THEOSIS - PLEASE HELP..

Hello,

I thought we agreed that we are not hypostatically uniting with the Divinity & that we cannot consume Divinity(please read previous threads), then could someone explain this. Im so sorry if I'm getting hung up on words..

-----

St Cyril of Alexandria said in the Fraction Prayer in our Coptic Orthodox Eukologion (Al Kholagy): "When your glory descends on your Sacraments, our minds are lifted to behold your majesty.  When the bread and wine are transformed to your body and blood, [i]our souls partake of your glory and become united with your Divinity ... You gave us the privilege to eat your body publicly; grant us to unite with you sacramentally (secretly). ... As you are one with your Father and the Holy Spirit we become united with you and you with us..."  St Gregory the Theologian in the Liturgy we pray in our Kholagy also says: " And when you ascended to Heaven bodily you filled us all with your Divinity." 
[/i]

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

Please for goodness sake, someone answer this... (thanks for your love & patience). THe more I read, the more I think I know, and then i realise i don't know anything. Is that fair!?

Ortho11, please help me out man, I don't know where Iqbal's gone, but i want closure on this.

Comments

  • Sorry, i have only PART of the answer. I still need help with this.

  • I thought we made a difference between partaking OF and partaking IN
    but I think it means we taste or touch the divine when we take communion, not that we acutually become divine or anything like that.
    I'm not sure though, plz correct me if I'm wrong. God bless and plz pray for me
  • [quote author=godislove260 link=topic=6590.msg87611#msg87611 date=1210775593]
    I thought we made a difference between partaking OF and partaking IN
    but I think it means we taste or touch the divine when we take communion, not that we acutually become divine or anything like that.
    I'm not sure though, plz correct me if I'm wrong. God bless and plz pray for me


    OK, i'll summarise.

    In the person of Jesus Christ, God shares Himself with the human race, in order to conform them to all that God is in knowledge, righteousness and holiness. As God became man, in all ways except sin, He will also make man god, in all ways except His divine essence. So, the question remains – What then is this UNITY during comunion??

    So how do we Unite with Divinity:

    The answer is SIMPLE:  In the Orthodox Church of Christ man can achieve deification because, according to the teachings of the Holy Bible and the Fathers of the Church, the Grace of God is uncreated. God is not only essence, as the West thinks; He is also energy. If God was only essence, we could not unite with Him, could not commune with Him, because the essence of God is awesome and unapproachable for man, in accordance with: ‘Never will man see My face and live’ (Exod. 33:20).

    Therefore, in the Holy Communion, we DO NOT UNITE WITH the Divine Essence, but with His UNCREATED ENERGIES (uncreated, we mean “Outside of God”). Not with His Divinity.

    But given that the energies of God are also divine, so they can be called divinity too - in that sense, u can say we unite with divinity. BUT ONLY IN THAT SENSE!! We do NOT UNITE WITH DIVINITY. We unite with His Divine Grace. A property of that grace is its life giving properties.

    Period.

    So, why on earth does our Beloved Saint Cyril say "our souls partake of your glory and become united with your Divinity". This baffles me.

    To unite His Divinity with our Humanity makes us not only Godly, but equal to God. We are His sons through adoption, not through substance (or Essence).

    If we grasp a bare electric wire, we will die. However, if we connect a lamp to that wire, we are illuminated. We see, enjoy, and are assisted by the energy of electric current, but we are not able to grasp its essence, yet we enjoy its properties and attributes.

    Let us say that something similar happens with the uncreated energy of God.

    If God had only the divine essence – of which we cannot partake – and did not have His energies, He would remain a self-sufficient god, closed within himself and unable to commune with his creatures.

    God, according to the Orthodox theological view, is One in a Trinity and a Trinity in One. As St. Maximus the Confessor, St. Dionysius the Areopagite, and other holy Fathers repeatedly say, God is filled with a divine love, a divine eros for His creatures. Because of this infinite and ecstatic love of His, He comes out of Himself and seeks to unite with them. This is expressed and realised by means of His energy or, better, His energies.

    We unite with His Divine Energies - OK... but not with HIS Divinity. I experience the power of an electric current when I put a lamp in the circuit, but for goodness sake, i don't have to experience it by putting my finger in the electrical circuit and making myself part of that circuit. I cannot!

    Its same with this unity of Divinity... what then can we conclude from our Father Cyril?

    (I sent a mail to Orthodox11). how comes no one is answering this?
  • wow thanks very much for the explanation, truly God's mercy and grace is infinite.
    Praise Him with all our hearts...
  • [quote author=godislove260 link=topic=6590.msg87795#msg87795 date=1210881243]
    wow thanks very much for the explanation, truly God's mercy and grace is infinite.
    Praise Him with all our hearts...


    Wait before you thank me, could you just wait until Clay, Safaa, or Iqbal just confirm it. I didnt post it to answer myself. I posted it so that they could help shed some light on this.

    Sorry... just wait until someone more knowledgeable comes along.
  • [quote author=QT_PA_2T link=topic=6590.msg87585#msg87585 date=1210746408]
    our souls partake of your glory and become united with your Divinity ... You [/i]


    QT,

    If I am not wrong, It was St Athnasisus the great, whose commemoration day was celebrated today who wrote that "God became man so that man might become God".This, of course does not mean that we will acquire the substance or nature of God  such as being  the all-knower,the all-aware-the ominpresent, the all-creator,but God-like by imitation. As you correctly pointed out, our union with the devine is a union with the energy of God and not the essence of God, for God's nature is incomprehensible to humans and that this union could only be accomplished through the grace of the Holy Spirit.This heavenly promise of  union with the devine was made by the Lord Jesus Christ when He prayed to the Father asking "John 17:21: That you might be unified, with the Father, in the same way that the Father and the Son are."Not only does this verse explains that there is a possibility to be unified with God ,but that we also have the permission to have it as long as we do God's will.

    Similar verse could also be found in   Mt5 :48 :Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.Perfection is supposed to mean completeness.However, we can only attain that high state only when we are changed into God,that is, when our frail and weak Human nature has been totaly eliminated and transformed.

    As you know,St Athanasius' writing was, of course based on the scriptures and in no way deviates a micro inch from it.St Athnasisus used a very vague and confusing concept  of " united with your divinity" (St Cyril the great took the term from St Athansisus)" because the tradtions of his days demanded it.Remember also,that he was battling the heretics.In them good old days, when the Greeks were masters of the mind, the so called moralists and sophists used to teach that a person may be deified by consciously pausing  the activity of the brain/mind thereby contemplating the eternal ,resulting in the experience of nirvana (similar to Buddhism). Since the Greek Philosophers like the Platonists considered some of their gods to be of human origin, it was not something out of the ordinary to think of the idea of human divinization.Thus, St Athnasisus was talking the language of those days,that was rooted in pre christian philosophy and it might interest you to know that the concept he used was widely known accepted and used. All church fathers, Greats like St Cyril, St Basil, St Macarious, St Efraiam the Syrian, The Sts. Gregorys etc etc.,followed suit and used the terms and definitions extensively.

    My 2 cents Arkadash.
  • Greetings Hezekiel,

    Many thanks for coming and gracing us with your post. I definately feel that your post blesses the discussion and adds some credibility given my ignorant and un-confident understanding in theology.

    Hezkiel, my belief - and this is based on the writings of the Fathers of the Greek Orthodox Church:

    You are right. God wishes us to be in His Likeness. Yes. In fact, this is our ultimate goal: To be in His Likeness.

    St. Athanasius of Alexandria wrote, “God became human so humans would become gods” (On the Incarnation 54:3, PG 25:192B). His statement is an apt description of the concept of theosis. But notice the miniscule case “g”. We do not become “Gods”, but gods. Had we hypostatically united the Divine Nature with our Human Nature, we would be equal to Christ. But the Bible tells us otherwise. So therefore, this unity that occurs during the Mystery of Communion of the Eucharist, is not one where we become Gods! But rather where we become gods. Its where we become godly. Hence the union between God and ourselves during communion is not hypostatic in its nature. It cannot be, for we are called sons of God not by Essence, but by the spirit of adoption (please read proofs below).

    But why not study the difference between "a god" and "a God"? Surely - knowing this would help us know what happens during Communion?

    Anyway, we know that God is One. Naturally, the crucial Christian assertion, that God is One, sets an absolute limit on the meaning of theosis - it is not possible for any created being to become, ontologically, God, or even part of God.

    In the person of Jesus Christ, God shares Himself with the human race, in order to conform them to all that God is in knowledge, righteousness and holiness. As God became man, in all ways except sin, He will also make man god, in all ways except His divine essence. So, the question remains – What then is this UNITY during comunion??


    Therefore, in the Holy Communion, we DO NOT UNITE WITH the Divine Essence, but with His UNCREATED Divine ENERGIES (uncreated, we mean “Outside of God”). Not with His Divinity, but we Unite with the Divine Grace.

    The Greek word “energeia”, and it’s various forms, appears over 30 times in the New Testament, yet it is not translated as “energy” even once in most popular English translations!  It is variously rendered as: operation, strong, do, in-working, effectual, be mighty in, shew forth self, and even simply dropped out of the sentence; everything except what it means

    I do believe this is the problem. What we do not understand, we make up for in heresy. And heresies try to make our understanding simple, yet they contradict with the truth. That’s the only issue unfortunately. Who understands everything? But, when my need to understand reaches the point of fabricatig of the truth to satisfy intellectual needs, this gives rise to nonsense, and nonsense gives birth to lack of faith and Church division.

    Energy is often defined as the ability to do work. Several different forms of energy, including kinetic, potential, thermal, gravitational, sound energy, light energy, elastic, electromagnetic, chemical, nuclear, and mass have been defined to explain all known natural phenomena, and to this, I add Divine Uncreated Energy. It also has the ability to work! For Sure!! In this case: To purify us / To purge us / To cleanse us from our sins with His Life Giving Blood. The deadness of our souls from sin is cleansed with His Life-Giving Body & Blood. With His Holy Body & Life-Giving Blood, we Unite with Him in His Likeness, not Hypostatically. (what do u think about that!??) lol ... Where the heck IS IQBAL!! ouuufff!! In fact, His Honoured Blood is hyssop to our souls.

    God, according to the Orthodox theological view, is One in a Trinity and a Trinity in One. As St. Maximus the Confessor, St. Dionysius the Areopagite, and other holy Fathers repeatedly say, God is filled with a divine love, a divine eros for His creatures. Because of this infinite and ecstatic love of His, He comes out of Himself and seeks to unite with them. This is expressed and realised by means of His energy or, better, His energies.

    With these, His uncreated energies, God created the world and continues to preserve it. He gives essence and substance to our world through His essence-creating energies. He is present in nature and preserves the universe with His preserving energies; He illuminates man with His illuminating energies; He sanctifies him with His sanctifying energies. Finally, He deifies him with His deifying energies. Thus, through his uncreated energies, holy God enters nature, the world, history, and men's lives.

    So, during communion, I partake of the Divine Energies. Does this make me God!? No, because I did not unite with His Essence. My nature did not hypostatically unite with His Nature. I was only blessed, , or better still - i was sanctified to have His deifying energies WORK in me.

    We agreed that the energies of God are divine energies. They too are God, but without being His essence!!. They are God, and therefore they can deify man. If the energies of God were not divine and uncreated, they would not be God and so they would not be able to deify us, to unite us with God. There would be an unbridgeable distance between God and men. But by virtue of God having divine energies, and by uniting with us by these energies, we are able to commune with Him and to unite with His Grace without becoming identical with God, as would happen if we united with His essence.

    So, we unite with God through His uncreated energies, and not through His essence. This is the mystery of our Orthodox faith and life.

    Therefore it is HERETICAL, if not totally illogical, to say that we unite with God’s His Divine Essence.

    Western heretics cannot accept this. Being rationalist, they do not discern between the essence and the energy of God, so, they say that God is only essence. And for this reason they cannot speak about man's deification (gr. theosis). Because, according to them, how could man be deified when they do not accept that the divine energies are uncreated, but regard them as created? And how could something created, i.e., something outside God, deify created man?

    Now we have a clearer understanding of God’s uncreated energies, let’s read the sayings of the Apostolic Fathers and see what they say about uniting with God during Communion.

    Listen, according to the Greek Orthodox Church buddy, Theosis is exactly THIS. According to the Coptic, its exactly this. But the COPTIC Orthodox Church has gone (and i say this with a BIT of regret) one step further and defined deification as being “becoming like God” (homoiosis theoi) - which is the understanding of the Greek Church already, but it appears that they needed to really clarify this due to heretical thought entering into the Church (I don't wanna mention any names so as not to offend people, but I do believe such thought came from someone who's name began with M and ended in atta El Maskeen).

    I'm not saying this person was heretical. I believe that he added confusion due to his lack of understanding of Divine Uncreated Energies. The idea is right. But the way of expressing it is wrong. See?? (that's my opinion anyway).


    When we are fully and perfectly energized by the Divine Energies, we radiate the pure Light of God. 

    Translating directly from the Greek, Saint Paul writes

    “For it is God who is energizing in you, according to His will and to energize for the sake of His being well-pleased.”  (Philippians 2:13).

    The NKJV translates it as,

    "For it is God who works in you both to will and to do for His good pleasure". Note how much clearer the translation is when the word “energon” is translated as "energize" rather than as "works".

    St. Paul further writes “[Christ] who will change the appearance of our humble bodies to take on the form of the body of His Glory, through the energization of His Power, and to put into submission all things to Him” [Philippians 3:21]. And to the Ephesians in verse 1:19-20 Paul writes “and what exceeding greatness of His power, in us who believe, through the energization of His mighty strength, energized in Christ, raising Him from the dead and seating Him in the right hand of Him in the heavens”.  This energy “in us” is the same Energy that will change the bodies of the saved to be glorified resurrected bodies. It is the same Divine Energy that raised Christ from the dead.  This Energy is in fact, the Grace of God. As St. Paul writes “… I became a minister according to the gift of the Grace of God given to me by the energization of His Power”. (Ephesians 3:7).  The NKJV- incorrectly uses the words “effective working” for energization in this verse.

    This Energy has the power to heal, as St. James writes “Confess your sins to one another, and pray for one another, so that you may be healed. Prayers energized by a righteous one are very powerful”. [James 5:16]. The word “energized” is the correct meaning, rather then the typically “fervent” or “earnest” (both adjectives) used in most English translations. The Greek word means “given energy to” hence, ‘energize’.

    Receiving this Divine Energy is the results of faith in the true God, as St. Paul says"…[you received]…according to the truth, God’s Word, which also energizes in you who believe" (1 Thess.2:13). You do not receive this Energy by works, but by faith, “[isn’t it] in vain, if the One who provides you the Spirit and the powerful Energies in you, were by works of the law, or by hearing in faith?” (Galatians 3:4,5). 

    This energy is the Grace of God, in Eph 3:7 St. Paul writes “That I was made an attendant through the gift of the Grace of God, granted to me by the energization of his power”.

    Salvation in Orthodox Christianity, as taught in the Holy Scriptures, begins with being forgiven, and then ultimately "getting to" heaven, but the process is much more than that.  It means being healed, purified, illumined and transformed by God by His Divine Energy into a similitude of God [Jas 4:9], which will bring us into union with Him. It is the process in which humans are completed or “perfected” [see Heb 10:14 among others], “divinizing” us, making us “Christ-like” or more accurately “assimilated to God”, through the Energization of His Power, not through Unity with His Essence!!


    Refuting Heretical Thought that Says we are “Divine”

    The next step is to look at and try to explain with love, the heretical thoughts that people have in thinking that we are hypostatically united to the Divine Essence:


    There are two classic biblical texts quoted in support of deification are
    1) Psalm 82:6 ('I said, you are gods and all of you sons of the Most High') and
    2) 2 Peter 1:4 ('precious and very great promises have been granted to us, that through these you may become partakers of the divine nature' [θείας κoινωνoί φύσεως]).


    If baptism makes us sons of God and the Psalm addresses us as gods and sons of the Most High, then baptism must make us gods. But there is the problem. When we say “Baptism makes us ‘sons of God’”; unless we admit the truth that it is through the spirit of adoption, then we deify ourselves for no reason.   

    Proof:

    Romans 8:15 15 For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father. (KJV)
    Romans 8:23 23 and not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the first fruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies. (RSV)

    Galatians 4:5 5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. (KJV)
    Ephesians 1:5 5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, (KJV)
    In English adoption derives from the Latin adoptare meaning to choose. On the other hand, sonship derives from an Indo-European root that means to give birth. It is clear, without any doubt, that we have been “CHOSEN” by Him to be called His sons, not through hypostatic Union, but through the spirit of adoption. This clearly means that we are NOT of the same essence as God. Baptism does not qualify us to be the same essence as God. Confession does not render us divine. The Holy Communion does not deify us, it works in US. We explained this point above concerning the Divine Energies which Unite with us, not the Divine Nature. How could this unite with us? God humbled Himself and took the shape of a man, and now you wish to magnify yourself and take the shape of God through such interpretation?!!

    What are we then? We are adopted Children of the Divine God. In that case, we have what is known as “Divine sonship”.

    Divine Sonship through baptism therefore brings with it the divine qualities of immortality and freedom from passion. Because we were adopted to this position of sonship, we can only profit from the qualities of the Divine nature that we are subject to through the fulfilment of the Holy Spirit in our lives when we partake of the divine sacraments. We cannot be partakers IN the Divine nature. No! Only partakers OF This nature.

    We receive therefore qualities of the Divine Nature through the sacrament of baptism, not the essence of Divinity through baptism. This is a logical statement, not even at the intellectual  nor theological advanced level of our Church Fathers.

    Therefore, these qualities, because they are transfered to us through the Church Sacraments from the Father, through the Son, by the fulfilment of the Holy Spirit, we call them “Divine Energies”.


    Again, we are not Divine.

    Standing in the Sun gives me a Sun tan. This is due to the energy of the Sun. But by receiving a suntan, I am not the same nature or substance as the Sun. Its definitely not by joining myself to the Sun, combining our two natures together that I intend to get a sun tan! This is absurd to think that. Or even, because the Sun is shining, and I happen to be standing in the light exposed to the Sun’s energies, am I now that light? No. Or Am I participating of the energies or rays of the Sun?

    The Fathers of the Church wished to express how baptism incorporates us into Christ, making us gods by grace in contrast to Christ, who is God by nature. We are godly by the Grace of this Divine Nature. If God’s Grace are His Divine Energies, then we are godly by virtue of union with His Divine Grace and not Essence.

    Having been endowed “in His image,” man is called upon to be completed “in His likeness.” This is Theosis. The Creator, God by nature, calls man to become a god by Grace. This is Theosis, but given the confussion of certain people, the definition had to be more "user friendly" - but there was no reason for that!

    THe greeks LIVE in the greek language. They are not confused. We live in the Coptic Language - its not used. Its causing us problems. It causes us to stumble if we are not careful!! Look at us bickering over which letters are pronounced as what!? What kind of life is that!? The 2nd most accurate bible in the WORLD is the Coptic Bible. But WHAT USE is it if we do not speak Coptic ourselves so we enjoy the richness of the Word of God?? We enjoy the richness of God's word simply because the Coptic Church Fathers were just that... COPTIC! THey summarised everything for us. We read their homilies and therefore reap the rewards of being Coptic.






  • What ever the case is, I think we should refrain from using the word "Theosis", and use the word "Sanctification". Merely because it already embodies the concept of Theosis, and it avoids error. Another thing is that Theosis is not a word that is in circles outside the EOC, and it is needlessly misinterpreted as the doctrine of Mormons. For the sake of unity I think we should drop the word from our vocabulary. This, however, does not mean that we disagree with the validity of the Greek Church's use of it, but we should stick to "sanctification", because this is what we ask for in the Agpia and in the Liturgy. It is better to be consistent.
  • [quote author=clay link=topic=6590.msg87847#msg87847 date=1210924632]
    What ever the case is, I think we should refrain from using the word "Theosis", and use the word "Sanctification". Merely because it already embodies the concept of Theosis, and it avoids error. Another thing is that Theosis is not a word that is in circles outside the EOC, and it is needlessly misinterpreted as the doctrine of Mormons. For the sake of unity I think we should drop the word from our vocabulary. This, however, does not mean that we disagree with the validity of the Greek Church's use of it, but we should stick to "sanctification", because this is what we ask for in the Agpia and in the Liturgy. It is better to be consistent.


    Hi Clay,

    You've gone a step further and seen the issues this word has caused within our Church. The entire reason why i took this up as an interest was to understand more and see what the problems were.

    "For the sake of unity" - i disagree. I totally disagree here clay. Its just that. For the sake of unity - Theosis SHOULD be used, but its definition should be one of sanctification. Yes. Not of becoming a God, but of becoming "godly".

    If we do not, it will increase the distance between us and the Greek Orthodox Churches. THey use Theosis. They use it, but do NOT abuse it. Its easy for them having mastery of the Greek language. To them, the definition in NO way gives rise to the idea that we are somehow united with a divine essence. Not at all. If we fail to keep the definition of this word correct, we will surely increase the gap between us and them, and even cause more confusion.

    But on the whole, did u like what i said? Anything in there worth correcting?? Please feel free to comment.
  • By the way, don't misunderstand me, i'm aware that this word has caused some issues within our Church. THey've coined now a new term:They've called it “becoming like God” (homoiosis theoi).

    But what worries me, is that people have changed the definition of theosis. Do u not see that us, by rejecting this term, and then using homoiosis theoi instead will no doubt result in more differences - and for no reason.

    If homoiosis theoi (in the Coptic Mindset) = Theosis (in the Greek Orthodox Mindset) - why not stick with Theosis and Change people's mindset who seem to believe Theosis is anyting outside of its real definition. Keep the original definition. The greeks had NO problem with this word. We only had problems with it since people started believing they are uniting with God's Essence, not His Divine Grace. So, what's the answer? We hurt ourselves ecumenically to teach them a lesson?
  • Here's something I found to put the record straight: FOR EVERYONE!

    The recent theological disputes, in reference to Matta El-Meskeen and Babawi, have been taken to a far greater extent then perhaps they should have been. Firstly, Pope Shenouda on no account denies the Divinity of Christ. The problem stems from the missunderstanding of the concept of Theosis. Some "theologians" such as Babawi have taken theosis to mean that man may become God by partaking in the essence of God. This is incorrect, and Pope Shenouda is right to react against such wayward theology. By taking such a stance, the Coptic Church does not deny that humanity may partake in the energies/works/operations of God, only that man may never come near the essence of God, which is transcendant. Because the above mentioned (Matta and Babawi) have taken theosis to mean that man is deified and as such partakes in the essence of God, the Church clearly claims that such an idea is theologically incorrect. Thus, the dispute is a reaction to incorrect understanding.

    To be clear, the Coptic Orthodox stance is a reaction to the misconcieved understanding of theosis, and not to the correct understanding of the concept which is the partaking of the graces/energies of God as seen in the writings of Athanasius, Basil, and more recently Eastern Orthodox Theology.


    THis came from the following website:

    http://www.dioceseofsouthsinai.org/pages/hhpopeshenoudaIII.htm

  • Sanctification is the Universal concept. It is a word that is catholic (unlike Theosis), orthodox and Apostolic (only few Theologians used it, and I think they were post-Nicene). I do not think we should cause more needless confusion. I asked my parents who have read Coptic material all their life, and asked about Theosis- they stared blankly. The word is a new phenomena in the Greek Church, as far as I can understand.
  • Divine Grace, Fr Tadros Malaty, 1992 Alexandria, page 6 and further:

    7. Many scholars are of the opinion that the Alexandrian theology concentrated on the
    "deification," as it is strongly evident in the writings of SS. Athanasius and Cyril. By deification they mean the renewal of the human nature as a whole, to attain the characteristics of our Lord Jesus Christ in place of the corrupt human nature, so that the believer may enjoy "the partaking in the divine nature" (2 Peter 1:4), or the new man in the image of His Creator (Col. 3:10). This theological mind drew the heart of the Alexandrians away from the arguments about the term "grace" to concentrate on attaining it as being an enjoyment of Christ Himself Who renewed our nature in Him.

    This practical line is clear in the sayings of all the Alexandrian as shown from the
    following quotations:
    The Word of God became man, that you may learn how man may become god.
    St. Clement of Alexandria

    The Son in His kindness, generously imparted deification to others...who are transformed through Him into gods, as images of the Prototype... The Word is the Archetype of the many images.
    Origen

    He was made man that we might be made gods...
    St. Athanasius

    The human nature has conquered in Jesus Christ and attained victory... He participated
    in our humanity that He would grant us much of His riches...
    St. Cyril of Alexandria

    Therefore, the Alexandrian Church was involved in the experience of "grace" and talking
    about it, not through philosophical expressions but as a new life in Christ, Who is dwelling
    within us. The believer enjoys it by practicing the undeviating evangelic and ascetic life, joyful and angelic. This is made through understanding the word of God by spiritual studying of the two Testaments, by attainment of heavenly consolations amongst tribulations, by witnessing to the Gospel under all conditions, through the theological understanding of the new nature and participating in worship with an elevated mind. All these things are fulfilled by the grace of God which we enjoy throughout our daily life.

    Divine Grace, Fr Tadros Malaty, 1992 Alexandria, page 20 and further:

    2. GRACE OF RENEWAL (DEIFICATION)
    The Alexandrian , in all their theological views, used to concentrate on the grace of God
    as a grace of the continuous or dynamic renewal of our nature by the Holy Spirit, who grants us the close unity with the Father in the Son, or the communion with God. In Jesus Christ, not only we receive forgiveness of sins by the Holy Spirit, but also we attain the "new life" which is free of sin as a divine grace. St. Paul speaks of "putting off the old man" or "the old corruptible nature" and putting on "the inner man" or the renewed nature in the Spirit, created after the likess of God in justice and holiness (2 Cor. 5:21' Rom 8:1). By the divine grace, we became members of the Body of Christ, children of the Father, have the power to practice the saintly life, for we are sanctified in Christ, consecrated to the Father.
    The believer as a whole, his soul, body, senses, emotions, mind etc... is sanctifiedas a tool for righteousness (Rom. 6:13). The Risen Christ is present in the believer's life as a divine gift, granting him inner glorification, as a pledge of the eternal heavenly glories.
    This conception of man's renewal of his nature is called "deification," because of his
    sharing in the divine nature (2 Pet. 1:4), and receiving Christ as our righteousness and
    sanctification (1 Cor. 1:30).

    The Alexandrian theology can be summarized in these words: [God took our humanity,
    that man may share His life], or [God became man that men may become gods.]

    Joseph Sittler says: [Eastern and Western, is a different way of speaking about the work
    of Christ. In the West that work is ed upon redemption from sin; in the East it is ed upon the divinization of man.In the West the doctrine central to that work is atonement; in the East the central doctrine is participation, illumination, reenactment, and transformation. In the West the work is reunification. The Western Saviour is the Eastern Pantocrator.]

    See the rest of the book for the rest of the Chapter, it's too much to paste here:

    http://coepa.org/tNG/cnt_download.php?id=254&dname=Download2tNG/cnt_download.php?id=254&dname=Download2


  • Man and redemption, Fr Tadros Malaty, 1992 Alexandria, page 14 and further

    In this chapter he quotes many church fathers (Mostly St Athanasius) explaining the role of God in salvation. I think it speaks for itself!

    7. TO RENEW OUR NATURE
    In the Epistle to the Hebrews, St. Paul clearly explains the difference between the
    animal sacrifice and Christ's Sacrifice, for the first one was repeated because of its
    weakness and failure to renew the depth of human nature, but the last One was offered
    once only for it still has the power to renew our interior man. Origen says that Jesus
    Christ as a Priest and Victim at the same time did not offer animals blood that consumes
    but His own Blood that gives life, resurrectiand immortality. He always changes
    believers from mortality into immortality, redeeming their nature to participate in His life
    and to bear His likeness.

    Origen says that the Logos is our Teacher, Law - giver and Model 29, by
    associating with Him, we lose our deadness and irrationality, becoming "divinely
    possessed and rational 30. He is" the pattern of the perfect life 31, the exemplar of true
    virtue into whose likeness Christians are transformed 32, thereby being enable to
    participate in the divine nature 33. He says: [Discoursing in bodily form and giving
    Himself out as flesh, He summons to Himself those who are flesh, in order that He may
    first of all transform them into the likeness of the Word who has been made flesh, and
    after that He was before He became flesh 34], [The Son of His kindness generously
    imparted deification to others ... who are transformed through Him into gods, as images
    of the prototype .. the word is the archetype of the many images 35].

    St. Clement, Origen's teacher, explains the Savior's role in the renewal of our
    nature, as he said: [For this He came down, for this He assumed human nature, for this
    He willingly endured the sufferings of man, that by being reduced to the measure of our
    weakness He might raise us to the measure of His power 36]. He also says: [The Word of
    God, became man just that you may learn from a man how it may be that man should
    become god 37].

    St. Athanasius in his discourses against the Arians confirms that the Incarnate Son
    of God hungered, wept and was wearied; He acted as our Mediator, taking on Him what
    was ours that He might impart to us what was His. In Him we became a new creation.

    [As "the Word became flesh" John 1:14, so also man himself received the gifts
    which came through the Word ... For every one interceding for another, receives the gifts
    in his own person, not as needing, but on his account for whom he intercedes 38]

    [He for our sake became man, so we for His sake are exalted. It is no absurdity
    then, as for our sake He humbled Himself, so also for our sake He is said to be highly
    exalted 39].

    [He Himself has made us sons of the Father, and defied men by becoming
    Himself man 40].

    [For He has become Man, that He might deify us in Himself and He was born of a
    woman, and begotten of a Virgin, in order to transfer to Himself our erring generation
    and that we may become henceforth a holy race and "partakers of the divine nature" as
    the blessed Peter wrote (2 Pet. 1:4). And what the law could not do in that it was weak
    through the flesh, God sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin,
    condemned sin in the flesh Rom. 8:3 41 ].

    [He was made Man, straightway all things were set right and perfected. Earth
    received a blessing instead of a curse, Paradise was opened to the robber, Hades cowered,
    the tombs were opened and the dead raised, the gates of Heaven were lifted up to await
    Him that "comes from Edom" (Ps. 24: 7; Isa. 63:1) ... The Word has been made Flesh,
    and put on it, in order that "in Him" all should be set right. Suffering Himself, He gave us
    rest, hungering Himself, He nourished us, and going down into Hades He brought us 21
    back thence ... At the restoration it was fitting that all things should be "delivered" ( Luke
    10:22) to Him, in order that He might be made man, and all things be renewed in Him
    42].

  • [quote author=clay link=topic=6590.msg87852#msg87852 date=1210931108]
    Sanctification is the Universal concept. It is a word that is catholic (unlike Theosis), orthodox and Apostolic (only few Theologians used it, and I think they were post-Nicene). I do not think we should cause more needless confusion. I asked my parents who have read Coptic material all their life, and asked about Theosis- they stared blankly. The word is a new phenomena in the Greek Church, as far as I can understand.

    Man, its ok with me either ways. I'm just learning this stuff to educate myself against heresies within the Church.

    I'm not bothered. If the pope wants the term out.. its out..
  • Listen Clay,

    Just as I was telling matt, i'm not interested in becoming a theologian. Im reading all this so we can be immune to heresy.

    What can we do if our beloved Fr Malaty is talking about theosis in his writings, and our pope is refusing to use it? Where does that leave us?.

    What does God want from us?
    What does the Church want from us? To be stupid and not think?? OK.. i can do that (lol)
    Whatever the doctrine of the Church, Im happy to accept it... but to go on and avoid using words like theosis that were used before, and used by our fathers and used now by our Coptic Champions in Theology like Fr. Malaty, then the situation becomes confusing. THe pope says "DOnt use the Word Theosis" ... we go home, read books from the fathers and our CHurch leaders in Theology and they employ the term "theosis".

    What then?

    Its best, as I said, to make life easier on everyone that they use the term theosis and educate people on its use. That's it. Besides... its their job. Otherwise , my friend, it really be confusing!!
  • Hello QT_PA_2T,

    I write to thank you for your long and educational reply.Thank you my friend for taking the time to outline all the details of our great fathers and I am printing it. I am now better informed and will defend our apostlic faith even more solidly when arguing with those who look down upon us for being what we are.

    Thanks once again and keep it up.
  • When in doubt, go with His Holiness' explanation, word, cautions, bans, etc.  He is Divinely Inspired.  He is the Father of all of our Fathers.  He is the Absolute Theologian for the Coptic Orthodox Church.  There is nobody that comes close to his understanding of the Will of God.  I do not deny other theologians in the Church, but none is as lucid and perfect in their expression all of the time as he has been.  He leaves no nuance with out proper due for expression and explanation.

    Save us O God, grant us grace, because of the dear and humble prayers of Pope Shenouda on our behalf.
  • [quote author=ilovesaintmark link=topic=6590.msg88113#msg88113 date=1211335492]
    When in doubt, go with His Holiness' explanation, word, cautions, bans, etc.  He is Divinely Inspired.  He is the Father of all of our Fathers.  He is the Absolute Theologian for the Coptic Orthodox Church.  There is nobody that comes close to his understanding of the Will of God.  I do not deny other theologians in the Church, but none is as lucid and perfect in their expression all of the time as he has been.  He leaves no nuance with out proper due for expression and explanation.

    Save us O God, grant us grace, because of the dear and humble prayers of Pope Shenouda on our behalf.


    Hi,

    Yes, I agree.

    Nowhere did i see that H.H is rejecting the term Theosis. What he has been rejecting appears to be the distorted definition that some people have of Theosis - which obviously seems to be, for me, the most logical thing to do.

    Furthermore, as I said, the Greek Orthodox, whole heartedly reject what we reject with respect to Theosis. They too see that we unite with God's Divine Energy, NOT with His Essence.

  • now since you guys are still talking about this in looong threads......which i am not goin to read.
    why do you all make it so complicated to understand with much words and thoughts?!

    our faith is simple to understand and is supposed to stay that way......
  • [quote author=minagir link=topic=6590.msg88176#msg88176 date=1211346910]
    now since you guys are still talking about this in looong threads......which i am not goin to read.
    why do you all make it so complicated to understand with much words and thoughts?!

    our faith is simple to understand and is supposed to stay that way......


    Words cannot describe perfectly the Holy Trinity. The union between the Father and the Son is a term we take for granted. We use our own human language to describe the Essence and Nature of God, and sometimes, we fail and make mistakes because we end up either "humanising" God because of our weak use of the correct terms that we use to describe His Divinity and Love. We also are in risk of deifying ourselves because of the same reason.

    Its simple to the simple. If it was so simple, there would be no heresies.
    Would there?

    This thread started not as a study in Theology, it started as a source to help us (well me at least) to be immune to any new contemporary heresies of the Church.

    You say its simple, but even Fr. Matta El Maskeen was seen as a heretic by the Church. You say its simple, but yet there are many other divisions here within our Church.

  • I agree with QT.

    If we recall heresies may be veiled in one letter not even a full word, phrase, or term.

    If we recall Nicea, the issue was over the letter "i" (iota).  Hence the colloquial term:  "not even an iota".

    QT is strong in his comments that we have to guard for every word, and I will add guard for every letter.  It is in these "cracks" that the Devil is able slide into place with heresies to try to break the CHURCH.
  • I disagree. There is clearly a Biblical basis for allowing some diversity (if one is not content with being divisive!), especially concerning the law.

    "But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and arguments and quarrels about the law, because these are unprofitable and useless. Warn a divisive person once, and then warn him a second time. After that, have nothing to do with him." (Titus 3:9, 10)

    On matters of doctrine pertaining to Salvation, of course, we must stick to that which was delivered by the Apostles.
  • [quote author=clay link=topic=6590.msg88198#msg88198 date=1211377354]
    I disagree. There is clearly a Biblical basis for allowing some diversity (if one is not content with being divisive!), especially concerning the law.

    "But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and arguments and quarrels about the law, because these are unprofitable and useless. Warn a divisive person once, and then warn him a second time. After that, have nothing to do with him." (Titus 3:9, 10)

    On matters of doctrine pertaining to Salvation, of course, we must stick to that which was delivered by the Apostles.



    I'm not sure I understand, what do you disagree with Clay?

    I think Mina's point is wise that our faith is simple. If we are asking questions on theosis etc, its because we are ignorant of our faith. Its important that we have a good understanding in our faith, and as such i feel the need to ask questions.

    This is well within the guidelines of tasbeha.org. They have an entire subsection where people can discuss dogma and theology. If I'm asking questions on theosis its not to excell as a theologian, its to make sure that i'm completely sure of our dogmas & doctrine.

    If i was insisting on something inherently incorrect, then that would be wrong. No doubt. But this thread is not to evangelise my particular doctrine, or my personal agenda. Its to see what we believe in and see what is being taught by some heretics. That's all.

    I cannot stand it when people refuse me learning about a subject because they feel its too controversial. We are not kids. We are adults. It would be immature to just blatently ignore such issues.

    Personally, I've actually grown a lot spiritually reading about all this. After reading more about Theosis, i truly see how awesome Our Lord is in fact. I see how much He wants to sanctify us, and keep us pure and close to Him.

    Do not deny me what this site is intended for: Learning orthodox doctrine & dogma.
  • Watch this, and tell me if he is not clear and sinple in what he says:
  • [quote author=clay link=topic=6590.msg88198#msg88198 date=1211377354]
    I disagree. There is clearly a Biblical basis for allowing some diversity (if one is not content with being divisive!), especially concerning the law.

    "But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and arguments and quarrels about the law, because these are unprofitable and useless. Warn a divisive person once, and then warn him a second time. After that, have nothing to do with him." (Titus 3:9, 10)

    On matters of doctrine pertaining to Salvation, of course, we must stick to that which was delivered by the Apostles.



    Clay, that's precisely why I'm asking. I need to know exactly what was received from the apostles. Many Copts are interpreting Saint Athanasious' "Incarnation of the Word" as that we are "Gods". I.e. we receive the Divine Nature.  And they use biblical and patristic sources to justify their views.

    Look... that's only PART of the story. Concerning Theosis, they've twisted the story.
    Theosis, to them means "becoming God". Theosis to ANY Greek Orthodox person means "becoming LIKE God" (which = becoming Godly). See??

    There are strong suggestions in our liturgy that indicates that we do in fact partake of Divinity, as per Saint Cyril's fraction prayer (given in my 1st post in this thread). His prayer states that we unite with Divinity.

    No one has bothered to answer this yet. I'm assuming (OR HOPING), that what he meant was we unite with the Divine Energies of God. The greeks go even ONE step further than us and call them "uncreated energies" to stress on the fact that its energies outside of His Divinity Nature.

    What then does Cyril mean??

    Mina - giving me a link without any explanation doesnt help!! Also, I saw the videos, no where in there does he mention or explain Saint Cyril's Fraction prayer that states that we unite with His Divinity.

    If you personally believe that we unite with His Divinity, then that's your issue. I'm more interested in what the Coptic Orthodox Church thinks [b](officially).

  • Firstly, I am not against the concept. if you look at times past, I have mentioned the word 'Theosis'- but every time I seemed to say that I had to justify the usage. Actually, I told you once to visit upon the concept Theosis in another thread. As 'Doubting Thomas', you might remember I also queried about Theosis and its validity. We ended up validating it. However, I am interested in the concept- not the word. I mean what is in a word, if it is not just a tool to clarify or communicate in the best possible way a concept. If the concept does not become easily manifested by the use of a word, when another word does the job- it is a misnomer, impractical, useless, or worse- heresy.

    However, 'Sanctification' seems to be weaker in conceptualizing what I understand by 'Theosis'. It is for this reason that I personally am fond of the word. But, for those that it causes contention- and I believe almost needlessly, why use it? Of course, with the availability of the Church Fathers texts, perhaps, as you hvae argued, it would be necessary to use the word pretentiously, even if some will be confused for a while about it.

    However, I do not have the call for preaching! This is not a place where I am going to assume responsibilities that god has not called me for.
Sign In or Register to comment.