, at least some perspectives on it, is how I've seen Theoria described--it's that interior-mystical dimension that is probably going to give Lutherans a hard time. But, if we understand Theosis as our being conformed to Christ, and our sharing in the Divine Nature through our union with Christ, I don't see how we can avoid it. It's fundamentally part of what big picture salvation means.

Not a gradual ladder-climbing toward God; but rather the Self-giving of God in Christ through Word and Sacrament; our identity in Christ, now ours through faith and, in the resurrection, in full.

"Beloved, we are God’s children now, and what we will be has not yet appeared; but we know that when he appears we shall be like him, because we shall see him as he is." - 1 John 3:2

-CryptoLutheran
 
Upvote 0

zippy2006

Dragonsworn
Nov 9, 2013
6,772
3,371
✟241,835.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
I'm surprised no one brought up the Lutheran theologian Tuomo Mannermaa and his "New Finnish interpretation of Luther" which argues that Luther taught a kind of theosis. He of course has his critics among Lutherans but there is not a unanimous Lutheran position on this.

Tigger45 posted some articles that reference him.
 
Upvote 0

zippy2006

Dragonsworn
Nov 9, 2013
6,772
3,371
✟241,835.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
I vote yes. Where I probably disagree with, at least some perspectives on it, is how I've seen Theoria described--it's that interior-mystical dimension that is probably going to give Lutherans a hard time. But, if we understand Theosis as our being conformed to Christ, and our sharing in the Divine Nature through our union with Christ, I don't see how we can avoid it. It's fundamentally part of what big picture salvation means.

Thanks. Out of curiosity, how is the idea of Theoria problematic for Lutherans?

Would "little picture salvation" just be justification?
 
Upvote 0

Newtheran

Well-Known Member
Sep 10, 2018
783
571
South
✟26,789.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
In his post here @FireDragon76 links to Lutheran theologian David Wagschal's critique of the traditional Christian doctrine of Deification or Theosis. In beginning to explicate the doctrine of Deification, Wagschal tells us:

This is the teaching that salvation is the progressive and gradual sanctification or “divinizing” of the person, the church, and the cosmos. It is the idea that God saves or redeems us by permeating the creation and transforming it into its own (properly) divine form. -The Problem with Deification
Here is a quick outline of Wagschal's basic criticisms:
  1. Deification creates the notion that God's love rests on our future, deified selves rather than on ourselves as we exist in the here and now, namely as sinful.
  2. Deification creates the notion that salvation is progressive ladder-climbing rather than gratuitous and radical gift.
  3. Deification leads to political theologies.
  4. Deification leads to an appearance- and performance-based focus.

What do you think? Is Deification compatible with Lutheranism? Feel free to completely ignore Wagschal's analysis if you have thoughts different from his on the topic.

From Orthowiki:

"Theosis ("deification," "divinization") is the process of a worshiper becoming free of hamartía ("missing the mark"), being united with God, beginning in this life and later consummated in bodily resurrection. For Orthodox Christians, Théōsis (see 2 Pet. 1:4) is salvation. Théōsis assumes that humans from the beginning are made to share in the Life or Nature of the all-Holy Trinity. Therefore, an infant or an adult worshiper is saved from the state of unholiness (hamartía — which is not to be confused with hamártēma “sin”) for participation in the Life (zōé, not simply bíos) of the Trinity — which is everlasting.

This is not to be confused with the heretical (apothéōsis) - "Deification in God’s Essence", which is imparticipable."

I think that when most of us see the word "deification", we automatically think apotheosis ("I shall be like the most high!"), not theosis which is probably more akin to the protestant concept of sanctification. So my personal opinion as an orthodox (little o) Christian with Orthodox (capital o) sympathies and a confessional traditional Lutheran is that it is compatible.

It's also important to know the biases of individuals who make such critiques. David Wagschal is a graduate of St. Vladimir's Seminary who apostasized from Eastern Orthodoxy to embrace progressive Lutheranism of the ELCA flavor.

This is his church: Redeemer Lutheran Church, Toronto

This is what they are doing per their website: "The rainbow flag is flying over the church!"

He is not a reliable source on orthodox Christianity, whether that o is lower case or capitalized.
 
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

Resha Caner

Expert Fool
Sep 16, 2010
9,171
1,398
✟148,100.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
[theosis] is probably more akin to the protestant concept of sanctification.

Similar to, yes. But are they the same?

Where I probably disagree with, at least some perspectives on it, is how I've seen Theoria described--it's that interior-mystical dimension that is probably going to give Lutherans a hard time. But, if we understand Theosis as our being conformed to Christ, and our sharing in the Divine Nature through our union with Christ, I don't see how we can avoid it. It's fundamentally part of what big picture salvation means.

Right. What, then, are we talking about here? Are we:
1) Trying to apply the term "theosis" (or "deification") to a Lutheran concept already known as sanctification (or justification)?
2) Trying to place the concept of "theosis" into a gap left by the concepts of sanctification and justification?

Is there a distinction between theosis and those other terms? If so, does that mean there is something lacking in Lutheran concepts of justification or sanctification that is filled by theosis? Or is it some practice - a bit of adiaphora - where we can take it or leave it? Or is it prone to constant misunderstanding and abuse?
 
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
37,341
26,782
Pacific Northwest
✟728,085.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
Thanks. Out of curiosity, how is the idea of Theoria problematic for Lutherans?

Would "little picture salvation" just be justification?

That we can achieve Theoria or the Beatific Vision in this life, i.e., we can attain perfection, glory, etc in this life is problematic; because it promotes a Theology of Glory, a theology of our attaining glory here, especially through our own efforts.

Theoria, that is the glory of the vision of God, in the Age to Come certainly isn't a problem, as that is biblical, as St. John says, "We shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is." (1 John 3:2).

I'd say that sure we could say "little picture salvation" would be our individual salvation, that is our justification; by big picture I mean the over-arching working of God, bringing about all things into the fullness of His purposes for creation, such as the renewal of all things. In the end, "He will dwell with them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them as their God." (Revelation 21:3) This perfect, glorious, state of all things toward which God is and has purposed us and all of creation. Our justification, forgiveness of sins, being intricately and intimately part of this larger work; that we have peace with God, participate in God, are purposed in God, to ultimately share in God and in the glory that is to come.

-CryptoLutheran
 
  • Informative
Reactions: zippy2006
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
37,341
26,782
Pacific Northwest
✟728,085.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
Similar to, yes. But are they the same?



Right. What, then, are we talking about here? Are we:
1) Trying to apply the term "theosis" (or "deification") to a Lutheran concept already known as sanctification (or justification)?
2) Trying to place the concept of "theosis" into a gap left by the concepts of sanctification and justification?

Is there a distinction between theosis and those other terms? If so, does that mean there is something lacking in Lutheran concepts of justification or sanctification that is filled by theosis? Or is it some practice - a bit of adiaphora - where we can take it or leave it? Or is it prone to constant misunderstanding and abuse?

I'd see Theosis as part of the now and not yet, and as such it is now in our sanctification, God's gracious work in our lives now, conforming us to Christ, the renewing of our mind, et al; and then in full in the future--the resurrection, and the sharing of the fullness of glory in the Age to Come. Theosis being our sharing in God, which is both now through the indwelling of the Spirit as grace through faith, and in the resurrection and the life of the Age to Come the full transformation of the human person in God's glory--i.e. "Glorification".

I don't think Theosis should be regarded as foreign to Lutheran thought, as Theosis is thoroughly part of the biblical language of salvation.

-CryptoLUtheran
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Tigger45
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

zippy2006

Dragonsworn
Nov 9, 2013
6,772
3,371
✟241,835.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
It's also important to know the biases of individuals who make such critiques. David Wagschal is a graduate of St. Vladimir's Seminary who apostasized from Eastern Orthodoxy to embrace progressive Lutheranism of the ELCA flavor.

This is his church: Redeemer Lutheran Church, Toronto

This is what they are doing per their website: "The rainbow flag is flying over the church!"

He is not a reliable source on orthodox Christianity, whether that o is lower case or capitalized.

That is good to know, though sometimes former adherents represent their old traditions accurately. In fact I don't think he misrepresented the concept of theosis in his article. If anything he overemphasized the Lutheran doctrine of justification, an error which may not be so common from ELCA Lutherans.

I still find his core criticism interesting, especially for laymen who are unable to make more subtle distinctions regarding justification, sanctification, and deification. Deification is foreign to Lutheranism at least on a certain level. Deification--or even sanctification--is apparently something that is not commonly preached from Lutheran pulpits. It is part of the broader tradition, but a lack of attention seems to eclipse it in favor of other doctrines which are more characteristically Lutheran.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: anna ~ grace
Upvote 0